Monday, June 30, 2014

Rivky Stein and Yoel Weiss:The "Mediator's Report" - Was Joseph Bamberger accepted as a mediator?

Joseph Bamberger
One of the key documents in this case is a court document labeled as being written by the "mediator." It is one of the documents available on the Redeem Rivky site   "Mediator's Report".

It struck me as strange that a mediator - someone who is supposed to arbitrate for the welfare of both sides and thus is officially neutral - should write a report for public consumption that clearly views the husband as the one responsible for the marriage breakup. There is no indication whether he is a psychologist, rabbi or social worker - no credentials are associated with his name. There is no indication of whether he is experienced in this work or whether he was used because he had the trust of both sides and was trusted to be neutral and viewed as having wisdom and commonsense.

Bamberger writes:
During early April 2013, Yoel Weiss requested my assistance to help mediate between him and Rivky Stein. Having in the past successfully helped numerous  couples traverse their divorce and custody amicably, I attempted to provide the same guidance to Weiss and Stein.
 The document has the name of the mediator inked over - presumably because the mediator didn't want his name used [DT- he confirmed that in an email]. However the full report is available elsewhere in the court documents - and includes his name - Joseph Bamberger and email address and phone number. 

I asked Yoel Weiss about this report. In particular why the mediator had apparently taken sides.

Yoel Weiss responded simply that Joseph Bamberger was not the mediator and he had never accepted him as such. These are his word,
He was not a mediator he was there for one purpose to remove the order of protection and that's it
 I have also asked Ezra Stein - Rivky's older brother to respond - and have so far not received any response.

 But Joseph Bamberger has responded to my email for more information.
I have no interest in being involved any more than I have, I am declining your request...

This obviously raises some very serious questions as to the significance and validity of this document. It is also strange that a court document wasn't notarized. [to be continued]

161 comments :

  1. "He was not a mediator he was there for one purpose to remove the order of protection and that's it"





    Again: when comparing the mediator's report with this declaration, it does not speak in favor of Yoel WEiss.


    Please ask the mediator whether the letter published by Rivka Stein was written by him and reflects the state of affairs as he sees it or as he saw it then.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Eliezer BerkovitsJune 30, 2014 at 3:50 PM

    Its a shame so many thousands of people have jumped on the Facebook bandwagon in blind support of Rivky without applying הוו מתונים בדין and analysing the situation carefully. The deeper we dig, the more worms we discover. The בית דיו does not appear to exist and now the mediator's credentials also appear dubious.

    ReplyDelete
  3. A mediator's report, by (legal) definition, is not admussible in court. (I haven't read too much of the court file posted, but assume one side tried to submit it as authoritative. Actually, mediators almost always decline to write report for that reason, making the existence of such a report highly suspect.) Either way, the reasons for breakup of the marriage is legally irrelevant to custody issues. Might be halachically relevant to get and or asset distribution issues, but probably only marginally relevant.

    Glad to read there's a brother / uncle on the Weiss side. Might be helpful.

    Does Mrs Weiss make an issue of visitation, yeshiva education, other such issues?

    ReplyDelete
  4. "This obviously raises some very serious questions as to the significance of this document."


    I don't agree. The document is a description of the situation the way he saw it when he wrote it (or did the mediator deny the authenticity of the document?). There might be various reasons why he does not want to be involved in this case any more, and it is understandable when you read his report. But there might also be other reasons like threats or intimidation attempts.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't agree.

    I do agree. First, it is important to know if this man indeed did "in the past successfully helped numerous couples traverse their divorce and custody amicably", or he did not.



    Second of all, if half of his report is a character assassination, it is extremely important to know what his credentials of character assessment are.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Bamberger acknowledged he had written the document that is among the court documents on Rivky's site. the document is authentic.

    The question is whether what he said is accurate

    ReplyDelete
  7. well, unless you want to tell us that he is a liar, we might at least take his personal experience with Yoel Weiss at face value, irrespective of what we think of the hearsay he reports.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hi i had a order of Protection Against rivky she had avi lefkowitz call rabby webster and said she is interested in dropping both of our OPP

    ReplyDelete
  9. Was this during the same period that Bamberger said he was trying to mediate with Rabbi Webster?

    ReplyDelete
  10. no yossi Bamberger Was hired By Uziel Frankel

    ReplyDelete
  11. No. before bamberger and uziel frankel came into the picture.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hi Yoel,

    Is the "seruv" document being used against you fake?
    Who do you believe created it?

    ReplyDelete
  13. So why wasn't Rabbi Webster able to get both of you to drop your respective Order of Protections?

    ReplyDelete
  14. From the outset this Bamberger character writes in a language that he accepted everything the wife claimed to him as fact while treating anything the husband claimed as suspect. He repeatedly refers to the husband with highly negative character names and characterizations. its clear he never liked him and he liked Rivkie all along.

    Anything this so-called "mediator" writes should be treated as biased and presumably without factual basis. He criticizes the husband for being upset and insistent that he, the father, should care for his children instead of his wife's mother. Certainly a father should have priority over a grandmother for caring for his own children. Yet Bamberger criticizes the father for this desire.

    Bamberger notably ends with saying that Yolie is "evil" and that Yoeli must "go down". This is hardly the language of a "mediator".

    ReplyDelete
  15. Yossi Bamberger, and Uziel Frankel are two divorced people. It took 20 years for Uziel Frankel to give a GET to his wife. Yossi Bamberger is a divorced guy as well, with three kids in the mix.

    They both are competing with themselves who could get into bed with rivky first( if they haven't yet)... they are doing all the dirty work for her....

    ReplyDelete
  16. You're operating under the assumption that anything Bamberger wrote is true. How about refrasing your question to even know if there is a shred of truth in Bambergers letter.

    ReplyDelete
  17. unless you want to tell us that the mediator is a liar


    Correct! The "mediator" is a liar. So many items posted on Dicker/Rivkie's site has been proven to be falsehoods.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I don't think most people here are actually interested in the truth. Many simply take a side and don't bother looking into the details.

    Most of what you posted is only a fraction of what doesn't make sense from yoels side. Even if rivky is a liar, there is still a whole lot that yoel has major issues with in his claims.


    I have seen him post defamatory things about rivky, even pictures that are clearly meant to only be seen between husband and wife. If he is so concerned about not doing a chillul hashem as he claims why does he do just that. A lot of what he has posted on youtube, his facebook page, or his g+ accounts is very contradictory to helping him out - despite him thinking that it will better his cause.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Concerned for fairnessJune 30, 2014 at 11:45 PM

    As an avid reader of this blog, who follows the gittin cases here closely, I got a shiver when I saw this latest post and saw the picture. Mr Bamberger is not a trained mediator or professional at all. He is a self styled businessman whose own wife divorced him taking his three children out of country. When I was going through my own contentious divorce he harassed me, coming into my house, rallying people against me, and sending me dozens of harassing texts. In my case the rabbanim and the beis din were on my side but yet he took matters into his own hands, humiliating me publicly without precourse to any psak or daas Torah. As a matter of fact, due to his intervention I was connived into a disadvantaged deal and my ex sued me in secular court causing me great loss in lawyer fees to protect myself. He is not trustable, and not in any way a professional mediator.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Wow.


