Stacy Hartman takes the stand in Geauga County Judge Grendell Ohio disciplinary hearings

The Gavel outside the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio, September 20, 2023, at 65 S. Front Street, Columbus, Ohio. (Photo by Graham Stokes for Ohio Capital Journal. Republish photo only with original article.)

Stacy Hartman took the stand Monday in the Ohio Board of Professional Conduct case against Judge Timothy Grendell. In the midst of a custody dispute, the Geauga County Juvenile and Probate court judge put Hartman’s two boys in juvenile detention after they refused visitation with their father, Grant Glasier.

The incident drew national attention and has taken up a large part of the disciplinary proceedings against Grendell. Hartman declined to be recorded or photographed on the witness stand.

Hartman on the stand

Ohio Disciplinary Counsel Joseph Caligiuri first asked Hartman about the circumstances prior to the incident that put her children in custody. She and Glasier had three children together, but Hartman described their nine-year marriage as “rocky,” and alleged there had had been abuse.

In early 2017, before the case was referred to Grendell’s court, the police responded to an incident at Glasier’s home while their sons Carson and Conner were visiting. Hartman recalled her oldest, Carson, crying hard over the phone saying, “his dad had slammed him against the wall again.” Later, Board chair Peggy Schmitz pressed her explain what she meant by “again.”

“I was aware of one other time that Carson was slammed up against the wall,” she said.

When Hartman arrived at Glasier’s home after the phone call, she described his knuckles as bloody, but police didn’t wind up pressing charges. In the following months, the boys’ guardian ad litem moved to suspend Glasier’s visitation, and the Domestic Relations court granted that request.

Over the next three years, Hartman said, her children regularly participated in reunification counseling at her urging, even if they were resistant. As she explained it, the kids were frustrated because Glasier “wouldn’t admit to any wrongdoing whatsoever.”

The case was eventually transferred to the Juvenile Court, and in the initial hearings, Hartman described Grendell as firm, but fair. She also noted he didn’t seem up to speed when he first heard the case. For instance, he asked Hartman and Glasier whose visitations had been suspended.

But that demeanor took a turn in May of 2020. The judge converted Glasier’s motion for custody — which Glasier was prepared to dismiss — into one enforcing visitation. Grendell did this mid-hearing, without prior notice or an opportunity for the parties to present evidence.

“I was shocked,” Hartman explained, “I didn’t know what was going on.”

The judge’s order was for Glasier to have his two sons for the full weekend unsupervised. Grendell has pushed back on the question of supervision arguing he ordered his constable to supervise for an hour and then allowed the constable to drop in at random.

“He was very forceful,” Hartman said of Grendell. “He was very one-sided.”

Juvenile detention

Two days later, when the court-ordered visitation was set to begin, Hartman brought her boys to the Sheriff’s office for drop off. She explained the boys were reluctant and didn’t want to pack for the weekend, so she packed for them. On the stand she repeatedly described encouraging them to go with their father.

But importantly, she insisted she never “ordered” them to do so.

Under Ohio law, a child is “unruly” if they do not “submit to the reasonable control” of a parent by being “wayward or habitually disobedient.” Refusing court-ordered visitation, doesn’t quite get them there — a point Grendell’s own disciplinary filings seem to acknowledge.

“The boys were not placed in custody because they allegedly refused to go with their father during his court-ordered parenting time; but rather, for their alleged ongoing disobedience of their mother,” Grendell’s answer to the disciplinary complaint states.

After the boys refused to go with their father, the constable called Hartman on speakerphone, telling her she needed to tell the boys to go, and warning they could be placed in juvenile hall. “I was frantic,” Hartman described, but she encouraged them to go. Because they refused, the constable took them into custody and they spent the weekend in juvenile hall.

“I was a mess,” Hartman said, “I was trying to figure out what I could do to help my kids.”

She was angry when she learned that the court had also placed restrictions on the boys’ communication, only allowing them to call their father.

“Even a criminal is permitted a phone call,” Hartman said.

Ahead of the drop off, Hartman explained, Grendell had never mentioned anything about potential unruly charges. After the boys were taken, she added, no one explained Hartman herself was the “victim” of those charges.

Eventually Grendell transferred the case back to Domestic Relations. The disciplinary counsel noted that move came just days before a news story about the case was set to air. After the transfer, the parties reached a settlement relatively quickly. The kids would have to respond in a timely fashion when their dad requested visitation, but whether they went was still up to the kids.

Another notable element that transfer brought to light was the absence of witnesses. When the case returned to Domestic Relations court, witnesses testified under oath about the status of the case. During the entirety of his time overseeing the case, Grendell heard sworn testimony from no one.

From the stand, Hartman argued Grendell had done “irreversible damage” to her son.

Her oldest, Carson, “became very depressed. He started cutting himself. He started failing out of school. He started being mean to his brother.” She said her younger son Conner had grown quiet and the incident “destroyed” his relationship with Carson.

She described how Carson moved out at 18 and after trying to live on his own, dropped out of school and moved to Florida to stay with Glasier. A few months later Carson died in a motorcycle accident in Pennsylvania.

Cross examination

After the disciplinary counsel finished its questions, Grendell’s attorney, Kimberly Riley, did her best to poke holes in Hartman’s testimony.

She asked if Hartman was aware that the constable had offered to stay the full weekend with Glasier and the boys. “No, no one ever told me that,” Hartman explained. Riley also asked why Hartman resisted signing a diversion contract over financial concerns when the therapist agreed to accept a payment plan.

“I didn’t trust the court at that point,” Hartman said, adding “they were giving so much pressure” to put the kids in the diversion program.

“Ultimately, I didn’t think my boys were guilty of anything,” Hartman said.

A few weeks after their stay in juvenile detention, some family friends organized a prayer vigil at the courthouse. After Riley noted Hartman’s phone number was on the flier, she asked if Hartman had paid to have it posted on the Geuaga Maple Leaf’s Facebook page. “No that’s not correct,” Hartman said. Then Riley suggested someone else paid for its placement.

“I’ve never heard of any kind of money exchanged,” Hartman insisted.

In a statement, editor John Karlovec confirmed, “Hartman did not pay the Maple Leaf to post her flyer to its Facebook page.”

As for the failure of reunification counseling prior to the juvenile hall incident, Hartman insisted she regularly encouraged the kids to participate. Riley pressed her on whether there were consequences for refusing. Hartman said yes — she didn’t let them have friends over and took away movies and video games.

She added that her sons liked to build forts with old stage set materials, so she took that away; her daughter with Glasier had recently gotten Snapchat and Hartman canceled her account.

The post Stacy Hartman takes the stand in Geauga County Judge Grendell Ohio disciplinary hearings appeared first on Ohio Capital Journal .