And how the hell does that matter now that the child is dead?

Killing babies....throwing babies in the trash like they are garbage....molesting babies....putting them in microwave ovens. When those who are accused of such are found guilty, why can't they just be shot to death after being judged as guilty? The war againt children requires drastic measures. I am up to here with hearing about children being murdered. We have all heard these stories time and time again but the response is just to put these killers and molesters in prison. Clearly, that is not a deterrent. If they know that they will be dead 15 to 30 minutes after being found guilty, they'll start getting the message. These SOB's deserve it. Then maybe kids can ride their bikes outside, play hopscotch, or go to the playground without having to look over their shoulders and being on guard against "stranger danger". Or, as in this case as well as many others, the family psycho.

Right now we do not know how either one of them died. To pass judgement before all the facts are in is just wrong. I would not necessarily agree that the courts made the right decision. I have heard of far too many cases where one parent or the other, usually the mother, tells outright lies about the other just to hurt their former partner. Often seeking full custody has nothing to do with love for the child or issues of the other parent's fitness, it is about nothing more than money and/or hurting the other person as much as possible. There have been numerous cases where mothers have made up false accusations of abuse against fathers just to hurt the fathers and get full custody and the child support payments that go along with it. They even go so far as to coach the son/daughter to lie about their father and turn the child against him. This behavior does immense damage to the child but the spitefulness of the mother overrides any thought of what she is doing to the child. I am not saying that any of this happened in this case, I am just pointing this out to show that people should not make judgements when they do not have all the facts.

You can say that none of this matters because the child would still be alive if the father had not taken her, so in the end he is the one responsible for her death. This may well be true, but you could also say that if the mother had not fought for full custody, taking the girl away from her father, the child would still be alive as well. It seems that regardless of what happened, there is plenty of blame to go around. Unless being with the father presented some imminent danger to the girl, why did the mother find it necessary to seek full custody. Obviously the mother did not think this was the case since she waited so long to report the abduction. This makes you wonder what the mother's real motivation was. If she felt the girl was safe enough with the father to not report the girl missing for several days, why did she want to take the girl away from her father. Sounds like it may have been for spite or some other reason not related to the welfare of the girl, but then again we do not have all the facts. All I am trying to say is that it is best not to judge anyone when you do not have all the facts.

how can you say that without knowing all the "facts" ? Do you know why they took away his joint custody ? was he doing wrong or did she just have more money and a better lawyer .Oh good I got full custody now so twice the child support , and I don't have to turn her over to him once a week. You can push a man - or woman - down only so much and he just might react and sometime stupidly . look at the news today . people killing their own families , suicides , etc. times are hard, a lot of people are hitting rock bottom. look at the different counrties with revolts and one headed here . Don't push anyone too far without expecting bad reults . without a good reason- what difference does it make- they are both the parent - why should a woman be treated any different than the man ? A lot of states are pushing for joint custody as they see it is better for everyone including the kids. ( well other than the wife being pissed she isn't getting more child support )

This was an inexcusable act by the father. But it also underscores the problems that have arisen since the feminists and courts have established a clear record of denying fathers equal rights in custody cases.

Richard,

I think most fathers get equal rights these days unless they are proved incapable or untrustworthy. This man obviously had serious issues if they took joint custody away from him.

He also obviously hated his ex-wife more than he loved his child.

silverton-2953905, You are living in a fantasy land thinking men are now treated fairly...far from it.

I am 100% with Richard: Horrible act, but often, these acts are brought on, at least in part, by the women, who try to cut fathers out.

Richard: "problems that have arisen"

Problems? In this mans rule book he had every justification in taking any of his children's life if he saw fit.

This child is dead and you people are saying it's the mother's fault? What the hell's wrong with you? It doesn't matter if the mother lied and/or the father deserved custody.....HE KILLED HIS CHILD!!!!. That makes it pretty obvious he DIDN'T deserve custody. Now that poor baby will never get to grow up.

Exactly, Edna!

I am a step-mother to a boy whose father was given sole custody. The tides are turning in the fathers direction.

As for the comments blaming the mother, this MAN comes from culture that believes

1)--the mother/woman is worthless and property only, and

2)--he has every right to kill his own children. And this type of murder is all too common now-a-days.

I have heard of about 6 or 7 murders of young children, mostly girls, that have all been done by fathers, or other male family members, simply because the child might have thought some how differently than the culture would allow. It doesnt really matter that these children were born in the USA or Canada--have lived their lives with the social culture clash and have died because of it.

All I can say is at least he killed himself also. Usually these types of men (I used the term very loosely), walk away from the murder and hold their head high. Like they did something holy!!!

There probably is such a place in Hell,poster,but it seems to me more crowded every day from reading the news and seeing Tv reports.

Edna and BethanyB, you are also living in a fantasy land if you believe there are not mothers out there, who lie during divorces to get whatever they want. While they may not be the killer, they can definitely be considered a part of the problem. Case in point regarding lying: http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?p=9646. How many are not caught?

Not everyone is pushed to a breaking point, but the point is that you will never know what someone else's breaking point is, or what they will do, until you have pushed them that far.

My ex lied in court to the point that had our divorce not ended, and she lightened up, she was going to be charged with felony perjury. I was told by the ADA that all I had to do was file the police report. Even then, she still got more time, despite the clear and obvious lying (she ultimately admitted it on the stand).

While fathers may get more time now compared to the 20-30 years ago, anyone, who thinks it has really evened out in family court, is just ignorant.

Again, this in no way, condones what the guy did either. That is unforgivable too.

Kevin, considering what this guy did, there was probably ample evidence of reasons to have cut him out. We shouldn't place any part of the blame on the woman w/o knowing what the reasons were that he had joint custody taken away.

The breakdown of marriage and the resulting breakdown of the family unit comes with awful consequences. . .period. IF this man took his daughters life and his own life, there is no excuse for that. . . period. That said, it's time we get real about the issue of Parental Alienation which, more often than not, is an alienation of the father.

I am a married woman with 3 stepsons, and I thank God every single day that my husband and his ex-wife put aside their differences to put their children's interests first. Even still, the children suffered some rough patches and great emotional loss. Had it not been for their parents being committed to seeing them through, abstaining from haranguing and bad mouthing the other, those times would have been all the more difficult.

My heart goes out to this family today and all families enduring such tragedies. As a society, it's high time we took a long, hard look at the decline of the family unit in our society. Children's lives are at stake! Even if they survive their parents divorce, there is damage. . .PERIOD!

I am appalled that richard, kevin and art think that there is ever justification for killing your own child. Just because you are angry doesn't given you the right to hurt someone and we have to stop condoning this behavior by shaking our heads and saying "he/she must have been provoked." Would any of you, richard, kevin or art side with the person who killed your love one just because that person had been pushed too far? Do you, yourselves want to be the victims of someone who's been pushed too far? We are civilized humans not cornered or caged animals.

When my oldest son got divorced his ex got full custody of their daughter because my son is in the Navy and he is out to sea every year for 4-6 months. She used the argument that since he isn't home all year and busy traveling the world taking exotic ports of call. She also argued that it was his choice not to be deployed and he could have stayed home to be with his daughter. This same little twit tried to keep our granddaughter away from us, we took her to court and won, because of a little pesky law that a lot of grandparents don't know about is the guarantee of grandparents rights to visit and have their grandchild even come and spend a few weeks with them during the summer.

Echo--just what I was thinking.

These vine-guys are sounding just a straw or two short of a breakdown. If you have that much anger toward the ex then a probate judge WILL NOT have a favorable opinion.

It is an age old saying that "the best thing a father can do is love the mother". Even if there is a split/divorce there must be a RESPECT for the other party.

Believe you me--my husband was never married to or in fact even never lived with the mother of my step-son, yet he was given full custody. While I understand the plight of the vine guys above--I lived it during our custody battle--you must take the higher ground. You simply have to let the probate courts see you as you want your child to see you. If you are obsessed with the "get-back" because of the hurt the EX gave you it will not be a positive in your case.