    Stockholm?
    Or, is he hopeful to marry one of these shrews?

    ReplyDelete
  21. RDE has done a lot of good work in changing the frame of thinking in our community regarding Child Abuse. I am looking forward to his response to my questions.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Referencing ambiguous questions and comments, instead of respond in clear and brief fashion says that you are fearful of the truth and must run to obfuscations.

    that he is in agreement that some of the items in Bamberger's

    Which item? About rabbi Webster? I didn't see that! Where did you see that?

    He also confirmed to RDE that Bamberger was involved to a certain extent.



    What? Bamberger approached him on behalf of Rivkie, so that he would drop his order of protection against her.


    Why the lies and the facts?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Who asked Uziel Frankel to get involved?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Why would Rivki need to hire Bamberger to remove the Order of Protection that she had against Yoeli?



    Read! If you would have read what he said, you would have seen that Rivkie hired Bamberger to get Yoely to remove the order of protection Y-O-E-L filed against Rivkie. That's a fact. Capish?

    ReplyDelete
  25. @Just the Facts - most of your questions have been answered by Yoel Weiss in the comments. Regarding #5 & #6 - ask Bamberger directly - there is an email on the report which is how I contacted him. I did not ask him those questions. #7 I have not contacted Rabbi Webster.


    At this point we need to ask - what has Rivky Steiin established and what evidence has she presented to support her claims? I don't know if Yoel is a tzadik or not - but the problem with her public relations bashing as well as the RICO filing and weaknesses that have been raised leave me increasing disturbed by her campaign. It is also not clear who has provided halachic guidance - which seems to be incorrect.



    I am also working on establishing who in fact is behind her campaign - she is not the organizer or brains or money behind it.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I don't think most people here are actually interested in the truth. Many simply take a side and don't bother looking into the details.


    Projection, dear. His whole post is all based on not having read what Yoely wrote. Or, it is purposefully misleading!


    And this is your response. That's projection. You, my dear, are not interested in the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  27. repharim please explain why you think Rivky is justified by this huge chilul hashem? The case smells worse and worse as I go through it.

    ReplyDelete
  28. that is a major question which I am trying to find out now. Do you know anything about him? Perhaps you could answer this question

    ReplyDelete
  29. I just re-read Bamberger's letter.


    1) Where does he criticize Yoel for his desire that he should be given a "priority over a grandmother for caring for his own children"?


    2) Bamberger never said "that Yoeli must "go down"". You are clearly twisting Bamberger's written words and have an agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I just re-read Bamberger's letter.

    1) Where does Bamberger criticize the father for his desire to be a "priority over a grandmother for caring for his own children"?


    2) We have Bamberger's written word before us. You are twisting his words with your claim that Bamberger feels Yoeli must "go down". He never wrote that.


    3) It is indeed clear that Bamberger, today, doesn't like Yoeli. But that doesn't mean he wasn't initially neutral and over time developed an unfavorable opinion of him. Every mediator, will over time develop opinions of the two parties. That is human and a fact of life. The question is if he conducted his mediation without bias or dropped it once he realized his bias against Yoeli was too strong and interfering with his ability to be impartial.

    ReplyDelete
  31. 1) He severely criticized Yoel for wanting to care for his children while his wife went out of town. The grandmother wanted to take the kids but the father insisted on caring for them until his wife returned from out of town. Yet Bamberger saw fit to criticize a fathers desire to care for his children for a few precious more time, considering the children don't live with him but rather are with the wife the majority of the time, instead of turning his children over to the grandmother when he could care for them until his wife returned.

    2) Bamberger at the very end of his diatribe letter ends of about Yoeli with the comment "before he goes down. What a sick demented way to talk about someone - to refer to him "going down"!? It clearly demonstrates Bamberger's one-sided clouded twisted mindset.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Here is the dialogue between myself and Yoel:


    Yoel Weiss: Hi i had a order of Protection Against rivky she had avi lefkowitz call rabby webster and said she is interested in dropping both of our OPP

    Just the Facts: Was this during the same period that Bamberger said he was trying to mediate with Rabbi Webster?

    Yoel Weiss: No. before bamberger and uziel frankel came into the picture
    _______________________________________


    Based on the above, we know that according to Yoel, Rabbi Webster was involved in mediation before Bamberger. In addition, Yoel didn't dispute that Bamberger and Rabbi Webster jointly tried mediation.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Rabbi Michael TzadokJuly 1, 2014 at 1:21 AM

    That varies from State to State. My mother in law by profession is a mediator in Wa. She is required to submit reports to the Court as well as to testify in cases.
    Can you provide proof that it is inadmissible in a Federal Court?

    ReplyDelete
  34. 1) I suggest you re-read his report of that incident. He doesn't criticize Yoel for wanting to take care of his kids. He criticizes Yoel for how he handled the situation.


    2) Today, Bamberger doesn't hide that he has a bias against Yoel and believes that Yoel has a destructive frame of mind. The question is, did he initially conduct his mediation impartially and over time, based on what he saw, heard, and dealt with, developed his very negative bias about Yoel.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Rabbi Michael TzadokJuly 1, 2014 at 1:29 AM

    I agree with Honesty. These are all very important issues that need to be determined. Further it needs to be determined if he wrote this of his own free will or if he was compelled in some way.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Rabbi Michael TzadokJuly 1, 2014 at 1:33 AM

    An order of protection is a public document. Can someone with a PACER account please confirm, or deny the existence of an order of protection by Yoel Weiss against Rivka Stein. That will be most helpful in ascertaining at least one element.

    ReplyDelete
  37. It seems that Bamberger is the fellow who illegally recorded the phone
    conversation between himself and Weiss without consent or advising him
    in advance that it is being recorded. But even worse than recording it
    was his taking 60 and 90 second snippets from it out of context to make
    it appear he said something other than what he said. (Such as the
    recording entitled "Yoily Will Not Go to Beit Din". A few seconds
    recording cut off from the entire conversation makes it appear that he
    said he wouldn't go to any beis din while he obviously was saying that
    he wouldn't go to Stein's kangaroo-for-hire non-existent beit din.)

    It
    also shows than Yossi Bamberger was in the tank for Rivkie right from
    the get-go with im recording his calls with Weiss without advising him
    because he was looking to trip him up and beat him with the recordings
    even during the time Weiss was dealing with him and Yossi Bamberger
    still claimed (as he wrote in his paper) that he was "still neutral at
    that time."

    ReplyDelete
  38. Today, that is not a fact.


    Bamberger says that Yoel hired him and Yoel never clearly disputes that. All Yoel said was that Uziel Frankel hired Bamberger and it was for the removal of an Order of Protection. At this time we don't know:


    a) who Uziel Frankel is and if he is on Yoeli or Rivki's side, someone who was impartial, etc..It is also possible, that Yoel asked Uziel Frankel to get a mediator and in a round about way, Yoeli did bring Bamberger into the saga.


    b) when Bamberger was brought in, if both parties still have Order of Protections, or only one party and which party that was.

