As a father, my son Tanner’s well-being is my top priority. Our custody battle began unexpectedly when my ex-wife, Rebecca Salyers (formerly Rebecca Milliron), left with Tanner without any warning, setting off a series of difficult events.

Things escalated when an anonymous tip led to an investigation by Trumbull County Children’s Services. This “tip” was a baseless accusation used as a tactic to block my custody pursuit.

Despite my innocence and the fact that no evidence supported the claim, the accusation cast a shadow over the entire case, exposing systemic flaws in Trumbull County’s family court system.

The Guardian Ad Litem’s Negligence: Jennifer Robbins’s Involvement

Jennifer Rae Robbins was assigned as Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) to represent Tanner’s best interests. Unfortunately, Robbins’ handling of our case showed significant bias from the start. Although a GAL is required to investigate both parents’ living situations thoroughly, Robbins failed to conduct even the most basic home visits.

When I proactively scheduled a meeting at her office, Robbins briefly met with me but later lied in court, claiming she had “looked through my windows” to assess the home’s conditions.

This was impossible: all my windows are fully covered with blinds, drawn for privacy and video recording setups, and they are never open to the public view. This false testimony was a clear indication of her bias and lack of thoroughness in assessing Tanner’s best interests.

In fact, Robbins’s interactions with me consisted of a single initial office visit and one follow-up call. Over the course of a nearly two-year divorce and custody battle, I had virtually no engagement from her, and her recommendations repeatedly favored Rebecca without substantive investigation.

Early on, I asked about the potential for equal custody, and Robbins dismissed it, clearly siding with Rebecca before any evidence was even reviewed.

This lack of professionalism and impartiality seriously compromised Tanner’s well-being, and the fact that the court ultimately rejected her recommendation speaks volumes about the merit of her conclusions.

Court Proceedings with Magistrate John Pico

When our case first went before Trumbull County Magistrate John Pico for temporary custody orders, Pico’s disregard for due process was clear. He asked each of us what we wanted—Rebecca shared her preference, and Pico sided with her almost immediately, granting her custody based solely on her request.

When I expressed a desire for equal custody, Pico chuckled dismissively, as though my request for fair time with my own son was absurd.

This dehumanizing reaction set the tone for two years of living under temporary orders that heavily favored Rebecca and left Tanner without the balanced parental involvement he deserved.

At one point, Pico suggested he might review the orders if there were no issues, but instead of reevaluating our case, we appeared before a different magistrate who simply maintained Pico’s prior ruling.

No consideration was given to the evidence I had gathered, and my son’s expressed wish to live with me was ignored. Despite promises of review and fairness, the court system’s response only extended the temporary orders, disregarding Tanner’s emotional needs and subjecting him to a biased custody arrangement.

The Impact on Tanner’s Well-Being

Throughout this process, Tanner expressed a clear desire to live with me, which he even voiced directly to the court-appointed GAL and the judge during the hearing. Witnessing my son openly share his wishes and seeing those desires largely ignored was heartbreaking.

Tanner began as a bright, happy child, but after enduring the strain of this prolonged and unbalanced custody battle, he became withdrawn and confused, frequently asking why he couldn’t live with me.

Despite my spotless record, Tanner’s stated wishes, and overwhelming evidence of parental alienation on Rebecca’s part, the court continued to favor her heavily.

This pattern is a common one, as Trumbull County’s family court system often leans toward granting mothers primary custody, even when fathers are equally, if not more, capable caregivers. This bias is not only unjust but harmful, stripping children like Tanner of the opportunity to experience the full presence and support of both parents.

Baseless Accusations and Trumbull County Children’s Services’ Investigation

One of the most distressing elements of this case was an anonymous tip that led to an investigation by Trumbull County Children’s Services.

I was never informed of the specifics of the accusation until the final stages of our divorce. During this time, Rebecca’s daughter Ellie testified, though she admitted repeatedly to having no recollection of the events in question. Despite this lack of credibility, the accusation cast an unfair shadow over my custody case.

From my perspective, this was a calculated move by Rebecca to prevent me from gaining custody of Tanner, and I believe it was not an anonymous tip but a fabricated allegation orchestrated by Rebecca.

My lawyer advised me against engaging with Children’s Services or law enforcement directly, so I complied, addressing all allegations solely within the confines of the court proceedings.

The court’s willingness to entertain unfounded claims further illustrates the systemic issues at play, where the rights and reputations of fathers are too often disregarded without cause.

A Need for Systemic Reform in Trumbull County’s Family Court System

The issues I’ve encountered with Jennifer Robbins, Magistrate John Pico, and Trumbull County’s family court system represent broader, systemic problems that require urgent reform.

Guardians Ad Litem like Robbins must be held accountable for failing to meet their obligations. Her negligence and clear favoritism toward Rebecca demonstrated that the system lacks sufficient checks and oversight.

Reforms should include stricter training requirements for GALs, regular evaluations of their performance, and accountability measures to ensure unbiased representation for all children involved in custody disputes.

Magistrates like Pico should also be held to a standard that prioritizes impartiality and rigorous evidence review. A chuckle in response to a father’s request for equal custody is not only unprofessional but damaging to the child whose best interests are at stake. The court system must evolve to recognize the importance of both parents in a child’s life, and this starts with removing biases from family court proceedings.

Names and Local References for Transparency and Accountability

This case involves several key individuals and entities within Trumbull County:

• Guardian Ad Litem: Jennifer Rae Robbins
• Magistrate: John Pico of Trumbull County Family Court
• Primary Judge: Judge Samuel Bluedorn, overseeing the final stages of our trial
• Trumbull County Children’s Services

The injustices we’ve faced reflect deeply entrenched issues within Trumbull County’s family court system. The names and locations mentioned here serve as more than just context—they represent a call for transparency, accountability, and change in a system that must do better for its children and families.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What are the responsibilities of a Guardian Ad Litem in Trumbull County? A Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) must conduct a full investigation to understand the child’s best interests, including home visits to each parent’s residence. They should also remain unbiased and ensure all relevant evidence and the child’s own input are taken into account.
2. How can a biased GAL impact a custody case? A biased GAL can severely skew custody outcomes by favoring one parent without proper evidence, potentially placing the child in an environment that doesn’t reflect their best interests or desires.
3. What recourse do parents have if a GAL fails in their duty? In Trumbull County, parents can request a review of the GAL’s findings, file formal complaints, or seek a new GAL if they can show evidence of bias or negligence. Consulting a lawyer is crucial in navigating these options.
4. How can community involvement help bring change to the GAL system? Community members can support reform by advocating for policy changes, participating in public meetings, and supporting legislation to hold GALs accountable. Raising awareness and supporting advocacy groups can also influence positive changes within the family court system.
5. What signs indicate that a GAL may be biased? Bias signs include consistently dismissing one parent’s concerns, failing to investigate thoroughly, and showing a clear preference for one parent without considering all evidence. Any personal connections or conflicts of interest with either party also signal potential bias.
6. How can the family court system better protect children in custody cases? The family court system could benefit from stricter qualifications for GALs, mandatory training on impartiality, and regular performance reviews. Transparent feedback mechanisms and routine assessments of judges’ and magistrates’ decisions would help ensure that the focus remains on the child’s welfare.