Kids sent to juvenile detention over cold shoulder to father

[Simon_Jester]

Using conspiracy cult bullshit to describe the children's behavior instead of coming to the conclusion that they're scared of the court officials really tells you a lot about the mindset of the court. How is it these people have any power?

There's an impasse here.

It is necessary and proper that children not be bullied or intimidated by the court.

It is also necessary and proper that courts be able to expect that the people who enter a courtroom are prepared to follow basic directions, answer questions posed to them by court officials, and otherwise participate in the trial.

If numerous are finding the behavior of this particular group of children to be strange or disruptive, despite (presumably) having extensive experience in family law dealing with abused or traumatized children in the past... I do feel compelled to wonder if something strange might be going on, outside of the comparatively "normal" range of "children scared of abusive father and court that seems hellbent on making them live with him."

At the same time, the investigation of allegations of child abuse should be taken very seriously here, and if the judge here isn't doing that they're a lunatic.

[TheHammer]

It seems like the sort of behavior you would expect from . . . oh, I don't know, an abuse victim, maybe? This isn't all that dissimilar from the behavior by communities in rape cases where everybody rushes around the accused attacker if he's popular and well liked. There doesn't have to be any kind of grand conspiracy going on to explain it.

One of the articles did say one of the kids called the cops on the dad during a visit because the dad was threatening to kill them. I'd probably not want to be looking in the eye of somebody like that or cooperating with fucknuts who seem to be taking his side like the judge and Lansat are.

Now that said, we are only seeing one side of this. Lansat seems.......well like a fucking quack who should be forced to where a duck suit for a year to make the fact evident and the judge seems like a power mad tyrant, its impossible to say for sure just on the information we have whether or not the kiddies are really little mini-Mansons tapping out Morse code messages with their feet because their mommy told them to. Stranger things have happened, probably.

Divorce cases usually do have a parent turning the kids against another parent. Usually not to the extremes of Manson cult kids though. Cases will have kids hating a parent because the other parent filled the kids head with lies and pretty much brainwashed them into believing bunk.

We don't know for certain if thats not the case here, if the mother didn't teach her kids that daddy was an evil, evil man and terrible and not good.

I just have a really fucking hard time believing that the mother turned them into little cultists when what we've heard it sounds like relatively normal kids who are afraid of their dad who is said to be abusive, close to each other in a trying time, and will tap their feet when nervous.

Hey I tap my feet when nervous, I wonder who I'm communicating with?

I could believe that the Judge is nuts, that the Guardian Ad-Litem is nuts, or that any individual therapist, et al court appointee is nuts. But for ALL of them to have reached a similar conclusion regarding the mother, I've got to believe there is something to it. And I think the whole Manson quote has gotten way too much. The comparison might make perfect sense in the larger context of the case - a context we simply do not have at this point. But it seems as though everyone wants to bury the lead that the issue in this case was the children being alienated from their father by their mother.

Also, "scared kids" don't act defiant as these children have acted. They comply out of fear. For them to be doing the opposite, would indicate they don't feel fear of either their father or the courts. Perhaps the person they are really afraid of is the mother... The accusations against the father have never been substantiated. Personally, I'm kind of sick of this presumption of guilt for the father and presumption of innocence for the mother when all evidence points to the contrary.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Also, "scared kids" don't act defiant as these children have acted. They comply out of fear. For them to be doing the opposite, would indicate they don't feel fear of either their father or the courts.

You have clearly never worked with children in any capacity.

It is unbelievably naive and beyond idiotic to make the blanket assumption that every single child will comply out of fear. You don't know anything about these kids, their background, or their personalities. The physiological reaction to a fear stimuli is the classic "fight or flight" response. A wide variety of factors interact to dictate which route an individual takes, and how it manifests. There's a reason there are entire books on the psychology of fear.

[TheHammer]

Also, "scared kids" don't act defiant as these children have acted. They comply out of fear. For them to be doing the opposite, would indicate they don't feel fear of either their father or the courts.

