Female Judge assaulted at family law court - Please see post #96.

brooke 2 · 12-12-2015 02:17AM

Stheno wrote: »

Jesus Christ, did you read the thread? It was an intellectually disabled individual challenging a safety order his parents wanted

I have just edited my post, which I had written early in the thread.

You could do with anger management, I see.

hatrickpatrick · 12-12-2015 06:38AM

Azalea wrote: »

I thought Dolphin House was in Dolphin's Barn. Is there another Dolphin House out there which is a block of flats? Edit: there is, in Rialto.

My friends used to live beside this on the South Circular and I made the same mistake the first few times I went to parties in their gaff, typing Dolphin House into Google Maps and ending up in Temple Bar

hatrickpatrick · 12-12-2015 06:41AM

On a more serious note. What happened here was outrageous and should never happen in the justice system. But was anyone else's outrage over the actual incident overshadowed by the media's insistence on bringing gender into it?

If it had been a male judge who was assaulted by a female civilian, it would have been every bit as outrageous. This kind of gender bias is as insidious as the listing of the number of female casualties from a war-related incident as if they deserve more outrage than the male ones.

hatrickpatrick · 12-12-2015 06:42AM

brooke 2 wrote: »

You could do with anger management, I see.

If people on Boards got anger management, this place would become as boring as one of those old-school sex ed talks given by the nuns.

DEFTLEFTHAND · 12-12-2015 07:18AM

Tensions can rise very high in family court. Hopefully the bench will acknowledge this, such unfairness can cause a man to lash out like an ape.

Jawgap · 12-12-2015 08:15AM

Knine wrote: »

My child has a very severe disability but she marks on her little calender when her daddy is due to take her. Her little heart is broke today. It is very difficult trying to explain to her that he won't be collecting her.

The people who say the family courts are pro mother have probably spent very little time in one. You see if I went back to court No Judge can force him to be a proper father. He will however put on a great daddy display in front of his family & friends. The reality is far different. If you were a friend of his he would probably be lamenting about how he never gets to see his child.

The real losers are the children

I'm sorry your daughter is being let down and disappointed. Hopefully her Dad will cop on and realise how precious these years are and maximise his time with her.

On the question of the family court, I spend a fair amount of time there (Circuit and District). After my own divorce was finalised I was asked to expand some advocacy work I do for a charity to cover those who find themselves in those courts.

My view that the courts are ardently pro-mother stem from the facts that I've seen / heard women make the most horrible unfounded accusations against men (in a bid to have access or custody refused) and those accusations go unchallenged. If a man tries the same stunt he is - rightly - admonished.

I've never heard or seen a mother sanctioned for disrupting or denying access but I've seen plenty of men get hammered for messing with maintenance ( yes, I know they are 2 separate issues). I've never heard of a warrant being issued for a mother who disrupts access, but regularly see them issued for men who withhold maintenance.

Finally, the amount of material a guy has to bring to court to prove he is a good father is ridiculous. Whereas the mother is given the benefit of the presumption that she is a good parent. If anything, fathers are working against a presumption that their presence is not required in their kids' lives.

12-12-2015 08:36AM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Tensions can rise very high in family court. Hopefully the bench will acknowledge this, such unfairness can cause a man to lash out like an ape.

I doubt any group anywhere is as acutely aware of the tensions in Family Courts as much as the judiciary. They live it, they work there, they don't get to pop in and out and tut tut about the odd story where someone got angry, they see it every day.

Jawgap wrote: »

I've never heard or seen a mother sanctioned for disrupting or denying access but I've seen plenty of men get hammered for messing with maintenance ( yes, I know they are 2 separate issues). I've never heard of a warrant being issued for a mother who disrupts access, but regularly see them issued for men who withhold maintenance.

Finally, the amount of material a guy has to bring to court to prove he is a good father is ridiculous. Whereas the mother is given the benefit of the presumption that she is a good parent. If anything, fathers are working against a presumption that their presence is not required in their kids' lives.

My experience is somewhat different, to the point where in a recent case here in the SW a Judge removed custody completely from a mother who he felt was not following an access order. I appreciate that was an eyebrow raiser.

