Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Judge sends kids to behavior center (juvie?) for refusing relationship with father.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Judge sends kids to behavior center (juvie?) for refusing relationship with father.

    Story here.

    I understand that there is a lot we don't know and a lot missing from the story, but I am pretty confident that this,

    According to the court transcript, the 15-year-old apologized to Gorcyca but said he was not going to apologize to his father because he had done nothing wrong. He also alleged his father was violent and said he had seen him hit his mother, "so I'm not going to talk to him." Gorcyca reminded the boy that his father had never been charged with any offenses and that he loved his children and wanted to spend time with them.
    is fucked up.

    The court transcripts paint an even uglier picture. This judge said, almost verbatim, that by not having a healthy relationship with the father, he was disobeying a court order.

    The most fucked up part is that judge somehow compares the boy to Charles Manson. Even without knowing all the details, that sounds like a huuuuuuuge stretch.

    I don't know what else to say.

  • #2
    This judge needs to be dismissed. Also in the court transcripts is when orders that the children be separated and not allowed to see each other or their mom and their mother's family. Both parents opposed the sentences, but judge on power trip overruled them.

    Comment


    • #3
      Man, okay. I was willing to give this some benefit of the doubt as it seems like there is a long nasty divorce involved. But after reading the court transcript? No, this judge is out of line and has no right to not only order the mother to order her children to talk to their father but then order the children to do so or she'll find them in contempt and send them to juvie?

      Never mind the backhanded insults she throws at the kid. Questioning his intelligence, comparing him to Manson, etc.

      Other articles on this also indicate that the 9 and 10 year olds were given the same choice ( lunch with dad or juvie with their brother ) and they chose to go with their brother. She also ordered that only dad be allowed to visit them while they were in juvie and that they be kept separated as much as possible while in juvie. She likewise accused the mother of poisoning the children's minds against their father.

      Even if that is true, you don't punish the *children* for it. Nevermind ordering the into juvie until they agree to talk to their dad or until they turn 18. She also refused to allow the mother to say goodbye to her children before they were shipped off.

      Further transcripts show she also insulted the intelligence of the 9 year old girl during her hearing. Also this:

      You want to have your birthdays in Children’s Village? Do you like going to the bathroom in front of people? Is your bed soft and comfortable at home?
      Again, the judge, to the 9 year old girl.

      Her husband is also a judge and former prosecutor it seems and one who has a number of professional problems as well due to repeated overzealous prosecution. Which has so far, cost them 6 million in lost lawsuits. For libel no less. IE the husband continued to slander the accused even after the case was dropped.

      Nice couple.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Titi View Post
        This judge needs to be dismissed. Also in the court transcripts is when orders that the children be separated and not allowed to see each other or their mom and their mother's family. Both parents opposed the sentences, but judge on power trip overruled them.
        The fark discussion on this case has brought out those defending the judge, but I don't know how anyone can do so after reading the transcripts. Or heck, even this,

        "But I do not apologize for — for not talking to him because I have a reason for that and that's because he's violent and he — I saw him hit my mom and I'm not gonna talk to him," the boy said, later telling the judge, "I didn't do anything wrong."

        "No, you did," Gorcyca replied. "You — I ordered you to talk to your father. You chose not to talk to your father. You defied a direct court order. It's direct contempt, so I am finding you guilty of civil contempt."
        And this is why I hate judges.

        It's also a great case for children having more say in custody battles. Just because the father wasn't charged with anything doesn't mean he wasn't a monster behind closed doors. Also, if the father cared about having a healthy relationship, why did he head off to Israel for 2 weeks while his children were put in detention?

        Comment


        • #5
          Update

          She revoked the decision and they are now being sent to summer camp.

          This particular article tries to paint the judge in a more sympathic light, but I don't think that's possible. She not only dismissed a kid who said he was abused, she punished him for refusing to go back to the abuser. No court order can justify such horses assery.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Rageaholic View Post
            Update

            She revoked the decision and they are now being sent to summer camp.

            This particular article tries to paint the judge in a more sympathic light, but I don't think that's possible. She not only dismissed a kid who said he was abused, she punished him for refusing to go back to the abuser. No court order can justify such horses assery.
            I mentioned this to a friend of mine who works for CPS and she says there's probably a good deal of stuff we don't know about. Kids regularly lie about being abused or other stuff so they don't have to visit one of the parents or they've been brainwashed. The fact that it got to this point means something probably was going on already or else why would it make it to court?
            Violence has resolved more conflicts than anything else. The contrary opinion that violence doesn't solve anything is merely wishful thinking at its worst. - Starship Troopers

            Comment


            • #7
              I'm just trying to think of what kind of events would have to transpire for this to be justified. Not just putting them in the detention center, but using it as a threat the way she did. All this over refusing to eat with dad?

