December 16, 2008

Circular reasoning?

Rubic Says:

December 16th, 2008 at 7:32 am
I still don't understand just why blatant perjury and libel would be ignored; is there any way a libel suit could be brought up over false charges levied in a divorce/custody hearing? Then the libel case could be brought up in the original hearings as proof of unfit parenthood. It may seem circular, but it might be the only way to get the misconduct to mean anything.

There's also the question of whether a mistrial could be declared over a judge ignoring repeated libel/perjury, or whether the judges themselves could be held liable for such misconduct.

This is similar in calling Child Protection workers when abuse claims do not work in family court, which is what many of these men claim women do. Why is it okay to circumvent what Family Court has decided (on men's parts), yet when women do it attempting to protect themselves and children, we are brought to task on this issue?


Rj said...

Your last 5-7 posts have been very triggering for me. I have so much to say/write about...It is always the same stuff...same stuff

Glenn's Cult? said...

I am sorry Rj. It is hard for me to write it. I am staying away from certain subjects because they are simply too triggering. I suggest you stay away from Newsweek. It is actually a good response - there are many who are saying NO to joint custody. Those who are saying yes are very loud though :-(