Emergency custody papers filed by mother of JI's son 11/14/11

[scmom]

Alcoholism is hereditary, very hereditary - I don't think anyone would dispute that. Her mother was a member of AA and her side of the family have collected a lion's share of DUI's. I wouldn't say that is proof, but that's an awful lot of red flags.

True, true.

 

[Allusonz]

Alcoholism is hereditary, very hereditary - I don't think anyone would dispute that. Her mother was a member of AA and her side of the family have collected a lion's share of DUI's. I wouldn't say that is proof, but that's an awful lot of red flags.

There is one thing that gives me pause here.

The neighbor said that he could tell they were drinking but that they "were not drinking during the time he was there".

I would also like to know if LE suspected when they arrived whether she had been drinking as there are aspects that she does recall. Also she did state that it was a "possibility" during the one interview.

So many questions and so few answers...sigh

 

[Donjeta]

JMO but better late than never. If a parent didn't care before but suddenly starts caring, in principle it's a good thing, not a bad thing imo. Maybe they've been cured of a serious mental illness or sobered up or otherwise grown a spine. It's a start and it could be important for the child to learn to know the absent parent. Even if the relationship can never be repaired to what it could have been with constant good contact, many people say they've suffered from not knowing their roots and would have preferred to have some kind of contact with their parent instead of none at all.

After a bad parenting track record it would take a lot of serious work to get to know the child gradually and prove oneself capable of taking full custody but exercising visitation in a safe, supervised, possibly therapeutic setting might be in the best interests of the child.

If there's been child abuse, violent tendencies etc. instead of just plain staying out of contact and being unable or unwilling to pay child support, I would err on the side of caution; there are too many stories of children who have been returned to the abuser unsupervised and suffered further abuse.

 

[cityslick]

I would think the mother is caring. She doesn't want her child in a home where another went missing when the caretaker was smashed out of her mind, and an intruder came in a took her baby. I see no reason that the mother of the boy should not ask for temporary custody till the issues are resolved.

I have no faith in the courts and give no kudos to how they make their decisions. She may not have had money, job or a home. She may not have had the luck and relatives that JI has. Custody most likely given on income and home.

No one knows anything about JI. Doubt he is father of the year or anything close to it. To judge a mother as losing custody in a court of law w/o knowing the case and circumstances is premature. He is an electrician, owns a home and should be able to take care of himself and a child w/o taking her money to do so.

I do not expect the court to help this mother, afterall, the judge let OJ keep his kids.

BBM

All I know is if 6 years of no contact, no interest and no support of your child is caring, I'd hate to know what uncaring is.

 

[Nixie]

I think I would be a lot more understanding if mom were to want to take things slow and get to know her child. If she asked for visitation first and showed she wanted to be apart of her son's life, not having press releases after being visited by media about taking full custody away from the father who has raised him for 6 years without her help financially or emotionally. Even if Jeremy didn't need her money she still should have been there for her child and helped. Being a mom is more then giving birth, this child doesn't even know her and I think if she wants to get to know her child that is wonderful, but the way she has done it isn't the best way imo.

 

[cityslick]

I think I would be a lot more understanding if mom were to want to take things slow and get to know her child. If she asked for visitation first and showed she wanted to be apart of her son's life, not having press releases after being visited by media about taking full custody away from the father who has raised him for 6 years without her help financially or emotionally. Even if Jeremy didn't need her money she still should have been there for her child and helped. Being a mom is more then giving birth, this child doesn't even know her and I think if she wants to get to know her child that is wonderful, but the way she has done it isn't the best way imo.

I'd be more understanding if this desire to want to reconnect with her child wasn't using this 'event' (a missing child) as a means to do it when that desire apparently wasn't there 6 years prior.

 

[Allusonz]

Actually, I did say that the mom is non-caring (and non- supporting)! And I stand behind that. What you have told your children about their bio parents is lovely, and probably makes them feel wonderful.

But imagine how this boy would feel if he were told the truth - that his "mom" has the legal right to see him, but doesn't. And that she is supposed to give his dad money for him, but she doesn't. This poor child could get serious feelings of worthlessness from that. (I hope he doesn't know).

She hasn't made some noble decision to let his father have him - the COURTS decided that dad was better. They gave her the right to basically prove herself with visitation and support, and she didn't. And six years later she decides to try and pull this poor kid out of his home, after the trauma he has suffered by losing his baby sister? That does not sound like a caring, warm, loving mom to me.

I understand where you are comming from.

Many adoptive children face many similiar feelings. I have expressed my concern regarding the mother in many posts but will stop short of stating she did not care simply for the reason I am not in a position to judge that. Many birth parents do care, others don't. Her actions to me though are suspect...as far as I am willing to take it.

 

[cityslick]

I understand where you are comming from.

Many adoptive children face many similiar feelings. I have expressed my concern regarding the mother in many posts but will stop short of stating she did not care simply for the reason I am not in a position to judge that. Many birth parents do care, others don't. Her actions to me though are suspect...as far as I am willing to take it.

My take is if we're ok with casting suspicion on DB on her abilities as a mother based on her actions of that night, I don't see why the same can't be done for RR, based on her actions for the past 6 years.

 

[Just K]

Since this is a family court issue and no details are public, other than the general court rulings, from the prior court hearings and the current hearings, how does anyone know enough to make any assumptions as to this mother's intentions or prior efforts.

If she weren't paying court ordered child support, JI could have taken her back to court, her wages...if any...could have been garnished but that doesn't seem to be the case. It was my understanding that the last time she saw her child was 2008. That is three years not six years ago. Where did this SIX years ago come from?

For all any of us know, JI told the mother he wouldn't pursue further action or push her for any child support if she just went away. We don't know what he was holding over her head.