You have clearly never worked with children in any capacity.

And what are your credentials pray tell?

Also, pretty convenient to cherry pick a line out of a much larger point, which is that the children don't seem to fear the consequences of defying their father or the courts, which might indicate they fear the consequences (from their mother) of compliance.

OH and by the way ignore all the other amateur psychologists who have made a diagnosis of "CHILD SCURRRED" out of the fragments of information given to us.

It is unbelievably naive and beyond idiotic to make the blanket assumption that every single child will comply out of fear. You don't know anything about these kids, their background, or their personalities. The physiological reaction to a fear stimuli is the classic "fight or flight" response. A wide variety of factors interact to dictate which route an individual takes, and how it manifests. There's a reason there are entire books on the psychology of fear.

Not making a blanket assumption. I'm basing it on the fact that the court and its numerous appointees, including trained therapists, over the years who have studied these specific children did not conclude that their behavior was in any way based on fear of their father or of the courts.

[ArmorPierce]

Obviously sdnet keyboard psychologists have more knowledge and professional experience than court appointed therapists. Must be a grand conspiracy from the court against the mother and children.

[General Zod]

Because judges are never vindictive assholes when they think their authority is being questioned.

[Simon_Jester]

Look, I agree that TheHammer or anyone else who makes specific claims about why these kids do what they do is being grossly overconfident and overreaching their knowledge of the case.

At the same time, if it's NOT only the judge being a vindictive ass, but ALSO numerous other qualified adults with experience dealing with children (including traumatized ones) in the context of family law... And if they ALL think something fishy is going on beyond the "kids afraid of abusive father and the evil court that wants to make them stay with him..."

That at least suggests that the issue merits some extra thought. Otherwise we might as well not even bother having family law experts and psychiatrists and lawyers, because we're not going to listen to them if they disagree with our generic expectations about what is usually going on.

[General Zod]

At the same time, if it's NOT only the judge being a vindictive ass, but ALSO numerous other qualified adults with experience dealing with children (including traumatized ones) in the context of family law... And if they ALL think something fishy is going on beyond the "kids afraid of abusive father and the evil court that wants to make them stay with him..."

So far I don't see any evidence that the judge is getting the opinion of "cult like behavior" from anywhere but herself. Is there any paragraph in the article that I didn't see that says rather than implies she got her opinion from the psychologists?

[Simon_Jester]

There's Lansat, who's their legal guardian. Are there other people involved in the case who concur that something's wrong? That's the thing- we don't know. We can't, at least not easily, because a lot of this isn't going to be in the news. So far, the only two people related to the case in an official capacity agree that there's "cultish" behavior going on and that the children are persistently defying court instructions.

Can anyone point to anyone in a position to actually contact the children, in a neutral position on the case rather than being a partisan of the mother or father, who does NOT agree about the children showing strange behavior, and is on record saying so?

[General Zod]

I think it's pretty funny how there's almost no details about the mother's behavior leading up to things.

Can we have something a little more substantial about her behavior before leaping to the idea that she's manipulating the children out of some need for the father to not be an abusive shitbag?

[ArmorPierce]

Very valid point but it seems some folks here are doing the opposite and are leaping to the conclusion that the father is guilty despite judge, cops, court appointed therapist and others pointing to the mother or not finding the father guilty.

[General Zod]

Very valid point but it seems some folks here are doing the opposite and are leaping to the conclusion that the father is guilty despite judge, cops, court appointed therapist and others pointing to the mother or not finding the father guilty.

The fact that they didn't find any evidence of abuse isn't all that meaningful considering how hard it is to even prosecute a domestic abuse case to begin with. What if the injuries healed by the time the cops actually got around to looking into it? What if he hit her in a fashion that didn't leave visible marks?

[ArmorPierce]

So we are going to take the presumption of guilt despite the lack of evidence and expert opinion in the contrary?

I am admittedly no expert butI am guessing that we'll never know the full details of this case since it is a domestic dispute involving children.