              The only scenarios I can see would involve the kid being some kind of psychopath.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Rageaholic View Post
                The only scenarios I can see would involve the kid being some kind of psychopath.
                Which is being immediately ruled out because...why?
                Violence has resolved more conflicts than anything else. The contrary opinion that violence doesn't solve anything is merely wishful thinking at its worst. - Starship Troopers

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Greenday View Post
                  Which is being immediately ruled out because...why?
                  Because, without any additional information available on the people involved, you have to go by the odds. The odds of the father being abusive are way higher than those of the kid being a psychopath.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by the_std View Post
                    Because, without any additional information available on the people involved, you have to go by the odds. The odds of the father being abusive are way higher than those of the kid being a psychopath.
                    What are the odds of a kid lying because they've been brainwashed by a spiteful mother?
                    Violence has resolved more conflicts than anything else. The contrary opinion that violence doesn't solve anything is merely wishful thinking at its worst. - Starship Troopers

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Greenday View Post
                      What are the odds of a kid lying because they've been brainwashed by a spiteful mother?
                      Pretty good, actually.

                      Problem is, it's really hard to know what's really going on here. So the solution is not JD, but foster care and intensive counseling for the kids. Remove them from both sides of the equation, assess and diagnose any psychological problems and THEN work on re-integrating them with the parents.
                      Good news! Your insurance company says they'll cover you. Unfortunately, they also say it will be with dirt.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by the_std View Post
                        Because, without any additional information available on the people involved, you have to go by the odds. The odds of the father being abusive are way higher than those of the kid being a psychopath.
                        Yes, Occam's Razor.

                        If the kid was a psychopath, it would have been reported on. All we have is a comment from the judge saying that he was like Charles Manson. If there's a psychopath in this story, it's the judge.

                        Originally posted by Greenday View Post
                        What are the odds of a kid lying because they've been brainwashed by a spiteful mother?
                        If that's true, what the hell is putting him in this center going to accomplish?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Panacea View Post
                          Pretty good, actually.
                          Well, the problem is the kids are claiming domestic abuse both by the father against the mother and against them. Its very rare that children lie about domestic abuse specifically


                          Originally posted by Panacea View Post
                          Problem is, it's really hard to know what's really going on here.
                          Well, according to the court documents the father is not allowed to have unsupervised visits with the children. Thats warning flag #1. The reason for this is because the last time he had an unsupervised visit with them they ended up calling 911 from a park saying their father was threatening them. They also called their mother, who arrived, and the father allegedly got physical with her.

                          This is what the older boy and the judge are both referring to when the boy says he say him hit his mother and the judge corrects him saying he was "never charged" with anything. As if that renders the boy's point moot.

                          Additionally, the father moved the family from the US to Israel. Which is one fark of a culture shock for children. The mother brought them back to the US and filed for divorce. Since then, the father has remarried in Israel and wants to bring the children back to Israel.

                          Furthermore, while his children have been in juvie, the father returned to Israel instead of remaining because, you know, he is the only one allowed to legally visit them in juvie. So he left the country and left them in jail, essentially.

                          Oh, and the father retains a PR firm to help him with this case. His interview was handled by his PR firm.

                          The judge has actually walked back her decision after being torn apart by the media, legal experts and her peers. She's moving them to a summer camp now where both parents will have visitation rights. However, she insists her original decision is still the right decision and everyone is just misinformed and hasn't seen the "8 pages" that show the mother is a master brain washer.

                          The judge is also claiming parental alienation, which a controversial and not widely accepted diagnosis. It also does not apply to any child where domestic abuse is involved. Parental alienation is when a child expresses negative feelings or avoidance towards one parent that are not supported by anything the child has witnessed or experienced themselves.

                          If the child has witnessed or experienced something(s) that they are basing their negative feelings on, that is NOT parental alienation. Thats just good ol' fashion estrangement. The very fact the 15 year old gave a specific reason for what he had witnessed as to why he did not want to talk to his father completely negates the judge's parental alienation claim.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Rageaholic View Post
                            If that's true, what the hell is putting him in this center going to accomplish?
                            I'd assume therapy would help.
                            Violence has resolved more conflicts than anything else. The contrary opinion that violence doesn't solve anything is merely wishful thinking at its worst. - Starship Troopers

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Greenday View Post
                              I'd assume therapy would help.
                              Then send him to therapy, not juvie.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X