Kirk recusal motion in West Virginia Supreme Court

There are more developments to report in the case of Lt. Col. Joel Kirk, whose ongoing struggle with the family court in Harrison Country, West Virginia, has now come to involve the State of West Virginia Supreme Court.

Yesterday, Lt. Col. Kirk, who is embroiled in a long running custody dispute, filed a pro se (self-represented) motion with the family court of Judge Lori B. Jackson, containing a motion for a continuance on the grounds that he was given insufficient notice to find representation on a hearing scheduled for tomorrow. The hearing was scheduled after the Guardian Ad Litem for the children of the Kirk marriage, Mary Snead, filed for an injunction to prevent Lt. Col. Kirk and avoiceformen.com from releasing court documents pertaining to the Kirks’ children.

Kirk was given two days notice of the hearing and lives in a rural area with limited legal resources.

The motion also contained a request for Judge Jackson to recuse herself from the case due to possible bias she may have related to coverage of the case.

Judge Jackson subsequently passed the motion to the West Virginia State Supreme Court for an opinion on the recusal.

This leaves the case in limbo until Chief Justice Menis Ketchum returns from a leave to rule on the recusal motion.

More details will be posted as they are reported to AVfM.

Motion for continuance and recusal


Support us by becoming a member

AVFM depends on readers like you to help us pay expenses related to operations and activism. If you support our mission, please subscribe today.

Join or donate

Sponsored links

  • echofoxtrot

    With due respect, I think he should have done a recusal *statement*, not a recusal *motion*. In other words, TELL the bitch judge that she is recused, rather than ASK her to recuse herself. Perhaps he can withdraw the recusal motion, and simply make a recusal statement?

    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

      Sure, and may I suggest you use italics instead of all caps to make a point? It has a lot more weight, while at the same time being streamline.

      ex. Tell the bitch….vs. TELL the bitch….

      • echofoxtrot

        okay, will do, thanks for the correction.

      • Raven01

        Except that it seems one must install wordpress to do so.
        And, WP couldn’t even be bothered to include an simple installer in the download package. Instead it asks for database info, etc, not something people on a time budget can always mess around with.
        If there is a list of commands that anyone can use please let me know, the eons old [i], [/i] etc have not been very successful in many modern blog/BBS posts for a few years now.

        • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

          Well they work for me, not only here but on my own blog. I use those tags all the time. So you know, you can assume they work here. 😉

          • Raven01

            So the is functional?
            This did not work for me, the last time I used it.
            Thanks, it seems I should have tried it a few more times.

          • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

            Hmm, maybe I’m wrong, and they only work for some people? Maybe it’s dodgy or buggy?

          • Raven01

            Naw, I’m pretty confident you are right. I just must have tried during upgrades or something, just enough to decide it didn’t work and gave up.
            And, congrats you must have seriously irked a pathetic excuse for a human pretending to be a judge for a couple of her cronies to follow and down vote such innocuous comments.

        • http://manamongoaks.com/index.html Ray

          I believe em will also work for i. Here’s some info on HTML,

  • http://menzmagazine.blogspot.com/ Factory

    It’s days like this that I am proud as Hell to be associated with you guys….

    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

      No prouder than we are of you, bro.

    • Darryl X

      Yup. Brings tears to my eyes.

    • Carlos

      My thoughts exactly. Family courts have gotten used to riding rough-shod over the rights of fathers and children with total impunity for a very long time.

      It’s a beautiful thing that’s been accomplished here. I’m sure this judge and GAL are still trying to make sense of what just happened.

  • Turbo

    So, just to be clear, does this mean that the hearing on Thursday will not go ahead?

    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

      Correct, sir.

      • Turbo

        Well, that is good news. It will now be interesting to see how Chief Justice Menis Ketchum rules on the recusal motion.

  • http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com Suz

    Whew! (For now.) Anything else we can do, besides double down on publicity?

    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

      Try to take a breath, lol. I know I am. :)

    • Codebuster

      Sway the presidential debates maybe? There might be an opportunity big-time here. It would be a pity to waste it.

