Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://seattle.cbslocal.com/2014/06/20/judge-orders-deployed-us-sailor-to-attend-custody-hearing-or-lose-daughter-face-contempt/

This is utterly unbelievable. I cannot use nasty enough words to describe my anger over this.

I've had the Civil Relief Act keep me out of the fire before due to me being in Japan when a malicious bitch sued me for rent after she kicked me out of the apartment. That law is there to keep things like this from happening. She's flangrantly thumbing her nose at it, and I hope she gets disbarred at the least for it.

Holy feth... that is absolutely dispicable!

Can the Sailor sue for damages?

 whembly wrote:
Holy feth... that is absolutely dispicable!

Can the Sailor sue for damages?

I'm sure his command is working with Navy Legal to figure out what to be done. I just cannot believe the Judges flagrant disregard of the law on this.

 djones520 wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Holy feth... that is absolutely dispicable!

Can the Sailor sue for damages?

I'm sure his command is working with Navy Legal to figure out what to be done. I just cannot believe the Judges flagrant disregard of the law on this.

I'm not sure how most legal systems - never mind that of the US - work, but would a decision like this - if not successfully appealed - create any sort of precedent for ignoring the Civil Relief law? If it would then I'm sure he's gunna get the best legal aid the Navy can offer, as that'll be a very damaging precedent to set for the armed forces.

I doubt she'll be disbarred, but I wouldn't doubt that she'll have to face the BAR Association as well as a judiciary hearing. This is all sorts of ridiculous.

What does the sailor Family Care Plan say? Sounds like the judge is about to bolo big time.

Well Jones, you have the 101st and a tarmac full of Apaches. Swing by Knox and wake up the tread-heads (heard armor school came back to where its supposed to be) to go 'splain things to this judge.

Tread Heads moved to Benning. Well the Armor School did

xraytango wrote:
Well Jones, you have the 101st and a tarmac full of Apaches. Swing by Knox and wake up the tread-heads (heard armor school came back to where its supposed to be) to go 'splain things to this judge.

While I know you weren't serious, I know this would just exacerbate the issue. This judge is either someone who hates the military, or one of the femi-nazi's who feels that men have to business being the parent.

The kid is removed from the birth mother by CPS, which requires gak to have almost literally hit the fan, given to her father.

Father goes to serve his country leaves daughter with step-mother.

Judge wants to give the daughter BACK to the woman who lost her daughter to CPS.


What the hell part of that makes any sort of sense? "Welp, the kid is clearly better with a parent dysfunctional enough for CPS to step in. BETTER SEND EM BACK BECAUSE FRELL KIDS!"

Judge needs to be disbarred. That's a dick move, plain and simple.

Not commenting on this case in particular, but removal by CPS is not and should not be a permanent thing.

 Jihadin wrote:
Tread Heads moved to Benning. Well the Armor School did

Yeah, I remember that happening and thinking, "what's the 82nd going to do with tanks?" seems I recently heard some scuttlebutt about it likely coming back.. . Try some salt with that.

Right now Knox's primary mission is Human Resources, can you believe it, nothing but miles and miles of desks and paper.

At least they still have the Zussman MOUT range.

xraytango wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Tread Heads moved to Benning. Well the Armor School did

Yeah, I remember that happening and thinking, "what's the 82nd going to do with tanks?" seems I recently heard some scuttlebutt about it likely coming back.. . Try some salt with that.

Right now Knox's primary mission is Human Resources, can you believe it?

At least they still have the Zussman MOUT range.

Good question about the 82nd, since it's at Bragg.

82nd at Bragg and not at Benning.

All good. You are not the only one to Soup Sandwich that

Hey it starts with the same letter!

I was probably thinking about the Jump School which is there, which lead to my confusion.

Looks like with inf, airborne, and tank they have a good combined arms program. Looks like a good move for centralizing training.

Probably helps save money too.

Not all bad things.

 whembly wrote:
Can the Sailor sue for damages?

Surely not. As a government official, she is immune from civil lawsuits stemming from the execution of her duties, and making court decisions like these is well within the scope of her job.

I hope media attention can right this travesty. I suspect that she will answer for this before the bar, as well.

She's also up for election in a few months, it looks like.

does the stupidity of judges know now bounds? I mean.....Im sure a soldier literally overseas can fly at a moments notice. That is an 2 hour commute TOPS right?

We had a case around here where a murderer walked free because the arresting officer was deployed overseas.

Fortunately, they appealed and got the green light to try him again.

Hopefully this guy can get some kind of appeal process on his side, maybe with a judge who isn't lazy.

I'm sure the Naval Command is going over his Family Care Plan.

The fact that this has made the news like this, means that some very high brass is likely going to get involved.

 Sasori wrote:
The fact that this has made the news like this, means that some very high brass is likely going to get involved.

