Judge Margaret Noe Orders Deployed Sailor To Attend Custody Hearing

Started by Eviltwin, Jun 20, 2014, 05:04 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down


Judge Orders Deployed US Sailor To Attend Custody Hearing Or Lose Daughter, Face Arrest
June 20, 2014 7:10 AM


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."

The judge reiterated that regardless of Hindes' assignment under the Pacific Ocean, he will appear in court or face contempt of court.

Judge Noe denied the motion for a stay under the Service Members Relief Act, ruling that he could have arranged for his wife to bring the child to her mother, saying, "At this point, I don't think I have any alternative but to enter a bench warrant for his arrest," Noe said.

Hindes is not allowed to appear by Skype or phone, and as with most custody cases, not being present in the courtroom often has a large impact on the outcome of the custody ruling.

Hindes' young daughter Kaylee is currently living with her step-mother in Washington State.

"He's protecting the rights of others, but who is protecting his rights?" said Hindes' current wife and the child's step-mother, Benita-Lynn. Six-year-old Kaylee has been living with Benita-Lynn in Washington State while Hindes is deployed aboard the nuclear submarine.

"I'm just trying my best, to keep everything together," a weeping Benita-Lynn told ABC News. "It's just hard."

- Benjamin Fearnow
Affirmative Action: The federal government takes your job away from you and gives it to a woman. Then she sneers at you because you are unemployed.


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."

Except the SMCRA says "shall", not "may" (assuming that the court determines that there may be a defense to the action and a defense cannot be presented without the presence of the defendant. But that assumption seems to be satisfied by the judge's insistence that he shows up).

The SMCRA was made for this exact situation.

Judge Noe denied the motion for a stay under the Service Members Relief Act, ruling that he could have arranged for his wife to bring the child to her mother

Why would he have done that? Is there a valid court order that he has to transfer custody of the kid to the mother? Obviously not; the current action by the mother asks for transfer of custody. So the judge's "reason" has nothing to do with the denial of the motion; in the SMCRA there's no exception saying that the motion for stay can be denied because the defendant isn't doing something voluntarily for which there's no court order.
The spreading of information about the [quantum] system through the [classical] environment is ultimately responsible for the emergence of "objective reality." 

Wojciech Hubert Zurek: Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical


Judge orders break in sailor's child custody case

ADRIAN, Mich. (AP) - A Michigan judge has called a time-out in a child custody dispute involving a sailor aboard a U.S. submarine.

Lenawee County Judge Margaret Noe released an order Sunday, delaying some matters until at least Oct. 22.

The judge cited a federal law that suspends court action when a member of the armed services is away. Noe says she didn't know Hindes was in the Pacific Ocean until June 16 when he was supposed to appear or have someone bring his 6-year-old daughter to court.

Hindes, his wife and daughter live near Seattle. The judge says ex-wife Angela Hindes of Ohio still is allowed parenting time. She'll consider that issue Monday.

Noe has been criticized for her handling of the case. She says facts have been sacrificed for "sensational stories."


For better or for worse, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Without those "sensational stories", it is unlikely that Judge Noe would have changed her mind regarding the stay under the SMCRA.
The spreading of information about the [quantum] system through the [classical] environment is ultimately responsible for the emergence of "objective reality." 

Wojciech Hubert Zurek: Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical


Affirmative Action: The federal government takes your job away from you and gives it to a woman. Then she sneers at you because you are unemployed.


Anon By Choice June 22, 2014 at 03:25

Celebrate Women's History Month Series with Hon. Judge Margaret Noe
[Watch pig eyed pretend Judge Noe celebrating supremacist women's history month above.]

[The disHonorable Margaret Noe '75 served as an assistant prosecuting attorney for more than 20 years, working to prosecute neglect and abuse cases. In 2005 she was appointed Lenawee Circuit Court probate judge by Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm. Many of the cases she has presided over involve children and family issues]

This stinking dog [excuse my language] of a judge has always had an AGENDA, which she has been able to work at religiously under the protected and covered status of US. Judiciary and US. Judicial discretion.

