Samuel and Benjamin’s father has been
awarded FULL & IMMEDIATE CUSTODY. My visiting rights remain the
same- every Tuesday 11- 5pm and every second Sunday 9-5pm. Visits are to
continue at the centre and I will still have to pay 44 Euros each visit
to see my children. My applications for weekend access and overnight
visits have all been denied by Judge Susanne Göttlicher.
Once again, her decision came as a total shock. She has held
NO CUSTODY HEARINGS, has heard all my witnesses IN SECRET COURT, behind
closed doors so I did not have the opportunity to cross-examine them or
present any of my evidence.
She has not commissioned a psychological assessment on the
father or the children, despite my repeated applications and despite her
instructions to do so by both the Appeal Court and Supreme Court.
I have a 14 day window to appeal. It is holiday time in Vienna and
the city has practically shut down. My lawyer and virtually every good
lawyer in town is away on holiday. She timed her last custody decision
at exactly the same time. 2 years ago exactly knowing the holiday
situation.
Baruch Hashem. So nice to hear that the Daddy has been awarded primary custody.
ReplyDeleteAll too often these days, feminist judges simply award the ex-wife custody by default, for no other reason than her being female.
Sometimes the good guy does win!
JJ, unfortunately in this case, it is not good news.
DeleteWhilst in the father's care, these twins have been severely neglected. They have had teeth surgically removed due to decay. Their father leaves them all day in the care of nannies who do not speak their language. They hardly speak and they have not been toilet trained, at age 4. Does this sound like the children are thriving in their father's care? Not in this case. The judge is ignoring requests to look into the children's wellbeing, and they are suffering.
Furthermore, the judge herself is being investigated because of this court case, which shows that there is definitely something amiss.
Lisa from where do you have your information? get your info right before you comment. agree with every word you write JJ
DeleteYada yada yada. I love how ex-wives throw all kind of mud and lies in their custody quests.
DeleteDear anonymous. There is plenty of photographic evidenxe of the twins with missing teeth and wearing nappies at age 4. Further more even if the father is a stellar example of parenting, why is custody not being shared equally? The mother has been assesed to be physically and psychologically fit to be a mother yet is denied her children! How can you not see this as a miscarriage of justice when a mother has minimal access to her own children for no reason? I am not being anti fatherhood. I am thinking of two young boys who need their mum just as much as their dad.
DeleteLisa, Where has your concern been for all the fathers who are denied shared and equal custody? That is something that happens far more often than a case like this. There you are silent but here only you raise your voice?
Deletera - that isn't the point. Lisa is referring to this case.
DeleteI think Judge Susanne Göttlicher. should go to Israel and take 'Justice 101' at DaatTorah Institute led by the one & only.
ReplyDeleteThis is the story of the NY courts every single day that the sickening arko'oys is open, however the men are always on the receiving end. This woman seems to have been denied due process. This is how it works in Brooklyn all the time and then one has the biryonim demanding a get.
ReplyDeletewe don't know all the facts, perhaps the father should have the children and that is the halocho after 6 years old.
JJ, you appear to have combined a prejudice against feminism with a prejudice in favor of divorcing fathers -- but what makes you believe the father should have custody in this case?
ReplyDeleteLong before feminism was heard of, divorce-court judges routinely granted custody of small children of either sex to the mother, unless there was good evidence that she was unfit. The (female) judge here might be thought to be "feminist" by breaking the pattern. However, Ms. Alexander (the mother) alleges the father's improper influence on the judge and manipulation of the custody determination procedure. She also alleges that the father was violent toward her, which would normally be a strong argument in her favor, since a man who does not restrain his anger dealing with his wife will likely not restrain his anger with his sons, either. What leads you to believe the father is the "good guy" here?
It is easy to hurl all sorts of false allegations when fighting for custody.
DeleteSomeone I know who had close contact with the family at the height of the split knows of no incidents of violence (by either side). This isn't to say that it is impossible, of course. I have major reservations as to the full veracity of the mother's campaign.
DeleteDomestic abuse is often concealed - therefore it is not unusual that even close contact does not help in observing abuse.
DeleteWhat other issues do you have reservations about 1) the two psychological evaluations that contradict the court ordered report and say she is a competent mother? 2) the children are not getting proper care? 3) the judge is acting in a biased manner?
what part do you agree with?
The two reports were paid-to-hire by the mother. What did you expect them to say?
DeleteHow do we know any alleged abuse has not been perpetuated by the mother?
As far is the psychological reports go - there is certainly a 'stira' between the two sides.
Deletewe only hear about the children's development from the mother. I think it unlikely that the significant and major developmental problems (which, as alleged by the mother, are tantamount to neglect or even abuse) would be undetected or, even worse, ignored by the entire Austrian welfare bodies - nursery staff, social workers, police etc.
Not to mention the accusations about the judge being biased........ What does it say in pirkei avot about being a dayan...?
JJ is telling you his feeling and the unfortunate truth. When this happens and the woman wins -which is most of the time-we say nothing because that is usual. These children may very well be better off by the mother but countless fathers are in the same predicament daily - especially in the US. While this may be a specific case of misjustice it is a case that has finally given a man something women get all the time - children without due process. Personally, I have no issues having my ex have my kids because I know I wouldn't be able to take care of them the way she does. I also like my freedom. I have moved on and my ex is stuck where she is. I have nice visitations, prob less than I want but I am not fighting. She is stuck watching her good years disappear. She doesn't begrudge me for this because it is standard in the world and we didn't work out. The fact that she is pleasant to deal with is also the norm. However there are cases where people continueto live in acrimony. Fathers who are judged against because of people like me who allow the saying children need their mothers to be the rule. These people want a fair trial too. Orgs like ORA don't let them. Judges and BD are predetermined against them. They call them foolish and crazy. Why? Because they want to raise their kids. I don't want it but I can't say he is wrong for wanting it. I don't begrudge working or stay at home moms so why should I do dads a disservice? So, the people like JJ are not cheering for the father in this case, they are cheering for men. If you want to change this case - start by changing the world.
ReplyDeleteWell said.
DeleteWhere is everyone who is sticking up for this mother - when the shoe is on the other foot as it is so many more times - and the father is unfairly denied custody? That happens so many more times than a case like this. It is almost routine for fathers nowadays to get the short-end of the stick. Where are the big mouths here when that happens all too often?
" My lawyer and virtually every good lawyer in town is away on holiday."
ReplyDeleteWhat does THAT mean? Nothing would disqualify one from being labelled a "good lawyer" more than abandoning the case when you're most in need.
This woman (seemingly) needs better counsel, and perhaps that's where her supporters should be putting their resources.
Blogging and public awareness is one thing. However, what happens in the courtroom is what counts.
If justice is on this woman's side, then perhaps she needs a better legal advocate.
Obviously justice is on the father's side.
Delete