    ReplyDelete
  39. @Daas Torah- "At this point we need to ask - what has Rivky Stein established and what evidence has she presented to support her claims?"
    Who needs to ask?! You want to know if her claims have legitimacy? She filed a claim in court so you'll have to wait and see.
    I don't understand why you're getting involved in this. You don't have the whole picture so everything posted here is pure conjecture.

    ReplyDelete
  40. I just reviewed my original questions. Almost all of them have not been answered (please see below). This would indicate your post here was premature and is heavily biased against Rivki without a foundation of basic fact gathering.

    Questions 1 - 4) Who hired Bamberger? Bamberger says that it was Yoel and Yoel never directly disputes that. All he said was Uziel Frankel hired Bamberger. We don't know who Uziel Frankel is and if he reached out to Bamberger on Yoel's/Rivki's behlaf or on his own. Therefore all of these questions are still open.

    We also don't know if both parties had Orders of Protection against each other when Bamberger got involved or only one? If it was only one, which party it was.

    In addition, to date, Yoel never directly disputes what Bamberger wrote in his letter. If he does dispute it, which portions does he not agree with?

    Question 5) In my original post, I made a mistake an labeled two questions as 5.

    My first set of questions were possible reasons of why a neutral mediator could come to writting such a report and still be conisdered neutral during the time they were involved in mediation. You might disagree, but I have not yet seen a response from you regarding this or have been provided with facts to say otherwise.

    My second set of questions still stand until we know who really was behind Bamberger's involvement.

    ReplyDelete
  41. @Menachem - I don't know where you have been for the last few years. You obviously know nothing about me. If you read back in the blog regarding child abuses, Tropper, Hirsch, Dodelson, Epstein etc etc you might start to comprehend what is going on in this blog.

    If you still don't understand then I would suggest you simply stop reading this blog

    ReplyDelete
  42. In regards to your question, "what has Rivky Steiin established and what evidence has she presented to support her claims?" Except for the Bamberger letter, I have not seen any evidence/ That is indeed why she filed a RICO case. The RICO law was written specifically to address scenarios where there is no direct evidence and has a very high bar that Rivki will have to overcome for it not to be dismissed.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Orders of Protection are not public when issued by Family Court

    ReplyDelete
  44. 1) By NY state law as well as Federal Law (which covers a conversation that is being held across state lines) only one party to a conversation needs to be aware that it is being recorded.


    2) It is total conjecture on your part that it was Bamberger who recorded the conversations.


    3) Even if it was Bamberger, he could of been recording them as a way to keep track of what each party's position was without having to take notes on paper. He could of been recording his conversations with Rivki as well. It doesn't mean that he was biased from the get go.


    4) Even it was Bamberger, we don't know that it was he who released them to Rivki to post on her website. They could of been stolen from him (computers hacked). He might of shared them with a party that he trusted and that person broke the trust and released them.


    5) There seems to be many parties involved and anyone could of had similar conversations with Yoel and released them.

    ReplyDelete
  45. We need to ask, why did the Lefkowitz's who fostered Rivky all these years and married her off to Yoily, evict Rivky from there house a year after her seperation from yoily??


    Rivky claims because Yoily threatened the family.... BUT, the eviction court documents show differently... Rivky accused Shimon Lefkowitz .. of sexually abusing her and going through her stuff... see poster below which Rivky posted in her website ...


    http://agunasagainstabuse.wordpress.com/tag/cross-dresser/

    ReplyDelete
  46. very important!!! see court transcript (link below)..... pages 14 and 15... why Rivky was evicted,,...

    https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B1tiRxwXnflAMktVWEJIUjlDckJJVHdITHVJZVlka05SZ0Q4/edit

    ReplyDelete
  47. Referring to a person "before he goes down" is gangster language. Bamberger completely discredited himself with the filthy type language he utilized throughout his diatribe.

    ReplyDelete
  48. If this is even considered a hillul hashem - it would probably be one of those cases were you have to choose between two evils. Let a potential rapist and psychopath get his way or publicize his identity and his actions causing a hillul hashem. Sometimes we have to chose between two evils. Would you say that not saying anything about him would be the lesser of two evils?

    Put yourself in her shoes for a moment and tell me what you would have done differently if everything she claimed is true? What would stop this guy from marrying someone else and let the cycle repeat?

    The other extremely important issue she is bringing to light is the agunah crisis in general that afflicts us today. Even if she is a liar - she is still bringing to light the fact that many jewish husbands out there are completely abusive people who should never be allowed to marry without serious change. Our communities general response to such people is to hush it over because god forbid we do a hillul hashem. Which is worse in hashems eyes - doing a hillul hashem or destroying his childrens lives?

    As far as I remember, hillul hashem is not one of the 3 things we are to give up our lives for. So causing a hillul hashem to save even one life is permissible. Sure it should be avoided if possible but something like this will spread throughout the world and hopefully every jew hears about this - and learns - abuse must not be hushed. Abuse is what kills people mentally and physically.

    And just for the record, I was abused when I was younger and you know what - no one would believe me if i came out about it now. What proof would I have? Words? I would be labeled as an attention seeking psycho. What does rivky have on her other than words. How would you prove rape after such a long period of time?

    Go to the doctor she took her kids to and ask if it's true that they were being underfed. Look at yoels income - if he has tons of expensive cars how could such a "loving" husband neglect his own children's health? Why are people so blindly ignoring the things that yoel cannot deny.

    We may never prove one way or another completely but yoels best explanation of his wife thus far has been, "after being happily married for 4 years, out of the blue in the spring of 2012, being under the spell of some demon[s], she suddenly decided to destroy her family". C'mon a wife "happily" married for 4 years suddenly decides to destroy it? I'm not sure what sounds more ludicrous, the demons or his wife randomly deciding she's sick of him.


    ***I should also mention that, I have seen yoel post very non-tznius pictures of his wife. Why would he do that if he's innocent. He claims he's trying to peacefully resolve this but is taking some pretty atrocious revenge at the same time.*** Or would you say it's more reasonable to say that rivky decided she needs to release pictures of herself showing off her body? She's been tznius to the outside world her entire life and perhaps she's had enough?

    There is not much truth seeking we need to do to find evidence of his abuse. I mean, we could just stop by their apartment and see if the signs are there. Are there 5 locks on his door that only open from the outside...inside his home? I mean, why would someone have FIVE locks on a door inside their home. It doesn't take a genius to figure out a lot of this stuff.



    Lastly, just because the online world could not get in touch with the beis din she used - it means nothing until someone physically goes and tries to meet with them. Speculating on that is pointless right now.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Has this Bamberger ever been עובר איסור יחוד with Mrs Weiss? To be polite.... What is his personal investment with this case compromised of?

    ReplyDelete
  50. Just The Facts r u ezra stein 646-871-3090 y don't you show who you r

    ReplyDelete
  51. Eliezer BerkovitsJuly 1, 2014 at 10:51 AM

    Nothing there any more.