But the stinking dog [excuse my language] doesn't register in her brain, that her physical protections and her protected legal status derive from, and are sustained by the selfless actions of US. sub-marina-males and other US. male service personnel whom keep the brutal enemies of her country at bay in very far off places. That is such that she may continue to pretend at being a Court Judge in safety and security.

This matter would have been worth requesting public issue of an EXECUTIVE ORDER by the POTUS, but even the office of POTUS has itself been subverted to the same rent seeking AGENDA of this stinking dog [excuse my language] of a judge. That is, an agenda to spread parasitic socialism by which weak, dissolute, corrupt, intemperate and degenerate persons may fatten themselves at the public treasury and at expense of the strong, the honest, the upstanding, the patriotic, the loyal, the godly and the forthright.

All SOVEREIGN american men reading this should now see clearly if they did not see clearly before, why compulsory selective service registration is not for them and why compulsory selective service DUTIES can never ever apply to themselves. This so called Constitutional Republic is no such thing but a Cleptocrat's-Bazaar of vote selling swindlers and power hungry charlatans, each servicing dependent fiefdoms, constituent liars, parasites, thieves, beggars and rent seeking officials after jobs and sinecures for public service fees.

A man whom isn't a fool ALWAYS refuses to serve THIS type of society and political set-up that only seeks to use and abuse him, in return for nothing but exposure to personal humiliation, injury or death.

These godforsaken bastards in office and bureaucracy not only handicap general populations and society by their malfeasances, they also recklessly indent children to servitude by extracting unlimited, unsustainable amounts from the public treasury and then borrowing international credit in the peoples name to pay for their unwanted State services and maladministration fees. Does all this not weaken and destroy home nations from within socially, morally, ethically and economically?

I know why I hate these agents of socialism without limit. And I also know why others too must hate these agents of socialism without limit as well. The consequential effects of these peoples, their policies, their structures and their actions now and on future generations are impoverishing, desolating, corrupting and despoiling.

Only recently a certain legislator Harry Reid dared to question the authenticity of men on the national Supreme court. But the irony of questioning his own authenticity as a man on the national legislature did not strike him, for with these parasitic agents of socialism, their theory is only double plus good when applied to others not themselves.



Check this rent seeking dog of a retired English Judge, whom having officially bastardized millions of children whom were subsequently exposed to sexual and physical molestation in their fathers absence, is now back again to conduct inquiry's into the said abused children's horrific experiences.

Our horrible genderist societies are very good at manufacturing problems to solve by official policy for which billions and millions in civil-service fees are charged to the public treasury and then on the rebound creating public inquiries and public inquests into the consequences of such devilish policies for which more service fees are chargeable by officials.

Public service officials engaged in these practices should be aware that this their dirty game and charade is not lost on observers, no matter the respectable disguises, euphemisms and big titles they apply.


"Butler-Sloss: I won't quit as head of abuse inquiry"

"The retired judge appointed to chair a child abuse review has insisted she will not quit - as the PM claimed she was the right person for the job.

Elizabeth Butler-Sloss was chosen by the home secretary to head the inquiry into allegations of historical abuse.

But Labour's Simon Danczuk said her position was tainted because her late brother, Sir Michael Havers, was Attorney General in the 1980s.

Downing Street said the peer "commands widespread respect and confidence".

Baroness Butler-Sloss was announced on Tuesday as head of a wide-ranging probe into how allegations of abuse by politicians and other powerful figures in public institutions such as the NHS, the church and the BBC in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s were handled.

MPs and victims claim she is too close to the establishment, particularly as Sir Michael was Attorney General at the time of the alleged paedophile scandal."

"But Alison Millar, the lawyer who represents alleged victims of child abuse, said she doubted her clients would think Lady Butler-Sloss was the right person for the job, especially given the connection with her brother.

Sir Michael faced criticism after he sought to stop Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens from naming in Parliament a top diplomat - Sir Peter Hayman - as a paedophile in the early 1980s.

But Lady Butler-Sloss said she was unaware of her brother having any role, as attorney general, in the paedophile controversy in the 1980s.

"I know absolutely nothing about it," she told the BBC. "If people think I am not suitable then that's up to them."

"Asked if she would consider her position or make further comment if calls continued for her to stand down, she added: "I am certainly not going to be talking to the BBC or anyone else about this any further."