    • Darryl X

      Personally, I’m tired of all this legal stuff. We’re dealing with malignant narcissists. They will never interpret and apply the law in the way with which it was intended but will instead apply it to satisfy their addiction to power and control. All these motions and stuff is just satisfying their addiction to power and control. It makes us slaves to them. They get high every time a man has to beg for something. And to get high the next time, the man has to beg more than the time before. These malignant narcissists need a bigger dose each time. The only motion for recusal I want to see concerning this broad is a bunch of men marching into her court and lifting her off the bench and throwing her onto the street.

      • Aimee McGee

        And it would leave the children with their abuser.

        Sometimes you have to work with the law, sometimes you have to chose to go against it, but only ever do that considering the full consequences

        • Darryl X

          How does that leave the children with the abuser any more than the alternative?

          What we’ve found during the last forty-four years is that no matter what laws are drafted and implemented to protect innocent men, malignant narcissists and feminists thwart them. It’s what they do. They don’t know how to do anything else.

          Our forefathers gave us a pretty clear template for governing our country so that free men could remain free. Forty-four years ago, we got to a point of that template which promoted revolution as an affirmative defense against the violence that was done to us first and without provocation.

          Abiding by the law and drafing new ones and changing old ones is a pointless exercise by now. Your argument that “it would leave the children with their abuser” aside from making no sense also sounds like an MRA version of the feminist mantra “best interests of the children”.

  • Iron John

    Well, that is a relief. I’m glad he was able to buy some time. Now maybe he has a chance to get a real good lawyer before these people try and railroad him.

  • Codebuster

    OT (sort of). There’s an election coming up… I wonder if we shouldn’t at least be trying to sway the direction of the debates. I just posted the following comment, for what it’s worth, to 2012 Election Central:

    How are you going to deal with a judicial system that is increasingly showing signs of being broken, especially with respect to the family courts? By way of example, the cases relating to Judge Lori B Jackson or Prosecutor Mary N Kellett. What are you going to do to restore the US Constitution to at least some semblance of its former authority and credibility?

    • http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com Suz

      Anyone who actually comprehends the question, will squash it like a cockroach.

    • http://manamongoaks.com/index.html Ray

      I think the presidential debates tonight were on domestic issues, but I heard no comments about the war on males, or any issues that adversely affect men as an identity group.

      Isn’t it funny, they didn’t even bring up the bogus war on women?

      I suspect women’s reproductive choices will at least get a mention before all the debates are over.

      I’m not holding my breath to hear about any issue affecting men.

      I did hear one TV pundit say tonight that both candidates were experiencing a “gender gap.” According to that pundit, most women are for Obama and most men are for Romney.

      • Carlos

        I think the “War on Women” phrase has backfired in the minds of most media pundits — which is unfortunate. I personally love the “War on Women” rhetoric. I think it’s a perfect example of the way this country has it’s priorities all screwed up, and how feminists are full of shit. Every time they say “War on Women” they give me the perfect opening to go off on a mini-rant about female privilege, feminist dogma and modern day misandry.

  • Teerex

    Clowns in robes.

  • dhanu

    Judge Jackson herself doesn’t want to be in this case any longer, it seems. That’s why she complied so readily. She’s probably afraid of this level of public exposure of her vile self for the first time. A search of her name on the Internet (as Bombay pointed out a day back) shows that she’s been trashed. In short, she got FTSU’d.

  • optimusprime

    I definintely think this needs to be stepped up as it seems the corruption level so far is very high. We may soon find out how high. My question is why did Jackson defer to the Chief Justice? Disqualification law clearly states that a judge “shall recuse him or herself” not go to a higher court and ask. She clearly does not want to recuse herself or she would have done it. The Guardian tainted the Judge by bringing her attention to the negative press and accused the LtCol of doing it. I cannot imagine even the most intellectually defenseless person on earth determining that this Judge could be “unbiased” at this point much less a “reasonable” one. One has to wonder why this move?

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      Things vary a lot from state to state and even county to county, and the letter of the law doesn’t always apply the way a simple reading would.

