This is the most “neutral” article I came up with on a quick search…
My question is why would Judge Lisa Gorcyca think incarcerating the Tsimhoni children (and apparently isolating them) helps this situation? Was she just frustrated? And if she was, why not jail the mother if she was the cause of the alienation? Is there someone familiar with the child protective services arena that can explain what I’m not seeing, because my kneejerk reaction is that we need to get rid of any family court judge that is this bullying.
If the mother is so bad, hell, switch custodial parents then. But lock up the kids? Isolate them from each other? Threaten to lock up them up until they’re 18? The boy claims he saw his dad commit an act of violence and the judge says:
It’s like something out of a bad movie. “What’s wrong with you? Everyone says your dad is great! Your fear is so wrong, I’m sending you to jail! And your little sister too!” - only she just didn’t disappear in a puff of green smoke like the Wicked Witch of the West - she actually punished them with the full force of the law.
Absolutely horrific. What kind of father would allow this to be done on his behalf? Clearly no one with any power had the children’s interests at heart.
I agree, but it sounds like the mother is also responsible. The mother has the ability to influence the children to honor the custody arrangement, that she agreed to.
Making them spend time with him may not have been in their best interest. Maybe he was an abusive jerk and they reasonably chose to avoid him.
Why assume she agreed to any arrangement? The court will force an arrangement if no agreement is reached and these children are not the property of either parent. They chose not to see him and obviously felt very strongly about it, so I sure wouldn’t have made them if I were her.
Maybe the mother has poisoned the relationship with a fine father. The judge should have sent the mother to jail if that is the case. There is either a good reason for the children not wanting to see their father such as he being abusive, or the judge should do everything possible to enforce the visitation order. But if the children are balking, and the primary custodian is their mother, she’s the one who should be doing time.
That’s how I see it - if the mother is at fault, yeah, lock her up. But locking up the children? It says they have court-appointed attorneys as well (but if this judge appointed them, I have to wonder about that as well) - couldn’t the children’s attorneys stop this?
I’m going to first assume that the judge in this case has better knowledge of what’s gone on than you, I or the reporters covering it.
If there were grounds for sole custody by the mother and no visitation by the father, that should have been brought up and argued prior to the custody agreement being put in place. The only thing mentioned is that one of the kids claim they saw their father hit their mother. Sounds like the judge didn’t believe the kid, and most judges would at a minimum inquire about that, and we don’t know that the judge didn’t.
A separate question that I always wonder in these kinds of horror stories is this: Is there no appeal to a higher court, or other higher authority? One reads stories like this sometimes that go on and on, when some seemingly out-of-control loose-cannon judge or prosecutor or CPS worker totally trashes the lives of families or others, and there never seems to be an option, or not an easily available option, to get the case escalated or reviewed. It often seems that taking the case to “the court of public opinion” is the first, last, and only appeal available.
Put them in jail! That will make them want to have lunch with their (allegedly abusive) father!
This made me very angry. The children also claimed that the father was abusive. Why on earth would the judge ignore that and force children to spend time with him?
I hope that the children have an outside person assigned to represent their interests, and that they are able to sue for being inappropriately jailed.
The thing that caught my attention about this case is the length of time the kids need to stay locked up. Until September unless appeals happen? That sounds excessive for a child who’s only charged crime was contempt.
Even though that article is long, I can’t help but feel we’re only getting part of the story. Divorce is always ugly, doubly so with kids in the mix, triply so with kids old enough to speak for themselves in court… because one or both parents are almost always using them on some level.
I believe the article mentioned that each child had his or her own lawyer, but each refused to speak with that lawyer. Like Amateur Barbarian says, there might be more here than is immediately apparent. Or maybe the mother (or the father) is as nuts as they make each other sound.
:dubious: