A couple of days ago, I posted about the Missouri case of Jeremy Irwin, father of one year old Lisa Irwin, who was reported missing early on October 4. He and Rasleen Raim, the mother of his oldest child, are in a custody battle now, because Rasleen Raim is nervous about the alleged kidnapping, and the ramifications to the safety of her child. I don't blame her at all, but the attorneys for Debbie Bradley and Jeremy Irwin still think a mom should feel secure about her child being in Debbie Bradley's care. Shortly after Ms. Raim filed suit, a Washington judge gave Solomon Metalwala, the father of two year old, missing, Sky Metalwala, custody of Sky's older sister Maile. Now, a Florida judge has reversed a custody decision in the case of Michelle Parker, missing since last month, and Dale Smith's three year old twins. This apparently happened yesterday, after lots of public outcry about Dale Smith, Michelle's fiance and the primary suspect in her diappearance, initially got custody. It is not clear if this happened because of a bad act on the part of the father, more findings about his care of the children, or if evidence concerning the disappearance of the childrens' mom was discovered in his home, but it seems that suspects and defacto suspects in mysterious disappearances of other people are not always seen to make good primary custodians of children. Need I even mention Terri Horman? She does not have custody of any of her children right now, either.
What's likely to happen if custody to Jeremy Irwin's oldest child transfers to the mom? Well....let's see; Debbie Bradley will no longer be able to collect food stamps, using this child as one more member of the household. She no longer has little Lisa, and losing another child would leave her ineligable, which, in turn, means that she would have to get a job. What else would happen...one less deduction at tax time for Mr. Jeremy! ( I hope those unpaid taxes from a couple of years ago are paid, now, Jeremy!) Also, since Jeremy probably makes more money than his son's mother, he will probably have to pay child support. That would certainly be a bummer for Debbie and Jeremy.
What else might happen? A little boy might become reaquainted with his mom. A mom who may very well have been threatened or initmidated by a drunk and criminally inclined Debbie Bradley. He also may finally have a chance to learn about his mother's culture, and who he is. I doubt that Jeremy has gone to any great lengths to explain life outside of his own narrow sphere to any of his children. Also, it is an opportunity for this child to learn another language or two.
Something else might happen, too. It's a something that probably bothers the heck out of John Picerno and Joe Tacobella. It goes straight to the core of why I think Debbie and Jeremy MIGHT (!!) be hiding a few things from law enforcement. Not only have they given several different accounts of what happened on October 4 and admitted that Debbie drinks too much; Debbie and Jeremy have worked incredibly hard to block testimony from both of Lisa's older half brothers. But if they did not live with Debbie or Jeremy, who would stop them from giving statements to the police or testifying? Tacobella has no control over family court in Missouri, and Picerno is a criminal attorney, not a family law specialist.
Taco and Pico can spread as many lies as they wish about the situation. Just as surely as eleven minus eight equals three, both of those little boys will grow up one day. And there is no statute of limitations on murder.
What's likely to happen if custody to Jeremy Irwin's oldest child transfers to the mom? Well....let's see; Debbie Bradley will no longer be able to collect food stamps, using this child as one more member of the household. She no longer has little Lisa, and losing another child would leave her ineligable, which, in turn, means that she would have to get a job. What else would happen...one less deduction at tax time for Mr. Jeremy! ( I hope those unpaid taxes from a couple of years ago are paid, now, Jeremy!) Also, since Jeremy probably makes more money than his son's mother, he will probably have to pay child support. That would certainly be a bummer for Debbie and Jeremy.
What else might happen? A little boy might become reaquainted with his mom. A mom who may very well have been threatened or initmidated by a drunk and criminally inclined Debbie Bradley. He also may finally have a chance to learn about his mother's culture, and who he is. I doubt that Jeremy has gone to any great lengths to explain life outside of his own narrow sphere to any of his children. Also, it is an opportunity for this child to learn another language or two.
Something else might happen, too. It's a something that probably bothers the heck out of John Picerno and Joe Tacobella. It goes straight to the core of why I think Debbie and Jeremy MIGHT (!!) be hiding a few things from law enforcement. Not only have they given several different accounts of what happened on October 4 and admitted that Debbie drinks too much; Debbie and Jeremy have worked incredibly hard to block testimony from both of Lisa's older half brothers. But if they did not live with Debbie or Jeremy, who would stop them from giving statements to the police or testifying? Tacobella has no control over family court in Missouri, and Picerno is a criminal attorney, not a family law specialist.
Taco and Pico can spread as many lies as they wish about the situation. Just as surely as eleven minus eight equals three, both of those little boys will grow up one day. And there is no statute of limitations on murder.
2 comments:
In the interest of the child, it would be best to have visitations with the mom first before switching custody. He does not know his mom, she is a stranger to him. To force him to go live with strangers at this point in his life would be devastating for him. Also, unless an attorney can prove child abuse or neglect (the legal definition, not just an opinion) Jeremy would at least get visitation rights, if not joint custody. If the boy's mom was so interested in him, why did she not see him for six years? I don't know if Deborah was in the picture at the time of the original custody arrangements, but if she was, and if the mom knew Deborah was an unfit adult in the household, why would the mom let her son totally be relinquished to this family? If I thought my child would have to go live with his father and an unstable woman, I would fight for joint custoday or at least visitation rights. There is some reason she gave up total custody along with visitation rights. For a mom to not see her own child for 6 years... most people would go crazy not seeing their kid for 6 weeks, or 6 months, let alone years.
I agree. But I do not believe all of the propoganda stating that she is a complete stranger....but that is just my opinion. It is also my opinion that she may have gotton a raw deal because of her culture, which is not mainstream midwestern American. Here's what isn't merely my opinion, but my experience: people of Middle Eastern descent in parts of the midwest that are heavily and mainly populated by whites with Germanic roots tend to get raw deals in matters involving the judicial system. Back to my opinion.....I think Jeremy Irwin may have gotton away with stomping all over the legal rights of his son's mother because of her culture. It goes to the heart of one of the things I truly hate about American culture, here in the "heartland". Not everyone actually has a "heart".
One thing Rasleen Raim WILL be able to state in court, as it has become not only part of a police investigation, but a public statement made on national television, is that Debbie Bradley drinks in excess. A box of wine, with psychotrophic drugs, chased by hard liquor is pathological drinking and quite excessive for any situation. Also not medically advised by any competent physician. And....alcohol IS a drug, don't kid yourself. So.....Rasleen should have no problem establishing drug abuse in the home where her son is held captive. Now; if she does not get custody, and MORE problems surface involving drunken Debbie and her boyfriend allowing her to "squat" in his home, (they now have no children together, so now, Jeremy has no reason to impose her presence on his child) and this little boy goes to foster care, he will be in the care of strangers, there, too. Yet no one bats an eyelash at the situation of foster children being in the care of strangers.....even Adam Herrman's situation has not taught the midwest a thing! If a stranger it is to be, I would feel better about the whole thing if the stranger were his mother.
My ex husband did not see our children for six years. Then he died. Never once did I encourage our children to write him off or give up on him. And while certain pathologies that plagued his life sadly persisted until he died, I know that if he had made recovery, instead, his love for his children would have remained unscathed. I cannot judge him, and I cannot encourage my children to believe they were not loved, even during his six year absence from their lives.
Post a Comment