      One of the little-known but vital functions of apellate and supreme courts (at both the state and Federal level) is that if a judge is not sure what to do abut something, s/he will ask a judge at a higher court for an opinion on what to do. Higher court judges probably spend more time fielding questions and requests from lower court judges than they do hearing cases. This can be anything from formal requests or simple off the record phone calls.

      It may be that she definitely wants to stay on the case but doesn’t know for sure if she can. It may also be that she wants off of it, but isn’t sure if she can.

      Simply having negative publicity may not be sufficient grounds to recuse herself. If it were, then anyone who didn’t like a judge’s ruling could simply publicly attack that judge and then find a pretext to revisit the case and demand recusal. The courts would never allow someone to endlessly judge-shop this way. Otherwise, pretty soon every attorney says “please go cuss out that judge,” and you could get away with murder, pretty much literally.

      The courts recognize that they can’t allow hijinx to gum up the works, and there’s case law to back that up. There was a case a decade or two ago of a guy who attempted to gum up the system by noticing that he had a Constitutional right to representation, and kept avoiding trial by declaring his attorney incompetent and firing him on the day the trial started, so he’d have to be given a continuance. The courts let him get away with firing various attorneys a few times until finally the courts said “you’re abusing the system, you may change attorneys one more time and you’re done, no more, you will either accept this next attorney or you will represent yourself.”

      If I’m recalling correctly (I researched this county’s judges a few weeks ago but it was a few weeks ago) there are only two family court judges IN that jurisdiction. She may want to recuse herself but the other judge may be saying “fuck you, you fucked this up I’m not having it dumped on me.” That would pretty much mean she’d be going upstairs to ask for advice.

      So really, it’s anyone’s guess. She may just plain be panicking and going back and forth on a daily basis as to whether or not she wants to hear this. She may even realize she screwed up massively in more than one way and be hoping someone will save her ass.

      In general, she’s pretty much having a really, really, really lousy week. Of that much you can be sure.

  • scatmaster

    I have never met Suz. I have never responded to a post from Suz. I do not know anything about Suz,


    She FREAKING ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!

    I wish I had her guts and her go to it ness.


    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

      Yep, Suz has been doing MUCH behind the scenes here. And has more yet to come. We have not been able to work in publicizing it, but the whole story will be told before it is over. :)

    • http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com Suz

      …And she’s blushing. Thanks.

  • http://angiemedia.com/author/rob Rob

    I read the motion for recusal. Nowhere is mentioned the allegations that Jackson’s husband is best friends with Tina Kirk’s attorney who is appearing in her courtroom.

    Such a relationships would seem on its face to create the appearance of impropriety. By judicial canons in many jurisdictions, this demands the judge recuse from the case.

    I heard a judge who was formerly a malpractice attorney state that an attorney he knows socially (that attorney’s wife is a judicial colleague of his in the same courthouse) could not appear in his courtroom because of conflict of interest. Clearly this judge recognized the appearance of impropriety that Judge Jackson fails to recognize and address by recusing.

    Has anybody considered filing a bar association complaint against Jackson over what appears to be an obvious conflict of interest?

    Another strategy would be for Joel Kirk to hire an attorney that who was formerly represented by Lori Jackson. Given that such a relationship is the reason given for the former judge to recuse when Tina Kirk hired her attorney, this would require Jackson to also recuse.

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      The friendly relationship between the attorney and the judge’s husband, while it smells to high heaven, would probably not be, on its face, justification to demand recusal. It would be a judgement call, although I think in this case it can and should be examined. That said, let me explain what Jackson’s defense would be:

      Judges actually do have social lives, and like most people spend a lot of time hanging out with and even marrying people who are in the same general profession. Furthermore, West Virginia is a small state and Harrison County West Virginia is a quite small county; its total population is under 70,000 people if I recall correctly. It is almost certainly just about mathematically impossible for a judge NOT to know the attorneys who work there in a social context.

      While all of this is to some extent excuse-making, it also exposes just how corrupt the judiciary can be in the United States. There is a thin paper wall at best between attorneys and judges. It is entirely possible for an arrogant judge to have breakfast and a morning beer with an attorney on the way to work and then hear a case by that same attorney as soon as coming in. Believe it or not, on its surface, that all by itself might not be seen by the system as proof of judicial misconduct, depending on the jurisdiction. All the judge and attorney have to do is put on an outraged face and say “we NEVER discuss the case outside the courtroom!” and unless you can prove otherwise, that’s the end of that.

      This does not mean that the relationship of the Embarassment To All Of West Virginia, The Dishonorable Lori Jackson, to the attorney who defended the child abuser Tina Kirk, should not be examined and it does not mean a complaint should not be made about it. I merely note that, while it may seem an obvious conflict, judges have more latitude on these things than you might think.

      There’s no doubt in my mind that her cozy status with the child beater’s attorney is a corrupt one. But the existence of that relationship is not, on its face, proof of malfeasance.

      • http://angiemedia.com/author/rob Rob

        The argument you present is in itself reason for why any decision having long-term impact (e.g., child custody, division of substantial assets or income) in a family law case should be made by a jury and not by a judge.

        It is too easy for the “professionals” in this system to have ex-parte contact with each other and deny it. It is too easy for them to make decisions and actions to reward each other knowing that what goes around comes around. A judge gives an attorney what she wants, knowing that the attorney will give judge what she wants — a political contribution, favorable opinions relayed to others during a campaign, etc. They don’t even need to discuss it because it is an unwritten practice accepted by many of “court officers” despite it being intrinsically corrupt.

        A jury of 12 people is far less corruptible if it is picked even the way that juries are selected today. Juries today are picked by getting rid of people who have experiences or subject expertise related to the case. You see this not just in state courts but also in Federal courts. The attorneys work to pick a jury for a case like a Federal lawsuit over software intellectual property so there will not be jury members who know anything much about software or intellectual property law. Even so, this jury can still make some passable attempt at fair rulings because sociopaths and criminals are still much less than half our society and so most of jury members will tend to at least try to be fair and just.

        The events in the Kirk case show that in the interests of fairness and justice there are many reforms needed in court procedures and rules. For example, when judges and attorneys first appear, they should be required to provide a detailed written summary of the interactions they have had with the other “court officers” previously or currently involved in the case. The written summary should mostly focus on any contact or indirect relationships (common family, mutual close friends, etc.) they had outside of a court room. Regarding courtroom contact, a simple list of cases where they both appeared could be adequate because there should be transcripts or recordings of those appearances (assuming court records were not altered or destroyed as has been reported to have happened in some cases with alleged corruption) that can be checked if the litigants or public have concerns. If somebody later discovers another connection outside of the court and can show evidence of it, that should be probable cause for a judicial integrity investigation and for the replacement of the judge on the case.

        The Kirk case and many other family law cases show that the American judicial system is a failure. The procedures and processes used are readily corrupted and there are few reasonably available mechanisms to detect and correct problems. The public believes you can appeal bad decisions. But by the time a family law judge is finished pillaging a family’s assets, the parties seldom have the financial or emotional wherewithal to engage in an appeal even if there was substantial wrongdoing by the judge. The appeal courts can also take many years to decide an appeal, meaning that the wrong may persist for a very long time even if it is someday corrected.

        The options outside of appeals courts usually are not effective, either. The judicial disciplinary bodies are frequently stacked with judicial cronies who will let a judge do just about anything so long as it does not harm another judge. Even felonies such as destruction of personal property for substantial self-gain get nothing more than a reprimand timed to be sure it will avoid informing the public until after the bad judge’s next election.

        Thanks to the propaganda used to indoctrinate the masses starting in government controlled schools, the general public does not understand how broken the courts are until they personally come face to face with the hidden epidemic of judicial corruption and abuse.

        What AVfM is doing to help the Kirk children and expose the abuse in Jackson’s court is something that every decent person in the world should be applauding. I say this even though it is obvious AVfM is covering this case because it is viewed as a violation of Joel Kirk’s rights because of the appearance of bias against a man.