Her nephew, the actor Nigel Havers, told BBC Radio 4's The World at One, that he knew his aunt well and he was sure that if she felt there was any chance of bias, she would not have taken on the job.

The former Chariots of Fire and Coronation Street actor, added that she had "had no political ties" to his father and knew nothing about the alleged events in the 1980s in Parliament.

"A Number 10 spokesman rebuffed suggestions the peer would be unable to investigate all areas of the abuse inquiry because of her brother's involvement in the controversy as Attorney General in the early 1980s.

The spokesman declined to say whether the PM was aware of her brother's position prior to her appointment, adding: "His view is she commands widespread respect and confidence."

The suitability of Lady Butler-Sloss did not come up at Prime Minister's Questions, although the remit of her planned inquiry did.

In response to a question from Labour leader Ed Miliband at Prime Minister's Questions, David Cameron said it "may well be time" to back calls by the NSPCC's Peter Wanless - in charge of a separate review into how the Home Office responded to child sex abuse allegations in the 1980s - to make covering up abuse a criminal offence.

Earlier Mr Danczuk, who has investigated child sex abuse allegations against former Liberal MP Cyril Smith, said the revelations of a family connection with Sir Michael meant Lady Butler-Sloss' position was compromised.

'Cover-up' offence?
"I think the government should think again in terms of who they have appointed for this position," he said.

"I think she should consider her position. I find it quite surprising that neither she nor the government realised her relationship with her brother was connected to Geoffrey Dickens.

"It beggars belief that that wasn't considered in the first place."

"Why has this come up now?

Labour MP Simon Danczuk last week called on Leon Brittan to say what the then home secretary did with documents he was passed in the 1980s containing allegations about powerful figures and paedophilia.

What happened to the files?

Lord Brittan passed them to Home Office officials. A 2013 review found 114 documents were unaccounted for. The review found the minister had acted appropriately.

What did the papers allege?

The allegations, compiled by Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens, were set to "blow the lids off" the lives of powerful child abusers, the MP's son has said. The late Mr Dickens said he planned to expose eight such figures.

Read more: 1980s child abuse claims explained

Conservative MP Sarah Wollaston, chairman of the Commons health select committee, has also cast doubt on whether Lady Butler-Sloss can continue. She wrote on Twitter: "Not doubting her integrity but hard to see why Baroness Butler-Sloss would want to accept a role so many regard as conflicted at the outset."

Keith Vaz, Labour chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee said he was surprised at the selection, pointing out that while Lady Butler-Sloss was "distinguished" she was also a member of the House of Lords.

Green Party leader Natalie Bennett said the peer was "categorically not the right person to lead child abuse inquiry," because of the involvement of her brother, adding: "No one should be expected to investigate a close member of their own family as part of an official enquiry. "

And Ms Millar, head of the abuse law team at Leigh Day Solicitors, urged the peer to step down.

"There needs to be not a shred of doubt that this inquiry is not an establishment cover up - and the concern really is that she is just too close to the establishment, particularly with this connection to Sir Michael Havers," she told the BBC.

Ms Millar represents some of the alleged victims of the Elm Guest House in London - the location where a number of sex abuse cases were alleged to have taken place.

'Gagging clause'
But former Tory children's minister Tim Loughton stressed the inquiry was "not a one woman show" and Lady Butler-Sloss would have a panel of independently-minded people working with her.

"Frankly, I despair," he told the BBC. "We're getting to the stage where even if the Queen were asked to chair this inquiry, there would be those saying there's a conflict of interest. If I'd been the home secretary, I would've appointed Elizabeth Butler-Sloss as well.

"We need somebody who has huge integrity, who has respect, who has great independence and has the expertise and knowledge to focus this inquiry... there are few people able to do it and Elizabeth Butler-Sloss is the obvious choice."

Labour MP John Mann said "multiple copies" of Geoffrey Dickens' abuse dossier, which he passed to then Home Secretary Leon Brittan in the 1980s, had been circulated.

He claimed the only reason why people were not coming forward to say anything about them was because they were bound by the Official Secrets' Act.

"They need the gagging clause removed... they fear being prosecuted," he told the BBC."

Go Up