Custody Hearing - Scheduled for 10/16

[raisincharlie]

Mt3K and others that may be heading to the hearing this am - would you please listen to hear if the Judge will allow the motion filed by the plaintiff's on 2 October concerning the submission of Nancy's statements? I think this is an important aspect - as these statements are Nancy's alone and may be much more telling than statements from others. Thanks !!!

 

[runr]

When I first heard the circumstances of this case (missing jogger, then found murdered off the side of the road in an undeveloped subdivision, then details of strangulation, etc.), my initial reaction was, "Random stranger, sexual assault, DNA will catch perp eventually."

Unfortunately, much of NC and BC's "dirty laundry" has been aired in the process.

In order to protect the children from any further disclosures from now until the case goes to trial (with any suspect, as I am in the SODDI camp until evidence indicates otehrwise), it would seem that staying temporarily with NC's family--with liberal private visitation with BC--would protect the girls the best.

Once the case is over, and the criminal sentenced, if BC is not the one who did it, he should immediately regain full custody of the children.

If they remain in NCarolina during this process, there is too much chance of the media glare causing them harm, IMO.

We shall see, of course.

Does NCarolina have "guardian at litems" AKA court appointed independent parties looking out for the best interests of the children?

 

[Just the Fax]

If being the most likely suspect that killed his wife was criteria for losing custody of his young kids, why is Jason Young allowed to keep his 5 year old daughter ?
This custody case should be interesting, as it could give Linda Fisher some hope to do the same thing and win. If nothing else, it will compel Jason Young to speak for the first time in 2 years.

 

[tippytoes]

When I first heard the circumstances of this case (missing jogger, then found murdered off the side of the road in an undeveloped subdivision, then details of strangulation, etc.), my initial reaction was, "Random stranger, sexual assault, DNA will catch perp eventually."

Unfortunately, much of NC and BC's "dirty laundry" has been aired in the process.

In order to protect the children from any further disclosures from now until the case goes to trial (with any suspect, as I am in the SODDI camp until evidence indicates otehrwise), it would seem that staying temporarily with NC's family--with liberal private visitation with BC--would protect the girls the best.

Once the case is over, and the criminal sentenced, if BC is not the one who did it, he should immediately regain full custody of the children.

If they remain in NCarolina during this process, there is too much chance of the media glare causing them harm, IMO.

We shall see, of course.

Does NCarolina have "guardian at litems" AKA court appointed independent parties looking out for the best interests of the children?

runr, I don't know if it's a guardian ad litem state. I wish SOMEONE would look out for the best interests of the children, but until now, no one has so.... I think not.

As far as the custody being decided when (and IF, big IF in North Carolina) charges are filed, I don't think the state can afford to wait. Unless this case is fast tracked before Albaroa and Young (both of whom I absolutely believe are guilty), it would be a mistake to wait the eternity it takes with the NC District Attroney. I hope not.

I truly hope today is a "put up or shut up" ruling. IF they have evidence, I have no problem. If NOT, they have some explaining to do regarding keeping a biological father a country from his children.

 

[tippytoes]

If being the most likely suspect that killed his wife was criteria for losing custody of his young kids, why is Jason Young allowed to keep his 5 year old daughter ?
This custody case should be interesting, as it could give Linda Fisher some hope to do the same thing and win. If nothing else, it will compel Jason Young to speak for the first time in 2 years.

This case isn't a spring board for the Young case. Jason has custody of his daughter. Brad shouldn't be separated, by an entire country, from his girls without evidence.

The DA can't re-write the mistakes in the Young case. "MOST LIKELY" is not a standard.

 

[Just the Fax]

This case isn't a spring board for the Young case. Jason has custody of his daughter. Brad shouldn't be separated, by an entire country, from his girls without evidence.

The DA can't re-write the mistakes in the Young case. "MOST LIKELY" is not a standard.

Who said there are mistakes in the Young case ?
I simply said if the Judge plans to consider that Brad killed his wife in deciding custody, then the same standard may be used in the Young case, if Linda decides to sue for custody of her Cassidy.

 

[CyberPro]

When I first heard the circumstances of this case (missing jogger, then found murdered off the side of the road in an undeveloped subdivision, then details of strangulation, etc.), my initial reaction was, "Random stranger, sexual assault, DNA will catch perp eventually."

Unfortunately, much of NC and BC's "dirty laundry" has been aired in the process.

In order to protect the children from any further disclosures from now until the case goes to trial (with any suspect, as I am in the SODDI camp until evidence indicates otehrwise), it would seem that staying temporarily with NC's family--with liberal private visitation with BC--would protect the girls the best.

Once the case is over, and the criminal sentenced, if BC is not the one who did it, he should immediately regain full custody of the children.

If they remain in NCarolina during this process, there is too much chance of the media glare causing them harm, IMO.

We shall see, of course.

Does NCarolina have "guardian at litems" AKA court appointed independent parties looking out for the best interests of the children?

North Carolina does have "Guardian ad litems", but AFAIK none have been appointed in this case. This is probably due to the grandparents obtaining temporary custody under the Ex Parte order. Although they do have a dog in the fight, they are suitable custodians of the interests of the minors involved, and have TS as competent counsel in the case to ensure that the minor's interest is considered.

CyberPro

 

[jmflu]

If being the most likely suspect that killed his wife was criteria for losing custody of his young kids, why is Jason Young allowed to keep his 5 year old daughter ?
This custody case should be interesting, as it could give Linda Fisher some hope to do the same thing and win. If nothing else, it will compel Jason Young to speak for the first time in 2 years.

Nothing wrong with referring to another case as an example, JTF, and as a comparison.

