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

[KaaBoom]

Well, folks, no news. But I did have a time to delve into the most recent court filings https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4jy2q37q3axx62a/AAASuO68l7LZn2GoLR705-lPa?dl=0 And there have been a flurry of them.

"However a few weeks ago the professionals involved believe the kids may have received information from outside sources/individuals about the case that has reverted the kids back to some of their behaviors prior to the program-although"

Well, it sounds like the parental alienation therapy has been a smashing success. :facepalm: Maybe this is the reason that mental health professionals don't endorse this BS.:thinking:

 

[Margo/Mom]

Aaaand it looks like decisions on the many filings won't happen until after the judge makes a decision on whether to step down. Announcement Monday. http://www.freep.com/story/news/loc...honi-mom-judge-removed-custody-case/73138078/

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Judge doesn’t disqualify herself in custody fight case

Mike Martindale, The Detroit News 9:19 a.m. EDT October 5, 2015

Pontiac — An Oakland Circuit judge on Monday refused to disqualify herself from handling a contentious child custody case.

"The court is not biased for or against either party," Judge Lisa Gorcyca concluded in a written opinion Monday.

It was not immediately known if her ruling would be appealed. Gorcyca has placed a gag order on parties in the case...

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...judge-disqualify-custody-fight-case/73369502/

 

[Margo/Mom]

Bettedaviseyes beat me to it. But here's more coverage on the Judge's decision: http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/judge-may-recuse-from-tsimhoni-case/35654892

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

http://www.theoaklandpress.com/gene...s-motion-will-remain-on-tsimhoni-custody-case

 

[Margo/Mom]

Hearings all week. Should be very interesting.

Of note: Mom is on her sixteenth and seventeenth attorneys at this point.

The Judge's written decision focused on a lot of basic procedural errors in the recusal request (timeliness, lack of attached documentation, last minute additions of information that was know at the time of the original filing), and then went on to attack things like the legal grounds and so forth. All of which just makes me wonder if Mom is not completely scraping the bottom of the attorney barrel in Michigan. She certainly, at this point, is not an attractive client, and her case becomes weaker and weaker over time through her own mis-steps (including what I am convinced is a wholly invented allegation of abuse--openly challenged by the parenting supervisor who was an eye-witness to the incident).

 

[KaaBoom]

Judge gives attorneys time to appeal in custody case

 

[Hope4More]

What a nightmare! Saw this for the first time yesterday and read up on it. Concluded that:

*The judge was overly harsh in her comments that day, but after 5 years of dealing with this intractable mess, can’t really blame her for losing patience (and apparently Oakland’s legal community doesn’t either).

*That mother’s depth of hatred for her ex-husband is frightening, and IMO obviously is what motivates her, not concern for her kids. That or she is genuinely mentally ill, which seems entirely possible.

*What she has done to those kids is appalling. Whether or not the mental health community officially recognizes the label “parental alienation” is beside the point. One would have to be completely naïve to not get that it is sadly not unusual at all to have parents use their kids as pawns in divorce battles.

*No doubt the dad is flawed in all kinds of ways, and he’d have to be a saint not to feel a great deal of anger towards his ex-wife. What he hasn’t done, as far as I could tell from the record, is tried to harm his kids in any way. I’m in awe of his persistence in trying to maintain a relationship with his kids, despite his wife’s unrelenting malicious campaign, and despite being repeatedly and utterly rejected by all of them. How devastating!

*I can understand the concern folks have, in theory, about subjecting kids to that mandatory parental alienation Not-Therapy course/class, whatever. I was surprised that the Court chose a vendor who doesn’t even have a college degree. More to the point, it’s easy to see how analyzing the situation solely through the lens of parental alienation could minimize or ignore the possibility of actual parental abuse as cause of the alienation. That’s in general, though. In this case I think the assessment of parental alienation is spot on, the kids need every support system and tool available to them, and the shame is that there are so few effective therapeutic options available to them.

*I’m glad the dad has again established his residence here. I can’t imagine a scenario in which he won’t win full custody of his children. I hope that when he does receive custody that the Court imposes mandatory supervision on visitation by the mother. I’d be extremely concerned about the kids’ safety otherwise. IMO, she hates her ex enough, and has shown such utter disregard for her kids’ emotional wellbeing, that she seems entirely capable of killing all of them if given that opportunity after losing custody.

*Last- I doubt those kids will ever be completely OK, especially the eldest.

 

[Hope4More]

Well, it sounds like the parental alienation therapy has been a smashing success. :facepalm: Maybe this is the reason that mental health professionals don't endorse this BS.:thinking:

Or, those kids are already so seriously damaged psychologically that it takes very little to erase what would have to be, given how little time away from their terrifying mom they've had, their tiny gains towards normalcy. What's shocking is that "outside sources/individuals" continue to defy the judge's orders to stay the hay away.

 

[jjenny]

Somebody needs to challenge this gag order the judge imposed. It's most likely unconstitutional.

 

[jjenny]

Hearings all week. Should be very interesting.

Of note: Mom is on her sixteenth and seventeenth attorneys at this point.

The Judge's written decision focused on a lot of basic procedural errors in the recusal request (timeliness, lack of attached documentation, last minute additions of information that was know at the time of the original filing), and then went on to attack things like the legal grounds and so forth. All of which just makes me wonder if Mom is not completely scraping the bottom of the attorney barrel in Michigan. She certainly, at this point, is not an attractive client, and her case becomes weaker and weaker over time through her own mis-steps (including what I am convinced is a wholly invented allegation of abuse--openly challenged by the parenting supervisor who was an eye-witness to the incident).

