Lawyer says dad may appeal because he doesn’t know how to use program
Garden City, N.Y. — The Associated Press Published on Friday, Aug. 13, 2010
State Supreme Court Justice Jerry Garguilo made the ruling after Debra Baker of Coram, N.Y., told the court she is moving to Venice, Fla. The unemployed bookkeeper explained her house is in foreclosure.
Judge Garguilo ordered the Bakers' children, 6 and 9, to communicate three times a week with their father on Long Island using the video-conferencing program.
James Baker's attorney is considering an appeal because his client doesn't know how to use Skype.
A national divorce center says Skype visitations are uncommon but not unprecedented.
The decision was published this week in the New York Law Journal.
Lets be realistic, the judge just ordered the destruction of the children's
relationship with their father.
If the mother valued the relationship between the father and children she would not have moved.
"Skype orders" are basically orders for destruction of relationships, made by judges, in a fashion similar to allowing a death row prisoner the right to choose the flavour of his ice cream before being executed.
The Feminist books of precidents, examples of what women should write have been receiving increasing number of amendments in recent years, especially this year in how, women can flee with the children to another jurisdiction, while suggesting that the kids can maintain the relationship via Skype or telephone etc.
Parents male or female who propose these orders often suffer extreme personality disorders and are exactly the sort of people who will abuse their fiduciary obligations as a parent.
They appear with lawyers and judges who "assume" that everyone, is squeaky clean with motives and that no one will abuse their obligations or contravene an order.
Bullony, orders are all too often written with very obvious deficiencies that an obvious invitation to abuse not just the letter but the spirit of the order.
What's worse is that delinquent deadbeat judges make orders without any common sense.
Example, the children will be picked up by the other parent at the home of a neutral friend down the road, when the judge does not have that person's consent, and without any evidence that the friend is willing, able or neutral.
The assumptions judges make, without any evidence, is not just speculation, its less reliable than any psychic who leaves their front light on.
We can expect to see Ontario Courts swamped with similar applications by vindictive parents, generally mothers because our judiciary adopt a brainless men are bad parents women are holy cows with a halo around their heads attitude.
If you are in Ottawa, and a female wishing to get rid of dad, there are three
judges you just have to know about.
Good old Justice Allan Sheffield will hold motions by arrangement, if your lawyer has his phone number.
Justice Denis Power makes decisions for his friends and the right lawyer can easily press his buttons to ignite his anger management problem, his court rage problem against the father. He is famous for outragious flagrant abuses of power that generally result in very large orders for Legal Costs to be paid to his friends.
Then there is Madam Justice Aitkin, who is a classic extremely bitter divorced woman with a pathological hatred towards men and a propensity to destroy children's relationships with their father. She is the judge most sort after by mentally ill violent women in Ottawa as that is the sort of mother she leaves the kids with to the exclusion of the father.
Then there is Madame Justice Lynn D. Ratushny who in 1995 she was appointed to the Self Defence Review, providing a report to the Federal Government in 1997 on the convictions of ninety-eight women who had applied to have their convictions reviewed as they thought they had killed in self-defence.
Ratushny probably has quite a DVD collection, you know, "Thelma and Louise" , "the three wives club" etc.
She is know for holding motions when other judges refused to do so, and to overturn other judges orders she does not like, that is, Ratushny is the judge you go to instead of appealing another judges decision, she just tears it up, even refusing to even read another judges decision and her justification? "She was not present in that court at that time"
Then there is Madam Justice Cheryl Robertson, her attractive expensive hairdo's hide a very nasty propensity to deprive litigants of all legal rights, and has the worst track record of sending fathers to jail.