On October 16, 2020, Dr. P. Raymond Griffin surrendered his license to the New York State Office of Alcohol and Substance Abuse Services (OASAS). This surrender came following a state investigation that found Griffin guilty of serious professional misconduct. The findings are particularly significant because Griffin was the court-appointed forensic evaluator whose report formed the evidentiary foundation for the custody orders that continue to restrict Stephen Russell's access to his daughter.
Dr. Griffin was cited for the following violations:
Griffin's professional evaluations did not fairly or objectively assess the evidence presented. His conclusions were biased and failed to meet professional standards for forensic evaluation.
Griffin mishandled toxicology evidence—the same evidence at the heart of the case involving Tara Walsh's administration of Seroquel to Stephen Russell without consent. This was not minor negligence but gross negligence, indicating reckless disregard for proper procedures.
Griffin's records and documentation were inaccurate, creating false or misleading information in his official reports to the court.
Griffin renewed his Credentialed Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Counselor (CASAC) license by using falsified documents. This was not negligence but deliberate fraud.
Stephen Russell's custody orders depend substantially on Griffin's forensic evaluation. The orders restriction Russell's contact with Evie were based, in part, on Griffin's conclusions and recommendations. Yet the state investigation found that Griffin:
According to the Motion to Vacate:
Stephen Russell had reported these issues to the court and to OASAS. The state investigation confirmed he was correct. However, the custody orders that relied on Griffin's fraudulent evaluation remain in effect, restricting Russell's access to his daughter.
While Griffin was found to have fraudulently handled toxicology evidence in the Westchester custody case, the San Francisco civil case directly addressed the toxicology of Seroquel administration. The jury in San Francisco found that:
The toxicology was properly handled and interpreted in San Francisco, but mishandled by Griffin in Westchester. Yet Griffin's faulty toxicology handling was used to support orders restricting Russell's custody rights.
Under New York law (CPLR 5015(a)(3)), a judgment or order may be vacated if the moving party can show:
The OASAS findings of fraud in Griffin's renewal and gross negligence in toxicology handling satisfy these requirements. The custodial orders would not have been entered, or would have been fundamentally different, had the court known that the evidentiary foundation was fraudulent.
These findings are matters of public record with the New York State Department of Health (OASAS). They are not disputed or subject to confidentiality claims that would prevent their use in subsequent proceedings. The license surrender is a matter of public record that can be verified by checking OASAS's public database.
This is public record evidence from the New York State Department of Health. The findings of fraud and gross negligence are unambiguous. They directly undermine the evidentiary foundation of the custody orders. The evidence is contemporaneous with the alleged misconduct and not subject to dispute. Its only limitation is that remedying this fraud requires a motion to vacate the orders that depend on Griffin's report.