Cui bono? Whom does it benefit? The ancient Roman formula for determining responsibility as well as culpability for any given act. As far as such constructs go, it is the gold standard: so brief yet so profound, encapsulating the psychic history of man better than Freud ever did.
Also known as the "Rule of Cassianus," the Roman judge who devised it in the days of Cicero (who recommended its use), cui bono is still the most relevant question that can be asked at any trial. For, except in very few instances — so rare that we erect statues to the exceptions — man is activated by his own interests, first and foremost. If you would know the architect of any work, do not look at the inscriptions, but at the bottom line. Whoever benefits directly by any act may be presumed to have committed it, whether as hero or villain.
Keep that in mind.
It appears that the most important documents in the Cubas-Izquierdo custody trial, which begun today, in Miami, have mysteriously disappeared from from the Juvenile Court Clerk's Office, adjacent to Circuit Judge Jeri B. Cohen's courtroom, where they had been deposited by the Department of Children and Families as per official procedure. The documents in the lost folder, which constitute the court's official record, include the mother's voluntary surrender of custody to the state, known as a dependency disposition (that is, she disposed of her dependent). Also "misplaced," as The Miami Herald characterizes it, is the transcript of the legal hearing where Elena Pérez agreed with the state's contention that she was an unfit mother and renounced custody of her children.
Now this is no mere case of casual negligence which can be easily remedied by duplicating the lost documents. The court has, or should have, the originals documents and these cannot be duplicated. So irregular is this loss and ominous its consequences that it could impact or even preempt the case. In fact, the abusive, psychologically-unbalanced and suicidal mother, who is supposedly penniless, has hired her own attorney to represent her "interests" in the case, though legally she has none. It is obvious that the Castro regime is hedging all its bets, and if it does not succeed in getting custody for the father, may just claim on the basis of the lost court record that the mother never surrendered custody and attempt to have her so-called "parental rights" reinstated. Kurzban, the lawyer hired by the Cuban regime, threatened to avail himself of the opportunity afforded by the "lost" of the official court record to petition the Third District Court to halt the trial and give custody to the birth father.
It was reported by The Miami Herald that Judge Cohen was outraged with this development and blamed, of all people, the Department of Children and Family Services. Yet the pertinent documents had been deposited by DCF with her court clerk. The documents had disappeared from the court's own custody and jurisdiction. How is it possible that the most important documents in the most important case to be heard by Juvenile Court could just vanish without a trace? Yes, flukes do happen, but there are no indications that this was a fluke. If the documents were permanently removed or misplaced for the interim from the clerk's office, who could have done it and why?
Now is when we must ask ourselves cui bono?