* * * Custody Hearing 26 Mar 2010, 11am, Phoenix * * *

[Ives]

i would like to know what logan thinks about her crying and such. he knws how she thinks so to speak.

 

[Prof]

This is the first time she has seen Logan, right? I think that being in the same room got to her, made it more real to her somehow, and I think she would have liked to answer a question or two just by the looks she gave before invoking her rights -- those were not fake tears at all JMO

 

[Ives]

This is the first time she has seen Logan, right? I think that being in the same room got to her, made it more real to her somehow, and I think she would have liked to answer a question or two just by the looks she gave before invoking her rights -- those were not fake tears at all JMO

BBM-thats my thinking. and why im interested in logans thoughts.

 

[BeanE]

BBM-thats my thinking. and why im interested in logans thoughts.

I agree, it really does take someone who knows her to assess what she's feeling. She's got a complex personality, and isn't easy to read.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

IMO, her crying was because Logan was there, but it's BS.

She looked like a child. The crying and swinging in her chair. And what was with the coddling? Her def atty kept rubbing her shoulder and back, whispering to her and then was allowed to sit right next to her on the witness stand?!? I have NEVER seen anything like that before. Her atty shaking her head when Logans atty was saying EJ should have to give info as to where Gabe is?!?

I am so angry right now after watching the videos. It absolutely disgusts me that there is a baby out there, that very well could be in danger. He was ripped from the arms of his loving family and given to Lord knows who -- if he's still alive -- and the one person, ONE AND ONLY person who knows where he is and could save his life refuses to speak and is allowed to refuse to speak. "Envoking my right to remain silent". What about Gabe's rights?!? What about Logan's rights?!? It is infuriating she can do whatever she did and have more rights than the victims.

There has got to be some changes to some laws. THIS should not be allowed. THIS is a disgrace to the justice system. Proven criminals should NOT have more rights than the victim, especially when the victim is a baby.

I cannot imagine how Logan and his family must be feeling right now. I'm going to take a break before I go postal.

 

[Litlred]

I wish they could water board her. My heart is breaking for Logan watching this.

 

[iluvmua]

She's having a hard time looking at Logan during his testimony. If she gave Gabriel away to spite Logan, you would think she would have a more 'in your face' attitude with him. She does a whole lotta crying during and in between hers. I also think she's crying for herself because she knows there is no way out of this, ever.

She looks like she could be close to her breaking point. I sure hope so.

I hope she is! the ONLY way EJ could possibly see freedom in the very distant future is if Gabriel is in fact alive. ( of course right now i'm not very hopeful that he is)

 

[kissdegirl]

This is the first time she has seen Logan, right? I think that being in the same room got to her, made it more real to her somehow, and I think she would have liked to answer a question or two just by the looks she gave before invoking her rights -- those were not fake tears at all JMO

I couldn't agree more. She wanted to talk, but she's advised not to. Why!!! :banghead: I think LE needs to get in there and get a negotiation going with her attorney. This is rediculous. I am angry on so many levels right now. Where's Gabriel's rights? He's going through such an important developmental stage right now, and bouncing from the S's, to SA with EJ and whomever else, and now, wherever he is, assuming he's remaining with the same couple that supposedly took him from EJ....this is all going to affect his emotional and psychological development. IMO, she is still doing him harm by invoking the 5th amendment. And, for all we know he could be in physical danger too. Protecting the innocent should be #1 priority. You can't beat a child, but invoke your right's while the world sits back and watches you continue to abuse that child...this is no different IMO. Bruises heal, but this never will if he's not reunited soon. He will always have a hole in his heart for his daddy and loving family.

I'm raging, and crying out loud at the same time. That baby needs to be home with his loving father, surrounded by the people who love him the most. Gabriel deserves that!!! Whoever has him, needs to put on a hooded sweatshirt, with a cap and sunglasses, maybe even a fake beard, put Gabriel in a carseat and drop him off at the nearest firestation....now! It's dark, nobody will recognize you. Watch from a distance to make sure he is safely found by the firefighters. Do the right thing for Gabriel....this is about him!

 

[Litlred]

I think she is crying because she is afraid to speak in public or be seen in public and she is being forced. Alot of anxiety going on with her. Maybe major depression has set in and this would explain why she doesn't want to leave her jail cell. I don't think they are tears for Gabriel.

 

[TXHOPE]

I couldn't agree more. She wanted to talk, but she's advised not to. Why!!! :banghead: I think LE needs to get in there and get a negotiation going with her attorney. This is rediculous. I am angry on so many levels right now. Where's Gabriel's rights? He's going through such an important developmental stage right now, and bouncing from the S's, to SA with EJ and whomever else, and now, wherever he is, assuming he's remaining with the same couple that supposedly took him from EJ....this is all going to affect his emotional and psychological development. IMO, she is still doing him harm by invoking the 5th amendment. Protecting the innocent should be #1 priority. You can't beat a child, but invoke your right's while the world sits back and watches you continue to abuse that child...this is no different IMO. Bruises heal, but this never will if he's not reunited soon. He will always have a hole in his heart for his daddy and loving family.

I'm raging, and crying out loud at the same time. That baby needs to be home with his loving father, surrounded by the people who love him the most. Gabriel deserves that!!! Whoever has him, needs to put on a hooded sweatshirt, with a cap and sunglasses, maybe even a fake beard, put Gabriel in a carseat and drop him off at the nearest firestation....now! It's dark, nobody will recognize you. Watch from a distance to make sure he is safely found by the firefighters. Do the right thing for Gabriel....this is about him!

Kiss! You brought tears to my eyes! I feel the same way too. She wanted to talk. You could tell. It was so close to coming out, you could feel it. Now I really do want Logan to talk to her-just them two no attys. If she's not ready now, I do think she will be ready soon if her atty shuts the @$*& up!!!