I also feel that if non-believers can post here, believers can post "there."

 

[maconrich]

North Carolina does have "Guardian ad litems", but AFAIK none have been appointed in this case. This is probably due to the grandparents obtaining temporary custody under the Ex Parte order. Although they do have a dog in the fight, they are suitable custodians of the interests of the minors involved, and have TS as competent counsel in the case to ensure that the minor's interest is considered.

CyberPro

ICAM!! There had to have been a good reason for the court to turn the children over to Nancy's family. As has been pointed out many times, NC isn't a state that's concerned about the rights of grandparents, so the fact the judge awarded temporary custody to them says a lot (to me).

As far as today, I'm inclined to go with those who won't be surprised if the involved parties reach an agreement (between themselves). And IMO it is NOT in the best interest of the children to be handed over to BC right now. There is too much at stake and it's better to err on the side of safety than to take the chance that the girls might be hurt or that BC might take off with them.

That said, if he does decide to go thru with the hearing, it should be interesting...
ETA: I also agree that the Young case IS very relevant to this case and see no reason it shouldn't be discussed when appropriate!! And in this case it absolutely was!!

 

[jmflu]

No, your first post clearly was. The ignore post was just silliness because I know you know where it is.

I have been on topic and tried to guide you to that as well....yeah, let a mod sort it out.

There IS an ignore button?? Where?

 

[Just the Fax]

No, your first post clearly was. The ignore post was just silliness because I know you know where it is.

I have been on topic and tried to guide you to that as well....yeah, let a mod sort it out.

I don't need to be guided when I did nothing wrong....k ?
It was not my intention to post here today and then be immediately attacked.

 

[jmflu]

"Non believers" aren't banned from anywhere. Just because not everyone is in agreement that Brad should be in handcuffs doesn't take away posting rights.

Not trying to take away rights, TT, trying to expand them.

I believe it was your post in the other thread that wished all the believers would just leave that thread to the nons.

No one is banned... yet.

 

[tippytoes]

I don't need to be guided when I did nothing wrong....k ?
It was not my intention to post here today and then be immediately attacked.

Who attacked you? There were several posters discussing the custody hearing until your post. Re read.

 

[garner_nc]

chicoliving already closed the general discussion thread because of attacks, insults or whatever you want to call it....Can we please not go down that road again?

 

[tippytoes]

Not trying to take away rights, TT, trying to expand them.

I believe it was your post in the other thread that wished all the believers would just leave that thread to the nons.

No one is banned... yet.

That's not what happened to the first non-100% believer thread, but the great thing is that ALL posters can add to any thread. Because I don't 100% believe Brad should be in jail at this moment, I am not relegated to a non-believer thread.

The first day that thread opened, I posted, but the thread was bombarded by "believers" Brad is guilty.

Reardless, I am sure I am allowed to post in the custody thread, whether I believe or not and that's the reason I am on this thread. I would like to get back to that topic if it's ok.

 

[jmflu]

That's not what happened to the first non-100% believer thread, but the great thing is that ALL posters can add to any thread. Because I don't 100% believe Brad should be in jail at this moment, I am not relegated to a non-believer thread.

The first day that thread opened, I posted, but the thread was bombarded by "believers" Brad is guilty.

Reardless, I am sure I am allowed to post in the custody thread, whether I believe or not and that's the reason I am on this thread. I would like to get back to that topic if it's ok.

Don't feel intimidated just because there are a lot of people who think Brad is guilty. There are plenty of people who believe he's not that coexist on that thread just fine. But when we get all emotional about it and start insulting each other and speaking with sarcasm, threads get shut down and people get banned. We welcome you and your point of view anywhere you like to post. :crazy:

 

[ncsu95]

ICAM!! There had to have been a good reason for the court to turn the children over to Nancy's family. As has been pointed out many times, NC isn't a state that's concerned about the rights of grandparents, so the fact the judge awarded temporary custody to them says a lot (to me).

As far as today, I'm inclined to go with those who won't be surprised if the involved parties reach an agreement (between themselves). And IMO it is NOT in the best interest of the children to be handed over to BC right now. There is too much at stake and it's better to err on the side of safety than to take the chance that the girls might be hurt or that BC might take off with them.

That said, if he does decide to go thru with the hearing, it should be interesting...
ETA: I also agree that the Young case IS very relevant to this case and see no reason it shouldn't be discussed when appropriate!! And in this case it absolutely was!!

Why couldn't he leave with his girls? He's neither a suspect or a POI in the murder of Nance, so doesn't that mean he is free to go where he wants with his children?

 

[maconrich]

Who said there are mistakes in the Young case ?
I simply said if the Judge plans to consider that Brad killed his wife in deciding custody, then the same standard may be used in the Young case, if Linda decides to sue for custody of her Cassidy.

Soooo I can't help but wonder if this case might end up being a reference point in NC?? And if so I wonder if it might help reduce the number of women murdered by their husbands in these parts?? :blowkiss:

Sorry to be forgetful but what time is this coming down today??



NCSU -- was typing while you posted so will answer you in this post (instead of doing a back to back one). What I meant by taking off is more along the lines of vanishing before the murder case is solved - or at least before he's cleared.

 

[ncsu95]

There used to be. But I don't see it anymore.

Hey mods, what happened to the ignore user button?

Click on the users name that you want to ignore. Right under there name, click on "user list" -> "add to ignore list".

That should do it.

 

[jmflu]

Click on the users name that you want to ignore. Right under there name, click on "user list" -> "add to ignore list".

That should do it.

So, when you do that, you won't see anything they post, is that it?