        Frankly I don’t think what is going on in this case is bias again men as much as it is the usual judicial corruption in action. If you reversed the mother/father identities (so Joel Kirk was the one behaving as Tina Kirk and had the same attorneys she now has), in my view Lori Jackson would probably still be putting the kids into the custody of a drunk child abuser with BPD and it would be mostly women screaming about bias against mothers. Unfortunately for them, they mostly have alternative rabid feminist media run by people with little insight or integrity so their arguments would probably devolve into “all men are evil” and imbecilic talk of “the patriarchy”. (AVfM, of course, is ot the mirror image of the rabid feminists but instead has some real insights and integrity.)

        This case has so much judicial misconduct that it should be getting traction outside of MRA websites. It deserves national media coverage. Mothers should be just as ticked off about this case as fathers because it shows that a judge can abuse the law and put children in harm’s way at her or his whim for what are obviously not reasons of facts or law. If this case does not get the national media attention it deserves, it is another data point in the sea of examples showing that mainstream media is in cahoots with the criminals running the nation.

  • Kimski

    I took another listen to the AVfM Radio interview with Lt.Col. Kirk, where he mentions another naval officer that Tina Kirk allegedly were supposed to be marrying, before she called Lt. Col. Kirk in California two years later.

    Would it be possible to find this guy, and have him witness on behalf of Lt. Col. Kirk, because he might have some valuable first hand experiences, that could prove to be pure gold in backing up the claims made by the Lt. Col. Kirk about his x-wife?

    I may be reaching for straws here, but I hope everything turns out right for the Lt. and his kids, and from my point of view anything goes.

    • http://angiemedia.com/author/rob Rob

      I had the same thought about tracking down that guy to see what his experience was.

      All the many adverse comments I heard about my ex’s former love interests pale to the lies she has told about me. She has also attacked later love interests with what sound to me to be similar kinds of distortions or falsehoods, although I cannot say for sure they are because I don’t know these people. Hence I wonder if much of anything negative she had to say about anybody connected to her was true. Certainly she has a consistent track record of lying about my parents, our children, and many others about facts that I know well.

      But even when you can prove somebody is a frequent liar, family law judges usually don’t care to do much of anything about even their well proven lies and perjury.

      Some of them also block the ability to discuss affairs and past relationships in family law cases, even when they directly relate to the very poor parent the person is. “No fault” divorce apparently means that it does not matter what the woman did, she can’t be blamed for anything as she is not responsible for her actions according to the court.

      For example, a judge blocked discussion of an affair a woman had while she was several months pregnant with her husband’s baby. The man with whom she had an affair knew she was pregnant.

      The woman caught an STD from this affair and hid both the affair and STD from her husband. Fortunately it wasn’t AIDS or herpes.

      Anybody who knows anything about STD risks for pregnant women knows that if the woman had contracted herpes at that stage of pregnancy, the baby would have ended up almost certainly doomed to death or severe birth defects. The judge didn’t think that mattered. From the court’s perspective, a woman who endangers her unborn baby’s life by having an affair with a man who turns out to be an STD carrier is a good mother. This so even though the man with whom she had an affair is almost certainly responsible for spreading herpes to other(s) from what I have been told by what I believe is a reliable source.

      Maybe contacting the naval officer might not be useful in court, but it could help further further explain the case to the public.

  • andybob

    Not entirely OT – sorry anyway.

    The four daughters of the Italian man whose wife abducted them to her home country of Australia have been returned to him. This is how it is being reported:

    “The mother of four girls sent back to Italy in a bitter custody dispute is not likely to follow them for fear of being prosecuted and victimised in their father’s country.
    The sisters, aged nine to 15, were forcibly removed from their Sunshine Coast home on Wednesday night by Australian Federal Police after a Brisbane judge dismissed the mother’s last-ditch application to keep them in Australia.
    Channel Seven footage shows the girls screaming and resisting before they are put in two cars.
    Their mother banged on the rear window of one car as it drove off.
    She ran after the car and collapsed to the ground sobbing.
    The sisters were driven to Brisbane Airport and taken to a boarding gate by the officers as one girl wailed, “Let me go. I want my mum, I want my mum.”
    Their mother watched on, calling to them: “I love you.”
    “I’m just praying, I’m just praying, I don’t know what to think. I’m terrified right now,” she said.
    The girls left on a flight in the early hours of Thursday.
    Brisbane Family Court Justice Colin Forrest ruled on Wednesday that the girls had been wrongfully kept in Australia and there were insufficient exceptional circumstances to allow them to stay.
    However, he refused to make the order to return the children to Italy until their father gave an undertaking to withdraw any criminal complaint against their mother.
    The girls’ great aunt, who acted as the litigation guardian during the case, said the mother had told her she wouldn’t return to Italy to be with the girls.
    She is a student and has no money.
    “She has absolutely no money, none of us do, so we can’t support her financially in Italy either,” the aunt told AAP.
    The aunt also said the family feared the mother would be prosecuted and persecuted, despite the father’s assurance to the Family Court.
    “I know that the courts have got an undertaking from the father that he won’t prosecute her in any way in Italy, but I’m not sure that holds any weight once he’s in another country,” she said.
    “We’re certainly skeptical on whether there would be any consequence for not holding him to that undertaking.
    “It’s the only reason (she’s not going back). What good is she to her daughters if she’s in prison?
    “Going to Italy and being completely isolated from her daughters and risking her being imprisoned, it makes no sense.”
    The great aunt said the girls’ father had turned his village against the mother.
    “I would say she would be unwelcome,” she said.
    “Her life in Italy was untenable. That’s the reason she’s here.”
    The sisters attracted international media attention in May when they went into hiding to avoid a 2011 Family Court order to return to Italy, where they are the subject of a custody dispute.
    The sisters, who hold dual Italian and Australian citizenship, travelled to Australia with their mother in 2010 for a one-month holiday and remained here since.
    A further custody case will now be dealt with in Italy.”

    Notice how the mother turns in a bravura tour-de-force, complete with howling, fainting and breast-beating. She has succeeded in creating maximum trauma for the daughters.

    She claims that she is too afraid to follow them to Italy, enjoying her martydom to the hilt. The only thing she is afraid of is facing the consequences of her despicable behaviour. She abducted those children, alienated them from their father and repeatedly flouted court orders.

    The report blurs the distinction between prosecution and persection. Holding her responsible for her crimes is presented as attacking her. Most shockingly of all, the father, whose despair at losing his children for so long is entirely ignored, is being held responsible for whether or not she faces any kind of punishment. Apparently, he’s expected to turn a chivalrous blind-eye to her misdeeds.

    Notice the way all of these women moan about having no money. This woman, and her entire support system, is skint. How can she possibly be the best person to raise four children? It may be good news that this father will be reunited with his children, but it remains an outrage that it took so long.

    All of this despair was allowed to happen just because our legal system indulges and appeases selfish, evil, narcissistic women while the rights of men – and their children – are trivialised and ignored.

    We must band together to protect men like Lt. Col. Kirk more than ever.

    • Tawil

      Sickening, absolutely sickening emotional manipulation by this “mother”. Is it any wonder the judges sent the girls back?

    • Turbo

      Summed up perfectly AB.

      The trauma that that woman has put those children through is horrendous. And that complete act for the cameras at the Airport, poor me poor me, utterly disgusting. If she loved those kids she would be on that plane with them back to Italy.
      She claims that she is concerned that she may be held accountable for her child abduction and put in jail, and what good would she be to her kids in jail. All I can say to that is what fucking good are you to your children living in a different country. If you love your children you go back, face the consequences of your crime, and be there for your kids. It is unbelievable how selfish this woman is, this child abductor, this child abuser.

      The decision was right and just, but it took 2 years, when it should have happened in 2 months. That was 2 years of parental alienation and indoctrination that this mother had to poison the minds of her children. Is it any wonder those kids are confused and scared.

      Of course, as usual, the media coverage has been horrendously bias to the mother, as we all have come to expect these days. This case reminds me of the Gillespie children saga, and the prince who used an underground network to free his children from a mother who would not return them home because she wanted to leave that country.

      I just watched this footage and the news report at my local pub, one or two people were upset at the footage of the kids in a distressed state. I reminded them, firmly, that this whole episode, and all these children’s grief, has been caused by their mother, and the system that allows such people to use their kids as tools to get what they want.

