Navy Dad facing arrest and loss of custody!

[Titi]

Because he serves on a Submarine and Judge decided that if he couldn't be there constantly for his daughter, then her biological mother should have custody.

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/S...?tab=video&c=y

The daughter's new step-mother has been there for her when he was gone and that was good enough for the Navy, but not for this judge. Also you know something really bad had to happen for him to get full custody in the first place. (A Daily mail article I read mentions that CPS took the child from the mother.) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...iles-away.html

[HYHYBT]

Setting aside the CPS issue, whatever it was, if one parent is going to be gone months at a time anyway, it makes sense for the other to have custody of any children. With visitation whenever his ship comes in, of course.

[Jetfire]

Sounds like he is remarried and the daughter is staying with her step mother; so she does have a family; it's not like he abandoned her to serve on the sub or anything. There's probably some paperwork or something that hasn't been done to get the step mom recognized as a legal guardian to handle this sort of mess.

The fact that he's military and the judge isn't accommodating his deployment is going to get anything the judge decides thrown out; but it's going to be a nightmare for all sides in the mean time.

[s_stabeler]

so wait... the judge is refusing to delay the hearing because it is physically impossible for the father to be there, and so a) issues a warrant for the father's arrest for contempt and b) says it may affect the outcome of the case? and c) won't let the father attend the hearing via other methods ( Skype or phone were mooted as possibilities)

I hooe the judhe decides to quit being an asshole- because this IS an asshole move- the father can't attend, not won't attend- and I'd like to know what the CPS issue is too.

[Rageaholic]

Depending on the circumstances, I could understand losing custody of the daughter (assuming there are no step mothers to take care of her), but arrest? What the hell is wrong with this judge?

[crashhelmet]

The bio-mom lost custody due to neglect. Full permanent custody was given to the father as a result. Now she's trying to back-door her way in? Where's CPS in all of this? Why aren't they saying anything, let alone being called upon?

[s_stabeler]

so wait... the judge would rather have the daughter brought up by someone who doesn't care, rather than someone who cares, but is not actually biologically related to the kid? (step-mom)

[Rageaholic]

so wait... the judge would rather have the daughter brought up by someone who doesn't care, rather than someone who cares, but is not actually biologically related to the kid? (step-mom)

How much you wanna bet the judge is one of those "pro family" people.

[AccountingDrone]

Because he serves on a Submarine and Judge decided that if he couldn't be there constantly for his daughter, then her biological mother should have custody.

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/S...?tab=video&c=y

The daughter's new step-mother has been there for her when he was gone and that was good enough for the Navy, but not for this judge. Also you know something really bad had to happen for him to get full custody in the first place. (A Daily mail article I read mentions that CPS took the child from the mother.) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...iles-away.html

Dude needs to get legal involved - having a step parent has in the past been enough to keep custody as long as the custodial agreements are held to.

[Cia]

Navy JAG needs to get involved because the Judge is completely ignoring the Federal Law that protects service people under deployment. The Judge needs to be slapped upside the head with an extremely large Navy cluex4 followed by a extremely curt phone call from the State AG.

[Jester]

Not only is what the judge doing a complete asshole move, it is completely illegal. There is a federal freakin' law that requires any legal proceedings that a service member can't attend due to deployment be given a 90 day extension so that the service member can attend.

This judge is ignoring federal law, ignoring what was previously decided is best for the child, is ignoring the fact that the dad is not neglecting his child, is ignoring the fact that the child is apparently well taken care of, and is ignoring the fact that the dad was originally granted full custody due to the mother being found to be neglectful.

That's a whole lot of ignoring for one judge. One might even presume them to be ignorant.

And yet another story with an idiot judge making idiotic decisions. What the hell is going on in this country that all these morons are sitting on the bench and getting to make decisions that affect people's lives so drastically?

[s_stabeler]

there's a more basic issue here, actually. Situations where one party CANNOT attend a hearing in a civil case. It seems that it is up to the judge if allowances will be made- and if not, it is treated as refusal to attend. Why? (for example, if one party is in hospital on the date of the hearing)

In short, WHY was Skype or appearing by phone ruled out?

[HYHYBT]

For that matter, why any of it? Nothing about this makes any sense; why would any judge act this way?

[Gilhelmi]

there's a more basic issue here, actually. Situations where one party CANNOT attend a hearing in a civil case. It seems that it is up to the judge if allowances will be made- and if not, it is treated as refusal to attend. Why? (for example, if one party is in hospital on the date of the hearing)

In short, WHY was Skype or appearing by phone ruled out?

The man is on a Naval Submarine. The boat stays submerged for the vast majority of their deployment (in-fact Submarines do very poorly on the surface).

Anyway, the Navy has very expensive equipment to transmit signals to the boat. They are usually short text messages, that is all they can receive. There is a possibility that the Navy Officer in question does not even know about this yet. Story posted on 17th so only a couple of weeks. I suspect he is just now getting word about this.

[Jester]

there's a more basic issue here, actually. Situations where one party CANNOT attend a hearing in a civil case. It seems that it is up to the judge if allowances will be made- and if not, it is treated as refusal to attend. Why? (for example, if one party is in hospital on the date of the hearing)

In short, WHY was Skype or appearing by phone ruled out?

Yes, but in those situations you mention above, there is no overriding federal law mandating that judges absolutely have to make allowances for a future court date. When it involves an active duty member of the military who is deployed, there is such a law, that the judge completely and illegally ignored.

For that matter, why any of it? Nothing about this makes any sense; why would any judge act this way?

Why do stupid people act stupidly?

Honestly, there have been several dick moves by judges in the last year. Why would this one surprise you any more than the others?

Am I the only one jaded enough to not be surprised by this kind of shit?