During this time period, we should have pumped Richard J. Marco, BBAS esteemed attorney, for more information.  

    Instead, we chose to remain in our waiting exile. Other BBAS clients were far more demanding in their requests for updates about their children than we were. We didn’t ask for updates about Anguel’s well being, and rarely about his paperwork status. What good would it have done?

    But was no news on Anguel good news?  Was playing the chastened client doing him any good?  What response would we have gotten other than “he’s doing well” ...  blah blah blah blah?

   March grew into April.  We took note that we had not had been in direct contact with Denise Hubbard since February.  That was fine as far as we were concerned.

    So, it was a stunner when, on April 16, Daniel received the following from “Denise Hubbard” bbadoption2@hotmail.com, titled “Hello,” from a portal email address no less. 

    We had been under the impression Denise would not be contacting us directly at all.  Why was she going against the word of her own counsel in contacting us?  Was this being done to check up on us ... or had our silence scared her?  

Hi Guys:  Just a note to say hi and let you know I was thinking of you all today!  I hope your holding up OK?  Are you enjoying your spring?  Have a great week!  Denise!

    Upon receipt, Daniel was more amused than anything else.  He responded:

Thank you very much for writing.  Yes, we are holding up OK.  Spring has been a little wet and cold so far, but that’s OK.  We are very much looking forward to bringing Anguel home. (BTW), has there been any luck finding out if he might have a sibling?)  Dan Case

    He was even more surprised to receive the following from Denise.  Guess who had blinked?

Great!  Enjoy the wonderful weather!  Still waiting for the release?  I asked Valeri about the sibling and still no confirmed answer.  Denise

    The release.  The release, oh her agency for that damned release.  

    She knew that if we signed, she had our guaranteed silence. What sort of people walked away from $9,500?  Those with higher moral standards than a liar running an adoption agency. Those who measure the worth of themselves by more than the balance of their checking account.

    We kept no response of Daniel’s to this.

    The curt emails, forwarded on from Valeri, were to continue. It was through one of these that we learned that BBAS street address had changed to a P.O. Box.  

    Nice to know about these things in advance, especially since we had asked before we we had been cut off. Yet another way of isolating us.

    Finally, our anxiety began to grow regarding the lack of information being sent our way about Anguel’s paperwork.  Curt, one-sentence emails forwarded on from Valeri Kamenov and Mr. Dobrev weren’t cutting it. 

    Our tolerance was nearly at an end. After Denise’s “kindly” email to us, we were becoming agitated.

    May came and still no word about his dossier getting the MOJ’s signature or even if a courtdate had been scheduled.

    Then the evening of Monday, May 29, 2000 hit.

    After I had gone to bed, Daniel was online answering email and one came in from “bbadoption,” carbon copied to SO113@aol.com; and “AttyMarco” titled “Update 5/29.”

    After reading this and responding, Daniel said he felt physically ill.  He wouldn’t even wake me up because he knew I’d go ballistic at that time of night.  

    This is the threat email that Denise Hubbard, in her auspicious capacity as agency director sent us, her paying clients.  Make no doubt.  

    We call this one the “Take It Up the Ass and Enjoy It” message.  This one email is just one minor reason for this website, but it’s one we keep constantly in mind.

            Mr. And Mrs. Case:

I just returned from Bulgaria and visited Burgas.  I spoke with Dr. S. and she was quite distraught with the fact that you had another attorney asking questions about your case.  She advised you need to not have any other attorney contact the orphanage.  Anguel is part of the Building Blocks cases and only will be recognized as so.  She will not give any information on this child or this case to any other individual unless the person is part of BB.

I played with Anguel and he is doing well.  Dr. S. would only let me see him and felt because of the issue stated above that their was no need to provide updated photos or videos.  She felt the adoptive parents were trying to stop the adoption and no other photos were needed.  I assured her otherwise, but she still insisted on no photos being released.  She advised the case would continue unless there were further interventions you create or we advised you were no longer interested in this child and wanted to work with another agency for the adoption of a different child.

Please note your case is going well.  We want Anguel to have a good home.  Your case at this time is in the Ministry of Justice.  There was a delay with the documents being signed due to this issue.  I have cleared this problem and now we hope the signature will be made within the next two weeks.

We will advise of any other changes.

Denise Hubbard

    Infuriated is the word that comes to mind even today.  Interesting they blamed us for contacts made by AIAA and Jordan Dardov.  

    Perhaps if we had been treated better, we wouldn’t have had to contact another agency to see if they could get our son out of Dr. Sabrutova’s Mother and Child Hold ’em Till We Sell ’em Home.  Was Dr. Sabrutova up to something else at this time that she was so incensed? (Hold on to that thought).