      They shut up then, and changed the subject.

      My best wishes to those girls, may they find peace and happiness, away from a manipulative, selfish and narcissistic mother.

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      It is difficult when reading this not to fall prey immediately to the emotional response of “those poor girls being ripped from their mother!” But the mother’s histrionics should be the dead giveaway of what’s really wrong here. A double-whammy: if Dad were caught on camera indulging in such histrionics, how would he be treated? With loathing and contempt, that’s how. Which says a lot about our double standards towards women and men.

      Intelligent, mature adults would be saying “it is vitally in my children’s interest that they have a functional relationship with their father and mother both, and the parent who is trying hardest to make that happen is the better parent.”

      That, alas, is obviously not happening here, but absent proof that the father is a monster the presumption of any reasonable person should be that it’s the mother who’s acted irresponsibly this whole time, and her emotional antics should be seen as completely inappropriate. The way our society coddles women (and thus demeans mature, responsible women) is sickening, and people just can’t see it.

      Yet. I think the day is coming when that changes. I think.

      • Bev

        “those poor girls being ripped from their mother!”

        I have already seen those sorts of comments in the media I expect to see more of them.

  • andybob

    The two eldest daughters were removed from the flight at Brisbane Airport after their violent tantrums ‘traumatised’ the other passengers. Their behaviour was so feral that four security staff were unable to restrain them.

    I wonder where they learned that the appropriate response to not getting your own way is to behave like a two year-old with no concern for the rights and welfare of others?

    If they’d been boys, they’d have been tazered, doped and strapped into a luggage container. I’m not suggesting that this should have happened to them, or anyone. What I am suggesting is that no-one should have given in to their tantrums. It would have been a valuable lesson for them, especially so soon after witnessing their mother’s fruitless senery chewing.

    It’s possible that these girls actually are traumized, but it’s far more likely that they have enjoyed two years of unrestrained freedom and indulgence in the bosom of their all-woman family, and are loath to give it up. Mum doesn’t do boundaries. Life in Papa’s village is going to be a snooze after the media-fueled frenzy that their mother has provided for the past two years.

    Remember their Gramdmother threatening to kill them if they were forced back to Italy? Who wants to sun-dry tomatoes or pickle olives when you can be embroiled in that kind of high drama? It’s not as is they’re being sent to an unfamiliar country. They are returning to the home where they were born and raised – and loved by their father and his large doting family.

    I hope the two youngest daughters are still reachable enough for their father to restore bonds. The eldest two, judging by their disgraceful behaviour, have absorbed enough of their mother’s crazy to be effectively ruined.

    I fear that the father’s greatest battle lies ahead.

    • Tawil


      I hope the youngest two get delivered to the dad or he will hang himself.

      Judging by her theatrics and manipulations so far, this mother most likely coached the girls and set the tantrums up.

      Of course the older two, if they get thier way and get to stay in Australia after thier carefully rehearsed tantrums, will probably realise they actually love thier dad and will go back to him after the mother “wins”…. which after all is what its all about- mother wants to win regardless of the collateral damage, then she can discard the girls.

      PS. Am wondering if this little incident was the reason why the girls were split into two pairs to travel seperately….. is that possibly the reason? If not why else?

      This whole episode is sickening…

      • andybob

        Totally agree, Mr Tarwil.

        The mother certainly coached the girls to throw those tantrums with zero concern for either their physical safety or emotional well-being. A wise and loving mother would have councelled her daughters that in a few short years (two and a half for the eldest) they could return to Australia any time they liked.

        Sadly, this woman is a sociopath who, like Tina Taylor Kirk, has cottoned on to the fact that feminists have created a world that panders and rewards appalling people like her.

        • Tawil

          Latest update…. it appears the older girls have been packaged back to Italy. I note that the mother was waiting at the airport to try and coax the older girls into another frenzy, but the federal police took the girls onto the plane via a secret passage and SURPRISE SURPRISE the girls didn’t tanty. Here is the article:


          THE mother of four girls at the centre of an international custody dispute was unable to say goodbye to two of her daughters as they were put on a flight bound for Italy.

