We The Parents

🚨 BUSTED: DISHONORABLE JUDGE LESLIE CELEBREZZE BOOKED INTO JAIL YESTERDAY 🚨

📍Cuyahoga County, Ohio

​It is official. Yesterday, June 1, 2026, former Family Court Judge Leslie Ann Celebrezze was sentenced to 60 days in jail, hit with a $10,000 fine, and marched straight out of the courtroom into a jail cell.

​This is a massive win. She is officially Inmate ID: 0370501, booked on felony tampering charges.

​The facts are clear: Celebrezze rigged her own courtroom. She manually bypassed the mandatory random assignment system to steer high-conflict divorce cases to her personal friend, approving nearly $500,000 in fees funded directly out of the life savings of everyday families.

​The system tried to hand her a pass. Prosecutors didn't even push for jail time. But because the paper trail was completely undeniable, she was locked up anyway.

‼️THIS IS YOUR PROOF: START DIGGING‼️

​This is the ultimate proof that judges are not immune. For years, parents have suspected that family court judges and professionals are running games behind closed doors to drag out conflict and bleed parental assets.

​This case proves it: What you think they are doing, they are actually doing.

​But they only win when they operate in the dark. Celebrezze didn’t get caught because of rumors—she got caught because the evidence was right there in the court logs and dockets.

​We are handing you the proof right here that accountability is possible. Now, it is your turn to look at your own cases:

​1️⃣ Pull your own dockets. Request the internal court assignment logs.
2️⃣ File the records requests. Use public records and FOIA laws to look for patterns, unmatched entries, and financial steering.
3️⃣ File formal complaints. When you find the discrepancies, do not sit on them. Force the state judicial conduct boards to look at the evidence.

​They want you to believe they are untouchable. Do not let them. Use this victory as your blueprint, and start digging in your own county.

​We The Parents | Investigative Journalism & Court Watch

You are listening to audio from a Seminole County, Florida family court hearing in the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit, where Christopher Sprysenski explains why court watchers were excluded from a virtual hearing.

Judge Sprysenski openly states the case was NOT sealed — yet says observers needed to file motions asking permission to “watch court” virtually.

He then claims one observer had an “active writ” and uses that as part of the justification for excluding the group, despite there being no active writ since last year.

Following this hearing, the court watcher contacted the JA asking why observers were denied access. The response? “You can set up a case management hearing.”

Days later, a new writ was issued on that same court watcher — essentially reactivating an old writ after she attempted to court watch.

We the Parents court watch family courts all around the country on a weekly basis and have never heard of court watchers needing to file motions just to observe a virtual courtroom in a non-sealed case.

And publicly singling out a court watcher in open court — while falsely implying they had an active arrest warrant — appears far more like humiliation and intimidation than transparency.

How is the public supposed to feel safe observing family court when court watchers are being treated like this? 🚨

We the Parents
Investigative Journalism | Court Watch | Public Oversight

⚠️🧑🏼‍⚖️🏝️🍹WHO IS LEGAL AID ACTUALLY HELPING? 🤔

A local attorney just publicly stated that lawyers are warned in law school against taking family court cases pro bono and that parents are “going to waste time looking for that.”

Meanwhile, Legal Aid websites publicly advertise services for:

• Divorce
• Paternity
• Injunctions
• Guardianship
• Child custody

Yet almost every parent we speak to says they were denied, turned away, or told Legal Aid doesn’t handle their situation. 🚩

So we are genuinely asking:

Who is Legal Aid actually helping in family court? 🤔

Because parents across the country are being told to “call Legal Aid,” only to end up right back where they started — alone, pro se, overwhelmed, and financially destroyed.

📣 We are looking for parents who actually received real pro bono representation from Legal Aid in family court.

Not advice. Not forms.

An attorney who actually stood beside you and fought for you in court.

If that was your experience, we want to hear from you.

Cue the violins. 🎻

We the Parents
Investigative Journalism | Court Watch | Public Oversight

🚨 COURT WATCHER BLOCKED FROM PUBLIC HEARING — DAYS LATER, NEW CONTEMPT WRIT ISSUED 🚨

📍 Seminole County, Florida

Christopher Sprysenski

On April 8, 2026 at 8:30 AM, a public We the Parents Court Watch event was scheduled for a Seminole County family court hearing before Judge Christopher Sprysenski.

