VA VA - Isabella Miller-Jenkins, 7, Bedford, Sept 2009

[Cubby]

With all due respect it's not just LGBT rights. This case made news because of their sexual orientation, but it happens to thousands and thousands of parents all the time who also get the same lack of enforcement of custody and or visitation rights.

The courts have already ruled against Lisa's claims regarding her interpretation of the law. She doesn't have a chance to win any appeals.

Lisa Miller is the kind of person, regardless of sexual orientation, who would have acted with the same selfishness to a former significant other even if she were in a heterosexual relationship that ended. If that were the case, she'd be tossing out all kinds of false allegations of sexual abuse or she would have found some other adament excuse to alienate her childs father from her daughter.

I personally don't believe Jenkins is getting unfair treatment from the courts. I don't believe they are treating her any differently because of her sexual orientation. I simply believe when it comes to family court, the courts are too slow. I don't think the case would have been 'expedited' if either of these mothers were fighting an ugly custody battle with a man.

I'm a never married single mother. I've been a member of various online Single Parent communities for about 8 years now. I see many many non custodial parents denied access to their children with little if any success at having their parental rights enforced.

JMHO

 

[Button]

I wasn't sure if it happened a lot or not, talking about not issuing arrest warrants and giving the parent (who is not cooperating) more time to hide. Apparently it does, which is extremely sad and disappointing.

I'm not a biological parent. I have two step-sons that I love like I would my own kids, I've been in their lives for 3 years now. I was extremely heartbroken when their mother and I separated last Summer and I wasn't able to see them, so I can only imagine how JMJ must feel.

I just hope LM comes to her senses and goes to court on the 23rd, I doubt she will but I can still hope for the best for Isabella.

 

[Cubby]

Thanks for your input Button. In my situation my sons father and I never went to court outside of our initial child support and to establish paternity. Everything else we have handled outside of family court.

This is not only relating to the case between Jenkins and Miller, but all parents denied access to their children. A child has a right to both of their parents. They don't get to choose their parents and unless one or both parents are deemed unfit the courts should consider the child first and just what a long extended custody battle such as the one between Miller and Jenkins would do to the child. Had the courts acted sooner with enforcing even visitation the child argument would not exist that Isabella will be taken from the only mother she remembers. Jenkins did nothing to cause this child harm, Miller put her own daughter in this situation by continuously disregarding court orders. Why the courts allow parents like Miller to do this which causes the child the most harm I'll never know. It's not like they don't have thousands upon thousands of case histories to see what children go through. They need to put the child first and grant custody to the fit parent who demonstrates the willingness to coparent. There is no need to beg, plead and hope a parent might comply when they continuously refuse to. Heck, if we blew through a stop sign LE wouldn't ask we try stopping at that stop sign repeatedly until we get it right, we'd face the repercussions immediately. Sadly family court doesn't follow that same analogy.

jmo

 

[Button]

So much going on here at home. Just thought I'd let you know Janet posted on the FB page and said there's a court hearing tomorrow to talk about contempt and things like that. Keep her in your prayers.

 

[Cubby]

So much going on here at home. Just thought I'd let you know Janet posted on the FB page and said there's a court hearing tomorrow to talk about contempt and things like that. Keep her in your prayers.

I saw this a few days ago in the news, and decided against posting at the time because it was somewhat confusing imo. To summarize, Jenkins requested an arrest warrant or some kind of charges from the judge in Virginia, who declined for one of the stupidest ( best word I could find ) reasons I have ever read. Rather than indicating he has no jurisdiction to do so in VA until this becomse a criminal as opposed to civil matter in VT it sounds as if he is trying to appeal to the citizens of VA - who clearly have no understanding of how these matters work in family court. Millers 'supporters' who clearly have even less knowledge somehow see this as a victory? :waitasec:

Link to the news article from last weeks court hearing:
http://www.wset.com/news/stories/0210/707185.html

from the above link:

The judge could have held her in contempt of court, a charge she's already facing in Vermont, where this legal battle began. But a judge says he can't do the same here, because Miller was never notified of the pending charges, and she's nowhere to be found.

Despite her absence, there were plenty of people at court Wednesday on her behalf.