     Why would Dr. Sabrutova have been so angry at us for attempting to get Anguel out using Charity? What was she up to over there on the Black Sea? (A year later, we would find out that was not just a rhetorical question).

    And since when did we give our agency any authority to say whether or not we intended in continuing to pursue Anguel’s adoption? It was not in the contract we had signed, assuming that the contract we had signed for Russia was applicable. 

    “We advised” ... what was this?  Who were they to have any say in what we did, how we did it or who we contacted about it?

    The most obvious and glaring lie was the “delay with the documents being signed due to this issue.”  At no time was proof presented to us that us contacting AIAA or Jordan Dardov had caused any delays with Anguel’s paperwork.

    If it was a ploy to blame us for delaying Anguel’s adoption process, it didn’t work.  We seriously doubted if Denise even had any pull whatsoever that she could have “cleared” this faux problem with the MOJ.  The only problem she should have cleared was herself and this obnoxious and hurtful email.

    After an hour, Daniel regained his temper, and responded with this fairly even-handed message.  He hit “Reply All” so it went to SO113@aol.com and “AttyMarco:”

What is this about?  Could you please elaborate?…Well, that’s the way it should be…We are certainly not trying to stop the adoption.  We think of Anguel EVERY DAY.  We can’t have him home too soon for him and for us.  We certainly didn’t intend to create any interventions.  We weren’t aware we had created any in the first place.  Did she say whether he had a sibling or not?

Well, that’s good to hear at least.  We had been waiting to hear when that hurdle was crossed or would be crossed.  Hopefully the court proceedings will go smoothly.

If there are any other documents, or updated documents that might even possibly be required, now’s the time to give us the heads up.  The more prepared we and you are, the better things will go.

    Daniel played dumb about my contacting the other entities and played the hopeful daddy once again.  Denise’s response was caustic and blameworthy.  Not to mention another major LIE contained within:

            Mr. Case:

You or your wife contacted another agencies attorney to inqure about Anguel and his sibs.  When you did this, it sent red flags to the director on your stability.  I made a special trip to solve this problem.  Because of this situation, I was unable to get any updates on any of the children in the orphanage.  The director was quite distraught.  I will advise of any other paperwork changes when they come.

Denise Hubbard

    “Red flags” as to our stability?  This was slander.  

    The Pope Himself would have been going off the rails about having to conduct the adoption of a two-year old child using this agency. We are blamed for the problems Denise herself caused with her lies.

    Had she indeed made a “special trip” to solve the “problem.”  If so, why hadn’t we been informed of it?  If it was a problem that we had caused, shouldn’t we have been made aware of it? Perhaps we could have helped.

    Daniel fired off a letter the next day to Richard J. Marco, via email and certified U.S. mail.  He asked Mr. Marco if Denise was operating within the boundaries set forth by Mr. Marco about contacting us directly applied to Denise as well as to us.

    The April 16 email was curious. As was this slanderous and hurtful thing we had just received.

    We never received a response, which goes to show what an honest and caring organization and attorney we were dealing with. 

    They really care about the babies and the children, don’t they?  They really care about their clients as well.  What happened to that “caring and helpful” agency director who wanted to give All God’s Orphaned Children a Forever Family?

    We were pissed off.  Very, very, very pissed off.  

    Our long term plans began to take shape in how we were going to inform the rest of the world about this “adoption experience.” 

    First, of course, we considered suing them. Although our contract with BBAS, the one we had signed for Cyril’s adoption, specifically stated that in such a case damages would be limited to the amount of money we had actually paid, in effect making such litigation uneconomical unless you found a lawyer willing to work pro bono or represented yourself, we had never actually signed a contract for Anguel’s adoption from Bulgaria.

    In fact, Denise had returned a check I wrote to cover a separate application fee for Anguel’s adoption, suggesting they were waiving contractual coverage. Also, the contract for Cyril’s adoption specifically refers to the Russian government at one point.

    However, Rick Marco had told us in writing that BBAS considered itself contractually obligated to complete Anguel’s adoption, which was one of the few strings we had to pull on them. So we had to consider that, too, as would any judge or jury.

    There was one possible way to argue that BBAS had breached the contract for Cyril, though — Section 5, which states that the agency has the responsibility to provide medical information and access to care while in the foreign country.

    Could that be a window of opportunity to hold them accountable? My mother referred us to a lawyer in Cleveland she knew, and we got in touch with him. He asked to see what we had.

    It was a lot, and we sent it out to him for review.