Posted on 06/20/2014 5:46:18 PM PDT by tired&retired
Sorry you find my pursuit of the facts so distressing. When a child is covered by a Custody agreement, moving that child out of the state commonly requires the permission of the non-custodial parent. Whether that’s at issue in this case is germane to understanding the exact nature of the case.
Of course, if you’d just rather jump to conclusions on the basis of a one-sided presentation from the attorney for one party, you’re welcome to. It doesn’t particular serve the determination of the truth, though.
Much as I hate the misuse of the phrase “teaching moment”, it might apply here. Compare this story regarding the actual status of the case with the one in the first post.
http://www.lenconnect.com/article/20140620/NEWS/140629919/10058/NEWS
You are correct. The sailor is from Washington state and I assumed the judge was from Seattle.........my bad.
And then they scratch their a$$es while trying to figure out why a guy might want to kill his ex....
LOL! What you call pursuit of facts is not going to happen on Free Republic.
What you’re doing in actuality is idle speculation.
If you were truly searching for just the facts you’d need to go to Michigan and interview all the party’s involved as a start. Unless you are one of those involved, you won’t find any of them on this web site.
Isn’t there an existing Federal law that protects servicemen on active duty from various legal problems when they cannot appear to defend themselves?
“Navy submariner Matthew Hindes was given permanent custody of his daughter Kaylee in 2010, after she was reportedly removed from the home of his ex-wife, Angela, by child protective services.”
Wow, is this screwed up. Despite the kid being taken care of by his current wife, he will lose custody of her and his ex-wife will get the kid back. Not only that, but when he gets back to port he will be met with cops with handcuffs and hauled away to jail and probably get a dishonorable discharge from the Navy.
He should reply, through his CO and Congressman, that the hearing is to be held aboard the submarine, deep in the Pacific ocean, at the time of her convenience.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.