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

[jjenny]

Where should the children go following the end of camp on 13 Aug 2015?

Back to their mother.

 

[MyBelle]

The link you provided is only available to subscribers.

I'm not a subscriber and had no problem opening it.

 

[Woodland]

Back to their mother.

Chuckles

 

[epiphany]

I'm not a subscriber and had no problem opening it.

I usually can open that site, but perhaps a limit bc I couldn't open it either. Can u C & P?

Also, does the article refer at all to Israeli law and courts re the likelihood that she would ever have been allowed to leave Israel with the children unless father agreed to it?

 

[jjenny]

I usually can open that site, but perhaps a limit bc I couldn't open it either. Can u C & P?

Also, does the article refer at all to Israeli law and courts re the likelihood that she would ever have been allowed to leave Israel with the children without Dad's permission?

"One of the reasons that Eibschitz-Tsimhoni may have grabbed her kids and run to the U.S. to seek a divorce could be so that she wouldn’t be subjected to Israeli family court system, particularly the much-maligned rabbinic court system."
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/routine-emergencies/.premium-1.665369

 

[epiphany]

"One of the reasons that Eibschitz-Tsimhoni may have grabbed her kids and run to the U.S. to seek a divorce could be so that she wouldn’t be subjected to Israeli family court system, particularly the much-maligned rabbinic court system."
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/routine-emergencies/.premium-1.665369

Thank you. She wanted to divorce him & wasn't gonna do it there for obvi reasons

 

[sorrell skye]

Here's a judge that supported Gorcyca's decision:


The Oakland County Chief Judge Nanci Grant was upset with FOX 2's story and wanted to point out that Gorcyca felt she exhausted all other avenues to reunite this family. And that the mother has had multiple attorneys and has ignored several court orders.

Grant says the children are not in the detention portion of Children's Village - but the care portion. However - as you saw from the court transcripts, that's not what Gorcyca said. She said "jail" she used the terms "cells" and mentioned they would have to go to the bathroom in front of other people.

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/2...decision-to-hold-children-in-detention-center


Although 25 pgs, pages are short; transcript is a quick read and a must:

http://download.gannett.edgesuite.net/detnews/2015/pdf/showcausehearing_gorcyca.pdf

The judge threatened all the children with "jail".

She threatened them with jail repeatedly. She threatened them that would live in jail until they were each 18 years old.

What a compassionate judge.

 

[MyBelle]

BBM

Unfortunately it would appear, and I stress appear, that this judge did tolerate the games this mother played for years - and realized and regretted it that last day in court. The judge could hardly speak according to the transcript - tripping over and repeating words, getting words wrong etc. The judge had lost it imo - but that is no excuse. She should have been in charge all along - but was not.

I do agree the judge ultimately made the right decision though at that point in time - it may have been different if the judge wised up and took control a lot sooner though. The kids are suffering no doubt imo - but that was what the judge was for years ago.

Nice in theory but unfortunately, it is never resolved quickly if the parent has the money to pay an attorney to help orchestrate the games that have gone on in this case. (No offense intended to our two fine attorneys here.) And the kids do suffer because the situations drag out. Especially if they are separated from their primary caregiver for extended periods of time. I've seen it happen in my own family.

I doubt this Judge was aware of the mother's blatant disrespect for the court--and for her--until she started ignoring court orders and the GAL weighed in. It seems there were several incidents of direct interaction between the judge and the mother but the Judge's ire wasn't to the explosion level until the mother went to the news media and started her campaign.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

I usually can open that site, but perhaps a limit bc I couldn't open it either. Can u C & P?

Also, does the article refer at all to Israeli law and courts re the likelihood that she would ever have been allowed to leave Israel with the children unless father agreed to it?

A parent can leave the U.S. with a child. All they need is a passport. I assume the same is true for Israel. What this woman did was to "jurisdiction shop." She thought the U.S. courts would be more favorable in terms of custody and she was right. That was then and I doubt she retains custody.

JMO

 

[epiphany]

Nice in theory but unfortunately, it is never resolved quickly if the parent has the money to pay an attorney to help orchestrate the games that have gone on in this case. (No offense intended to our two fine attorneys here.) And the kids do suffer because the situations drag out. Especially if they are separated from their primary caregiver for extended periods of time. I've seen it happen in my own family.

I doubt this Judge was aware of the mother's blatant disrespect for the court--and for her--until she started ignoring court orders and the GAL weighed in. It seems there were several incidents of direct interaction between the judge and the mother but the Judge's ire wasn't to the explosion level until the mother went to the news media and started her campaign.

JMO

The judge should have held Mom in contempt then. Tossed Mom in jail. Not place the kids in "jail", a "cell"...detention facility!

Judge abused her power and glad media got a hold of it bc if they hadn't, kids would still be at the place

 

[sorrell skye]

Nice in theory but unfortunately, it is never resolved quickly if the parent has the money to pay an attorney to help orchestrate the games that have gone on in this case. (No offense intended to our two fine attorneys here.) And the kids do suffer because the situations drag out. Especially if they are separated from their primary caregiver for extended periods of time. I've seen it happen in my own family.

I doubt this Judge was aware of the mother's blatant disrespect for the court--and for her--until she started ignoring court orders and the GAL weighed in. It seems there were several incidents of direct interaction between the judge and the mother but the Judge's ire wasn't to the explosion level until the mother went to the news media and started her campaign.

JMO

BBM

GMAB

This father has had more than enough money since the estrangement in 2009 to win custody of his children. If he wasn't able to win primary physical custody 6 years ago, I have to question why.

He's been more than financially able to hire a stellar attorney. If he truly desired primary physical custody - why has he failed to secure it - if he is the parent who allegedly shares the primary emotional bond with his children, if he is the parent who has allegedly proven to have provided the daily ongoing physical needs for his children, if he is the parent who his children allegedly look to for their emotional, physical, and financial needs?

I'll speculate: because he hasn't provided any strong evidence of the above things - the very things the Court looks at when determining primary physical custody.

 

[MyBelle]

The judge should have held Mom in contempt then. Tossed Mom in jail. Not place the kids in "jail", a "cell"...detention facility!

Judge abused her power and glad media got a hold of it bc if they hadn't, kids would still be at the place

She didn't abuse her power as a family court judge. The 15-year-old son was defiant, refused her request to have lunch with his dad and smirked at her. That behavior would alarm any judge and she held him in contempt. The other two chose to join him. Their choice and she accommodated them.

The media had nothing to do with anything other than to piss her off more, imo. I do believe she acted on the father and GAL requests for the camp.



JMO

 

[MyBelle]

BBM

GMAB

This father has had more than enough money since the estrangement in 2009 to win custody of his children. If he wasn't able to win primary physical custody 6 years ago, I have to question why.

He's been more than financially able to hire a stellar attorney. If he truly desired primary physical custody - why has he failed to secure it - if he is the parent who allegedly shares the primary emotional bond with his children, if he is the parent who has allegedly proven to have provided the daily ongoing physical needs for his children, if he is the parent who his children allegedly look to for their emotional, physical, and financial needs?

I'll speculate: because he hasn't provided any strong evidence of the above things - the very things the Court looks at when determining primary physical custody.

I suggest you read the articles that clearly say the Judge didn't believe either parent. In the past, Judges routinely favored the mother. That attitude has changed in the last few years.

I'll speculate that the mother has just as much money as the father. Perhaps more. But this case she can stick a fork in. She's going to lose her kids.

JMO

 

[epiphany]

Here's the GAL, Lansat:

<snip>

Gorcyca&#8217;s reprimand of the children during the June hearing reflects statements made by Lansat in his 2014 report. For example, he wrote, at a court-ordered parenting session in August 2014, the children &#8220;huddled together as if they were sending messages/vibes to each other in some Manson-like behavior&#8221;.