          The mother, who cannot be named for legal reasons, arrived at the airport earlier on Thursday night in a last ditch effort to see her eldest two children after it was revealed they were taken off a flight bound for Italy last night.

          The Courier-Mail revealed the girls, aged 14 and 15, had been split from their younger two sisters last night and taken to a nearby location.

          The paper witnessed all four girls being manhandled through the airport late last night and being put on a flight but the elder girls were later removed.

          Tonight, the girls were placed on an Emirates flight due to depart for Dubai en route to Italy at 8.45pm. They were moved to the plane via a private passage way and so did not see their mother who was waiting in the terminal.

          The mother discovered the girls were aboard the plane after a person in the terminal, who had a relative aboard the flight, received a text message saying the girls were on the plane and were behaving in a distressed and out-of-control manner.

          It took a moment of disbelief for the news to sink in before the mother clung to the railing for support as the passenger sent a text message back to his relatives.

          He reported that the girls were on the plane, “sobbing”.

          Another passenger reported seeing police but did not see the girls.

          The mother remained at the viewing deck after the flight closed, supported by the two friends that had accompanied her to the airport.

          The girls are expected to land in Dubai after the almost-fourteen hour flight.

          The plane carrying the two younger sisters landed in Singapore for a brief stopover earlier on Thursday afternoon.

          The girls looked miserable but were quiet as they were escorted off the plane ahead of other passengers.

          The children are travelling on flight EK433, which stopped at Singapore en route from Brisbane to Dubai. A second leg will then take them to Rome

          • Tawil

            PS. do make sure and watch the sickening video footage on the link below of the mother wailing “baby, baby, baby, baby…..” to her kids, clearly attempting to wind the kids up as they are taken onto their plane:


            I actually hate this woman…. she reeks of foiled entitlement.

          • http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com Suz

            Sort of OT, another hysterical mom doesn’t notice that it’s not about her:

            From the audio, “I don’t care about the dogs! The dogs can go to the pound for all I care!” and from the text, “Thank you so much, you saved my life and his too, you saved our lives,”

            Hamsterlation: The dogs who protected my son are disposable, useful idiots, and I am the one who was in danger.

          • Tawil

            “Thank you so much, you saved my life…. and his too””

            You got it… another hysterical mom doesn’t notice that it’s not about her.

          • Kimski


            I just absolutely love those kinds of ‘freudian slips’, where you really get to see what is going on behind all the high drama and the tears

            ‘Why don’t you get it? -It’s all about me.’

            As someone who always thought I was going to have kids one day, and seeing that opportunity vanish as a consequence of highly egotistical versions of ‘her choice’, twice in a row, it is also a constant source of anger that some people are even allowed to breed, considering what they put their kids through.

            Those australian girls and the boy with the dogs should be out there, playing little league baseball or something, without any other cares in the world than concentrating on being kids.

            Scarred for life, no compensation, as Dire Strais once said it in a tune of theirs.

  • Gamerp4

    The sunshine is coming, Wait for it Col Kirk, AVFM and all the men and women here have got your back.

  • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam
    • Turbo

      Wow, excellent, and not even the usual MSM hatchet job. There is actually some balance in the report.

      And AVfM is described as “a men’s rights group based in Houston”

      Not a “hate group”, not “anti women group”, not a “misogynist group”, not an “angry mens group”.

      This is progress I think.

      • andybob

        I also love how they make a point about Mary Snead refusing to answer the many calls they’ve made to her. Also, Lori B. Jackson’s statement explaining herself somehow manages to miss the printing deadline. The reporter knows they’ve been given the runaround and doesn’t like it one bit. They look like the scurrying cockroaches that they are.

        Sure makes me very proud to be associated with that ‘men’s rights group based in Houston’ that has pursued this matter relentlessly.

        • Kimski

          “They look like the scurrying cockroaches that they are.”

          I’ve just begun to look into the possibility of making a little extra money on the side, by renting out dark places to hide by the hour.
          I predict there will be a growing market over the next couple of years.