Access and maintenance, as you acknowledge, are completely different. There are obvious reasons why jail is invoked more regularly in maintenance matters, not least because they are much more straightforward and technical, is there an order, was the money paid. As you know access is much more likely to devolve into battles with an analysis of individual access incidents, "I texted her that I was running late, she said the kids had to get back for Irish dancing, the car broke down so I texted again, she said Jack was getting upset cos they had left the dog alone at home etc. etc. etc."

I completely disagree about the presumption. Could you identify the Judge who presumes that the father is not required? Judges here in the SW are extremely strong in the view that the child's best interests are served by having contact, or healthy contact, with the father. I assumed it was thus throughout the country, I had never heard otherwise. I have never gone into Court with paperwork proving a father was a good father...what does that even consist of?

Jawgap · 12-12-2015 09:12AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I doubt any group anywhere is as acutely aware of the tensions in Family Courts as much as the judiciary. They live it, they work there, they don't get to pop in and out and tut tut about the odd story where someone got angry, they see it every day.

My experience is somewhat different, to the point where in a recent case here in the SW a Judge removed custody completely from a mother who he felt was not following an access order. I appreciate that was an eyebrow raiser.

Access and maintenance, as you acknowledge, are completely different. There are obvious reasons why jail is invoked more regularly in maintenance matters, not least because they are much more straightforward and technical, is there an order, was the money paid. As you know access is much more likely to devolve into battles with an analysis of individual access incidents, "I texted her that I was running late, she said the kids had to get back for Irish dancing, the car broke down so I texted again, she said Jack was getting upset cos they had left the dog alone at home etc. etc. etc."

I completely disagree about the presumption. Could you identify the Judge who presumes that the father is not required? Judges here in the SW are extremely strong in the view that the child's best interests are served by having contact, or healthy contact, with the father. I assumed it was thus throughout the country, I had never heard otherwise. I have never gone into Court with paperwork proving a father was a good father...what does that even consist of?

Not so in Dublin, in my experience. I'm obviously not going to name judges but when I heard a judge had been assaulted one name did leap to mind (and it wasn't Judge Walsh).

Paperwork usually involved affidavits detailing their living arrangements with supporting documentation and occasionally photographs. I've heard judges question fathers at length about the living arrangements and question them about other people who might living in the property (for example new partners) in a way mothers aren't even if they have moved new partners in or moved back to their own parents.

I've also had experience of fathers providing psychologist's reports - admittedly that's a relatively rare occurrence.

Yes maintenance and the breaches thereof are easier to assess but even when I've seen a mother completely ignore court mandated custody and access arrangements I've never seen them get more than a stern rollicking from the bench. If you're found to have breached a court order they're should be some measure of equivalence in the sanction applied, one parent shouldn't get an easier ride just because they're the mother - it just encourages further misconduct.

12-12-2015 09:27AM

Jawgap wrote: »

Paperwork usually involved affidavits detailing their living arrangements with supporting documentation and occasionally photographs. I've heard judges question fathers at length about the living arrangements and question them about other people who might living in the property (for example new partners) in a way mothers aren't even if they have moved new partners in or moved back to their own parents.

Around here that would only be an issue if there was some evidence tendered that the living arrangements were, by any objective stretch in a subjective matter, unsuitable. Have only seen arrangements seriously questioned where a father moved into, say, a shack with an unsafe gas fire (lots of hippies around Cork and Kerry!), a caravan and so on, or moved in with say someone who was taking drugs...because it exposes the children to dangers. But there is no presumption here against fathers, the presumption here is that access is good for the children. Generally the advice here is that of course access will be granted unless there is a serious reason not to grant it, and it will increase to overnight access in due course (and indeed possibly straight away if the child is not an infant or there has been no extended break between the father and child so there is no need to build up contact again).

Jawgap · 12-12-2015 10:19AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Around here that would only be an issue if there was some evidence tendered that the living arrangements were, by any objective stretch in a subjective matter, unsuitable. Have only seen arrangements seriously questioned where a father moved into, say, a shack with an unsafe gas fire (lots of hippies around Cork and Kerry!), a caravan and so on, or moved in with say someone who was taking drugs...because it exposes the children to dangers. But there is no presumption here against fathers, the presumption here is that access is good for the children. Generally the advice here is that of course access will be granted unless there is a serious reason not to grant it, and it will increase to overnight access in due course (and indeed possibly straight away if the child is not an infant or there has been no extended break between the father and child so there is no need to build up contact again).

