Adobe Acrobat Document Oct,2000, Horowitz, Request for USJD Investigation
Adobe Acrobat Document: 45.9 kB, 6 seconds seconds @ 56kbps

Adobe Acrobat Document USJD Report, Child Advocate, Witty Dismiss, Feb,01
Adobe Acrobat Document: 659 kB, 1.52 minutes @ 56kbps

Adobe Acrobat Document May10, 2001, USJD Response
Adobe Acrobat Document: 242 kB, 33 seconds seconds @ 56kbps

Case History Section 29


2000 - 2001 - Oct - Feb

Reports to the US Justice Department / Insuring the Children's Well Being

  • Package Sent to the US Justice Department, October 2000
  • Follow-up package sent in February, 2001, to the Public Integrity Section 
  • USJD Final Response, May 10, 2001
  • Order and Establishment of a Professional Child Advocate for the Children
  • Answer to ,"Why didn't they Kill you" and Report on Witty's Dismissal
  • Michael Witty's Documented Dismissal and DA Jeanne Smith Disqualified for Conflict

As Harmon commenced a parallel effort to the US Justice Department in the summer of 2001 while continuing to seek justice in Colorado, this too seemed doomed from the beginning.  His Canadian attorney, Alan Gold made a connection with his American colleague and high level Washington DC attorney, Bill Moffitt to take the case to the US Justice Department with a request for a full investigation.  As reported earlier, Mr. Moffitt was quickly lured away by political influence, and less than 6 weeks into the effort embarrassed Mr. Gold by abandoning the case.  Mr. Gold then took the case directly to the US Justice Department with Harmon's full package and report.  With all of the evidence presented through President Bill Clinton's US Justice Department, (The man who "Did not have sex with that woman") through their Public Integrity Section (Imagine that!) the request for investigation was rejected at year end 2000 while Clinton was literally a "lame duck" (Surprised?).  In January, 2001 the government baton was handed over to the new George W. Bush administration where John Suthers as Bush's Colorado Republican constituent  was actually appointed Federal Attorney for the State of Colorado. A supplement to the original package was sent in February, 2002 to the Bush administration prior to Suthers' appointment including evidence on his and Jeanne Smith's political corruption and pointing out that Suthers' pending appointment by President Bush to the position of US Attorney for Colorado was inappropriate and should be further investigated.

In January, 2000, Harmon received word from a Canadian investigative reporter interested in his case that Michael Witty, the former El Paso County Administrator found guilty in the Fund's embezzlement scheme; the same man that Harmon had forced DA's John Suthers and Jeanne Smith to investigate and prosecute by reporting their cover-up to the FBI, had his case and charges dismissed.  The reason for his dismissal was due to DA's Smith and Suthers' "CONFLICT"! Literally the same complaint that Harmon had lodged in his case that was summarily ignored!  Harmon's original report to the DA, the Fund directors and the FBI clearly denoted that Dan May, as Deputy DA to Suther's and Smith while placed on the original Fund embezzlement investigation was also a Fund board member with an obvious conflict!  Imagine when forced to prosecute, with full knowledge of the conflict, DA's Suthers and Smith set up a scenario where their "Good Old Boy" club member, Michael Witty would be guaranteed a dismissal soon after his conviction due to their known conflict!  Well, it would seem that the bad guys have carefully planned their way out of their mess, and Harmon ends up being the scapegoat to be punished severely for standing up to the corruption and blowing the whistle. This certainly gives new definition to, "The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave"; .... free to be as corrupt as you like, as long as you have the political power to bravely pull it off!

As a final effort towards ensuring the safety and well being of his two children, Danielle Wilfred and Isaac Wilfred, in spite of  the Jeanne Smith's and John Suthers' corruption; from January through March, 2001 Harmon approached the Colorado family court from the safety of Canada by Motion in the Dearna case. By court order he had received no communication and no news of the children's well being since they were returned to their abusive mother by the DA and the Colorado Courts two years earlier.  In cooperation with his ex-wife Dearna's Denver attorney, Jeffrey Herren, the Court agreed to place a special child advocate on the case to provide counselling and evaluation and to be a required intermediary for limited communication between Harmon and his children.  As Dearna had moved the children several times already and had now fled the state to avoid service for depositions, court ordered evaluations and contempt orders; and after Harmon and Carolyn provided a $5,000 retainer to Court approved California psychologist Dr. Ira Gorman, Dearna violated this court order by refusing initial communication, providing limited access to Dr. Gorman and ultimately moved again to avoid being served another contempt order for her rebellious actions.  After some limited counseling for the children, Dr. Gorman did provide a serious and in his words, "concerning" report by telephone that Isaac was very aggressive and Danielle very withdrawn, and he needed more time with them to provide additional counseling to get to the bottom of their difficulties.  This was not to be so. Dearna simply moved the children again in complete defiance of the Court order and disregard of the well being of the children.  These actions took place with no further attempts from the court to stop her contempt.

In March of 2001, with bogus phone calls being made to their Canadian home by process servers from Colorado attempting further harassment through the Canadian justice system, and having tried everything they could to expose the corruption and restore Harmon's constitutional and parental rights in both the US, Canada and through the Hague Commission, to no avail; Harmon and Carolyn left Ontario for the Canadian west coast and ultimately arrived in New Zealand in August, 2001 to start life over. 

Index of PDF Documents in Case History Section 29, Reports to USJD / Children's Well Being:

PDF 1:
Pg      1-2         Oct, 2000 Request for Investigation to USJD, Chief of Staff, Horowitz

Pg      1             Letter and Outline of Package to USJD, Public Integrity Section

Pg      2-4         Motion for Appointment of Special Child Advocate

Pg        5           Letter of Introduction to Dr. Ira Gorman

Pg      7-8         Case Summary to Gorman and Request for Mediation

Pg      8-9         Response to Investigative Reporter. "Why didn't they kill you"?

Pg    10-12      Report on Witty's dismissal and Court of Appeal Order of Dismissal

PDF 3:             
Pg      1            USJD Final Response, May 10, 2001






  1. At the risk of being totally redundant, the question must be asked again as to how the USJD could possibly ignore Harmon's request for an investigation with the evidence of corruption presented?  Could it be that it simply was not taken seriously due to the government changeover from Clinton to Bush?  Lost in the shuffle?
  2. With the USJD Public Integrity Section's mandate also including conflicts of interest in prosecutions, again, how could they ignore the clear conflicts involving Harmon's case that even the Colorado Court ultimately recognized by dismissing Witty's charges? Were they asleep when they read Harmon's case book or were they directed to ignore it by someone higher up?  The White House perhaps?
  3. Why were the Colorado criminal and family courts so focused on prosecuting Harmon to the detriment of his children? How could any system not recognize that children in child abuse come first on the agenda, especially when placed back into the abuse by the system?
  4. Who was instructing and financing Deana's multiple relocations from state to state in definace of the court and why didn't the court make an effort to stop this illegal behavior?
  5. Were reports on the children's psychological well being ever reported to the court, and if so, what did they say and what did the court ever do about it, if anything?