March 22, 2004
Justice Both Blind. and Slow
Yet More Delays in Custody Battle
Editorial by Michael G. Ryan

What is another three-week delay in a case that has already dragged on for more than four years?

For Jack and Casey He, who have waited almost 1500 days to see their daughter again, another twenty-one days is nothing short of agony.

The battle between the He's and Jerry and Louise Baker for custody of the He's daughter Anna Mae-a case that has attracted international attention and, recently, the unblinking eye of the media-was, for a brief time, racing along at breakneck speed. After a series of delays by Chancery Court Judge D.J. Alissandratos, who recused himself from the case when he came under scrutiny, the case was moved to the court of Judge Robert "Butch" Childers. Childers expedited the case after years of postponements, hurrying the trial through twelve-hour days and rare Sunday sessions.

He then presented the attorneys for all involved three weeks to prepare closing arguments so that a ruling could be handed down within thirty days. The date of those closing arguments was to be Monday, March 22.

Yet, after years of preparation and those three additional weeks to summarize their position, the Bakers and their attorney, Larry Parrish, decided to ask the judge for more time. Further, Parrish-an attorney for more than three decades-filed a motion asking Judge Childers to allow him to take the stand again to clarify statements he made during the trial. Under oath, Parrish conceded that he'd followed instructions from the previous judge, Alissandratos, to prepare documentation that would issue a no-contact order preventing the He's from seeing their daughter.

This highly questionable act was not done with the knowledge of the He's or their attorney, and Parrish now seems to recognize the gravity of his previous testimony. In essence, he has asked the courts for permission to recant or revise history.

The judge's response to objections from the He's attorney, David Siegel, was surprisingly forgiving: "Nobody's perfect," Childers said of Parrish's apparent lapse in judgment and his desire to gloss over his dubious actions in the past.

And so another delay is introduced into a case that has already been juggled with circus-like precision by the Bakers and Parrish. Their arguments for keeping Anna Mae-none of which address the legality (or lack thereof) of their actions in the past-continue to be built around the tired maxim that possession is nine-tenths of the law. In court, they have indicated, through Louise Baker's own journals, their desire to separate the He's from their child right from the beginning of their relationship.

Parrish has called into question the gifts that the poorer Chinese family bestowed upon their daughter, mocking those gifts' seeming lack of intrinsic financial value. And they have exemplified xenophobic cultural ignorance by arguing that conditions in China are unfavorable to girls, and therefore Anna Mae is safer and better cared for with them than with their biological parents.

As Louise Baker so arrogantly noted in People magazine, if Casey He truly loved her daughter, she would want what's best for her and would surrender her claims to the child, leaving her with the Bakers. This begs the question of whether the Bakers' home is what's best for Anna Mae in the first place.

Parrish's intent to correct his testimony, the no-contact order drafted like a deal with the devil in the dead of the night, the racial, ethnic, cultural, and financial judgments against the He's in court, all of these add up to the frightful suggestion that the court system in Memphis, Tennessee, has not yet joined the rest of the legal system in the twentieth century, let alone the twenty-first.

Such legal two-stepping periodically crops up in higher courts-witness the Scalia-Cheney duck hunting episode-but rarely with such ferocity and alarming regularity as it has in this case, in this city, in this state. Further, Childers noted in court that the case was "very difficult" and placed him "in a predicament."

Yet the precedent for ruling is clearly established-the recent case of Luz Cuevas and her daughter Delimar, separated for six years when the child was abducted after allegedly dying in a fire, or the Elian Gonzales case, which garnered international headlines.

The He case is headed for a similar spotlight, which could call into question the way justice is perceived in Memphis as compared to the rest of the United States. Judge Childers acted with great judicial haste when the case first came to him, yet now he has reached a "hurry up and wait" moment, making one wonder just what the mindset is in Tennessee that leads to such bipolar rulings.

Now another twenty-one-day delay in closing arguments, and a final opportunity for the Bakers and attorney Parrish to adjust their truth, seek revision to how they are perceived, let the media drift away to the next big thing so the spotlight is removed from their actions, and hold onto Anna Mae as long and as hard as they can.

For the He's, that twenty-one days might just as well be thirteen more years. At the rate the wheels of justice have turned in Memphis under the guiding hand of Larry Parrish, it may not be until Anna Mae turns eighteen that her real parents can welcome her back into the family that has waited so long to be with her again.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Michael G. Ryan is a professional writer living in Seattle, WA. His interest in the He case sprang from a USA TODAY article in January 0f 2002, which made evident the injustice being dealt to the couple, and he's been involved in the case ever since. In that time, he and his wife have had their own child, a son, which reinforced his desire to see the He's reunited with their child. Ryan and his wife are both adopted.