Nope.
No, it isn’t. It’d be sexism if the father was being blamed because he’s male. He’s being called out because allowing this travesty to happen in his name.
Bullshit, both parents are allowing this to happen, neither one is more or less to blame than the other.
What’s bullshit? I’ve called out the judge and the mom too. Also looking at the dad doesn’t make it sexism. They are at this point because the mom isn’t able to or isn’t willing to force the kids. So the dad might have some last bit of control over whether the kids end up in jail. Even if the mom is wrong too.
You seem very invested in this being an sexist accusation, so we’ll just have to disagree on that point.
The problem is that the judge did not listen. She said it right there in the transcript that she was doing this over the father’s objections. Page 9, line 7: “This is over your dad’s objection. I want this to be heard. Obviously, it’s over your mother’s objection. Your dad - I wanted to do this because of your horrific behaviour a long time ago and your dad begged me not to. He begged me not to…”
So don’t blame the father for the Judge being a psycho if he tried to stop her.
He didn’t stay to fight their incarceration; he immediately left the country on a business trip.
Fair enough and I’m pleased to be wrong that he tried to stop it. That’s a good thing.
She is referring to the father’s past objections to her sending them to the detention center. She states more than once that their incarceration will be reviewed as soon as their father says the word. She even states she would review it the very day he asks for it. But he didn’t ask; he went on a trip.
I quoted that information from the transcript back in post #54 and explained it again in post #59.
Have you read the transcript?
I don’t understand why people would comment on this without having read the transcript.
And for some who claim to have read it, I don’t know why they ignore information from the transcript and then speculate on things for which there is no evidence.
It’s bizarre.
THIS x 1000.
When kids don’t want to see a parent, there are generally some very good reasons why, and being brainwashed is usually not one of them. :dubious: They’re old enough to know if they want to see him or not.
You are spreading factually incorrect information.
What she said was that if during their time at Mandy’s Place they start interacting with their father in a civil manner he could then tell the judge and she would release them.
By leaving that part out you make the same false assertion that others have made - that dad can just say the word and they would not go to Mandy’s Place, or that they would be released unconditionally.
I quoted the relevant text from the transcript in post #54 and explained it again in post #59.
Why are you posting things that are easily proved to be false?
The father had a pre-existing business trip scheduled. The kids wouldn’t have a simple lunch with the father and willingly chose Mandy’s Place over that. So the father had no power to “get them out” and there’s no reason to believe the kids would have changed their ways anytime soon.
The father has to keep his job so he can keep paying the lawyer’s bills for this catastrophe caused by the mother.
At least he appears to be paying his bills. The mother is on her 7th or 8th lawyer now. The most recent one, representing her during the court appearance for which we have a transcript, quit because she owes him over $16,000 that she apparently won’t pay.
Do you have a cite for this?
According to the court transcript the mother was specifically excluded from seeing the kids.
In fact the only one the judge was going to let visit them was the father, along with therapists and legal representatives.
Here’s what you do, or rather don’t do.
You don’t poison the kids against the other parent so they won’t have any problem going to see them and in fact look forward to seeing them. Then there’s no problem.
At this point, after all the damage the mother has done to destroy the relationship, yeah it’s going to be hard to get them to go.
That’s why she needs her parental rights stripped and the kids need to be somewhere out of her influence and get therapy to heal from the tremendous amount of damage she’s done.
OK, but where are you getting any evidence that the mother did that? She may have, or she may not have. But we don’t know that.
You don’t have to assume it.
There is plenty of evidence for it.
And yet, despite that, you ignore it and then speculate that the father is the problem.
Assume the mother is an angel and assume the father is an asshole.
There’s too much of this kind of crap going on.
Why have you clipped away part of the sentence I wrote? Go ahead and read the whole thing.
Was he forced off on his trip at gunpoint while the kids sat in jail for two weeks? Sorry, must have missed that part.
The judge who has been dealing with this psychotic woman for almost 6 years and knows way better than you or I do the facts of the case sure seems to think so.
What is your evidence that she isn’t brainwashing the kids against their dad and poisoning their relationship to the extent of ruining it?
Or do you just want to assume something, despite the facts, because you’re more comfortable with the world being like that?
Some people seem to think the judge was comparing the kids to Manson. It seems to me that she was comparing the mother to Manson in the way it is painfully obvious and readily apparent that she has been brainwashing the kids against their dad.
What a sick twisted woman the mother is. I don’t get why people are defending her.
Actually, I do, and that’s messed up.
Was the mother forced at gun point to ruin her children’s lives and their relationship with their father?
No?
Guess she did it cause she loves them.
I don’t assume anything. My exact words were
I’m not claiming she didn’t brainwash. For all I know, she’s a terrible parent who filled the kids’ heads with lies. I’m just saying let’s not assume anything either way just yet.