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

[Woodland]

With all due respect jjenny - what is your solution to this situation?

I see you are defending prior and current actions of the mother and children - to what end though? What is your resolution?

Fwiw - initially (and still do) object to some of the statements by the judge at the last hearing - until the 2 verified lawyers weighed in and explained not only this case but other similar cases. I have better insight thanks to them albeit not sure why the judge took so long to act. Jmo.

What should happen now? The horse seems to be dead already - my interest is in future cases and sensible opinions/suggestions to a resolution. History is just that - gone.

Look forward to a better resolution not taken by the judge to date.

 

[sorrell skye]

The three attorneys were appointed on the day of the hearing. How does their conduct indicate anything?

The conduct of the 3 children's attorneys indicates that they were ass-kissing the judge, IMO (according to the court record I read). It seems as if they were terrified of pissing off the judge - and that is NOT someone anyone needs to be representing them in a court of law.

 

[SweetT]

I have not followed this case all along but if those were my children, I would be livid..as a mother. I cannot imagine the irreparable damage that judge has done to these children with the belittling etc. If the judge has a problem with the mother, then take it up with the mother. If she thinks the mother brain washed the children then demand them go to counseling or therapy etc to find out the situation etc but not send them to juvenile detention. This is all wrong IMO.
Have the mom go to therapy or counseling, hell the whole family even.

 

[MyBelle]

He did try get custody. His problem is that he seems to work in Israel and spend a lot of time there. Actually I've seen articles that state he lives in Israel (while some others claim he lives in US). Regardless, he seems to spend a lot of time in Israel. So he wanted kids to be moved to Israel but was denied. I don't know what kind of relationship he had with the children before the divorce, but I think the relationship since the divorce wasn't good. The kids have been "alienated" for many years now.

No, the problem 5 years ago was the Judge didn't know who to believe. I doubt that's the case today.

BOTH parents are citizens of Israel. The mother voluntarily moved back to Israel with her husband in 2008. She decided she wanted to be in the U.S. so she took the kids, moved back to the U.S. without telling her husband and she filed for divorce in Michigan.

A parent who refuses to follow a custody order and denies access to the other parent is eventually going to lose the children. No judge is going to tolerate the games this woman has played for years.

JMO

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/routine-emergencies/.premium-1.665369

 

[MyBelle]

The conduct of the 3 children's attorneys indicates that they were ass-kissing the judge, IMO (according to the court record I read). It seems as if they were terrified of pissing off the judge - and that is NOT someone anyone needs to be representing them in a court of law.

Yes, attorneys do tend to do that. I've never seen a case where intentionally pissing off the Judge resulted in a good outcome for the client or the attorney.

JMO

 

[Woodland]

No, the problem 5 years ago was the Judge didn't know who to believe. I doubt that's the case today.

BOTH parents are citizens of Israel. The mother voluntarily moved back to Israel with her husband in 2008. She decided she wanted to be in the U.S. so she took the kids, moved back to the U.S. without telling her husband and she filed for divorce in Michigan.

A parent who refuses to follow a custody order and denies access to the other parent is eventually going to lose the children. No judge is going to tolerate the games this woman has played for years.

JMO


http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/routine-emergencies/.premium-1.665369

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.

 

[sorrell skye]

So is the general attitude that since this case seems to be more or less resolved judicially, that we should all just forget about it and move on?

If so, my response is Hell No!

At any time, any one of us (or our family members) could be involved in a contentious Family Law matter. We should all be concerned - regardless of our circumstances and regardless of where we reside.

 

[Woodland]

We should definitely be concerned about this case regarding future cases. Resolutions/good ideas are needed though, flogging a dead horse doesn't work - or so I've heard.

 

[sorrell skye]

No, the problem 5 years ago was the Judge didn't know who to believe. I doubt that's the case today.

BOTH parents are citizens of Israel. The mother voluntarily moved back to Israel with her husband in 2008. She decided she wanted to be in the U.S. so she took the kids, moved back to the U.S. without telling her husband and she filed for divorce in Michigan.

A parent who refuses to follow a custody order and denies access to the other parent is eventually going to lose the children. No judge is going to tolerate the games this woman has played for years.

JMO

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/routine-emergencies/.premium-1.665369

The link you provided is only available to subscribers.

 

[jjenny]

So is the general attitude that since this case seems to be more or less resolved judicially, that we should all just forget about it and move on?

If so, my response is Hell No!

At any time, any one of us (or our family members) could be involved in a contentious Family Law matter. We should all be concerned - regardless of our circumstances and regardless of where we reside.

The case is nowhere near resolved. Kids have been send to summer camp where they can only state until August 13 (the program doesn't go longer than that).

 

[sorrell skye]

We should definitely be concerned about this case regarding future cases. Resolutions/good ideas are needed though, flogging a dead horse doesn't work - or so I've heard.

