Sticky

By:
On:

by Michelle Riess Hi everyone! Writing has always been therapeutic for me but writing about my adoption is no longer providing me with the peace or clarity it once brought–in fact, it is doing the opposite. While I am happy that I have reached so many other late discovery adopteesContinue Reading

By:
On:

This is a quick analysis of a 1981 Courier-Post article highlighting some of the major inconsistencies with what Edward Kent stated during his court testimony and what actually took place during Michelle’s adoption process. This post briefly discusses these critical issues and questions why the court, and the State ofContinue Reading

By:
On:

Michelle Riess was recently a guest on Extreme Genes with Scott Fisher. It’s a two-part interview, now available for free on the Extreme Genes website. There is also a bonus interview available only to Extreme Genes paid subscribers. Michelle’s portion of the episode begins around the 10:45 mark, then continues afterContinue Reading

By:
On:

Original Publication: Courier-Post Original Publication Date: June 5, 1981 NOTE: Much of the information taken from Kent’s testimony completely contradicts Hollie’s experiences and even some of the details that were provided to Michelle by her adoptive father in 2017. We briefly discuss these issues and inconsistencies in this post. CAMDENContinue Reading

By:
On:

Original Publication: Courier-Post Original Publication Date: October 17, 1981 NOTE: Much of the information taken from Kent’s testimony completely contradicts Hollie’s experiences and even some of the details that were provided to Michelle by her adoptive father in 2017. We briefly discuss these issues and inconsistencies in this post. ByContinue Reading

By:
On:

Original Publication: Courier-Post Original Publication Date: November 18, 1978 NOTE: Much of the information taken from Kent’s testimony completely contradicts Hollie’s experiences and even some of the details that were provided to Michelle by her adoptive father in 2017. We briefly discuss these issues and inconsistencies in this post. ByContinue Reading

By:
On:

173 N.J. Super. 215 (1980) STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. EDWARD KENT, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. Argued March 10, 1980. Decided July 1, 1980. [1] *218 Before Judges SEIDMAN, MICHELS and DEVINE. William C. Levine, Assistant Prosecutor, argued the cause for appellant (John B. Mariano,Continue Reading

By:
On:

Original publication: Courier-Post Original publication date: January 22, 1963 “His conduct is dishonorable and brings the profession into disrepute.” -a New Jersey Supreme Court Justice referring to Edward Kent TRENTON (UPI) – The State Supreme Court Monday reprimanded lawyer Edward Kent of Levittown* for bypassing a Pennsylvania lawyer and dealingContinue Reading

By:
On:

Original Publication: Courier-Post Original Publication Date: June 25, 1981 NOTE: Much of the information taken from Kent’s testimony completely contradicts Hollie’s experiences and even some of the details that were provided to Michelle by her adoptive father in 2017. We will be writing about these inconsistencies at a later date.Continue Reading

By:
On:

Original Publication: The Philadelphia Inquirer Original Publication Date: April 15, 1978 NOTE: Much of the information taken from Kent’s testimony completely contradicts Hollie’s experiences and even some of the details that were provided to Michelle by her adoptive father in 2017. We will be writing about these inconsistencies at aContinue Reading

By:
On:

Original Publication: The New York Times Original Publication Date: April 15, 1978 CAMDEN, N.J., April 14 (UPI) – A lawyer with offices in Marlton, N.J., and Willingboro, N.J., has been indicted for allegedly arranging the illegal adoption of babies. The indictment of the lawyer, Edward Kent, 52 years old, wasContinue Reading