13
   

Over the line. Family court judge videoed beating his dtr.

 
 
Linkat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2011 03:40 pm
@chai2,
I had heard about it in passing only - I cannot bring myself to watch the video. Just reading the newsreport is enough.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2011 03:45 pm
Mother and Father are unfit parents. Disgusting.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2011 04:14 pm
@aidan,
Quote:
well I think it fits here because she didn't get her mom on tape hitting her and if the father is charged with something it'll be physical assault - won't he?
American law punishes physical transgression much more harshly than psychological, and keeping in mind I think most relationship violence should be handled outside the legal system I dont think this is right. Violence against another is violence, and there are a lot of transgressions that damage more deeply than does a beating.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2011 04:19 pm

The ex-wife attributed the problem to "addiction".

To WHAT ?
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2011 04:23 pm
@aidan,
aidan wrote:
Yeah - well I think it fits here because she didn't get her mom on tape hitting her and if the father is charged with something it'll be physical assault - won't he? If they bring in emotional abuse - yeah the mom is just as guilty. But in this case, the mother is an accessory to the actual criminal activity of physical assault.

Quote:
Aiding and abetting is an additional provision in United States criminal law, for situations where it cannot be shown the party personally carried out the criminal offense, but where another person may have carried out the illegal act(s) as an agent of the charged, working together with or under the direction of the charged party, who is an accessory to the crime. Internationally, it is comparable to other laws governing the actions of accessories, including the similar provision in England and Wales under the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861.

URL: http://able2know.org/reply/post-4782377
Is this a FEDERAL crime??

What is the jurisdictional predicate ?
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2011 04:30 pm
@chai2,
Your point is very well taken.





David
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  8  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2011 05:03 pm
@hawkeye10,
And here, once again, you minimize the man who uses corporal punishment but demonize women who, according to your earlier post, inflict far more and lasting damage with their psychological abuse.

What the hell happened to you in your life that made you so twisted?

What am I even doing talking to you?
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2011 05:19 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
According to one news article, the statute of limitations for child abuse is five years, so no one is talking about any criminal action.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2011 05:31 pm
Generally it bothers me that news media (television, radio, or internet) routinely broadcasts disturbing video or the audio of 911 calls.
0 Replies
 
chai2
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2011 06:03 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:


The ex-wife attributed the problem to "addiction".

To WHAT ?


Right after that she clarified "His addiction"

I don't know to what.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2011 07:21 pm
@Mame,
Quote:
And here, once again, you minimize the man who uses corporal punishment but demonize women who, according to your earlier post, inflict far more and lasting damage with their psychological abuse.
That is an interesting comment directed to one who claims to believe in belt punishment but who never the less says that this case appears to be child abuse.
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2011 07:48 pm
@hawkeye10,
I never said any of those things - you did. I don't believe in 'belt punishment' at all and I never said anything about this case at all.

Are you confusing me with someone else (like yourself)?

My only comments have been about you and what you've said.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2011 07:54 pm
@Mame,
Mame wrote:

I never said any of those things - you did. I don't believe in 'belt punishment' at all and I never said anything about this case at all.

Are you confusing me with someone else (like yourself)?

My only comments have been about you and what you've said.
Yep, I was speaking about you directing your comment towards me, claiming that I want to let the guy off easy when I actually said that while I believe in belt punishment this to me crosses into child abuse. I am not in the slightest bit going easy on this guy, and I dont appreciate your claiming that I am.
0 Replies
 
aidan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2011 12:06 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
Is this a FEDERAL crime??

Could be - having a child abuser sitting on the bench sentencing other child abusers.
That's like putting a shark in charge of the swimming pool.
Quote:
What is the jurisdictional predicate ?

I don't know David.

I wasn't aware I was saying it was a federal crime. Did what I posted seem to indicate that? If it did, that wasn't my point.

And for the record, I did watch the interview and that Mom is an abomination - sitting there saying 'I left him when she was six months old but he shamed me into coming back'. Was she not ashamed to stand there in her new role of 'co-dependent' and watch her husband beat her daughter?
Which action should she be more ashamed of - taking her daughter out of that or bringing her back in and subjecting her to it for 19 more years?

I don't know, I'd have understood it alot more if she'd said, 'I don't know what I was thinking or doing and I'm ashamed of MYSELF - but thank God my daughter lived through it and has forgiven me' .
At least then we'd see her having taken responsibility for her behavior instead of trying to explain her participation away by blaming her husband's addiction which she mentioned only cryptically - probably so she couldn't get sued.
They're both just trying to cover their butts. Mom too.
And as I said, I almost think she's the sicker and scarier of the two. You could hear it in her voice on that tape - she was calm and in control. No one was making her do and say what she did and said.
Too bad you can't get arrested for being a cruel, uncaring and controlling bitch to your children.

Those two looked and acted like tag-team sadists.
I wonder if the younger daughter has any tales to tell.

hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2011 12:11 am
@aidan,
Quote:
Those two looked and acted like tag-team sadists.
Exactly...that the mother gets a pass from anybody, including the kid, is mind boggling. OH wait, she had a man to blame....I keep forgetting about that all purpose get out of jail free card that women always have tucked away!
aidan
 
  2  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2011 12:17 am
@hawkeye10,
You know the mistake you make is lumping all women together.
I'm not assuming you, or all men take pleasure in beating people smaller than them with leather straps (0h wait - you're into BSDM or whatever it's called) so maybe YOU do.
That's a joke - whatever floats your boat as long as it's consensual...but back to my original point - most men are not like this man - so don't lump all women into this woman's camp.

