MI - Three siblings in juvenile detention for contempt, Pontiac, 9 July 2015

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
KaaBoom said:
OK I will try to make this simple. The kids don't want to have anything to do with their father. If the father would just accept that, and go back to Israel and take care of his new wife and baby there, none of this would be happening. The mother has had custody of the children for the last five years. She would continue to have custody. The status quo would continue. If the father wasn't pushing it, there would be no reason for the court to even be involved anymore. There would be no reason for the court to order the kids to have lunch with him.

The father is the only one who could put a stop to this. But because he is all but hurt about the kids not wanting to talk to him, is doing his best to make their lives a living hell. He's cost the mother $75,000 in legal fees, and he got his nine year old daughter thrown in jail. He's a big man, isn't he?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

So in your world children can just randomly decide to disavow a parent? Both parents, or just one? What if there is only one?

Clearly this was not status quo in this family prior to the mother filing for divorce. Nobody has ever terminated the father's rights. He remains their father. It has been substantiated that the mother has a long history of interference and refusal to follow court-ordered plans. In the face of this, it is puzzling that anyone would advocate for a parent to walk away from their children.
 
From the concept of natural justice, and, IMO, for trust to remain in a judicial system, the perception that the public holds can be as important as the actual action taken. If the perception exists that even the slightest impropriety has occurred, the judgement is tainted and dissatisfaction, at the least, may result. To many, the appearance of impropriety implies actual impropriety. For this reason, it seems to be acceptable for judges to recuse themselves from ruling on specific cases.

Lord Hewart CJ...the question is whether he was so related to the case in its civil aspect as to be unfit to act as clerk to the justices in the criminal matter. The answer to that question depends not upon what actually was done but upon what might appear to be done. Nothing is to be done which creates even a suspicion that there has been an improper interference with the course of justice.
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Sussex_Justices,_ex_p_McCarthy

The following quotes are excerpted from the Code of Conduct for United States Judges.

Commentary Canon 2A
...Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. This prohibition applies to both professional and personal conduct. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen.
Click to expand...
http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges

Canon Three A...(3) A judge should be patient, dignified, respectful, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity. A judge should require similar conduct of those subject to the judge's control, including lawyers to the extent consistent with their role in the adversary process.
Click to expand...
http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges

Commentary Canon Three A 3 .... The duty to be respectful includes the responsibility to avoid comment or behaviour that could reasonably be interpreted as harassment, prejudice or bias.
Click to expand...
http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges

Canon Three C 1 A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances in which (a) the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding...
Click to expand...
http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges
 
wendiesan said:
From the concept of natural justice, and, IMO, for trust to remain in a judicial system, the perception that the public holds can be as important as the actual action taken. If the perception exists that even the slightest impropriety has occurred, the judgement is tainted and dissatisfaction, at the least, may result. To many, the appearance of impropriety implies actual impropriety. For this reason, it seems to be acceptable for judges to recuse themselves from ruling on specific cases.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Sussex_Justices,_ex_p_McCarthy

The following quotes are excerpted from the Code of Conduct for United States Judges.


http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges

http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges

http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges

http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges
Click to expand...

OK--but I don't think that the public perception is really about popularity (don't know about this specific judge, but many judges are elected and the ballot box is the place for the public to make that choice). The "public" seems to love Judge Judy--who is all about putting people in their place.

But ethics require a consideration of "impropriety or the appearance of impropriety." For example, were the judge married to the prosecutor, the two might be wholly capable of segmenting their relationship in such a way as to prevent any actual impropriety. Still, it looks dicey and really ought to be avoided.

The things that people have been bringing here--with one exception--have far more to do with basic disagreements with the judge's rulings (and typically with only limited knowledge of both the law and the facts and history of the case). The one exception has been the suggestion that Mr. Tsimhoni at one time dated a researcher in the judge's office. Now, whether this might rise to the level of "appearance of impropriety," most likely rests on facts that I do not know--such as when, how long, whether said researcher has any influence on the judge, or relationship beyond that of being a gopher for information, as well as whether there is any ongoing relationship to Mr. Tsimhoni. My gut suggests that this relationship was simply uncovered as the result of a fishing expedition on the part of readers wanting to justify their sense of anger at the judge.

I would imagine that a wise, ethical and responsible attorney advising Ms. Eibling-Tsimhoni might see the judge issue as nothing more than a distraction likely to prolong court proceedings. Such attorney might also be expected to have some knowledge about the other available judges and whether a change would likely be beneficial. Certainly there have been a number of endorsers citing the experience and fairness of both the judge and the GAL.