 

[cityslick]

Since this is a family court issue and no details are public, other than the general court rulings, from the prior court hearings and the current hearings, how does anyone know enough to make any assumptions as to this mother's intentions or prior efforts.

If she weren't paying court ordered child support, JI could have taken her back to court, her wages...if any...could have been garnished but that doesn't seem to be the case. It was my understanding that the last time she saw her child was 2008. That is three years not six years ago. Where did this SIX years ago come from?

For all any of us know, JI told the mother he wouldn't pursue further action or push her for any child support if she just went away. We don't know what he was holding over her head.

I'm just going to respectfully disagree. The fact that she admits to not having a relationship with her child for a long period (years) of time where nothing legally was preventing that and somehow it's the custodial parent's fault is silly to me. I take not having a relationship with her child meaning no contact whatsoever. Meaning, no visits, no phone calls, no nothing. Has the effort even been there? Based on her own comments, it doesn't sound like it.

The 6 years comes from when the custody order was done (2005). There is nothing to indicate she's visited her son on a regular basis since then.

 

[Just K]

"Rasleen Raim is the mother of the 8-year-old that was living in the North Lister home. Raim and Jeremy Irwin, Lisa’s father, once lived together in the same Northland home. But in 2008, the couple’s custody battle played out in court and Jeremy Irwin received full custody of their child."

Read more: http://www.nbcactionnews.com/dpp/ne...irwins-half-brothers-speaks-out#ixzz1fxDx8iY1

 

[askfornina]

"Rasleen Raim is the mother of the 8-year-old that was living in the North Lister home. Raim and Jeremy Irwin, Lisa’s father, once lived together in the same Northland home. But in 2008, the couple’s custody battle played out in court and Jeremy Irwin received full custody of their child."

Read more: http://www.nbcactionnews.com/dpp/ne...irwins-half-brothers-speaks-out#ixzz1fxDx8iY1

In September 2005, a Clay County judge awarded Irwin sole custody of his son and ordered that any visitation with Raim had to be supervised and arranged through Irwin.

Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/16/3270248/attorneys-trade-barbs-over-baby.html#ixzz1fxFdoRG2

 

[Karmaa]

I'm just going to respectfully disagree. The fact that she admits to not having a relationship with her child for a long period (years) of time where nothing legally was preventing that and somehow it's the custodial parent's fault is silly to me. I take not having a relationship with her child meaning no contact whatsoever. Meaning, no visits, no phone calls, no nothing. Has the effort even been there? Based on her own comments, it doesn't sound like it.

The 6 years comes from when the custody order was done (2005). There is nothing to indicate she's visited her son on a regular basis since then.

Also, JI's lawyers has said that she had no contact in 6 years, except a chance encounter when they were out and about, plus that she had not paid any child support. (Paraphrased)

 

[Just K]

This comment from the same article is very interesting: In a press release Wednesday, Savory wrote that Tacopina’s allegations against Raim were false.

“She knows what life is like to have her baby taken away from her,” Savory wrote. “Mrs. Raim understands how it feels to be gravely prevented from having a relationship with her son.”

Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/16/3270248/attorneys-trade-barbs-over-baby.html#ixzz1fxHzswFW Nov. 18, 2011 01:04 AM

 

[Just K]

Also, JI's lawyers has said that she had no contact in 6 years, except a chance encounter when they were out and about, plus that she had not paid any child support. (Paraphrased)

If all was on the up & up with JI, as it pertains to visitation and child support, then there ought to be further court dates in reference to RR violating a court order to pay child support. There has been no posting that shows any further court hearings RE: Custody & Child Support. If there are links to any such court hearings after 2008, a link would be appreciated.

 

[Donjeta]

I don't understand why he didn't pursue the child support issue, given that money was tight and they were having problems paying the bills.

Maybe he knew there was no money to be got?

 

[amymarie]

I don't understand why he didn't pursue the child support issue, given that money was tight and they were having problems paying the bills.

Maybe he knew there was no money to be got?

Maybe he didn't pursue the CS because he knew she would then retaliate by persuing her visitation rights (which often happens in these cases).

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I don't understand why he didn't pursue the child support issue, given that money was tight and they were having problems paying the bills.

Maybe he knew there was no money to be got?

Sometimes people make it very difficult to collect on court ordered child support. I have a friend whose wife never received one dime from her ex. Her ex was a drug addict who sponged off of family and never held down a real above board job. She never bothered to go after him because it was a waste of time. Her son is now 23 yrs old.

 

[cityslick]

If all was on the up & up with JI, as it pertains to visitation and child support, then there ought to be further court dates in reference to RR violating a court order to pay child support. There has been no posting that shows any further court hearings RE: Custody & Child Support. If there are links to any such court hearings after 2008, a link would be appreciated.

If JI was preventing visitation, which would of been in violation of a court order, then it was on her to find a way to make that happen if she wanted badly enough to see her son.

 

[hambirg]

I'm just going to respectfully disagree. The fact that she admits to not having a relationship with her child for a long period (years) of time where nothing legally was preventing that and somehow it's the custodial parent's fault is silly to me. I take not having a relationship with her child meaning no contact whatsoever. Meaning, no visits, no phone calls, no nothing. Has the effort even been there? Based on her own comments, it doesn't sound like it.

The 6 years comes from when the custody order was done (2005). There is nothing to indicate she's visited her son on a regular basis since then.

I still suspect she was deported. I don't know why Steve Young would have said that if it wasn't true. Those records are not public, so we would have no way of knowing. But LE/FBI would have access and know that. I wish I could find where he said that. :banghead: Does anybody else remember that at all, or am I losing my mind? :crazy: