Kids thrown in juvenile detention for refusing to see possibly violent father

This is all so weird, I struggle to believe that it's real.

Is it real?

YY Buffy - it's one thing to order someone to act in a certain way (and still absurd and abusive) but the judge actually wants them to feel differently and threatens that if she thinks it's an act and they don't actually love their father then she'll still keep them locked up. It's totally barbaric.

Also, that transcript is horrifying - I feel like I'm reading George Orwell's 1984.
(paraphrasing)

Idiot judge: "I ordered you to have a healthy relationship with your father. You chose not to talk to your father. You defied a direct court order. It's direct contempt so I'm finding you guilty of civil contempt"

15 year old child: "I didn't do anything wrong. He was the one that - how come - I thought there was like rules when - rules for like, you know, not hitting someone"

Idiot judge: "I will say this again - you're supposed to have a high IQ which I'm doubting right now because of the way you act, you're very defiant, you have no manners, I ordered you to have a relationship with your Dad. There is no reason why you do not have a relationship with your father. Your father has never been convicted of anything. He is well liked and loved by his community, co-workers, family and colleagues. You, young man, have got it wrong"

I'd want every case she's overseen reviewed post haste - it just shows such an unerring lack of judgement to lock up 3 children for two weeks for something that ISN'T a crime.

I'd also want a detailed analysis of her bank accounts because I can only imagine someone would do something so cruel and malicious if they were being paid off by one party.

I also note that in that article it says that they've been sent there by the father & guardian ad litem - so not because the mother or children have been listened to but because Dad's decided that he'd rather send his kids to a very dodgy camp if they're refusing to see him.

How can anyone NOT think this is a feminist issue?

It's about men's right to treat their children as possessions rather than people.

It's sort of glaringly obvious really.

The judge was SO mad it makes me wonder if she was fucking the guy or something. Her behaviour and attitudes are just demented, I wonder what her experiences and prejudices are, that led her to abuse her power so comprehensively.

Not sure they're comparable really. Judges are paid, Hunt's position was honorary.

Nice try though.

Wow! Poor kids. Not sure it is a feminism issue though.

If the judge were male they would be gone faster than Tim Hunt.

That is unfuckingbelievable. They were released after two weeks, to be sent to summer camp
observer.com/2015/07/update-tsimhoni-kids-freed-effective-immediately/

That transcript :(

Those poor children.

I've had a look on twitter and there's a couple of petitions doing the rounds.

Some people are saying the kids have been released? I can't quite tell.

It is abusive. Those poor kids.

And it's so spiteful.

They aren't allowed to see their mum
Or anyone on their mum's side (grandparents? other relatives)
Or anyone else their mum sends to check if they are oK
Judge says they will have to go to the toilet with people watching, wants to upset them
Similarly says that they will not be allowed to see each other, more spite

I don't get it?

Oh my god that transcript. Just, I can't believe that. What is the age of criminal responsibility in the US? What are sentancing guidelines? They have committed no crime and have been locked up with an initial review in 3 months, and judge says she's comfy with them staying til end of high school age (what age is that?) and review then and past 18 also.

I don't understand this at all. Honestly I'm shocked. The little one is only 9. Just, what the fuck?

Hold on what? She said she would have 3 children ages 9, 10 and 15 imprisoned (in solitary confinement? in separate prisons?) for up to 9 years?

For what, contempt of court?

What is the age of criminal responsibility in the US?

What the fuck?

Going to read the transcript now.

Here is the actual transcript. It has to be seen to be believed:

download.gannett.edgesuite.net/detnews/2015/pdf/showcausehearing_gorcyca.pdf

The dad then went to Israel for two weeks, despite his contact with the kids being the only way the judge would agree to release them. Apparently they are now on some kind of summer camp (supposedly for kids from juvenile hall). The older one was supposed to be on a high ability course at Stanford before all this happened.

Oh this is rage-enducing. Punishing the children for the behaviour of the parents.

This is a feminist issue because it once again plays into the trope of evil bitter woman turning children against honourable wonderful father who only wants the best for his children. It's a feminist issue because children have been taken from their mother and their siblings against their will.

The father agreed to the children going to prison. The mother didn't. Remind me again which one is supposed to be the abusive one?

Even if everything the father has said is true, and everything the mother is saying is untrue, it isn't a crime for children not to want a 'healthy relationship' with their father and the kids should not be punished.

And no child should ever be punished by being told they're not allowed to see their siblings, or mother, or people related to their mother, for nine years. Or asked by a judge if they'd rather have lunch with their father or go to the bathroom in front of other people for nine years.

Oh and that he'd "move mountains" to see his possessions kids.

I can't believe the assumption that the father can't possibly be abusive because he is a well-liked upstanding member of the community and hasn't been arrested.

it's so awful. I heard about it the other day and was raging about it.