This is an update from a case I tried to discuss earlier this year. So long story short, I told you so. Last February, Judge Beavers continued inaction left a young girl in the care of a seemingly emotionally abusive and at times negligent father. The mother had to endure a year or more of supervised visits and complete obstruction of any parenting time at all, while the 11 year old girl (9 when it started) was suffering emotional and psychological abuse.
It came to light at the 11th hour that the child AND THE COURT were manipulated by her older brother, father and aunt for nearly 2 YEARS or more. The aunt was having an affair with the father. You heard right, the father was diddling his brother's wife. As I understand it, the aunt came forward and admitted the affair because she thought she would divorce her husband and marry her husband's brother. The aunt became disillusioned and started spilling the beans when her husband's brother admitted he had no intentions of marrying her.
The amazing thing was that the Paulding County guardian ad litem recommended that the child remain in the toxic environment despite all that was disclosed in the final hearing. From my perspective, the GAL believed removing the girl now would be too traumatic so she recommended the child remain in an abusive environment and figure it out for herself when she reached the age of emancipation. Is this because the father had a favored local lawyer? One that has had cases before Judge Beavers for at least two decades? If all a child knows is abuse, will they ever truly know what normal is? Does a fish know that it lives in water? If all a child knows is abuse, how will that child ever come to the realization that she was stuck in a form of trauma bonding (absent the sexual abuse often associated with trauma bonding). Would she live a life of being in abusive relationships because all she knows is trauma bonding?
Tossing the GAL's asinine recommendation and his own passive-aggressive inaction of nearly 2 years, Judge Beavers suddenly had a "light bulb go off" and he realized the young girl was in a toxic environment and had been manipulated by the older brother, father and aunt. Judge Beavers awarded custody to the mother. This after Judge Beavers denied the mother any visitation/parenting time at all and had her on supervised visitation for nearly a year, as if she was the problem.
He finally realized that it was best for the girl to be removed sooner rather than later. For the girl, was it better late than never? Or will two years of inept judicial oversight and at times questionable ethics cause long lasting damage to her?
What I had figured out in the first hearing I attended, Judge Beavers (allegedly) took 2 years to figure out? Judges have to follow the law but as Judge Beavers has selectively told me, he has broad discretion. Discretion that he may exercise at his convenience? Discretion he may have abused in ignoring precedent and settled law to dare parties to successfully navigate the pitfalls and inflated expense of appellate courts.
Edited by Domestic Violence by Proxy, 03 December 2016 - 04:34 PM.