Posted on 06/10/2011 8:46:34 PM PDT by tang-soo
The following was provided by Chuck Douglas - Talk Show Host for WTVN 610 AM Radio in Columbus, Ohio.
JULIE SMITH CASE IS FINALLY MOVING FORWARD
I have had Julie on the show a couple of times. I got this press release today. Pay particular attention to the next to last paragraph.
For Immediate Release
June 10, 2011
Mother Sentenced to Jail Vindicated by Appeals Court
On June 9, 2011, the Tenth District Court of Appeals for Franklin County vindicated the Mother of a seven-year old child who was sentenced to jail twice for refusing to comply with multiple invalid “temporary visitation orders” issued by the Franklin County juvenile court. In spite of being dubbed “temporary visitation orders” these invalid orders have been in effect for 975 days.
“While we are ecstatic with the ruling, justice has still not been served. It is indeed a sign of a broken system when a parent, a good parent, has to fight for 975 days and risk everything to get their child back” says biological mother, Julie Smith. “Precious time and memories with my child have been forever lost at the hands of a system that is supposed to protect my daughter and me” says Smith.
For more than two and a half years, Julie Smith has been fighting against a shared custody arrangement forced on her by former Franklin County Juvenile Magistrate Judge Rexanne Hosafras and Juvenile Judge Elizabeth Gill. In October 2008, Ms. Smith was sued by her former live- in girlfriend seeking shared custody of her then-5 year old daughter. Ms. Smith, an undisputed “great mom,” deliberately never agreed to share custody of her only child with the woman. However, in less than 30 days and without a hearing, former Magistrate Judge Hosafras “temporarily” awarded the ex girlfriend shared custody of the child while the petition for permanent shared custody was pending. Since then, former Magistrate Judge Hosafras and the Honorable Elizabeth Gill issued a series of extraordinary and expansive orders forcing Ms. Smith to share her daughter and ordering jail time if she didn’t. The Smith Family has incurred over $125,000 in legal fees appealing those orders over a course of nearly three years and yesterday, the Appeals Court agreed with Ms. Smith when it found that the juvenile court exceeded its authority by granting the ex girlfriend visitation.
Ms. Smith takes little solace in this decision, though, because the petition is still pending and scheduled for a long trial over the course of the summer. However, Smith’s case was recently reassigned to a new Magistrate Judge after former Magistrate Judge Hosafras left the bench to join the firm of Massucci and Cline which represents her former girlfriend. “If that doesn’t speak volumes, I don’t know what will” says Smith.
“I hope and pray for a fair hearing, but it has been a long 975 days and it is hard to believe in justice and fairness at this point, especially since Judge Hosafras has joined my former girlfriend’s legal team. You cannot imagine how painful it is when the court charged with protecting your child, without reason in law and fact, decides to insert itself into your life, into your family and take away your child. It’s utterly devastating,” says Smith.
Read more: http://www.610wtvn.com/pages/chuckdouglas.html#ixzz1Ow0BwJIP
I hope folks think about this before we allow pols to change the definition of marriage. If it can happen to this woman it can happen to any parent.
This story is the best argument against gay marriage and civil unions. When you change the definition of "marriage" for a few you change the definition of "parent" for everyone.
Er, can anyone say "conflict of interest?"
Pretty sure that disqualifies the entire firm from representing the ex-girlfriend.
Wow! Last I heard this woman was on the run with her daughter. I’m glad things are looking up for them.
What I would like to know in this situation, is who the biological mother is. It may not dictate the right idea outright, but then again, I wonder if she was the child’s biological mother, if she could use that as part of a legal argument. I do feel, however, that if there was some serious fighting between these women in the home, it was not all that great for the child though.
In bed with dogs, get fleas. If she conspired with the girlfriend to obtain the baby, the girlfriend gets shared custody.
I agree with you on the marriage part, but it also gives plenty of the issues that come when people cohabit, including those who are not homosexual. It’s hell to pay when there are kids involved, and these cohabitation relationships actually do break up.
It’s an ex-girlfriend who was neither married, nor a biological parent of the child. The woman wishes, for whatever reason, that her ex-girlfriend not come close to the child. It sounds a lot like abuse as a reason. I hope that she and her daughter come around, but for now, the important part is to ask what the mother’s side of the story is. From reading the article, it sounds a great deal as if there is an unfair bias and the mother’s claim of abuse could be true. I just don’t know the full details.
The bad implications are that the legal structure and precedent of being a parent, legally and/or biologically, is being violated, and that is not good news.
Yes. And from what I remember from previous articles about this situation, the mother left the "gay" life, became (IIRC) a Christian, and of course never gave the previous gf any custody or parental rights etc.
Great comments.
We are right on the brink of the abyss. It either turns around - back to solid, God-based Constitutional principles, or....
Rough road, very rough road.
There were several stories about this situation in the past. The ex girlfriend had nothing to do with the conception or birth of the child. The mother gave up the “gay” life and changed her life for the better. IIRC they didn’t even live together very long.
It’s an insane and disgusting and evil situation.
The mother turned her life around. This is a perfect example of Judges Gone Wild. And of course all those court appointed fiends, such child advocates and child protection agencies are larded with lesbians. Obviously not all or everywhere but it is a profession into which homosexuals have gravitated to.
This is pure EVIL what this judge is doing to the child. Forcing an unnatural worldview that is sick and dysfunctional and ignoring the inalienable rights of a child to their biological mother and biological father.
Our Constitution can NOT recognize two “mothers”. The logic of that and this ignorant judges conception of biology and nature and Natural Rights is so evil and twisted. She lives in an upside down world where she is saying good is evil, and evil is good.
We have one standard of right and wrong set up in the Constitution which she is blatantly ignoring....God’s laws—it is written—NOT her made-up bizarre, sick laws.
This woman took unfair advantage of our Christian attitudes, especially the one of live and let live. She thought she could flaunt her lifestyle choice in our faces and get away with it.
Well, she wove a web of lies and deceit that entangled her.
While I hope, for the benefit of rest of society, that she eventually wins in court, there is a price to be paid for being so stupid, and I'm pleased that she's paying it.
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.