Hmm.. her representation shows up in court and somehow the judge forgot that an attorney can appear in court on behalf of his or her client without the client appearing? What happens when say someone is dodging a forclosure notice and they can't be found to be served, or a child is going through the court system and a notice is placed in the legal notice section of the newspaper to advice any potential fathers said child is being placed for or considered for adoption? Does it all just come to a grinding halt because those measures already in place by the courts become irrelevent? I think this judge is really appealing to his interpretation of just how knowledgeable the general public is on family court matters. Not a smart move, imo.

The REAL court date that actually has any relevance is scheduled for tomorrow, Tuesday January 23rd, IIRC when the Vermont judge - who has jurisdiction - starts procedings or making decisions regarding contempt with or without Ms. Millers presence, and how it should be. When do we get the "uh, I wasn't aware judge" Oh, as a solid defense?

Well see what happens in court tomorrow.

 

[Cubby]

The Associated Press - Published: February 23, 2010



RUTLAND - A Vermont judge has ordered the arrest of a woman who has refused to turn over her 7-year-old daughter to her former lesbian partner.

Family Court Judge William Cohen found Lisa Miller of Forest, Va., in contempt of court during a hearing Tuesday and issued the arrest warrant.

A little more at link:

http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20100223/NEWS/100229966

We were all well aware this was coming today. Lisa has been giving extension after extension to comply with the courts orders yet she chooses to remain in contempt. I wonder if this now means this has gone from a civil to criminal matter with the issuance of an arrest warrant.

This also means VA has NO CHOICE but to honor the arrest warrant and actively search for this missing child.

I hope this means Janet can finally have her daughter returned to her.

Race horse out of the gate.

 

[Button]

Janet posted on the FB page. Arrest warrant was issued for Lisa Miller. I was confused by the court date on the 17th. I CAN NOT BELIEVE the judge said because Lisa could not be contacted t know about the court date he couldn't issue a warrant.. um wasn't she supposed to give IMJ to Janet on Jan. 1st. yes she was. That's no excuse.

Anyway I'm happy that a warrant has been issued, now we just have to see if she'll be found.

 

[Cubby]

I'm still a little confused too. I understand the VA judge could not issue an arrest warrant last week because he has NO JURISDICTION on the case. (despite whatever excuses he wishes to tell the public).

What I don't understand is the reasoning Janet and her attorneys sought that happen within the courts in VA. There is a reason for it, I just don't know or understand what it is......

I'm going to try and find Janets FB. If not, would you mind linking it here Button?

thanks!

 

[Cubby]

ok, there is about a million Janet Jenkins listed at FB. Would you please link the correct FB address here Button?

tia!

 

[Button]

They're persuing the case in VA because that's where LM moved with IMJ when she left JJ. VA doesn't recognize gay marraige, but they don't have jurisiction because this originated in VT. It's really confusing.

There's a law to protect parents passed in 1980 (correct me if I'm wrong) it's so parent A can't move to another state and fight for full custody there while Parent B is still in the state they originally lived in. Wherever the family resides when they were married is where the case needs to be heard. JJ and LM lived in VA, but moved to VT so they could be married. They had IMJ in VT, and when they broke up LM and IMJ went back to VA and that's where LM persued getting the divorce and custody of IMJ. VA courts said they couldn't do it because gay marriage wasn't recognized there and it would have to be done in VT.

They're going through VA courts for an arrest warrant, the only reason why I can think they're doing this is because that's where LM was residing throughout this whole ordeal.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=251765214097&ref=ts There's the link for the FB page.

There's a similar case that happened in Texas, a gay couple went to MA and got married then came back to Texas to live. They were married around 5 years and decided they hated each other and wanted a divorce, a Texas judge wouldn't divorce them. The only way they could get a divorce is to move to MA, be residents there for a year, then they could legally divorce there. This would mean they would have to quit their jobs and spend a lot of money to move to MA just to spend more money to get the divorce finalized. It's crazy that the laws don't work together in cases like this.

 

[Button]

http://valawyersweekly.com/vlwblog/2010/02/23/arrest-warrant-issued-for-lisa-miller/
Click "today rejected" for doc.