    Besides, what evidence is there that this is Rivkys blog, and not say yours....?

    ReplyDelete
  52. Did anyone else pick up on the fact that Yoel contradicts himself in almost every news article that he is quoted in? First he says that hell give her a Get after the custody battle (which is evil in its own right since there is no halachic justification for using a Get as a tool of extortion). Then he says that he already offered a Get. In a recorded tape on her website redeemrivky.com he says that he will not give a Get for 5 years because she had him arrested 5 times. Which one is it Yoel?

    Why was Bamberger needed by Yoel to remove the order of protection? What role was he supposed to play in doing so? Was he supposed to simply drive her to court so she could sign the proper documents or was he supposed to "convince" her on behalf of Yoel to remove the order? It seems to me that yoel asked bamberger to mediate between them but secretly he had a plan to use bamberger to manipulate Rivky in to removing the order of protection maybe even returning to him. When Yoels plan didnt work out and bamberger realized that Yoel is a sick sadistic person that is just trying to control Rivky and make her suffer he got upset at bamberger and then claimed that he was never the mediator.

    In a letter that Yoel wrote to the redeem rivky facebook page he says:
    This is a ''kosher porno website'' camouflaged under a ''free aguna
    site''...

    I think that all of you have been to the redeem rivky facebook page and
    I would like to hear anyone objectively say that they agree with the
    above ridiculous statement made by Yoel. The only site that closely
    resembles a porno site ( and to be honest is also far from it) is
    Yoel's youtube account which has videos and pictures of Rivky posted
    against her will, while she is wearing clothing that is immodest.



    Yoel, Why did you post immodest pictures of Rivky on YOUR youtube account? Does your "adam Gadol" that you speak of in the letter know about your youtube account? Does he condone your behavior? Why have you not published his name?


    It is clear that Rivky does not want to be married to Yoel anymore. The marriage is over and they should both move on. Yoel, there is no reason to withhold a Get from Rivky. If she does not want to be married to you anymore you should not force her to be against her will. Give her a Get and put an end to this Chilul Hashem...

    ReplyDelete
  53. The link above says "nothing is there" and your link that the picture is hosted at is not a link to her website. Why do you think that this was published by Rivky? Is it possible that this was published by Yoels family to try and alienate Rivky from her foster parents? Did anyone speak to the Lefkowitz family and ask them why they decided to break their ties with her?

    ReplyDelete
  54. Hmmm, Why did he "harass" you? Were you trying to withold a Get from your wife and use it as a tool of extortion? If so why were you witholding a Get from your wife? What halachic justification did you have to mentaly abuse your wife by witholding a Get from her?

    ReplyDelete
  55. Yoel, if this is really you please see my questions I posted above and I would like responses to them.

    ReplyDelete
  56. did you also use the get as an extortion tool?

    ReplyDelete
  57. @Avi are you a rav? a posek? or you just a baal habayis who thinks whatever he thinks - G-d obviously agrees with him?

    Please tell me the halachic basis of your claim that a wife has the right to a Get on demand? It is not in the Shulchan Aruch. It is clearly not the view of rov poskim. It wasn't even a view of secular society until about 20 years ago..

    If a besis din - after hearing both sides - poskens that the husband must give a get - then he must. At the present no beis din has heard both sides.

    the gemora doesn't claim that there is a prohibition of mental abuse by not giving a get on deman - so why do you claim there is?

    ReplyDelete
  58. @Avi - your curiousity about another person's life doesn't mean that you have the right to demand information. You come across as arrogant - please tone down your comments in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  59. It is entirely legitimate to take the position that the Get will be the last part of the divorce process, after custody and other issues have been resolved, and not the first. And it is legitimate to decline to provide the Get if the wife is making unhalachic demands in custody in the non-Jewish court.

    The recording about the 5 years was clearly made because he was angry that she illegally and falsely accused him of violating an trumped up and unjustified Order of Protection resulting in her having him unjustifiedly arrested 5 times and spending a night in jail 5 times, with her violating all the halachas of sheker, mesira and arkoyos. Out of frustration he said he would withhold it for 5 years for her 5 arrests, as heard on the recording. On his comment on Stein's Dicker PR facebook page, the husband commented he would give her a Get as soon as the custody is resolved.

    On this website he seemed to comment, if I understood correctly, that Bamberger was brought in by his wife to try to convince him to remove his order of protection against his wife. Bamberger's original involvement was on her behalf not his.

    ReplyDelete
  60. I assume you are referring to this:

    4 MR. BERKE: She posts on the internet

    5 posts in the community that the land lady's son, who

    6 is a foster mother is a sex abuser. She is

    7 slandering this guy. She did the same thing to my

    8 client and in different forms.

    9 You want her to live in her home when she

    10 puts that kind of stuff out all over the place about

    11 the son.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Not only do I have the right to demand, we all have the obligation to demand answers from Yoel as to why he is continuing to abuse Rivky by posting non tznius pictures of her. Did the Rav sanction the release f non tznius photos on his internet site? Do you condone this behavior?

    ReplyDelete
  62. there is a court document stating that she has to leave her flat because she accused the son of the landlords of molesting her. So this seems plausible. It is also true that her foster parent's name is Lefkovitz.

    But of course, if she was molested, she has every right to defend herself.

    ReplyDelete
  63. It is not a normal thing for people to secretly record phone conversations they are having without informing the other party. And the husband can easily verify if he was on the phone with Bamberger during those conversations.


    Sure, Bamberger's computers were "hacked" by Shira Dicker to post on her Public Relations website for the wife. That's good for a laugh.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Yoel, I am not Ezra Stein, I have never spoken to Rivki in my life, nor any of her supporters. My knowledge about this case is purely from the public documents that have been posted on Rivki's site, court documents that I downloaded from PACER and shared with RDE. My questions are basic questions that anyone who is trying to get to the bottom of this in a fair unbiased way, would be asking. I am hoping you will answer the many questions that have been posted on this site regarding your side of the story of what happened here.

    ReplyDelete
  65. @Avi why are you ignoring what I wrote - and instead bring up a different topic. You don't have the "right" to demand information nor do you have an obligation to do so.

    I haven't seen his web page and I don't know what pictures you are talking about. I am responding to your strident comments which don't have a basis in halacha.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Many lawyers, therapists, etc... record everything without telling the parties that they are being recorded.


    If those recordings are indeed from Yoel (so far he has not denied that they are recordings of himself), I am sure Bamberger is not the only person that Yoel had these conversations with and said similar things to.

    ReplyDelete
  67. I am not sure if the moderator takes a long time to publish or if I am having some of my comments censored. At any rate, if Mr Bamberger recorded the conversations he probably did so because he realized what type of person Yoel was and that he would try and deny things he said later on...

    ReplyDelete
  68. @Avi I sometimes take a couple hours to moderate comments. But delays are typically because Disqus sometimes delays posting approved comments are simply rejects by acceptance. sometimes I have to approve a comment 3 times before it stays up.

    there are also delays if Disqus decides to place a comment into spam.