That's good to hear.

I suppose in any system there's going to be a diversity of experiences.

I've been involved in cases where fathers have been refused overnight custody because they've moved to an apartment above the ground floor and where fathers have been rebuked severely for raising the fact that a mother was moving back to her parents where the maternal grandfather had a history of domestic abuse.

Knine · 12-12-2015 11:06AM

Jawgap wrote: »

I'm sorry your daughter is being let down and disappointed. Hopefully her Dad will cop on and realise how precious these years are and maximise his time with her.

On the question of the family court, I spend a fair amount of time there (Circuit and District). After my own divorce was finalised I was asked to expand some advocacy work I do for a charity to cover those who find themselves in those courts.

My view that the courts are ardently pro-mother stem from the facts that I've seen / heard women make the most horrible unfounded accusations against men (in a bid to have access or custody refused) and those accusations go unchallenged. If a man tries the same stunt he is - rightly - admonished.

I've never heard or seen a mother sanctioned for disrupting or denying access but I've seen plenty of men get hammered for messing with maintenance ( yes, I know they are 2 separate issues). I've never heard of a warrant being issued for a mother who disrupts access, but regularly see them issued for men who withhold maintenance.

Finally, the amount of material a guy has to bring to court to prove he is a good father is ridiculous. Whereas the mother is given the benefit of the presumption that she is a good parent. If anything, fathers are working against a presumption that their presence is not required in their kids' lives.

I actually don't agree. I have also been in court - years & years of it. I had to bring folders & folders of evidence. The evidence is certainly not restricted to one sex. Definitely not.

The parent that is not getting their court ordered access can go back to court for breach of access. I have several male friends who did did very sucessfully.

Maintenance is not enforced in this country. The absent parent can change address or leave the country & never pay a penny. In my own particular case he tried to hide substantial savings, the fact that his partner lived with him therefore his outgoings were shared.

Victor · 12-12-2015 11:25AM

Family courts tend to be less formal, so it's quite possible the courtroom layout is also informal.

If the judge had taken a kick to the head, I can't see her being released so quickly from hospital.

snubbleste wrote: »

I thought the family courts were held in camera and nothing could be reported. nothing!

the rules were changed a few years ago. Only anonymised summaries can be reported. There may be other restrictions.

Jawgap · 12-12-2015 12:14PM

Knine wrote: »

I actually don't agree. I have also been in court - years & years of it. I had to bring folders & folders of evidence. The evidence is certainly not restricted to one sex. Definitely not.

The parent that is not getting their court ordered access can go back to court for breach of access. I have several male friends who did did very sucessfully.

Maintenance is not enforced in this country. The absent parent can change address or leave the country & never pay a penny. In my own particular case he tried to hide substantial savings, the fact that his partner lived with him therefore his outgoings were shared.

That's your case.

I was drawing on several years of experience spread over only a few dozen cases (admittedly only a fraction of what an experienced family lawyer would process), but based on that my view is that mothers have an easier ride when it comes to getting a court to accept their parenting bona fides.

That, however, does seem to vary from judge to judge and again in my experience female judges give men a slightly easier ride whereas male judges almost seem afraid to question a woman's capacity to parent.

Knine · 12-12-2015 12:18PM

Jawgap wrote: »

That's your case.

I was drawing on several years of experience spread over only a few dozen cases (admittedly only a fraction of what an experienced family lawyer would process), but based on that my view is that mothers have an easier ride when it comes to getting a court to accept their parenting bona fides.

That, however, does seem to vary from judge to judge and again in my experience female judges give men a slightly easier ride whereas male judges almost seem afraid to question a woman's capacity to parent.

My case has gone on years & years under numerous different judges in both Dolphin House & the District Courts. I don't think my case is unique. I have both male & female friends going through the same thing. Again I will say it. It is about the best interests of the children.

Jawgap · 12-12-2015 12:32PM

Knine wrote: »

My case has gone on years & years under numerous different judges in both Dolphin House & the District Courts. I don't think my case is unique. I have both male & female friends going through the same thing. Again I will say it. It is about the best interests of the children.

If a case drags on for years and years, especially in the DC, the it is not unique but it is, in my experience, exceptional.