If I'm not mistaken, which I'm sure I'm not, VA has also now issued an arrest warrant for LM, since VT ruled that way and LM resides in VA, VA also issued a warrant.

 

[believe09]

Did you read Miller's attorney's response to the court in VT prior to the warrant being issued? Basically it was since the arrest warrant would only be good in VT and the likeliehood of Miller being there was very small, what is the point.....

The point is now they can issue a nationwide warrant.....

 

[Cubby]

Did you read Miller's attorney's response to the court in VT prior to the warrant being issued? Basically it was since the arrest warrant would only be good in VT and the likeliehood of Miller being there was very small, what is the point.....

The point is now they can issue a nationwide warrant.....

BBM. No, and why didn't you add the link? Now I have to go searching for it, lol.

Now if Millers attorney's & VA think VA does not have to abide by another states custody orders, they really need to get their head out of their rear end.
:boohoo::loser::razz:ther_beatingA_Dead
smilies for the judge in VA and his not so intelligent comment, along with Miller and her attorney's.
I don't care how tough they try to act, they do NOT HAVE THE LAW ON THEIR SIDE!

God, I hope this is not going to be a case of VA snubbing VT's court order.
I don't even know what would happen next if that is the case.

 

[Cubby]

http://valawyersweekly.com/vlwblog/2010/02/23/arrest-warrant-issued-for-lisa-miller/
Click "today rejected" for doc.

If I'm not mistaken, which I'm sure I'm not, VA has also now issued an arrest warrant for LM, since VT ruled that way and LM resides in VA, VA also issued a warrant.

From the above link:

Meanwhile, the Virginia Court of Appeals today rejected Lisa Miller’s challenge to recognition by a Virginia court of the custody order from Vermont. And we knew this was coming too. Why Miller and her attorneys asked the same question twice, when VA originally said NO. Hmmm, well they just said NO AGAIN. Asking again and again and again, IS NOT going to change the law. NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO. NO Ms. Miller the courts HAVE to recognize other states custody orders no matter how much you want to believe they do not. You did not, nor do you have the choice to interpret the law any other way than which it was intended.

 

[believe09]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100223/ap_on_re_us/us_lesbian_custody_4

Miller's attorney Stephen Crampton said by phone during the hearing that he did not know where the girl, now 7, or Miller are and that he objects to the arrest warrant, which applies only in Vermont.
"It seems that it would be an exercise in futility, given that while no one has any idea precisely where Ms. Miller and Isabella may be located as of right now, it seems least likely" that they would be in Vermont, he said.

 

[Cubby]

They're persuing the case in VA because that's where LM moved with IMJ when she left JJ. VA doesn't recognize gay marraige, but they don't have jurisiction because this originated in VT. It's really confusing.

There's a law to protect parents passed in 1980 (correct me if I'm wrong) it's so parent A can't move to another state and fight for full custody there while Parent B is still in the state they originally lived in. Wherever the family resides when they were married is where the case needs to be heard. JJ and LM lived in VA, but moved to VT so they could be married. They had IMJ in VT, and when they broke up LM and IMJ went back to VA and that's where LM persued getting the divorce and custody of IMJ. VA courts said they couldn't do it because gay marriage wasn't recognized there and it would have to be done in VT.


They're going through VA courts for an arrest warrant, the only reason why I can think they're doing this is because that's where LM was residing throughout this whole ordeal.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=251765214097&ref=ts There's the link for the FB page.

There's a similar case that happened in Texas, a gay couple went to MA and got married then came back to Texas to live. They were married around 5 years and decided they hated each other and wanted a divorce, a Texas judge wouldn't divorce them. The only way they could get a divorce is to move to MA, be residents there for a year, then they could legally divorce there. This would mean they would have to quit their jobs and spend a lot of money to move to MA just to spend more money to get the divorce finalized. It's crazy that the laws don't work together in cases like this.

Yes, that is how it works. That law is linked somewhere here in this thread. There is also a law, I think linked somewhere within this thread, that basically says a child who is a product of a 'marriage' has rights to both those parents unless either is deemed unfit. I do not think Miller or her attorneys have a snow ball's chance in hades to get the courts to interpret the premise behind that law either, since the VT custody laws would intertwine with the prior. There is no way, shape for form Miller is going to come out changing the outcome of this ruling to her liking.