I don't believe that I'm "flogging a dead horse" when I post about the judge's statements/accusations/actions - especially the abusive statements she made to the children.

As far as I'm concerned, Judge Gorcyca's statements deserve all the scrutiny they get and then some.

 

[Woodland]

The case is nowhere near resolved. Kids have been send to summer camp where they can only state until August 13 (the program doesn't go longer than that).

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

 

[Woodland]

I don't believe that I'm "flogging a dead horse" when I post about the judge's statements/accusations/actions - especially the abusive statements she made to the children.

As far as I'm concerned, Judge Gorcyca's statements deserve all the scrutiny they get and then some.

What is a good resolution/lesson for future cases?

 

[epiphany]

If anyone comes across any family legal expert who supported the judge's decision, pls link. I'd be interested in reading it.

Kids sent to juvenile detention over cold shoulder to father a 'disturbing' ruling, experts say

Catherine Ross, a law professor at George Washington University who specializes in family law, compared the situation to journalists who are jailed for contempt of court by refusing to reveal the name of a source, where they remain until they back down.

“That’s basically what the judge did here,” Ross told the Guardian. “You can get out of prison when your father tells us that you’re ready to have a good relationship with him.” Ross said to her knowledge the decision was “unprecedented” in reported cases with established opinions of the court.

She added: “The initial threat of sending them to detention even for a weekend is disturbing enough.”

<snip>

Lawrence Durbin, a law professor at the University of Detroit-Mercy, disagreed [with decision].

&#8220;The judge&#8217;s actions seems to run counter to the important mandate of family court jurisprudence, which is to do what&#8217;s in the children&#8217;s best interest,&#8221; he wrote to the Guardian in an email. &#8220;Whatever problems were created that caused this couple to divorce, the children should not in any way be held responsible.&#8221;

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


Law expert stunned by judge's decision to hold children in detention center

Larry Dubin, an attorney who has been a law professor at the University of Detroit Mercy for the last 40 years, was also stunned by Gorcyca's decision.

<snip>

Dubin talked about the rights of the children and believes they may have been violated.

"To treat this like a case of contempt where she sends them away until they're willing to comply with court order seems harsh with respect to young children," Dubin said. "It certainly can raise all kinds of Constitutional issues."

Dubin believes the judge may have abused her power. They are not allowed to see their mother while they are locked away.

"If you want to bring them together," Dubin said. "This seems to be in my opinion, the opposite way of creating a loving environment between a mother and father."

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

 

[sorrell skye]

Yes, attorneys do tend to do that. I've never seen a case where intentionally pissing off the Judge resulted in a good outcome for the client or the attorney.

JMO

Any competent attorney's goal should be to represent their client, regardless of the judge's interpretation of the case. When I read the court record, it was clear that none of the childrens' attorney's cared about what was in the best interest of their child client(s) - if they had, they would have objected to some of the judge's comments - if for no other reason than to have their objections preserved in the court record.

No judge has the right to run roughshod over a court proceeding. IMO, this is exactly what Judge Gorcyca did when she verbally abused the minors who were in her court when she accused them of being in a "Manson-like Cult" and when she berated them for being "brainwashed" and she said "you are so mentally messed up right now and it's not because of your father".

As far as I'm concerned, this judge is mentally "messed up right now".

IMO, she has no business presiding over any Family Court matters.

 

[epiphany]

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

 

[Woodland]

Will be surprised if anyone supports the judges ruling on detention for the children on the day she ruled it. Also, don't see the comparison to a judge wanting to throw a journalist in jail though for not revealing a source - off the mark imo.

What preceded the ruling in this case has merit imo - the judge was wrong not to intervene years sooner for the children. Imo, mom has initials following her name that the judge placed too much confidence in. A title/designation does not make one the be all and end all of knowledge or doing the right thing when required. Like a member of LE for example. Jmo.

 

[Woodland]

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

Well I guess this is support for the decision - using the prior actions of mom as a reason - totally agree fwiw. But, too little, too late imo.

 

[sorrell skye]

What is a good resolution/lesson for future cases?

For obvious starters: No family law judge/commissioner should EVER berate a child for being a victim of alleged parental alienation. No family law judge should EVER threaten a child who is an alleged victim of parental alienation with jail time - which is exactly what this judge did.

As far as I'm concerned, Judge Gorcyca has no business presiding over family law court if she is unable to refrain from making abusive comments directed at the minor children.

If you wish to read her abusive comments toward the minor children, please go to this link:

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

 

[epiphany]

Well I guess this is support for the decision - using the prior actions of mom as a reason - totally agree fwiw. But, too little, too late imo.

Yes, this is support of Gorcyca's decision: Chief judge in the same county