Well... the unfortunate thing is there really is nothing that can be done right now. All we can hope is that the pressure that the media attention will bring will cause the Judge to back down. Other then that the Sailor is going to have to wait through the appeal process, and all of the stress and heart ache that he'll have to suffer in the mean time. Not to mention with an active warrant for his arrest, even just being a bench warrant... his career as a Submariner... destroyed.

This judge isn't just taking his child away from him, she's taking his LIFE away from him. It's unbelievably disgusting.

 djones520 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:
The fact that this has made the news like this, means that some very high brass is likely going to get involved.

Well... the unfortunate thing is there really is nothing that can be done right now. All we can hope is that the pressure that the media attention will bring will cause the Judge to back down. Other then that the Sailor is going to have to wait through the appeal process, and all of the stress and heart ache that he'll have to suffer in the mean time. Not to mention with an active warrant for his arrest, even just being a bench warrant... his career as a Submariner... destroyed.

This judge isn't just taking his child away from him, she's taking his LIFE away from him. It's unbelievably disgusting.

Only thing can think of that would destroy his career is if he did not do a "Family Care Plan". I've a couple Navy Suber's coming tomorrow for Apoc. I do not see the Navy being any different when deploying. Also its the quickest damn way out I know of to be remove from the service if the individual choose not do a family Care Plan.

Now I am going to go out on the limb. What was the living condition his daughter was left in? It has to be something serious for her to go out the norm to reject Soldier Sailor Act. What's the "other side of the coin?"

 djones520 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:
The fact that this has made the news like this, means that some very high brass is likely going to get involved.

Well... the unfortunate thing is there really is nothing that can be done right now. All we can hope is that the pressure that the media attention will bring will cause the Judge to back down. Other then that the Sailor is going to have to wait through the appeal process, and all of the stress and heart ache that he'll have to suffer in the mean time. Not to mention with an active warrant for his arrest, even just being a bench warrant... his career as a Submariner... destroyed.

This judge isn't just taking his child away from him, she's taking his LIFE away from him. It's unbelievably disgusting.

I don't know, Admirals carry a lot of weight when it comes to friends in high places. perhaps nothing he can do, but there is a lot his Senator friends can.

I don't think it will destroy his Career, it's a pretty well documented issue. I doubt any board would hold that against him, if it even makes it into his record. If you are referring to his clearance, he'd be cleared by any investigator into the issue.

 Jihadin wrote:
Now I am going to go out on the limb. What was the living condition his daughter was left in? It has to be something serious for her to go out the norm to reject Soldier Sailor Act. What's the "other side of the coin?"

That's my question. I've got to think there's something to this that we're not hearing. Nobody, including this judge, could possibly be this stupid/man-hatey/Social Justice Warrior-y/anti-military/Democrat enough to just ignore the law and think they weren't going to get reamed.

 Seaward wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Now I am going to go out on the limb. What was the living condition his daughter was left in? It has to be something serious for her to go out the norm to reject Soldier Sailor Act. What's the "other side of the coin?"

That's my question. I've got to think there's something to this that we're not hearing. Nobody, including this judge, could possibly be this stupid/man-hatey/Social Justice Warrior-y/anti-military/Democrat enough to just ignore the law and think they weren't going to get reamed.

If the situation was that bad, then go the CPS route again. You don't flagrantly disregard the law. If the child is suffering, there are routes to fix the issue without this violation.

 djones520 wrote:
If the situation was that bad, then go the CPS route again. You don't flagrantly disregard the law. If the child is suffering, there are routes to fix the issue without this violation.

Yeah, fair point. And none of that would explain the bs contempt of court charge.

I dunno. Maybe she really is just that dumb.

does the stupidity of judges know now bounds?

Judges. I love um, cause of all public officials they seem the most competent overall, but damn it's like there's no middle ground with them. They're either really good at what they do... or this @_@ And the worst part is that getting rid of judges this bad at their job is harder than pushing a boulder up an icy incline.

Not to interrupt the outrage-fest, but there's actually a kernel of legitimacy here. Not about the bench warrant, which seems oddly unneccessary, but about holding the hearing.

The first rule of custody hearings is: whatevere is in the best interests of the child is what should happen.

the second rule is that there is a strong presumptoin that being with a biological parent is the best thing for a child.

We know very few details, but there is a germane issue here, that shouldn't necessarily wait unitl the sailor returns. The judges refusal to allow him to appear by phone or skype is puzzling, but there's a question of fact as to who should have custody of the child right now.

Edit: it looks like the bench warrant is not for his appearance, but for failure to comply with her order to return the child to the custody of the biological mother. Which makes more sense.

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/judge-proceeds-custody-case-father-deployed-submarine

I would like to know more about why CPS took her away and gave her to her father in the first place, and why the judge is ok with giving her back now.

 Ahtman wrote:
I would like to know more about why CPS took her away and gave her to her father in the first place, and why the judge is ok with giving her back now.

Most CPS removals are short term in nature, and are often mostly done when there is clearly a more suitable guardian available (bio parent, bio grandparent, aunt/uncle).