[General Zod]

So we are going to take the presumption of guilt despite the lack of evidence and expert opinion in the contrary?

What expert opinion? All we have is the judge saying she thinks it's cult behavior. Where is she getting that from? Or are you just assuming she's quoting some expert or that the psychologists agree with her?

[General Zod]

Because so far I see a bunch of people willing to crucify the mother because they don't want the dad to be the bad guy.

[ArmorPierce]

What is the evidence for that she is being crucified rather than it being justified? The cops and judge did not find anything to substantiate the claim.

William Lansat the court appointed advisor would be am expert

In another article it mentions Lansat Referring to other mental health expert that was the one stated that the children looked like they were sending morse code. That of course could have been out of context.

[General Zod]

What is the evidence for that she is being crucified rather than it being justified? The cops and judge did not find anything to substantiate the claim.

William Lansat the court appointed advisor would be am expert

In another article it mentions Lansat Referring to other mental health expert that was the one stated that the children looked like they were sending morse code. That of course could have been out of context.

Because there couldn't possibly be any other explanation for tapping your feet when you're sitting in a room? It sounds like the sort of nonsense you'd expect from a conspiracy theorist.

[ArmorPierce]

Well to be fair that comment may have been taken out of context. It could be that it was just stated to give a description of the foot taping. .. not to say that they were actually sending out morse code.

I still find it more of an outlandish conspiracy theory that the court, cops, advisor and mental health expert are in cahoots against the children and woman. Not to say it can't happen but it would require a large conspiracy.

[General Zod]

Well to be fair that comment may have been taken out of context. It could be that it was just stated to give a description of the foot taping. .. not to say that they were actually sending out morse code.

I still find it more of an outlandish conspiracy theory that the court, cops, advisor and mental health expert are in cahoots against the children and woman. Not to say it can't happen but it would require a large conspiracy.

Why would it require a conspiracy? People simply aren't inclined to believe women when they complain about domestic problems as you're very adequately demonstrating.

[General Zod]

Let's break it down.

1. Cops called to file a complaint. Cop finds no evidence, dismisses her complaint.

2. Complained to psychologist. Psychologist asks why the cops didn't follow through with charges, doesn't believe her claims and dismisses them.

3. Court asks why the cops and psychologist didn't believe her, dismisses her claims.

So it's easy to see the chain of how her claims can be dismissed by all these experts without a conspiracy. If they assume her complaint had no merit because other "experts" dismissed it . . . well, what's going to happen?

[TheHammer]

Let's break it down.

1. Cops called to file a complaint. Cop finds no evidence, dismisses her complaint.

2. Complained to psychologist. Psychologist asks why the cops didn't follow through with charges, doesn't believe her claims and dismisses them.

3. Court asks why the cops and psychologist didn't believe her, dismisses her claims.

So it's easy to see the chain of how her claims can be dismissed by all these experts without a conspiracy. If they assume her complaint had no merit because other "experts" dismissed it . . . well, what's going to happen?

You're really fucking reaching here...

Why would it require a conspiracy? People simply aren't inclined to believe women when they complain about domestic problems as you're very adequately demonstrating.

You're not talking about layman here. These are Family court judges and lawyers, and therapists trained in the field. Dealing with domestic problems is what they do, and chances are they have experience at determining which complaints are legitimate and which ones are not. Does that GUARANTEE they are correct in this case? Of course not, but it makes it a hell of a lot more likely than the reverse scenario you are advocating.

[General Zod]

You're really fucking reaching here...

Are you going to actually explain how, or just be dismissive because you really don't want the dad to be the bad guy? How the fuck is it more of a stretch than "sending out some sort of code by tapping their feet?" Which sounds like conspiracy bullshit.

You're not talking about layman here. These are Family court judges and lawyers, and therapists trained in the field. Dealing with domestic problems is what they do, and chances are they have experience at determining which complaints are legitimate and which ones are not. Does that GUARANTEE they are correct in this case? Of course not, but it makes it a hell of a lot more likely than the reverse scenario you are advocating.

Remember "Satanic Panic" during the 80s and how it turned out to be complete bullshit? They had so-called experts there too. So far your entire argument amounts to "but, but, but, authorities said so!"

[Ziggy Stardust]

Also, pretty convenient to cherry pick a line out of a much larger point, which is that the children don't seem to fear the consequences of defying their father or the courts, which might indicate they fear the consequences (from their mother) of compliance.

I didn't "cherry pick" anything, I wasn't responding to it but it was irrelevant to the point I was trying to make. Did you notice that not a single word of my post was directed specifically at the children in question in this case? I was ONLY responding to your claim that all children will comply when they are scared, no matter the circumstances. I don't know enough of the details of these kids and their situation to have an opinion on that.

OH and by the way ignore all the other amateur psychologists who have made a diagnosis of "CHILD SCURRRED" out of the fragments of information given to us.

Since you utterly lack reading comprehension, I'll have to spell it out for you. None of the other people in this thread have made absurd blanket statements like the one you made that I responded to. I don't care what their opinions are on the children in question (which is why I never addressed that issue at all), and I don't care what your opinions are on the children in question. I am only responding to your broad claim that all children will comply when they are scared, which is in direct opposition to the entire field of psychology. Clear enough for you?

Not making a blanket assumption.

Now you're just lying. You said in the post I responded to:

Also, "scared kids" don't act defiant as these children have acted. They comply out of fear.

You are implying that these children could not possibly have been scared, because children always comply when they are scared. That's a blanket statement. And an absurd one. Maybe these kids were scared, maybe they were brainwashed. I neither know nor care which one. But to claim that they weren't scared because scared kids never act that way is simply factually incorrect, because your belief that scared children will always comply is unfounded.

I mean, I was very specific in quoting only the part of your post I was objecting to, and never in my previous post did I address any other issue than that one specific sentence, so I don't see why it is so difficult for you to understand that I was speaking in generalities, in no way specific to the children in this case.

[ArmorPierce]

Well to be fair that comment may have been taken out of context. It could be that it was just stated to give a description of the foot taping. .. not to say that they were actually sending out morse code.

I still find it more of an outlandish conspiracy theory that the court, cops, advisor and mental health expert are in cahoots against the children and woman. Not to say it can't happen but it would require a large conspiracy.

Why would it require a conspiracy? People simply aren't inclined to believe women when they complain about domestic problems as you're very adequately demonstrating.

Right, because we have something called a presumption of innocence unless there is evidence to the contrary.

The court has found evidence in the contrary with regard to the mother, not the father.

[ArmorPierce]

You're really fucking reaching here...

Are you going to actually explain how, or just be dismissive because you really don't want the dad to be the bad guy? How the fuck is it more of a stretch than "sending out some sort of code by tapping their feet?" Which sounds like conspiracy bullshit.

Simple... The family has already been put through a vetted systematic approach.

This scenario that you are descried are things that you pulled out of thin air.

I'm not saying that the vetted systematic approach doesn't ever result in the wrong ruling... but if you are arguing otherwise you require substantiating evidence.

You're not talking about layman here. These are Family court judges and lawyers, and therapists trained in the field. Dealing with domestic problems is what they do, and chances are they have experience at determining which complaints are legitimate and which ones are not. Does that GUARANTEE they are correct in this case? Of course not, but it makes it a hell of a lot more likely than the reverse scenario you are advocating.

Remember "Satanic Panic" during the 80s and how it turned out to be complete bullshit? They had so-called experts there too. So far your entire argument amounts to "but, but, but, authorities said so!"[/quote]

A bunch of religious nuts making unsupported claims is very different than saying that I am relying on the professional judgement of experts in their field unless I can be shown otherwise. In fact, the claim that the father, judge, cops and medical experts are all in the wrong without any actual support is more like the aforementioned religious nuts making unsupported claims. It boils down to saying it must be true because someone said it was.