The hearing was conducted as a hybrid hearing, with some participants appearing in person while others attended virtually through Microsoft Teams.

The hearing was publicly promoted in advance. Multiple observers RSVP’d and attempted to attend virtually through the court’s online system.

According to statements made on the record, observers were denied entry.

The party in the hearing reportedly informed the court that court watchers were present and requested they be allowed into the proceeding.

Judge Sprysenski allegedly responded that observers would need motions or permission to attend and further claimed one female observer “has a writ” and would not be permitted entry.

🚔 THE WRIT CLAIM 🚔

Records reviewed by We the Parents show the referenced writ appears connected to prior proceedings in case 2017-DR-002946.

Court records reflect:

- Docket 807 — Writ of Bodily Attachment issued September 19, 2025
- Docket 822 — Writ returned cancelled November 19, 2025

Despite the writ being cancelled months earlier, observers report it was still referenced on April 8, 2026 as justification for denying courtroom access.

📧 APRIL 8–24, 2026: EMAILS TO THE COURT 📧

On April 8, 2026, the court watcher identified on the record as allegedly “having a writ” emailed Judicial Assistant Amanda Joseph requesting written clarification regarding:

- Public access policies for virtual hearings
- Why observers were denied access
- The legal basis for requiring non-parties to obtain permission
- Why an observer was described on the record as “having a writ”

The email specifically stated the inquiry involved public access and procedural concerns — not the merits of any pending case.

On April 15, 2026, Amanda Joseph responded stating:

“Judge Sprysenski has no problem addressing your questions below during an in-person Case Management Conference.”

The response also requested dates to schedule that conference.

On April 24, 2026, the court watcher responded asking what case the proposed case management conference would even apply to, noting that the request involved courtroom access and transparency — not litigation of an active case.

The response again requested written clarification instead of an in-person proceeding.

⚠️ THEN THE CASE ESCALATED ⚠️

Court records show that same day — April 24, 2026 — new writ-related filings suddenly appeared in the docket:

- Docket 836 — Writ of Attachment Issued
- Docket 837 — Amended Writ of Attachment

This followed:

- Active ADA accommodation requests
- Updated medical documentation submitted before hearing dates
- Pending motions to disqualify Judge Sprysenski
- Objections to proceedings occurring while disqualification motions remained unresolved

Relevant filings include:

- Docket 811 — Supplemental Motion to Disqualify Judge Christopher Sprysenski (10/09/2025)
- Docket 813 — Objection to Any Action or Ruling While Motion to Disqualify is Pending (10/10/2025)
- Docket 834 — Notice of Non Participation Objection Request for ADA Compliance (02/11/2026)

🚨 THE BIGGER QUESTION 🚨

A court watcher questioned why observers were blocked from entering a public courtroom.

The response was not written clarification about public access policies.

Instead, the situation escalated into new contempt and writ proceedings from the same division.

The public can decide for themselves whether that sequence raises concerns.

If members of the public need permission to observe a courtroom…
then it is no longer functioning as a truly public courtroom.

If you have been affected by this Judge please contact us.

[email protected]

We the Parents
Investigative Journalism | Court Watch | Public Oversight

No one should be grieving a living child.

Yet family court has created an entire generation of parents, children, grandparents, siblings, and families grieving people who are still alive.

Children are often dropped off at school and never return to one of their homes again.

No chance to say goodbye to their bedroom, toys, pets, siblings, grandparents, cousins, aunts, uncles, friends, schools, activities, routines, neighborhoods, or entire communities.

Entire parts of a child’s life can disappear overnight.

And whole families are left searching for “proof of life” through public records requests, police reports, school transcripts, school programs, sports photos, social media posts, yearbooks, or strangers online.

This is not normal.
This is not healing.
This is insanity.
This needs to end.
This should never be happening.

People need to know what is happening behind the closed doors of family court.
Tell your story.
Speak up.
Share this.
Start the conversation.

The more people who understand this system, the harder it becomes to ignore.

Abolish family court.

We The Parents