    There are some comments I block - but not very many.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Feel free to take a look at Yoels webpage here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOIjtEGyR5m8pMlLvQoZFmQ/videos


    I am not ignoring you but I find it ironic that you claim I have no right to demand or request answers when you do the same yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Thanks for clarifying

    ReplyDelete
  71. 1) From what I have seen, is that when the husband says I will not give a Get until everything is settled, the wife feels like a caged animal and in many of those cases they ended up doing crazy things in order to get the Get. On the other hand, in the few cases where I have seen and heard of the husband giving the Get upfront, the parties end up coming to an arrangement in a more civilized manner, are able to move on with their lives less damaged and provide a stable and loving arrangement for their children.


    In almost all cases where the wife is doing crazy things, you will find a husband who first threatened he is not giving a Get at all or unless he gets X, Y and Z, etc....


    So in this case, what came first? Rivki getting Orders of Protection or Yoel threatening he is not giving a Get?


    2) You wrote: "Bamberger's original involvement was on her behalf not his". You are obviously someone on Yoel's side and know him personally. Bamberger says that he was hired by Yoel. Yoel says that Bamberger was hired by Uziel Frankel but has so far not answered the questions posted on this site of:


    a) who is Uziel and


    b) if Uziel might have done so on Yoel's behalf.

    ReplyDelete
  72. We can agree to disagree.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Rabbi Michael TzadokJuly 1, 2014 at 1:57 PM

    we all have the obligation to demand answers from Yoel as to why he is continuing to abuse Rivky by posting non tznius pictures of her.

    What are you talking about?
    Yoel Weiss' facebook:
    https://www.facebook.com/yoel.weiss.5?ref=br_rs&fref=browse_search

    All there is a picture of him with his daughter, and we have all seen his youtube channel this is just an amalgamation of home videos. So please either justify and provide proof for your claim or drop it.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Rabbi Michael TzadokJuly 1, 2014 at 1:58 PM

    Please either provide the court documents or drop the claim.

    ReplyDelete
  75. t is entirely legitimate to take the position that the Get will be the lastpart of the divorce process, after custody and other issues have been resolved, and not the first.



    Really? According to who? You? Why is that? So that the Get can be used as a means of extortion making the wife cave to meet his demands at threat of being caged for the next few years?

    ReplyDelete
  76. @Avi - perhaps you are right about demanding answers - but I doubt it. A simple test is for you to start a blog and see whether anyone cares about your demand to know.

    If your approach doesn't produce results then perhaps that means you should try something else. On the other hand if it is productive then it validites your question.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Rabbi Michael TzadokJuly 1, 2014 at 2:14 PM

    For me the most telling part, and the most damning to Rivka Stein is from page 3 line 21 until the top of page 6 line 9. That gives me very grave concerns regarding her current RICO complaint.

    ReplyDelete
  78. @Avi I asked you before whether you are a posek. Let me ask you whether you have basic knowledge about halacha? Is Rav Moshe Feinstein big enough for you?

    ReplyDelete
  79. From what I have seen, is that when the husband .. will not give a Get until everything is settled, the wife feels like a caged animal .. doing crazy things in order to get the Get. .. in the few cases where I have seen and heard of the husband giving the Get upfront,....


    How much experience do you have in this field, and exactly how many cases?


    From what I, and most Botei Din have seen, it is not true. She wouldn't behave properly about his kids. That's why the Rama Paskens that a husband should NOT give a get until all issues are settled.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Moe, you are obviously someone on Yoel's side and know him personally.

    In our dialogue you went from accusing Bamberger of criticizing Yoel from wanting to be with his kids ("He criticizes the husband for being upset and insistent that he, the father, should care for his children instead of his wife's mother.") to now seeing what Bamberger wrote was not that at all. It was criticizem of how Yoel handled the incident.

    I hope you see and understand from this back and forth , that your judgement on interpreting events related to Yoel is clouded with your feelings for him. I am sure the same can be said for Rivki's family members and supporters. This is human and totally natural. It is specifically because of this, that the Torah says that a Dayan needs to be an impartial person and can't be related to either party.



    I hope that both parties, their family members and supporters, realize this, see the tremendous damage they are doing to each other and even more importantly to their kids and get a hold of themselves and settle this in an amicable way. This marriage is obviously over, both parties need to focus on moving ahead with their lives, figuring out what is best for their children and providing them with a stable environment to grow up in.

    ReplyDelete
  81. please see his youtube channel here. There are 2 videos which he posted a non tznius picture of Rivky as the preview of the video when the picture has NO relation to the content of the video itself. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOIjtEGyR5m8pMlLvQoZFmQ/videos

    ReplyDelete
  82. I am not a posek but I doubt that Rav Moshe permitted recalcitrant husbands to post non tznius pictures of their wives on websites. Did Rav Moshe condone using a Get as a means of extorting ones wife?

    ReplyDelete
  83. On the Yoel Weiss Youtube channel there are indeed pictures which are not contained in the videos. I.e. the person posting the videos has added a picture as "title picture" which has nothing to do with the video.

    If the Yoel Weiss Youtube channel is indeed fed by Yoel Weiss, this would be a display of great hypocrisy.

    ReplyDelete
  84. @Avi why don't you acknowledge that you know nothing about halacha instead of changing the topic.

    Regarding the issue of extortion - please explain the difference between extortion and negotiating?

    halacha is not identifical to the current secular understanding of divorce on demand

    ReplyDelete
  85. Au contraire. In most cases where the husband is withholding the Get, you will find a wife making unhalachic custody demands and/or otherwise violating the husband's halchic rights using non-Jewish laws and non-Jewish courts.

    I never met or spoke to the husband and do not know him.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Remember that until a husband gives a Get, he also cannot remarry. He is on the same boat as his wife. He is not hurting her more than himself. He, too, is still stuck in limbo.

    ReplyDelete
  87. If you like u can email me or call me

    ReplyDelete
  88. Firstly, I resent your comment and it is pretty arrogant of you to say something like that considering you do not know me. Even if I know nothing about halacha, your statement is derogatory and hurtful. Is that comment within the guidelines of Halacha?


    Now, Where in halacha is one allowed to post untznius pictures of his wife on his youtube channel? Where in halacha is the act of using a Get as a means of extortion justified and condoned?


    There is a clear distinction between the two. Extortion involves the use of threats ie "If you dont give in to my demands you will never be free of me"...


    My questions are mainly aimed at Yoel and I am anxiously waiting to hear his response.

    ReplyDelete
  89. have a look at the youtube channel again. there is a cover picture that has nothing to do with the video.

    ReplyDelete
  90. I would like you to answer the questions publicly for EVERYONE to see. We all deserve answers!

    ReplyDelete
  91. Avi if my evaulation of your level of knowledge is true - then instead of resenting - why not do something to improve your knowledge?

    Yes my comment was within halacha.

    There are blogs that you can toss opinions around without concern for halacha - this is not one of them. So if it hurts to be told the truth and you resent hearing about your level of knowledge - then either focus on learning or go to another blog.

