Family says children in danger because judge ignores evidence of abuse

Rachael Levy

Wednesday, May 14, 1997 | 11:59 a.m.

A Family Court judge denied a mother's request for immediate custody of her two young boys even after their father was arrested on battery charges and ordered to stay away from his teenage son.

Judge Fran Fine ordered the boys, ages 6 and 8, to remain with their father until Clark County Child Protective Services could fully investigate the alleged abuse. A court hearing is set for May 22.

Child Protective Services apparently found no immediate harm existed for the two boys since they remain with their father. When a danger exists, said a county official speaking in general terms, investigators promptly remove the children and place them in a county refuge, such as Child Haven, or with a family relative.

The controversy raises the question of whether a judge should immediately revoke a parent's access to all of his or her children based on evidence of injury against one.

It also illustrates the mistrust many mothers and fathers bear against Family Court judges, who have been accused of creating more problems for families than solutions.

"I am so scared for my little ones," mother Barbara Lofink said. "When he beat (his older children), he'd pick 'em up by their heads and leave fingerprints on the sides of their faces."

The father, Todd Lofink, was arrested May 1 and faces misdemeanor charges of battery and domestic violence, which ultimately may be upgraded to a gross misdemeanor charge of child abuse against his 16-year-old son, police said.

His attorney, Bruce Shapiro, declined to comment on the case, saying his client prefers that his family problems remain a private matter.

The court has been the target of two media investigative series and numerous protests. Just last week, a state lawmaker proposed dismantling the court in Clark County, while other legislators have recommended creating a special panel to find solutions for the complaint-plagued court.

Fine said she denied the mother's emergency request because the Nevada Supreme Court has ruled that custody cannot be switched without a hearing except in emergency situations such as abandonment by one parent or a clear presence of danger.

State law prohibits judges from discussing ongoing lawsuits, so Fine explained in general terms that she never grants ex-parte motions or requests for immediate court intervention unless danger can be clearly documented by Child Protective Services.

"If they told me the child's in danger then, yes ... they are removed immediately," Fine said.

The judge's decision to maintain the status quo fills the boys' mother and grandmother with anxiety.

"Nobody listens. Nobody listens," said grandmother Christiana Wessel. "I am so afraid that one of them is going to end up dead."

While Fine's refusal to immediately give the mother custody leaves Barbara Lofink and her mother fearing for the boys' safety, it angers her lawyer, who believes case law does not support the judge's position.

Willick said the judge's decision to not hold an immediate hearing, and delay it for weeks, not only leaves the boys in danger, but allows the father to destroy evidence of alleged drug use.

Willick points to four other cases that he said show Fine's "gross double standard" between male and female litigants. In these cases fathers were given custody of children when there was no abuse or neglect proven against the mother, who was the primary caretaker, Willick said.

In another case, Willick said Fine switched custody based on a letter that accused the mother of alienating her children from the father, but did not give the mother a chance to respond.

"I don't think I can keep sacrificing women and children" to Family Court, Willick said. "If this was an isolated case, I could perhaps be more tolerant, but not on this record."

Fine has steadfastly maintained that she decides cases on their facts, not on litigants' gender.

Willick believes the Nevada Judicial Discipline Commission should look into the judge's actions. The commission has the authority to sanction or remove a judge from his or her elected office.

The commission receives more complaints against Family Court judges than any other kind of judge, an official said.

In 1995, the commission reprimanded Fine for attempting to influence two colleagues in a divorce case she had worked on as an attorney, and ordered her to pay $5,000 to the Clark County Law Library.

Todd and Barbara Lofink married in 1988 and she began caring for his young son and daughter, twins from a previous marriage. But Barbara contends she and the twins were abused during the marriage and she separated from Todd in 1995. By then, the couple had two children of their own.

(She previously had filed for divorce but never informed Todd and eventually the divorce proceeding was dismissed for lack of action, court records said.)

Barbara and her two sons obtained a Family Court order permitting them to move to Wyoming, where Barbara's grandparents live. In reviewing that order, Fine found that Barbara manipulated the judicial system to keep her husband ignorant of her plans, according to court records.

Fine switched custody to the father following a four-day hearing and a recommendation of the court's Family Mediation and Assessment Center, the father's attorney said.

Barbara now has custody of the boys during the summer and last saw them May 8 when she made a special trip to Las Vegas upon learning of the alleged abuse against her stepson.

Todd Lofink was arrested based on allegations that he grabbed his son's shoulder, threw him down on the teenager's bed and began hitting him in the face, chest and right thigh.

"It went on for about 10 minutes," the 16-year-old said in a police report. "When the cops came around 6 p.m. my dad started accusing me of calling the cops and threw me on my bed and told me not to 'f--- up' his life.

"Then he told me to hide in the bathroom and (said) he wasn't going to let the cops in, so they just busted in and my dad came and got me out of the bathroom. ... He said that he wanted to tell the cops we got into an argument and he just held me down to calm down, but I just couldn't lie to them or live in fear anymore."

Police photographs of the teenager's profile show red marks, the width of a finger, across his scalp.

The 16-year-old and his twin sister obtained a month-long temporary protective order against their father from a Pahrump justice of the peace May 2. They now live with their mother in Pahrump.

The protective order does not apply to the twins' half-brothers. While Todd Lofink was jailed, the younger boys lived with their uncle, who returned them to their father after his release from jail, court documents and sources said.

Even if the abuse or neglect is substantiated, the law requires Child Protective Services investigators to first try to keep the younger boys with their parent through counseling, drug treatment, financial assistance or other means to reduce the parent's stress, said Adrienne Cox, assistant director of Clark County Family and Youth Services.