Just a question for consideration--what specific actions do some of the judge's detractors advocate, and how do they derive from the law and the facts in this case?
 
wendiesan said:
From the concept of natural justice, and, IMO, for trust to remain in a judicial system, the perception that the public holds can be as important as the actual action taken. If the perception exists that even the slightest impropriety has occurred, the judgement is tainted and dissatisfaction, at the least, may result. To many, the appearance of impropriety implies actual impropriety. For this reason, it seems to be acceptable for judges to recuse themselves from ruling on specific cases.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Sussex_Justices,_ex_p_McCarthy

The following quotes are excerpted from the Code of Conduct for United States Judges.


http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges

http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges

http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges

http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges
Click to expand...

What is the "concept of natural justice?" I've never heard of it. I also know this case is in Michigan court. If the parent feels the judge acted in an improper or unethical manner then her attorney certainly knows the procedure for filing a complaint.

JMO
 
Just reading up. The transcript from 4-14-2015 is instructive: http://www.slideshare.net/EverythingPR/tsimhoni-v-tsimhoni-3-415.

As I read it, there was a motion to show cause, which was delayed in hearing for 30 days to give Mom and kids and opportunity to change some critical behaviors. These include kids going to a scheduled dinner with dad and refusing to eat. Judge instructed mom that the specific means by which to be supportive in this instance (or to stop being unsupportive) is to NOT provide pre-dinner or post-dinner meal. In other words, natural consequences. There is no rational reason for the kids to turn down food simply because of the presence of their father. Hence, if they do so, allow them to get hungry when the skip the meal--don't come rushing in with an alternate meal for them when they get home.

Likewise, apparently previous Skype arrangements had consisted of kids looking at the ceiling for 10 minutes or so until the session ended. Pro-active solution for Mom to tell kids that Dad is not a bad person for wanting a relationship, and suggesting bits of conversation, such as tell him about the trophy you just won, or whatever. That is supportive. Judge added in a consequence--if kids stare at ceiling and refuse to talk, remove access to electronics (games, phones, whatnot). Common parental consequence these days.

Judge also reiterated multiple times that she expected a positive report in 30 days. All clear expectations. All within the bounds of normal parenting behavior.

Also of note--this is the transcript that includes the information that Dad had moved back to Michigan, having resolved work issues in order to be able to make parenting these children a priority. Unclear about how that impacted his employment. Nonetheless, on the record.
 
Three Bloomfield Hills children at the center of a bitter – and very public – custody battle will remain at summer camp through Aug. 13, a judge ordered today.

A hearing date has been set for October to determine whether the mother, accused of alienating the children against their father, will lose custody.

Oakland County family court judge Lisa Gorcyca told warring parents Omer Tsimhoni and his ex-wife, Maya Eibschitz-Tsimhoni, that they should try to work out their differences and co-parent their three children, ages 14, 10 and 9. And she warned Eibschitz-Tsimhoni that if she continued to violate court orders she would throw her in jail for 20 days.
Click to expand...
http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/oakland/2015/07/22/oakland-custody-tsimhoni/30516507/

So--it would appear more camp time for awhile and no decision on the change of custody until October.

And likely a bit less drama:
Gorcyca also issued a gag order, preventing attorneys from talking about the case, and sealed the most recent court filings.
Click to expand...
 
wendiesan said:
And she ordered the parents to come up with a way to pay for the private camp cost between $3,925 and $4,040 per child. The father, who lives in Israel, is a General Motors engineer, and traffic safety expert. Eibschitz-Tsimhoni is a pediatric eye doctor.
Click to expand...

If the children hold both Israeli and US passports (I don't know, but they might), what's to prevent the father from taking them back to Israel if/when he wins sole custody? (except for the ability of the children to protest in whatever manner)
 
wendiesan said:
And she ordered the parents to come up with a way to pay for the private camp cost between $3,925 and $4,040 per child. The father, who lives in Israel, is a General Motors engineer, and traffic safety expert. Eibschitz-Tsimhoni is a pediatric eye doctor.
http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/oakland/2015/07/22/oakland-custody-tsimhoni/30516507/
Click to expand...

Well, I think the Free Press got it wrong. At least according to testimony of his attorney in court in April. Perhaps his job still requires presence in Israel from time to time?
 
Morag said:
If the children hold both Israeli and US passports (I don't know, but they might), what's to prevent the father from taking them back to Israel if/when he wins sole custody? (except for the ability of the children to protest in whatever manner)
Click to expand...

IF the judge were to grant sole custody to the father, I don't know that there would be anything to prevent his taking them to Israel, or the moon for that matter, any more than any other parent would be so prohibited.

As I see it, however, the judge looks to be committed to keeping the door to continued joint custody (even with a change in which parent is primary) open as long as humanly possible, hence the admonition that they work things out together--and both undergo psych evals.

Mom, and her legal team, certainly have every reason to see that there is much to be lost by continuing as things have been.
 
<snip>

Middleditch [father's attorney] also renewed a request that Tsimhoni’s ex-wife submit to a psychological evaluation. When the mother’s attorney, Andrew Abood, requested Wednesday such an order “be mutual” — to include the husband — Gorcyca told attorneys “do the whole family.”