 

[iluvmua]

EJ could very well end this carousel ride but she's TOO flippin'....... what's the word i'm looking for?

 

[iluvmua]

If she didn't kill her child then why all the " I invoke my rights" whatever she said thing?

What is she so afraid of?

He's been missing for 3 months now and you would think by now someone, anyone would have come forward if in fact she gave him to someone/a couple etc.

no reported sightings alive for 3 months.

This has gone on for WAY too long in my opinion. D or A Gabriel deserves to be found one way or another.

 

[DaneBramage]

I think the tears were tears of anger and frustration. I think she wanted to voice her opinion in court but knew she couldn't. And because Logan won.

 

[kbl8201]

havent read thru the whole thread yet but im guessing contempt has to do with the custody order she is now in violation of

 

[southern_comfort]

Ouch... I hope you have thick skin, yosande!

I won't comment on LM personally, but will deflect some of the bullets for you by saying that I see EJ as a victim on some level, perhaps not on the macrocosmic level where she may have killed her child or at put him in danger by operating outside the system, but at a much deeper level.

I know it's unpopular, but I am not a big proponent of unfettered fathers' rights. I am a big proponent of adoption, and I would like to see adoption made easier for mothers. I believe in serving the best interests of the child and don't put a great deal of weight on biology when it comes to making that determination. In the most perfect world I can imagine (perfect, of course, being a world where all children are loved and well cared for by their biological mommies and daddies), I think I might allow the mother to make the adoption decision on her own and require the father to intervene and prove himself at least as fit as the adoptive couple, should he desire to override the mother's decision.

If I imagine the players in this case operating in such a system, I suppose the outcome still would not have appealed to EJ because the Smiths are who they are. But maybe the Smiths never would have entered the picture if the system were more adoption-friendly to begin with.

JMO, of course.

 

[BeanE]

Logan is a named victim of Elizabeth's crimes, named victim by the prosecutor and courts of the state of Arizona.

Websleuths is a victim-friendly and supportive forum. We support victims. We support the rights of victims. We advocate for victims.

We do not trash victims. We certainly do not make things up about them.

Liberal warnings have been given in this forum. Take heed.

BeanE

 

[BeanE]

Ouch... I hope you have thick skin, yosande!

I won't comment on LM personally, but will deflect some of the bullets for you by saying that I see EJ as a victim on some level, perhaps not on the macrocosmic level where she may have killed her child or at put him in danger by operating outside the system, but at a much deeper level.

I know it's unpopular, but I am not a big proponent of unfettered fathers' rights. I am a big proponent of adoption, and I would like to see adoption made easier for mothers. I believe in serving the best interests of the child and don't put a great deal of weight on biology when it comes to making that determination. In the most perfect world I can imagine (perfect, of course, being a world where all children are loved and well cared for by their biological mommies and daddies), I think I might allow the mother to make the adoption decision on her own and require the father to intervene and prove himself at least as fit as the adoptive couple, should he desire to override the mother's decision.

If I imagine the players in this case operating in such a system, I suppose the outcome still would not have appealed to EJ because the Smiths are who they are. But maybe the Smiths never would have entered the picture if the system were more adoption-friendly to begin with.

JMO, of course.

I certainly can't support taking children from good parents just because the mother wants to because of personality or mental/emotional disorders. It's a novel concept though.

I'd rather we have a system that protects children from violent, abusive, neglectful parents like Elizabeth, and puts them with good, loving, caring parents and families like Logan and his family. We'd have far few abused and murdered babies and children.

And I think the Smiths - at least Tammi - clearly entered the picture because she is a criminal with a long criminal history, who lacks moral judgement, and treats people like objects.

JMO, of course.

 

[BeanE]

havent read thru the whole thread yet but im guessing contempt has to do with the custody order she is now in violation of

McQueary's attorney, Craig Mehrens, asked McVey to find Johnson in contempt for violating his December ruling that awarded visitation rights to McQueary.

McVey set a hearing for April 28 to review the contempt allegation.

Mehrens said McVey could order Johnson to produce the baby, or force her to remain in jail in contempt of court until she does.

Darn it I didn't carry over the link. If anyone wants it, poke me and I'll grab it. It's in this thread and in yesterday's daily news thread.

 

[southern_comfort]

I certainly can't support taking children from good parents just because the mother wants to because of personality or mental/emotional disorders. It's a novel concept though.

I'd rather we have a system that protects children from violent, abusive, neglectful parents like Elizabeth, and puts them with good, loving, caring parents and families like Logan and his family. We'd have far few abused and murdered babies and children.

And I think the Smiths - at least Tammi - clearly entered the picture because she is a criminal with a long criminal history, who lacks moral judgement, and treats people like objects.

JMO, of course.

Sadly, there really isn't a one-size-fits-all answer that works perfectly in every case, Bean-E. The system I support is not at odds with the concept that children should be protected from violence, abuse and neglect. In fact, it fosters that result much better than the system in place.

I am for the best of interests of the child. Period. I do not think sharing genes has much to do with the issue.

 

[BeanE]

Sadly, there really isn't a one-size-fits-all answer that works perfectly in every case, Bean-E. The system I support is not at odds with the concept that children should be protected from violence, abuse and neglect. In fact, it fosters that result much better than the system in place.

I am for the best of interests of the child. Period. I do not think sharing genes has much to do with the issue.

I'm for the best interests of the child too. Hands down. When a child has good, loving, caring family member to take care of them, I believe strongly that the child's best interests are served by placing the child with them. I believe denying a child that relationship is harmful to them emotionally.

I'm just having a hard time understanding, if I'm understanding what you're saying, taking or keeping a child from a good and loving parent or family member, because a non-biologically related person *might* be a tad better.

But we are off topic anyway.