I've attended enough hearings as foster parents that I'm pretty sure no judge is going to give her much in the way of custody (or anything at all, given one of the charges CURRENTLY under investigation is child endangerment of some sort, which she does have a CPS history of) until the smoke clears.
That said, remember this:
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/07/terri_hormans_divorce_attorney.html
Given my perspective on this case, if what I saw is accurate, she has an even bigger reason not to change custody now, as gitana said in the other thread. Once there's a custody decision, it's hard to get changed without good reason. What if they know something we don't about Kaine? Or Terri's innocence? Challenging the RO right now could be the WORST move, and waiting a few months could be wise.
Respectfully snipped by me for space.
Juvenile dependency court and family court are different animals. It is easier to take custody of a child away from a parent in juvenile cases because there is an independent third party (LE/Social Services) making an assessment that the child would be in danger remaining with a parent. In my experience, Th had a great chance at some kind of custody or at least visitation for the following reasons:
1. Kaine's allegations in the RO application are hearsay. He would have had to prove those allegations in court to justify an RO, meaning he would have had to offer actual evidence in the form of proof (LE testimony, etc). TH could have easily objected to the hearsay statements at the regularly set hearing (not the emergency hearing). Actually, he took a big risk by filing his application because had TH fought, he may have had to lay bare the evidence against TH in this case, whatever that may be.
2. TH has not been named a suspect or POI by LE in the investigation. Thus, it does not matter what possible charges are under investigation, in the context of the RO, unless LE would be willing to testify to that.
3. Most people are granted, at the least, supervised visitation. Even in the face of a finding of child abuse or DV.
4. Baby K is a child of tender years. Such children are usually found by the courts to need frequent contact with their primary caregiver (normally mama).
5. There still exists a general bias in favor of mothers, in the family court systems, especially when the children in question are young.
He wouldn't be in violation of the order (as in capable of being charged with a violation), because the order is in his favor only. There is no order requiring him to stay away from TH. However, if he does enter *her space* her lawyer would argue that he obviously didn't need the order in the first place, since he's deliberately put himself in contact with her. jmoo
This is more than your opinion. It is fact.
But why would you try to kidsnatch your own kid if this was the case?
Good question.
Personally I cannot think of any reason that I would not fight tooth and nail to see my dds if separated from them as TH is.
However, we do not know if she is fighting behind the scenes as she doesn't seem to be forthcoming with info (?)
If I push myself into coming up with a reason for K having sole custody and her having nil/restricted access, the only one I can think is that TH wants baby K to have the stability of the family home and her own belongings around her.
Baby K could still have the stability of her family home and see her mother. This is a flimsy reason for giving up custodial rights to a child, IMHO.
Respectfully, I am not sure what fighting behind the scenes means. This is real life and that means that fighting for child custody/visitation rights is done via the courts - publicly.
I've posted my theory of why she isn't fighting the RO at this time. It was poo-poo'd by many. Oh well.
Why should she fight the RO now, when there's a snowball's chance in hell she'll win and risk her defense in a probable trial related to Kyron's disappearance where, if found guilty, she'll never have her daughter again? Why not put aside the desire for immediate gratification (which won't happen in any case) and look toward a long-term goal that is more likely to be achieved?
Because it is in the best interest of baby K to have contact with her mother, as long as her mother is a safe person to be around.
Again, I fail to see how there was a snowball's chance that TH would win the RO case unless there is actual proof supporting Kaine's allegations. Allegations are not evidence.
She's not going to get her daughter back until and unless she wins the probable trial related to Kyron's disappearance. Or the grand jury declines to indict her.
I think you are right. Because one cannot simply go back into court and say, "I have changed my mind. I want to revisit the court order that I failed to contest previously." Also, now TH has helped created the status quo of Baby K living primarily with dad and having zero (0) contact with mom. The more time passes the harder it will be for her to change that without hugely compelling reasons. The Court likes to keep things the way they are when it comes to custody unless the way things are has suddenly become detrimental to the child. For example, the argument that, "Well, it is in the baby's best interest to have contact with mama" will likely not fly if the baby has had no contact with mama for a significant period of time. However, arguing that "the custodial parent is abusing the baby and custody should be reversed", that would be an argument that would fly with the courts in a bid for a modification of custody. IMO.