Her best bet is to cooperate with the courts now, because if she does not, I can guaranty the courts will ONLY give her so much time before they terminate her parental rights. I have seen cases of that happen when one parent adamatly refuses to cooperate with the other.

The courts will rule in favor of protecting the CHILD first with the hopes of keeping both parents in the childs life, but when they clearly see that is NOT possible they do move to terminate parental rights and that is the route Miller is PUSHING the courts at this time.

 

[Cubby]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100223/ap_on_re_us/us_lesbian_custody_4

Miller's attorney Stephen Crampton said by phone during the hearing that he did not know where the girl, now 7, or Miller are and that he objects to the arrest warrant, which applies only in Vermont.
"It seems that it would be an exercise in futility, given that while no one has any idea precisely where Ms. Miller and Isabella may be located as of right now, it seems least likely" that they would be in Vermont, he said.

Yes, he could be correct in that this particular warrant and the way it is written only applies in Vermont. that does NOT mean a federal warrant will not be issued for Miller, so I am thinking then the next step is to have that federal warrant issued, no?

thank you believe! :blowkiss:

 

[sniperacer]

There is also a law, I think linked somewhere within this thread, that basically says a child who is a product of a 'marriage' has rights to both those parents unless either is deemed unfit. <snip>


So you are saying all the state legislators are wasting their time in trying to pass 2009/2010 Equal Parenting Bills because this law already exists?

Please link this family court law!

 

[Cubby]

The bill you are talking about is a different thing entirely. I said nothing of the such regarding any bills for potential future laws.

I was talking about a law already on the books. which basically says a child born within a marriage is a product of that marriage... Did you read the full thread and the links within the thread? I'm sure I already posted the link I was refering to. Sniper, see quote below.

ACLU link with info regarding the case. Also within article, it states that Miller acknowledged the child was a product of the civil union and sought child support from Jenkins. (ok, ok, I know.... custody/visitation and child support are two different issues.... couldn't help myself. Miller recognized Jenkins as a parent when she sought child support, of course in addition to the courts recognizing as well.)

http://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/miller-v-jenkins-about-case

ETA: clarification regarding jurisdiction issue as described in above link.

Under federal law, once the courts in one state properly take jurisdiction over a child custody or visitation case, a court in another state cannot assume jurisdiction. The law is meant to prevent parents who are unhappy with a custody ruling from moving to another state to try to get a different result. The court held that Vermont had sole jurisdiction, and that Virginia must give full force and effect to the Vermont Court&#8217;s orders.

bumping this post since it answers the question button had on the law and some possible confusion by Sniper with what I was saying. The link explained it pretty well, if you hadn't already seen or read this link.

Sniper,

I believe the above article with regards to children born within marriage or a union being a product of the union is what I was trying to say in my previous post. Hope this clarifies your question. I think you might be confusing the challenges to current laws on the books within this case between Miller and Jenkins and any future bills or laws making changes to how custody is granted within a divorce or between fit parents.

I'm sticking to discussing the facts and current laws as they apply to this case between Miller and Jenkins, and Millers arguments how current law does not effect her case when in fact it does. I really can't say how laws that might come into play sometime in the future may or may not affect this case. I don't know that those laws will ever come into play, nor do I know if they will be retroactive to include already determined custody cases and how far back any retroactive dates go should they ever come into play..... so for now, I think I will stick to current on the book laws regarding this case. Everything else would be pure speculation when it comes to laws.

Hope that clarifies your question and any misinterpretation you may have had regarding my post.

 

[RoseRed]

Aside from the obvious reasons, this makes me so angry! I saw a few articles recently that said something along the lines of "mother won't hand daughter over to woman". Like this other "woman" is just some stranger who wants the child. NO! This other woman is her MOTHER!

Prayers that Isabella is found safe, and quickly. I'm sure her bio mom is filling her head with all sorts of nonsense. And she deserves the love of both of her parents, regardless of religious or political beliefs.

Who and where is bio dad?