    ReplyDelete
  92. You publicly insulted me and did so with under false pretense. Can you please point me to the sif in shulchan aruch which allows for publicly humiliating me?

    ReplyDelete
  93. The question is which came first? The wife's demands or the husband's refusal to give a Get?

    Even in cases where the husband did not implicitly say that he is not going to give a Get, but by nature he is a very controlling person, the wife is scared that the husband will not give a Get and in some cases she decides to play dirty from the outset.

    In addition, in cases where the husband is abusive, and the wife gets an Order of Protection to protect herself, has her husband arrested (which is permitted according to Halacha), etc.... it becomes very difficult for the husband to give up the control that he has over the wife and give a Get. Therefore, the wife feels her only chance is to play dirty.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Even though the Halacha is that the husband doesn't have to give the Get until the end of the divorce/settlement process, I am predicting that in the USA, the accepted process will change (even in the Chareidi world) and that husbands will be told to give the Get upfront.


    I am Chareidi, live in a mostly Chareidi neighborhood and daven in a Chareidi shul with a Chareidi Rov. My Rov who is very involved in Gitten, recently said that he feels that the Get should be given upfront, and has had discussions with some of the Rabbonim in our neighborhood to encourage the same.

    ReplyDelete
  95. @Avi if you continue with this I willl simply block you from the blog. It is your choice

    ReplyDelete
  96. I still don't know who he is.


    Is Uziel remarried?


    Is there anyone else living in his house?

    ReplyDelete
  97. @Yoel Weiss Why are you evading the questions that I asked you? Why are you posting non tznius pictures of Rivky? Why have you contradicted yourself in 3 seperate statements you made regarding giving Rivky her Get? Why do you continue to hold your wife in a dead marriage against her will? Why do you continue the emotional abuse towards her? Why are you trying to use the Get as a means of extortion?


    With regards to you barely coherent statement above: Who is Uzil Frankel? Do you have any evidence that he made a fake complaint? It seems that Rivky filed the complaint in court and it does not mention his name in it. Am I missing a paper?


    How do you have pictures of them together? Are you stalking Rivky? Didnt you learn your lesson from being arrested 5 times already?


    The truth is the more you open your mouth the more abusive you sound to anyone objective here.


    If Uziel did not give his wife a Get for 14 years why would he be doing all of this against you? I would assume that from recalcitrant husband to another you would be best buddies? If what you are saying is true, that even a Get refuser took her side against you I think that shows what kind of person you are...


    Instead of dodging the questions and deflecting why dont you answer the questions above? If Rivky doesnt want you anymore why are you chaining her in a marriage against her will?

    ReplyDelete
  98. My Rov


    Thanks for the quote from your anonymous "rov". Of course, you can just make this whole thing up yourself and attribute it to a nameless rov.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Even in cases where the husband did not implicitly say that he is not going to give a Get, but by nature he is a very controlling person, the wife is scared that the husband will not give a Get and in some cases she decides to play dirty from the outset.


    You are grasping straws. Concocting heroines, does not make the evil and self-destructive course of actions Mrs. Weiss has taken correct or justified. Find me a single case that you know personally where the wife acted in good order, negotiated in good faith and reasonable and was not able to obtain a get at the conclusion of the process?

    ReplyDelete
  100. @Honesty Are you condoning the posting of immodest photos against Rivky's will?

    ReplyDelete
  101. You Seem to no Everything about it except who is uziel frankel https://casetext.com/case/kolel-beth-yechiel-mechil-of-tartikov-inc-v-yll-irrevocable-trust-2#.U7LCdPldV8E

    ReplyDelete
  102. @Yoel Weiss How do you know where Rivky sleeps? Do you stalk her and follow her? Didnt you learn your lesson from the first 5 times you were arrested?

    Why are you stalking Rivky if she clearly does not want to be married to you anymore?


    Are you saying that everything in the rico complaint was fabricated by uziel and is all a figment of his imagination?

    Do you have any basis for your claim regarding the beis din? I did not see his name on the siruv they issued against you. What are you talking about?


    What makes even less sense is why would a recalcitrant husband like uziel take sides against another recalcitrant husband such as yourself? What you are saying just does not add up...


    You have some questions above that need to be answered. The public demands to know...

    ReplyDelete
  103. If she is consorting with a man in public where many people see her coming and going and fraternizing with him, obviously people will tell her husband what she is up to.



    Anyone can put anything they dream of in a court of private RICO complaint.

    ReplyDelete
  104. All the arrests were made under false pretenses by Rivkie, as the court found and declared her non-credible.

    ReplyDelete
  105. He in no way renounces any or all custody demands irregardless whether there was or was not a civil marriage. Custody has nothing to do with civil marriage.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Can you please show us proof that the court found all of the arrests were made under false pretenses?

    ReplyDelete
  107. The difference is that many people would want to marry Rivky whereas even if yoel got a heter eleph rabanim no woman would go near him with a 10 foot pole. The world outside of this forum is not foolish and does not fall for Yoels manipulative tactics. No girl would subject herself to the merciless hands of an abusive husband such as Yoel.

    ReplyDelete
  108. @Avi - are your related to Rivky? Your extreme emotional upset indicates you are personally involved - how?

    ReplyDelete
  109. Since it was asked, i know uzi, though i haven't seen him for ten years or so. Ad soon as i saw the rico complaint, i knew it wAS him.

    His ex wife left the family home with four or five children,. Then returned when she realized no custody, no home. So she giit custody, and got him evicted. Eventually, she git the house, as well as some investment property he owned. So a $400,000 settlement is really a BIG discount on what he would have been entitled to.

    The problem was his ex father in law, who would not allow a settlement, insisted on litigation. I happened to have known the ex wife's family, too. The father thought he was a BIG wheeler dealer,wanted to do business with me,even though he was in a different industry, and wanted a price of six figure volume, when his big deal was only $100. I walked away, but he insisted i come back, and repeated his same small offer fir big discount.

    Meaning, can't do business with him.

    In uzi's case, the poor ex wife suffered cause her father would not allow a settlement.

    But he wad the evil one.

    new it was him.

    ReplyDelete
  110. Part two -- discus acting up.

    The case was finally settled a few weeks after the father in law passed away.

    Meanwhile, uzi was beaten up (detached retina) for which he had a good case, evidence, etc, except he couldn't prove exactly who it as who did it. Police didn't care.

    Also meanwhile, he remarried, had a boy, etc.

    The E3 st address is not where he lives. I know who lives there. Mutual friend. Uzi lives in boro park proper.

    Why is he helping a woman? Can't hold that against him. Lawyers, toanim do that all the time.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Actually, every time Yoel speaks he speaks beautifully and he sounds like a real mentch.


    You, on the other hand, with your hyper questions and threats look quite foolish, attempting to be a bully. You also look like a silly liar.

    ReplyDelete
  112. in many cases where the husband is controlling,


    Projection, my dear. Playing dirty is the way a controlling person behaves. Real victims do not play dirty.