If I'd been this Mom - and I woke up out of my fog of 'codependence' to find that I'd participated in something like this - I'd probably want to kill myself.
I sure as hell wouldn't blame it on the guy.
She could have stopped this at any point. She didn't. Bottom line.
And I'm speaking as a woman about a woman.
So don't lump me in with this weak, excuse-making bitch and assume I'd make excuses for my criminally negligent behavior toward my children- and I won't assume you're a rapist or an abuser - okay?
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2011 12:20 am
@aidan,
Quote:
So don't lump me in with this weak, excuse-making bitch- and I won't assume you're a rapist or an abuser - okay?
Absolutely....I am a big picture generalist living in a world full of small bore specialists, my wide brush was never intended to represent all individuals, nor have I ever claimed that it does.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2011 02:27 am
Quote:
My name is William A. Dudley. The statement which
follows has been reviewed and approved for circulation by
Judge William Adams.
The seven year old video presently circulating the
internet and now made the basis of international media
attention, showing two parents disciplining their 16 year
old daughter, who had been caught, by her own televised and
internet reported admissions, engaged in repeated criminal
activity, was posted for reasons other than as professed by
the publisher.
It is regrettable that Hillary Adams, a bright and
gifted person, would include in her post that she is or was
a disabled or a special needs child. As multiple media
appearances clearly demonstrate, Hillary Adams is
articulate, possesses a superior IQ, and is capable of
functioning as a productive adult in today’s complex
society. No one should take the affliction of cerebral
palsy lightly. Hillary’s parents did not. Hillary’s
condition was monitored as a child and her medical needs
met. However, neither should a perfectly capable adult try
to use an affliction as a device for media sympathy. It
should now be apparent to the world that “disabled” was
mislabeled.
In response to the internet post, the media has
appropriately attempted to understand why Hillary Adams
chose the present time to disseminate the video. To many,
her answers to those questions have been confusing and
hollow. As she has said by recent interview, she “hoarded”
the secret tape for future use, but has not explained, even
now, for what purpose. Very few people find palatable her
claim that it was to “help” her father.
Perhaps Hillary Adams should explain, if she felt she
was raised by a tyrannical father, a claim shared with no
one until five years after adulthood, why she insisted on
living with her father and not her mother from the time of
her parent’s divorce, until she moved out on her own.
Hillary Adams has been living on her own for some time, and
has been an adult for almost six years, so why post the
video in late 2011?
William Adams is of the opinion that Hillary Adams is
an extremely bright, highly functional, adult. The media
has described her as a piano prodigy, who has competed at Carnegie Hall on multiple occasions. As one of Hillary’s
long term teachers noted in the press, Hillary, so close to
accomplishment, has of recent “inexplicably dropped out,
just two classes shy of completing her [college] studies.”
The video in question was recorded well before Hillary
graduated high school. If the public must know, just prior
to the You Tube upload, a concerned father shared with his
23 year old daughter that he was unwilling to continue to
work hard and be her primary source of financial support,
if she was going to simply “drop out”, and strive to
achieve no more in life than to work part time at a video
game store. Hillary warned her father if he reduced her
financial support, and took away her Mercedes automobile,
which her father had provided, he would live to regret it.
The post was then uploaded. The public may wonder if this
is the tyranny of which Hillary Adams speaks as her reason
to disseminate the video seven years after it was recorded,
and five years into adulthood? Is this the reason she
“hoarded” the video for seven years?
William Adams regrets the interruption and
inconvenience his daughter’s post has caused to the Aransas
County, Texas community. Judge Adams is confident that
when the dust settles and international media attention has
passed, and the work ahead, whether civil, criminal, or
administrative has taken it’s full course and has been
fully developed, with an opportunity for all sides to ask
and answer relevant questions, it will be concluded that
Hillary Adam’s actions in 2011 were misguided and
misleading.
Judge Adams regrets, if true, that his daughter
believes he is in need of healing from the family divorce.
Divorce is certainly traumatic, and takes a significant
toll on all, especially children. Judge Adams is of the
opinion that Hillary’s gesture is little more than a much
needed but hard to believe explanation of why she chose to
post the video. If this entire event was a plea for help
and healing, the methodology is certainly unorthodox.
Judge Adams, who among other reasons, still has a minor
daughter to consider, chooses to involve the media as
little as possible whilst personal family matters are
sorted through. The public may ponder what consideration
Hillary Adams gave her little sister before subjecting the
entire family to world-wide microscopic scrutiny, and
permanent consequences. It is Judge Adams’ civic responsibility to respond to
whatever investigations may result from a revelation of the
disciplinary actions resorted to by his former wife and him
on the viral video. Those investigations will require
answers to many questions raised by the media and public
and for which no appropriate forum has been chosen to date.
He is confident the process will be managed in accordance
with the law. For the sake of his family, co-workers, and
Aransas County officials who must endure the additional
work and expense, he wishes that the process not be played
out daily on a national stage


http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/11/03/judge.adams.statement.pdf?hpt=hp_c1

The kid is a train wreck, OK father, but how did she get to be that way? He refuses to even consider any responsibility, just as does the mother. What a shocker! *sarcasm*
roger
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2011 03:01 am
Looks like the only thing Dad didn't get around to doing was denying the facts of the video.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2011 03:06 am
@roger,
roger wrote:

Looks like the only thing Dad didn't get around to doing was denying the facts of the video.
Like the mother he is wearing blinders worthy of a Kentucky Derby winner.....
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 07/06/2022 at 12:57:16