<snip>

Lansat seemed shocked. &#8220;For minor children to evade armed Sheriff&#8217;s is absolutely appalling,&#8221; he wrote. &#8220;I advised [Maya] Tsimhoni that unless she gets these kids off the bench, there will be grave consequences &#8211; such as placement in Children&#8217;s Village.&#8221;

<snip>

&#8220;Consequently, the Court needs to consider, if there is to be any progress a draconian approach,&#8221; he wrote.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/10/michigan-judge-siblings-juvenile-detention


New judge AND a new GAL for starters

 

[epiphany]

She didn't abuse her power as a family court judge. The 15-year-old son was defiant, refused her request to have lunch with his dad and smirked at her. That behavior would alarm any judge and she held him in contempt. The other two chose to join him. Their choice and she accommodated them.

The media had nothing to do with anything other than to piss her off more, imo. I do believe she acted on the father and GAL requests for the camp.



JMO

The 14 yo and sibs did not break any laws to warrant placement in that type of facility until they all turn 18 yo. The judge abused her powers. Needs to be removed from family court cases

 

[sorrell skye]

A parent can leave the U.S. with a child. All they need is a passport. I assume the same is true for Israel. What this woman did was to "jurisdiction shop." She thought the U.S. courts would be more favorable in terms of custody and she was right. That was then and I doubt she retains custody.

JMO

BBM

Not true.

A parent CAN NOT leave the US with a minor child with only a passport. I know this from direct experience. A parent needs an affidavit from the other parent, granting permission to the other parent to take the minor child out of the country.

 

[sorrell skye]

The 14 yo and sibs did not break any laws to warrant placement in that type of facility until they all turn 18 yo. The judge abused her powers. Needs to be removed from family court cases

I know, right?!

This judge found them in contempt of court. I've NEVER in my life heard of any sentence for contempt of court that spanned that amount of time.

IMO, Judge Gorcyca is loco.

 

[epiphany]

I know, right?!

This judge found them in contempt of court. I've NEVER in my life heard of any sentence for contempt of court that spanned that amount of time.

IMO, Judge Gorcyca is loco.

Seems the GAL, Lansat, is a little off as well. See post above

I also read a quote of his where he believed the children were communicating in type of Morse code: when they were tapping their feet

Off the case, off the case!

 

[sorrell skye]

I suggest you read the articles that clearly say the Judge didn't believe either parent. In the past, Judges routinely favored the mother. That attitude has changed in the last few years.

I'll speculate that the mother has just as much money as the father. Perhaps more. But this case she can stick a fork in. She's going to lose her kids.

JMO

I'm more than aware that the courts don't automatically favor the mother these days - which is why I brought up why primary physical custody was awarded to the mother.

As I stated before: if the father was the parent who had tended to the childrens' daily needs, if the father had been the parent who had shared the primary emotional bond with the children, if the father had provided evidence to the Court that it was in the childrens' best interest to remain in his care, and if the father had provided evidence to the Court that the mother was a detrimental influence on the children, why was primary physical custody awarded to the mother?

The above questions are the ones that Family Court require answers to.

The fact that primary physical custody had been awarded to the mother tells me that the Court must have believed that it was in the childrens' best interest to be primarily cared for by their mother, and the Court must have believed that the mother was not a detrimental influence on the children when primary physical custody was awarded to her.

 

[MyBelle]

I'm more than aware that the courts don't automatically favor the mother these days - which is why I brought up why primary physical custody was awarded to the mother.

As I stated before: if the father was the parent who had tended to the childrens' daily needs, if the father had been the parent who had shared the primary emotional bond with the children, if the father had provided evidence to the Court that it was in the childrens' best interest to remain in his care, and if the father had provided evidence to the Court that the mother was a detrimental influence on the children, why was primary physical custody awarded to the mother?

The above questions are the ones that Family Court require answers to.

The fact that primary physical custody had been awarded to the mother tells me that the Court must have believed that it was in the childrens' best interest to be primarily cared for by their mother, and the Court must have believed that the mother was not a detrimental influence on the children when primary physical custody was awarded to her.

While the court may have believed six years ago the mother was not a detrimental influence, it really is irrelevant today because she has proved herself to be a detrimental influence. The kids have paid the price and so has the dad.

JMO