    ReplyDelete
  113. Hyper, bully comments seem to be all you feel capable of posting. Your posts reveal you as a control freak. You need to see a shrink very quickly.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Playing games here, huh?
    Hyper, bullying questions won't help. In fact, when a bully is ignored, they get even more hyper. Eventually they just run out of steam and look for others to bully.


    Yoel is wise for ignoring your hyper and bullying questions.

    ReplyDelete
  115. Moe, you are obviously someone on Yoel's side and know him personally.


    Hmm. Moe Ginsburg has been active on this site since Disqus has been installed, and has commented on many different topics.


    You, on the other hand, have only commented on this one topic. Oh, to the tune of 39 comments in a couple of days.


    It's very unlikely that Moe's interest in this blog stems from a relationship to Mr. Weiss. On the other hand it would really explain your comments and deep interest here, in only this topic, if you were related.


    Ahh, projection, my dear.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Moe? R u for real? Get has nothing to do with legal issues? R u an attorney or play it? In halacha Yoel Weiss should give a GET, now, or he should be given cement shoes, so she becomes an almana.

    ReplyDelete
  117. Yoel, I don't know Rivki or Uziel and you should contact them directly with your questions (which seem to be blackmail).

    But as an outside observer, you seem to be talking from both sides of your mouth. You wrote RDE that you are taking down the pictures because people "misinterpreted my motivation and they think I am trying to harm her - chas v'shalom - and control her."

    If you are not looking to control her or to harm her - chas v'shalom -, why:



    a) are you threatening to post new pictures?


    b) don't you just focus on moving ahead with your life and give her a Get?

    ReplyDelete
  118. By default under halacha a husband has no obligation to give a Get just because his wife wants one. She must prove to a valid (and real) beis din that she is entitled to a Get. If, and only if, a beis din after hearing both sides together in a Din Torah decides that he must give a Get, then and only then must he give a Get. This has not occurred in this case. Thus he is under no halachic, moral or legal obligation to give a Get at this time.



    I don't understand your comment of "cement shoes", but if you meant to imply she should try to kill him, then he would be justified as a matter of self-defense in killing her first.

    ReplyDelete
  119. Considering everything she has publicly done against him and gone to the non-Jewish press with grotesque, obsene and abhorrently untrue allegations that the goyish anti-Semitic media has made a heyday with painting Orthodox Jews as cruel barbaric neanderthals based on her untruths, I think it would be entirely reasonable for him to publish the photographs.

    ReplyDelete
  120. Just wondering -- anyone see the difference between the pr letter Yoel posted on rivky's site and his actual command of the English language? Meaning that heart-felt letter was not Yoel writing, but someone hired to put a new spin on the situation.

    ReplyDelete
  121. So why doesnt he share his beautiful voice with us and answer our questions? Is he afraid? Does he lack answers?

    ReplyDelete
  122. So you mean that he refused to give a get until he got a payment of US$ 400'000?

    Shady caracter.

    ReplyDelete
  123. Why does Yoel Weiss make any demands on custody? He chose not to get married civilly, so he has just visitation rights. That's life. If he wanted more custody rights, he should have gotten married civilly. It was his choice. Probably, his priority was that he did not want his non-wife to have any access to his assets. Fair enough. He did the right thing. But he should not complain about custody now. There is no reason why he should get shared, let alone full custody. On the other hand, he will probably not have to pay alimony, just child support.


    Why should a get be used to change this situation?

    ReplyDelete
  124. Rabbi Michael TzadokJuly 2, 2014 at 10:40 AM

    If he wanted more custody rights, he should have gotten married civilly. It was his choice. Probably, his priority was that he did not want his non-wife to have any access to his assets.
    You are definitely speaking from your ignorance here. Getting married civily in many states in the US is problematic halakhicly. Rav Birnbaum from the Mir refused to be mesader kiddushin in any wedding where there was a civil marriage and insisted that a civil marriage was the same as going to arkaot, as it gave the govt explicit power in any dispute resolution in the marriage.

    No one in their right mind is going to say to penalize a man for something so many Rabbanim have said is stam halakha in the US.

    ReplyDelete
  125. "Rav Birnbaum ZTzUK"L from the Mir refused to be mesader kiddushin in any wedding where there was a civil marriage"
    Really? I am appalled, and I hope this is a minority position. I also think it is a bit naive to think that this allows to bypass the law of the land, which will be applicable anyway in custody and child support matters. Only that the default position in matters of custody is less favorable for men (in most states) if they are not married.

    ReplyDelete
  126. Shady caracter.


    Yep. That's the guy advocating for Rivkie. That's where people say she has now chosen to reside - in his house!

    ReplyDelete
  127. Projection again.


    It is absurd to accuse Yoel of hiring a PR hack to spin a private custody battle into a world-wide media circus. Ohh, right, that's what Rivkie did. Now you have the audacity to claim Yoel did it??? Classic bully language "you did it".

    ReplyDelete
  128. You're legally ignorant. Being civilly married or not being civilly married has zero bearing on custody issues, arrangement and laws. Custody is between two parents whether they were married or not to each other. And if they were not married that does not legally affect what custody the father gets.

    ReplyDelete
  129. The law of the land does not require two people to get married to each other, even if they live together and have children together.

    ReplyDelete
  130. So why did he take them down?

    ReplyDelete
  131. When you will stop condoning these outrageous slanderous lies, fabricated "beit din" etc. by Rivkie, then you will have a right to ask me about those pictures.


    Why did Rivkie give the tabloids pictures of her and her husband touching each other, against Yoels will? I have yet to hear you protest against this.


    Stop throwing stones out of your glass house.

    ReplyDelete
  132. He doesn't your hyper questions any answers. He has answered well. It is Rivkie Stein and her hysterical supporters (you!) who have left many unanswered questions. Actually, they have been answered. You guys are lying. You guys will have your day in court.

    ReplyDelete
  133. That is legally incorrect. NYS does not care whether the two parents were married to each other or not in determining who gets custody and/or how much visitation.

    ReplyDelete
  134. Rivkie gave many family photographs of herself (and her husband) to the Daily Mirror and to the Daily News. They were not all modest and yet she provided them to non-Jewish tabloids that live on printing revealing photos to a readership that is looking to see such photos.

    ReplyDelete
  135. Just the facts - I don't know why you are obsessing on this issue. As someone who has erased various material on the internet - it sometimes can take weeks before all the material actually goes away. That is simply the nature of the Internet

    The fact that Yoel not only has stated publicly that he has erased the pictures - and all but one has in fact disappeared - so please stop hocking the same issue.

    ReplyDelete
  136. The issue is why did he put them there to begin with?

    ReplyDelete
  137. @/Avi you are either a severe reading disablity or you are so blinded by hate you simply can't process information.

    He states on the post

    Recently I had put a number of pictures of Rifky on the Internet which did not show her as a frum young lady who is the victim of a horrible husband.

    The pictures were taken about nine months before she married me and they show how she truly is - in interacting with her friends. She wasn't trapped by a photographer and had no objection to these pictures being taken.