Lawyers are very expensive. She could be out of money at this point.

 

[Hope4More]

Somebody needs to challenge this gag order the judge imposed. It's most likely unconstitutional.

Why do you have an objection to the gag order? I'm shocked, actually, that so much information has already been made public. IMO, these kids are all minors who deserve to have what little is left of their privacy protected.

 

[KaaBoom]

*I can understand the concern folks have, in theory, about subjecting kids to that mandatory parental alienation Not-Therapy course/class, whatever. I was surprised that the Court chose a vendor who doesn’t even have a college degree. More to the point, it’s easy to see how analyzing the situation solely through the lens of parental alienation could minimize or ignore the possibility of actual parental abuse as cause of the alienation. That’s in general, though. In this case I think the assessment of parental alienation is spot on, the kids need every support system and tool available to them, and the shame is that there are so few effective therapeutic options available to them.

The court had no choice in the vendor they chose. Since the American Psychiatric Association or any other medical or professional association does not support this type of "therapy" there are no professionals to do it. As for the rest of your post. I get your point. You love the father and you hate the mother. That seems to be a common opinion in this thread.

 

[KaaBoom]

Lawyers are very expensive. She could be out of money at this point.

People here seem to think the strength of a case is validated by who has the most money to pay for the best lawyer.

 

[Hope4More]

The court had no choice in the vendor they chose. Since the American Psychiatric Association or any other medical or professional association does not support this type of "therapy" there are no professionals to do it. As for the rest of your post. I get your point. You love the father and you hate the mother. That seems to be a common opinion in this thread.

Honestly, I don't love the father or hate the mother. More than anything else I simply feel a great deal of empathy and sadness for the innocent kids caught in the middle.

Secondarily, I feel for any parent who has had kids torn away from them. As a mother who loves her son as much as life itself, I cannot imagine the torture it would be to have anyone try to take him away, for any reason at all, much less a reason not grounded in any reality at all except anger or hatred.

And I can't imagine a mother who would do such a thing. I know enough about child abuse to know those kids aren't acting like children who have been abused by their father. More typical abused kids' behavior would be trying desperately to win his affection. They're terrified of him. That is NOT normal. It's awful, and my heart breaks for them.

 

[KaaBoom]

Honestly, I don't love the father or hate the mother. More than anything else I simply feel a great deal of empathy and sadness for the innocent kids caught in the middle.

It sounds to me like your empathy is with the father, not the children. If you were truly empathetic to the children, I don't think you would be supportive of the father. Until three months ago the children were perfectly happy living with their mother, who was the only parent they have ever really known. Since their father has been absent for the last eight years, due to his choosing. They were doing well in school and everything was all good, until a really terrible judge, by any standards decided to take them away from all that, and put them in juvenile detention, a camp, and finally in the custody of their father who they claim is abusive to them.

 

[Hope4More]

It sounds to me like your empathy is with the father, not the children. If you were truly empathetic to the children, I don't think you would be supportive of the father. Until three months ago the children were perfectly happy living with their mother, who was the only parent they have ever really known. Since their father has been absent for the last eight years, due to his choosing. They were doing well in school and everything was all good, until a really terrible judge, by any standards decided to take them away from all that, and put them in juvenile detention, a camp, and finally in the custody of their father who they claim is abusive to them.

It's clearly possibly to disagree about the facts of what's going on, and that's OK. But, you're wrong about my not primarily empathizing with those kids. How could anyone not?

 

[Margo/Mom]

Lawyers are very expensive. She could be out of money at this point.

I think you are right. The camp filed with the court for enforcement of the order for Mom to pick up the extra legal and security expenses. Apparently both parents still owe, but Dad has promised payment this minth while Mom has been ducking them. I don't think Mom has worked in awhile.

All of which makes this a bad time to launch a legal offensive against a Judge. Expensive way to prolong the process. Far better to focus on sticking to the rules, and getting some counseling.

 

[KaaBoom]

It's clearly possibly to disagree about the facts of what's going on, and that's OK. But, you're wrong about my not primarily empathizing with those kids. How could anyone not?

Because I have read every single post in this thread supporting the father, and they all seem to come down to father's rights. Which is fine, but that is empathizing with the father, not the children. The kids were happy and doing just fine with the mother. They just needed to be left alone.

I admit I'm not a supporter of father's rights. I'm almost 100% for mother's rights. But if this situation was reversed, and the kids had been living with their father for the last eight years, he was taking care of them, the kids were happy and doing well, I'd say the same thing. They are happy, leave them alone with the father. Why disrupt the kids lives with a custody change, when they are doing fine where they are at?

Kids are not property, and they shouldn't be treated as such by the courts. Parent's right's should not trump the children's rights, ever.

 

[KaaBoom]

I think you are right. The camp filed with the court for enforcement of the order for Mom to pick up the extra legal and security expenses. Apparently both parents still owe, but Dad has promised payment this minth while Mom has been ducking them. I don't think Mom has worked in awhile.

Do you have any evidence that she is not working<modsnip>?

All of which makes this a bad time to launch a legal offensive against a Judge. Expensive way to prolong the process. Far better to focus on sticking to the rules, and getting some counseling.

If the father was not fighting for custody of the children, then there would be no reason for any legal action, now would there? As a matter of fact the judge probably wouldn't even remember who these people are, after all these years. But you think it's OK for the father to keep taking legal action, but not the mother?