Mimesis Law
17 August 2017

Parenting by Police Intervention

Jan. 28, 2016 (Mimesis Law) — Ronald Jackson and Michelle Steppe have a daughter together, although they had never been married. That daughter lived with Michelle and for the first years of her life, during which it was believed that another man was her father.

In 2010, paternity was established by DNA testing, showing that Ronald Jackson was the father, and in a Suit Affecting the Parent-Child Relationship (known as a SAPCR, pronounced “sap-cer”) and subsequent court orders, Ronald was ordered to pay child support. He was also given visitation, under a standard visitation order, having the child on the 1st, 3rd, and 5th weekends of each month.

This was not a big happy family. Michelle, who was originally known as Michelle Irwin‑Jackson, legally changed her name to Steppe. Petitions and counter-claims were filed over and over. However, through all of this, Ronald still had visitation under the order, and under the order, while he has the child, has:

“the duty of care, control, protection, and reasonable discipline of the child…”*

It also provides that Ronald has the right:

“to direct the moral and religious training of the child.”**

In September of 2013, Ronald found that his 12-year-old daughter was sending inappropriate texts on a cell phone. So he took the phone away from her, and within hours, Grand Prairie Police Officers showed up at his door, demanding the phone.

Did I mention that it was reported that Michelle used to be a dispatcher for GPPD? Or that her boyfriend (or husband? It’s unclear, as her Pinterest page has a “Police Wife” board), Nick Steppe, works as a police officer for GPPD? Or that Michelle is now a member of a city Advisory Board in Grand Prairie?

Ronald did not want to turn over his parental discipline to the police, most especially police who appeared to be doing this either as a favor for Michelle, or as a means of intimidation. So he refused to turn over the phone to either his daughter or the police.

In my view, and in the view of most of those who commented on the WFAA FaceBook page, Ronald had the duty to handle reasonable discipline of his daughter. So why were the police involved?

Well, simply put, because Michelle was upset.

And when the police showed up, they began demanding that Ronald give up his right to discipline his child when he had possession of the child, and police don’t like it when people tell them to pound sand.

So they issued a citation for Theft under $50, a class C misdemeanor punishable by a fine of no more than $500. By God, we’ll teach him to defy us.

Only Ronald demanded a jury trial. So the city prosecutor dropped the charges and the GPPD filed the case with the Dallas County District Attorney as a Theft $50 but under $500, a class B misdemeanor punishable by six months in jail and a $2,000 fine.

Yeah, that’s so much more reasonable.

And they arrested him on a warrant, put him in jail, and forced him to post a $1,500 bond to get out. Then they went ahead and tried him.

Yeah, that’s reasonable too.

After the State presented its case, Judge Lisa Green directed the jury to find Ronald not guilty. It’s called a “directed verdict.” It doesn’t happen very often, although defense attorneys will almost always ask for it. Hell, it never happens.

What a directed verdict means is that the State’s case was so poor that it did not come close to showing that the defendant committed the offense. That it was so weak that no reasonable jury could possibly find the defendant guilty, so the judge tells them how they are going to vote on the issue. Not guilty.

Note that the defense doesn’t even have to put on a case. That’s how weak the State’s case was.

Ronald is now looking at a civil lawsuit.

The City of Grand Prairie should, but won’t, be looking at its own officers, prosecutors, and staff to find out why they went after a father exercising his duty to raise his own child.

Dallas County should be looking at why they wasted the taxpayers’ money in prosecuting this.

The citizens should be looking at the politicians, and ask not only why do you allow this, but why would you put the person who was the cause of this on a city advisory board?

In any event, Ronald was correct in telling the police to pound sand. It is not right for police to handle parenting, either directly or as a favor for an officer’s girlfriend.

*See Cause DF-10-04327, Order in Suit Affecting Parent-Child Relationship, 256th District Court, dated June 25, 2012.

**Id.

4 Comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

*

*

Comments for Fault Lines posts are closed here. You can leave comments for this post at the new site, faultlines.us

  • Sharon Ward
    29 January 2016 at 12:16 am - Reply

    This comes down to classic parental alienation.