    He is saying the pictures are to show the world who she is - as opposed to the frum person that she now presents herself - e.g.making challah


    She is trying to destroy him in many ways. He has every right to defend himself against her attacks - including showing who she is.

    This should be obvious - but it clearly isn't obvious to you. Please stop repeating questions that you don't care to hear the answers - believing that there are no satisfactory answers other than he is evil

    ReplyDelete
  138. Since you seems to have no problem with Yoel posting immodest pictures of Rivky in order to "defend himself" why would you have an issue with her going to the goyish press to "defend herself"? Furthermore, if this is a milchemes itzvah for him shouldnt we encourage him to keep those pictures on the site?


    Who is his rav that allowed him to post immodest pictures of her?


    If those photos were taken 9 months before they were married (according to yoel) why would such an ehrliche yid like Yoel marry a girl dressing up like that? Why does he even have these pictures if by his own admission they are not from the time they were married? How did he obtain them?

    ReplyDelete
  139. Just to make it clear in new york state a religious marriage is called a common law marriage we r civilly married now thats y she is suing me in supreme court for a divorce index # 54467/12

    ReplyDelete
  140. You sound like you no Uziel Frankel and i guess you no his son the crook Yehuda L Frankel (718) 437-1109.
    4009 16th Ave #2, Brooklyn, NY 11218
    the kid who stood by his farther when his mother did not get a get
    it was uziel frankel who was accused of beating his wife
    Madaline Frankel aka mati rosenberg

    ReplyDelete
  141. YES!!! I realized this as well. The letter written by him on Rivky's facebook page seems to be spelled properly, grammatically correct etc. ALL of @Yoel Weiss comments look like the were written by someone who hasnt completed 3rd grade...


    @yoel weiss who wrote that letter for you? Have you hired a PR firm to spin this in your favor?

    ReplyDelete
  142. As far as I understand, the default custody when parents are not married is with the mother.
    So he was satisfied with her having custody as long as they were together, and now, all of a sudden, he thinks he needs more custody?

    ReplyDelete
  143. When and where did you get married?
    Because Wikipaedia says:
    "Common-law marriages can no longer be contracted in the following states, as of the dates given: New York (1933,..."


    As far as I understand, you could have gotten out of your marriage very easily had you agreed to give a get back in August 2012, while retaining the status quo on custody and paying your 100$ of child support per week. I think this would have been a fair deal to you. It also stands to reason that had you given your get back then, your non-wife would not have resorted to the lawsuits she filed much later.

    ReplyDelete
  144. @Register - the RICO claims are only because Yoel didn't give her a get 2 years ago!?

    ReplyDelete
  145. If they had separated amicably two years ago, and had worked out a good divorced parenting routine, it stands to reason that the peace and quiet would have been more important to the mother than anything else and she would have renounced to sue or press charges. You have to consider that the trials cost a lot of nerves and money. Maybe if they had separated peacefully two years ago, the peace would have been more important.

    ReplyDelete
  146. @Register - you don't know what you are talking about. Rivky simply walked out of the marriage.

    If you believe her subsequent claims of abuse - there is no way a normal person would simply drop the charges. If you dont' believe her than she is using it as get extortion.

    She did not have sole custody - another fantasy on your part.

    Your comments seems just an excuse for your constant refrain that this is get extortion. it isn't and repeating over and over doesn't make it true.

    ReplyDelete
  147. I do not think that, objectively, a wife will walk out of a perfectly happy marriage from one day to the other, just at a minute's whim, and go and live in a 350$ basement rather than in a 1600$ flat.

    I suppose that there must be some pressure of suffering to prompt a spouse to take such a step.

    If Yoel Weiss assertion that she walked out just out of the blue is subjectively true this would imply:
    1) She is unhappy and he does not see it or
    2) He thinks he is powerful that she will not dare walk out.

    So, to me, her and his claims are not really contradictory in that matter, but they do not point to the objective reality Yoel wants to make us believe.

    Yoel Weiss had no reason to refuse a get. His rights for visitation are protected by New York State legistlation, the child support he had to pay was minimal, his non-wife had no claims to alimony or assets, since they were not legally married. His wife credibly asserted that she would not return to live with him and even refused to see him.

    Why did he refuse to give a get in August 2012?
    I think this was a very unwise move on his part.

    ReplyDelete
  148. His wife waged a war against her husband the minute she unilaterally walked out, including immediately refusing to all the father to even see his children for the first month she left, until she was ordered by court to allow the father to visit. Was he supposed to sit down and forget about his children and let her take them away from his forever?

    ReplyDelete
  149. There is allegations that she hooked up with a new man around the time she decided to leave and eventually even lodged by him. He very well may have convinced her to leave her husband for him.

    ReplyDelete
  150. well, if he belives that she cheated on him, he is not allowed to return with her. So aderaba he should give her get.

    ReplyDelete
  151. He has no intention to return to her and he has every intention of giving her a Get. He is currently exercising his halachic right (if not obligation) to withhold from delivering the Get just yet so that he can pressure her (as she wants the Get) to stop interferring with his ability to see his children, as she has been consistently doing until now, and be a father to them. Furthermore, he has the additional halachic right to hold off on giving the Get until all halachic and other outstanding divorce issues are resolved. The Get is the last piece that is done in the seperation and divorce process.

    ReplyDelete
  152. what is the source of these allegations? they are very serious, from a Torah perspective (seculars couldn't care less).

    ReplyDelete
  153. The husband wrote on this site that there are witnesses to that effect and that he has pictures of it.

    ReplyDelete
  154. RMT ,


    Where are you getting this opinion of Rav Birnbaum ZTL from ? I have spoken to people that he was their mesdar kedushin and they have civil marriages also .

    ReplyDelete
  155. so why don't they use the adultery argument in the secular courts? it might help his case

    ReplyDelete
  156. When did driving together constitute anything? Sounds like he just wants to discredit her.

    ReplyDelete
  157. Do you mean when he used profanity on the recordings?

    ReplyDelete
  158. "which did not show her as a frum young lady who is the victim of a horrible husband.The pictures were taken about nine months before she married me"


    This combination is particularly interesting and show how people try to put a spin on this.


    The pictures were taken before the wedding, so obviously she was not yet the victim of a horrible husband.


    Furthermore, it says that those pictures were taken between girls -women.


    By the way: Did the ladies shown dancing on the wedding video Yoel posted on his youtube channel agree to their dancing being published? I mean: if Yoel is so makpid on tzniut, how can he post a video of women dancing, from the other side of the mechitze?

    ReplyDelete
  159. Oh, so you caught him using profanity.


    How did Rivkie dress just a few months prior to getting married?


    Did Rivkie go and describe private bedroom descriptions to the tabloids?


    What about the type of manner of speech Yoel uses? It is caring and level-headed. Yes, you heard the word for garbage. Wow.

    ReplyDelete
  160. No. Rivkie discredited herself. All the documentation shows this.

    ReplyDelete
  161. who is this yossi bamberger? whats his story?? married? divorced? kids?

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.