Diamond Doll · 12-12-2015 01:05PM

Jawgap wrote: »

That, however, does seem to vary from judge to judge and again in my experience female judges give men a slightly easier ride whereas male judges almost seem afraid to question a woman's capacity to parent.

My solicitor would be in agreement with you there ... she thinks a lot of the younger female judges are more likely to side with the father, to try to dispel the perception that the mothers are always favoured in these cases.

12-12-2015 01:08PM

Victor wrote: »

Family courts tend to be less formal, so it's quite possible the courtroom layout is also informal.

Yep, in a lot of rural courthouses they can be held in little more than a back room with a desk and a couple of chairs and everyone almost shoulder to shoulder. At least the courtrooms themselves usually have witness boxes with high surroundings, the judge may be at a remove etc. but family court is a lot more intimate and less formal.

Knine wrote: »

My case has gone on years & years under numerous different judges in both Dolphin House & the District Courts. I don't think my case is unique. I have both male & female friends going through the same thing. Again I will say it. It is about the best interests of the children.

Family law cases in DC can drag in for a long time, often down to the fact that judges can be naturally reluctant to orders that may have very serious consequences and there can be tendency to do the "we'll try this for 6 months and put it back".

Azalea · 12-12-2015 05:54PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

What happened here was outrageous and should never happen in the justice system. But was anyone else's outrage over the actual incident overshadowed by the media's insistence on bringing gender into it?

I can understand noticing it and questioning it, but a person should rethink what outrages them if it actually overshadows this incident. It might be partly due to judges being less likely to be female, and the ingrained notion that women are more delicate and men can just suck it up.

If it had been a male judge who was assaulted by a female civilian, it would have been every bit as outrageous.

Nobody said or implied it wouldn't.

This kind of gender bias is as insidious as the listing of the number of female casualties from a war-related incident as if they deserve more outrage than the male ones.

No that isn't insidious at all - it's pretty blatant gender preference and is certainly appalling; far more serious than mentions of this judge being female.

Jawgap wrote: »

My view that the courts are ardently pro-mother stem from the facts that I've seen / heard women make the most horrible unfounded accusations against men (in a bid to have access or custody refused) and those accusations go unchallenged. If a man tries the same stunt he is - rightly - admonished.

In the bit of work I did, that was the case too - frightening stories of lies and deviousness from the mothers. The notion of the mother as the more fit parent stems from long, long before that though.

Little CuChulainn · 12-12-2015 08:22PM

Knine wrote: »

You are missing the point. It is not about what I want. It should be about what is in the best interests of the child. How often have you been in court?

A lot. Generally the court considers the mother to be the best interest of the child. That is the status quo and it takes a lot for a court to go against it.

haveringchick wrote: »

My experience is nonsense? How do you know?
Also you know nothing about disability rights
If his parents want him removed from the family home then his social worker is obliged to contest that application on his behalf
If you don't have any experience of these cases you shouldn't embarres yourself with your lack of knowledge

I didn't say your experience was nonsense, I said your conclusions were. The HSE is only obliged to be involved if he is under age or disabled to such an extent as to be incapable of caring for himself, in which case they will usually look to place him in a facility before letting it get to the stage of a barring order.

Mary63 · 12-12-2015 08:42PM

I wonder has the assailant ended up in the Central Mental Hospital in Dundrum,that to me seems to be the best place for him.

I really hope his poor parents weren't living in fear of their lives but I would say think ending up in Dolphin House was the end of a very long road for them.

In spite of the assailants intellectual disability he was clever enough to follow the court proceedings and to launch his violent attack effectively,He could have killed that poor woman,I hope she makes a full recovery and is able to return to work.Is it normal that there wouldn't be Gardai or security personnel in the Court rooms,this seems bizarre to me.

darkpagandeath · 12-12-2015 08:43PM

How are details of a case before the child court coming out ?

VinLieger · 12-12-2015 09:07PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

How are details of a case before the child court coming out ?

Its the family court and it didnt involve a minor so theres no reporting restrictions

12-12-2015 09:07PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

How are details of a case before the child court coming out ?

Family Court? Because they can be reported now.

Azalea · 12-12-2015 09:24PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

How are details of a case before the child court coming out ?

No child involved, older parents and their adult son.

Grab All Association · 13-12-2015 03:35PM

Female Judge assaulted at family law court - Please see post #96.

Comments