General Discussion

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts) Fri Jun 20, 2014, 06:09 PM Jun 2014

Judge Orders Deployed US Sailor To Attend Custody Hearing Or Lose Daughter, Face Arrest

Seattle, Wash. (CBS SEATTLE) – A U.S. Navy sailor from Washington State is currently serving on a submarine thousands of miles away in the Pacific Ocean, but a judge has ordered him into an impossible custody scenario: Appear in a Michigan courtroom Monday or risk losing custody of his 6-year-old daughter.

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. But now a judge has ordered him to appear in court Monday, or risk losing his daughter to his ex-wife in addition to a bench warrant being issued for his arrest, ABC News reports.

Hindes’ lawyers argue he should be protected by the Service Members Civil Relief Act, which states courts in custody cases may “grant a stay of proceedings for a minimum period of 90 days to defendants serving their country.”

But the Michigan judge hearing the case, circuit court judge Margaret Noe, disagrees, stating: “If the child is not in the care and custody of the father, the child should be in the care and custody of the mother.”

http://seattle.cbslocal.com/2014/06/20/judge-orders-deployed-us-sailor-to-attend-custody-hearing-or-lose-daughter-face-contempt/

Law schmaw.

9 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Judge Orders Deployed US Sailor To Attend Custody Hearing Or Lose Daughter, Face Arrest (Original Post) Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2014 OP

I disagree with the threat of contempt for him dsc Jun 2014 #1

SOME CLARITY ON THIS--the mother and her boyfriend were charged w/"child abuse and neglect." MADem Jun 2014 #6

“If the child is not in the care and custody of the father, the child should be in the care and..." DeadLetterOffice Jun 2014 #2

One important correction. IllinoisBirdWatcher Jun 2014 #3

I'm don't understand why she would threaten someone on a submarine in the Pacific with arrest. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2014 #4

This Judge needs to be removed from the bench. They obviously don't know the law. Katashi_itto Jun 2014 #5

"Step-Mom" versus "Real-Mom" appears to be the Judge's issue. IdaBriggs Jun 2014 #7

The "real mom" lost custody in 2010. LisaL Jun 2014 #8

The "real mom" lost custody, not parenting rights. IdaBriggs Jun 2014 #9

dsc

(52,160 posts)

1. I disagree with the threat of contempt for him

Reply to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Fri Jun 20, 2014, 06:16 PM

Jun 2014

but have to say I fail to see why the wife can't bring the child to court in his stead.

MADem

(135,425 posts)

6. SOME CLARITY ON THIS--the mother and her boyfriend were charged w/"child abuse and neglect."

Reply to dsc (Reply #1)

Mon Jun 23, 2014, 08:08 AM

Jun 2014

That resulted in the mother LOSING custody of the child.

Petty officer Matthew Hindes lives outside Seattle with his daughter, Kaylee, and new wife, Benita-Lynn Caoile Hindes. The biological mother, Angela Hindes, lives in northern Ohio. She lost custody of Kaylee in 2010, after a child abuse and neglect case was filed against her and her then-boyfriend, according to a recent filing by Matthew Hindes in the custody-dispute case.

....A day after the order was issued, Hindes responded with a letter explaining his overseas military service, and he included a letter from the U.S.S. Michigan’s command staff supporting it. Hindes did everything necessary to comply with the federal Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, providing a 90-day stay in civil court proceedings if his military service keeps him away, said his lawyer, Rebecca Nighbart. Based on that, Nighbart said they expected the hearing would be postponed until his return.

Instead, it was held without him, with a decision postponed until Monday....The 2010 allegations, which resulted in the father getting custody of Kaylee, led to a charge of child abuse against Angela Hindes. The Department of Human Services removed Kaylee from her custody, and Matthew Hindes took leave from the Navy to retrieve the then-2-year-old Kaylee. Matthew Hindes says the mother has failed to pay child support multiple times, according to his filings in the custody case.

The criminal case against Angela Hindes was resolved when she agreed to plead no contest to assault. She was given a 10-day jail sentence and probation ending in September 2012, according to court records....

http://www.freep.com/article/20140621/NEWS06/306210036/Adrian-Navy-custody-battle
The judge is a fucking IDIOT.

DeadLetterOffice

(1,352 posts)

2. “If the child is not in the care and custody of the father, the child should be in the care and..."