    Dad has had to fight for her! The only reason that this father was not in his daughters life for her first seven years is because this crazy mom LIED to him. Another man was under the impression for first 7 years that he was this lil girls father. When he filed for full custody of her, mom dropped the “she’s not yours” bombshell. DNA showed she cheated! Birth certificate changed. All public court record. This woman has disrupted so many lives that even that first father had to let go and get that crazy woman out of his life. She has tormented so many people and alienated not just this father, BUT TWO! How do you communicate with a woman like that??? She used her new boyfriends badge to control her ex and it blew up in her face.

    Also, she never married either men. She receives VA death benefits from her first husband and has had several wedding ceremonies but you won’t find a license or a divorce. She just changes her name in court. VA fraud?

    Dad has had to fight for her! Both dads! When a child tells you they want nothing to do with you but the courts still allows visitation… Eventually it becomes a very sad situation for dad when the kid hates you through each weekend or summer visitation. At some point, as much as it hurts, you let go and hope one day they return when they are adults and can make their own choices away from parental alienation. That is exactly what happened to the first dad of this girl. Her sister is 18 and now has a relationship with first dad, despite losing them 8 years ago. Someday maybe this girl will understand what her father did and will see that her mother influenced her choice to not want anything to do with him. So sad!

  • Cornflake S. Pecially
    29 January 2016 at 1:22 am - Reply

    The board Michelle was appointed to is the Animal Shelter Advisory Board.

    And seeing as how each board and commission establishes its own attendance rules, regulations and methods of enforcement, in Grand Prairie, she ought to fit right in.

    A bit strange though, after reading this post I would have definitely pegged her for putting her hat in the ring for a spot on the Housing/Community Improvement Commission seeing as how there isn’t a Police Oversight Board or Commission in Grand Prairie.

    There is a mighty fine photo of someone sporting a back hip holster appearing next to a bald eagle tramp stamp tattoo on her Pinterst page though, thanks for sharing.

    Texas! Gotta-love-it!

    P.S. If Ronald stops by and reads this post, I sincerely hope he considers putting in some language about Grand Prairie starting up a Citizens Police Oversight Board in his initial and final requests for an adequate resolution to the dastardly deeds delivered upon him. That should give the powers that be in Grand Prairie something to reflect upon, as they ponder the best way to settle the civil suit without having to face a judge or jury.

  • Nikki
    29 January 2016 at 9:25 am - Reply

    I LOVE your article on Michelle Steppe/Ronald Jackson. Having family with the exact same problems wih Michelle and her husband that Ron does, I am SO glad this is all starting to come out. Keep an eye out, this isn’t over and a lot more interesting information to come.. Check out Johnson County District Court… (Constant court actions there, Habeas orders because of illegal restraint, polygraphs to prove she falsely accused someone of attacking her and discovery filed about husbands child’s own cell phone, but I bet the husband wouldn’t be arrested for the exact same thing he is doing with his child’s phone the child’s mother sends for visits AND pays for, oh and cop husband doesn’t even pay child support) oh, and the best part… She was married to a Marine for 4 months who died in a training accident on base many years ago, so she just changes her name to whatever boyfriend she has and carries on “my husband, my husband,” all the while making whatever husband of the year, exwife and children absolutely miserable. SO thrilled that someone is seeing her for exactly what she is!!!!!

  • Mike Clifton
    29 January 2016 at 9:51 am - Reply

    Excellent article! This shows the exact element(s)of Parental Alienation(PA) and the hypocrisy of the Courts/Judiciary when it comes to same. Texas Family Courts refuse to get in front of this and acknowledge this(and ALL of the resultant problem(s)) to both the family and the child(ren). This is definitely ‘NOT in the best interest of the child’…CONTRARY to the fundamental concept of Family Court to begin with. ‘Interference of child custody’ IS A STATE JAIL FELONY via(TPC 25.03)!
    The Judiciary refuses to prosecute for this ‘CRIMINAL’ act yet will go out of their way(as in this case)in pursuit of a ‘without merit’ trial on the back end.
    It begs the question ‘why’ prosecute the one and not the other? This Judicial course of action just perpetuates the alienating behavior…it must stop!