<snip>

Gorcyca set Oct. 5-9 to hear arguments for future custody but said it was her hope the parents would step up and resolve matters and “may never have to come before me again.”

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...ge-upset-attacks-kids-custody-fight/30521769/
 
epiphany said:
<snip>

Middleditch [father's attorney] also renewed a request that Tsimhoni&#8217;s ex-wife submit to a psychological evaluation. When the mother&#8217;s attorney, Andrew Abood, requested Wednesday such an order &#8220;be mutual&#8221; &#8212; to include the husband &#8212; Gorcyca told attorneys &#8220;do the whole family.&#8221;

<snip>

Gorcyca set Oct. 5-9 to hear arguments for future custody but said it was her hope the parents would step up and resolve matters and &#8220;may never have to come before me again.&#8221;

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...ge-upset-attacks-kids-custody-fight/30521769/
Click to expand...

LOL at everyone gets a psych eval.
:rollercoaster:
 
jjenny said:
Now she threatens to send both parents to jail and children back to Mandy's place.

"Where do you suppose children will live when they are out of camp," Gorcyca said. "They were thriving at Mandy's Place. Maybe you would like them to go back to Mandy's Place when you're both in jail for 20 days."

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/2...ge-issues-gag-order-in-tsimhoni-children-case
Click to expand...

I believe that was a carrot and stick. Earlier in the article "Judge Lisa Gorcyca begged Omer and Maya Tsimhoni to come to some sort of resolution for the sake of their children

"Something drastic happens to fix your family and you two can figure this out and never come before me again," said Judge Lisa Gorcyca."

Meanwhile--one of the Facebook groups advocating for Maya has posted the report of the parental visitation supervisor. As the official records are sealed, this must be regarded as a leak, IOW, a work-around for the judge's move to keep the kids' business off the internet (apparently the camp has received threats). I won't repost it here. However, I will share that Maya's visit with the children was an exercise in pushing the envelop. Clearly the camp has had to make multiple accommodations for this family (including extra security, staff to keep the children at camp between sessions, media relations--all billed to the parents). And arrangements had to be made for the parental visits, at separate times, for which the camp provided a conference room and lunch for the children's mom time and conference room for the kids and dad later in the day. Multiple people (lawyers, GAL, etc) were involved. Despite this, there were some lingering questions during the time that mom was travelling to camp, having to do with her bringing a neighbor and a dog, and taking the kids outdoors for a picnic. There was communication that the dog and neighbor were not permitted to be a part of the visit--for understandable reasons having to do not only with court requirements, but also the safety of other children at camp. Apparently the decision about whether to allow the outdoors picnic was left to the camp director, who vetoed it (again, understandable in the context of camp where other homesick kids might be impacted). Maya told him she had already cleared it with the GAL (who wrote in the report that this was not the case), and told the kids they were going out for a picnic. Now, during the course of the "picnic" she made three separate trips to the car (to pet the dog, to get the cooler, get the pasta salad)--each time whispering in the ears of her children--until cautioned by the parenting supervisor that anything she said he had to be able to hear.

Now--if she wasn't trying to get the kids in the car and drive off, she certainly intended to give that impression--not to mention demonstrating that despite anything the court or its representatives might set up in terms of boundaries for a visit she intended to put her pretty little foot across them.

So--as judge--what to do with a family/mother like that?
 
<snip>

Middleditch lambasted the mother, Maya Tsimhoni, for not facilitating a relationship with Omer.

"She has thumbed her nose at every court order you have signed," Middleditch said.

The mother's attorney Andrew Abood claimed you can't blame Maya because the children refuse to have a relationship with the father. Both parents were allowed to visit the children separately at camp last week.

"We are going to hear criticisms of mom, who took kids on picnic and I guess she didn't follow the rules," Abood said. "And father didn't even spend the whole time, that's a travesty."

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/2...ge-issues-gag-order-in-tsimhoni-children-case
 
I had missed this [BBM]:

During the controversial June 24th hearing, the oldest child claimed he didn&#8217;t want to spend time with his father because he saw him hit his mother.

And hospital records show another child claimed he was assaulted by the father during a visitation back in March. Reports show the child suffered contusions to his shoulder forearm and chest - it was characterized as a non-accidental traumatic injury to the child.

Police were called, but no criminal charges were issued and the case was dropped.

http://www.myfoxny.com/story/295916...n-center-remain-at-camp-parents-meet-in-court
 
When does this stop?!
For me it stops when the father acknowledges that the children do not want to spend time or have a relationship with him at this point and time.
I wish he would love them enough to respect their wishes and set them free from this burden and let them live with their mother.
All of this is only building more resentment toward him from the kids.
Maybe if he does this they will want a relationship when they are older. This isn't helping any of them, least of all the kids.

JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 65 more.
Total: 2,675 (members: 66, guests: 2,609)

Online statistics

Members online
66
Guests online
2,609
Total visitors
2,675
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,856
Messages
18,130,790
Members
231,162
Latest member
Kaffro
Back
Top