Reply to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Fri Jun 20, 2014, 06:17 PM

Jun 2014

“If the child is not in the care and custody of the father, the child should be in the care and custody of the mother.”

Unless CPS has already determined that the care and custody of the mother is an unacceptable environment for the child.

WTF is this judge's issue here, anyway? Active duty military aren't allowed primary custody of their kids? Does that mean that military status is a reason to deny custody?

IllinoisBirdWatcher

(2,315 posts)

3. One important correction.

Reply to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Fri Jun 20, 2014, 06:48 PM

Jun 2014

~~may~~ must “grant a stay of proceedings for a minimum period of 90 days to defendants serving their country.”

The wording of the law is very clear:

§ 524. Stay or vacation of execution of judgments, attachments, and garnishments [Sec. 204]

(a) Court action upon material affect determination. If a servicemember, in the opinion of the court, is materially affected by reason of military service in complying with a court judgment or order, the court may on its own motion and shall on application by the servicemember—

(1) stay the execution of any judgment or order entered against the servicemember; and

(2) vacate or stay an attachment or garnishment of property, money, or debts in the possession of the servicemember or a third party, whether before or after judgment.

(b) Applicability. This section applies to an action or proceeding commenced in a court against a servicemember before or during the period of the servicemember's military service or within 90 days after such service terminates.

The judge "may" grant a stay on her own order. However, if requested by the servicemember, she "shall" grant. May means she can use judgment. Shall means that even if she is being an ass, she must grant the requested stay.

If this judge continues with her threat, she is in violation of federal law. Unless she has seceded and formed her own country, the following applies:

§ 512. Jurisdiction and applicability of Act [Sec. 102]

(a) Jurisdiction
This Act applies to—
(1) the United States;
(2) each of the States, including the political subdivisions thereof; and
(3) all territory subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

http://www.justice.gov/crt/spec_topics/military/scratext.pdf

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)

4. I'm don't understand why she would threaten someone on a submarine in the Pacific with arrest.

Reply to IllinoisBirdWatcher (Reply #3)

Sat Jun 21, 2014, 07:04 AM

Jun 2014

It's not like he can just get up and leave (or deputies could retrieve him).

Katashi_itto

(10,175 posts)

5. This Judge needs to be removed from the bench. They obviously don't know the law.

Reply to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Sat Jun 21, 2014, 07:45 AM

Jun 2014

IdaBriggs

(10,559 posts)

7. "Step-Mom" versus "Real-Mom" appears to be the Judge's issue.

Reply to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)

Mon Jun 23, 2014, 09:50 AM

Jun 2014

Step-Mom has no legal rights to the child. Dad does, but is obviously not caring for the child as he is on a submarine.

Obviously there are issues with a previous charge of abuse/neglect, and this article does not go into detail about those issues, or whether they were resolved. The "Real Mom" did NOT lose all of her legal rights, and frankly, if she can provide a safe environment for her child, she should get her daughter back / they can work it out custody/visitation when Dad is NOT ON A SUBMARINE.

Tough situation, but I don't think the judge is as out of line as other folks do -- anyone have any experience with these types of cases (who keeps the kids when parents are deployed)?

LisaL

(44,973 posts)

8. The "real mom" lost custody in 2010.

Reply to IdaBriggs (Reply #7)

Mon Jun 23, 2014, 10:05 AM

Jun 2014

To the child, step mom is the mom, as she has been raising her for years.

IdaBriggs

(10,559 posts)

9. The "real mom" lost custody, not parenting rights.

Reply to LisaL (Reply #8)

Mon Jun 23, 2014, 03:24 PM

Jun 2014

She has continued to have a relationship with the child (albeit with hardship due to the father removing the child from the state), and has paid child support (even if she is behind).

The "step mom" is a fairly new addition to the family unit, per the article.

I do not know what happened back in 2010, but the mother did not lose her parental rights when she lost physical custody, and she is still the child's "real" mother. I will assume the judge is more aware of the situation than I am, and will thus reserve judgment.

My knowledge of issues involving service members on active duty and the hoops they have to jump through to take care of their families is admittedly limited, but if the issues from 2010 were resolved without terminating parental rights / a simple change of physical custody, then I hope all parties involved are able to work things out for the best interests of the child. (Staying with her mother while her father is deployed seems very reasonable to me.)

Reply to this discussion