As for this vine topic & these vine-guys, careful guys--you sound like "if provoked" could be just a stones throw away.

asknreceive Thank you for the positive story of the divorced parents working for their kids first. My cousin is just divorced and she and her ex-spouse are still in the angry phase much to the detriment of their children. It is so painful to see but there is nothing I can do to help her or the kids. I hope some day she gets to the same point as in your situation.

Greycloud57 - I am glad too to hear that you got grandparents' rights. Those kids need ALL the adults in their life. Hugs.

If I can't have her no one can have her? What a mean, vindictive and evil piece of work this guy was.

greycloud57

I am glad you can see your grandchildren , but regretabaly, that is covered by state laws and does not hold true in every state, I can name 2, Fl and Ill. Grandparents have no rights. I know because my son lives in one and the ex in the other. At least they have shared (parcial custody), he get's them everyother Christmas and everyother summer.

... Rockmebritney. Please go eat a pinecone. Seriously, I'll wait. Done yet? Good! Because now you feel how most fathers in the United States feel in terms of custody battles. Whilst I personally place this man on the same level as that psycho mom who tried to go suicide in their mini-van off a bridge (if memory serves), I have a feeling this never would have happened had the woman not fought to get his rights as a parent taken away.

Not to say what I thought he did was right. I do not. However, Men are far more likely to lose any custody over their children, and are also far more prone to suicide, as the judicial system has a habit of outright violating them in service of the mother. For all we know, the mother is a fire spewing shedemon from Hell, and finally drove the guy off the deep end. Or he was a psycho and she was trying to save her children. We don't know, and I'm sure as heck not asking Mommy, since her side would be completely onesided.

What I do know is that this is a tragedy. Let's just hope this serves as a step towards fathers not losing complete custody of their kids. Like I said, had they settled for joint custody, this likely would have never happened. People need to stop shoving for their way or the highway, sometimes the outcome isn't exactly pretty...

I see where Kevin said he did NOT believe this was justified. I don't think anyone here believes it was justified, it is not. What the point of those posts are is that people have a breaking point and this man reached and passed his resulting in the tragic loss of a child.

Since we do not know all the facts rights now....maybe the man was Fine before he lost full custody?

Courts are not fair to fathers. Women do lie in divorce court to get what they want:

ETA: I can't post the links. Please google these words:

fathers mothers lie divorce kids

The first 2 sites are what I was trying to share.

A divorced man gains custody of his children and his ex-wife burns down his home. A woman in a custody battle buys a cat for her offspring because her divorcing husband is highly allergic to cats. A mother forces her children to sleep in a car to "prove" their father has bankrupted them. These actions illustrate a pattern of abnormal behavior that has emerged as the divorce rate involving children has grown.

The above taken from site number 1

Taken from site number 2

This couple had JOINT custody, she did NOT report her daughter as missing right away. This tells me she didn't think her ex was a danger. Otherwise why hadn't she been filing against him for abuse or something?

Everyone should be held accountable for their actions...this man I'm glad he killed himself if he killed his daughter. His ex if she was lying should be held accountable too. Everyone needs to realize that what they say and do has the potential to harm another.

I agree with whoever said it earlier..... we need have a little more facts about why they divorced, why the court revoked the fathers custody rights etc etc etc. before we cast blame. I believe that one can reasonably assume, it was a murder suicide, but we need to know the why's and what fors before we can "decide" whose fault this tragedy is.

We don't actually need any more information. Every murder has an excuse but there is NO excuse for killing a 2 year old. No matter what the court said, no matter if he was sad, no matter if they ruled the baby goes to anyone, no matter what the details are, to kill a baby because you can is murder and had the murderer not murdered her for this he would have murdered someone for that. The sane mind does not see murder of babies as a solution because someone made you mad.

I don't care what the court did. They have NOTHING to do with a murdering father or mother. And we don't need more details to know that. In reality the murder shows the court made the right decision, they just did not know how right they were. If they had known he was a crazy, murderous father, they would have protected this baby. But that is always a problem for families and courts, you don't always know until they do it.

I cannot fathom what kind of incredibly narcissistic mind-set it takes to murder a child. Using culture as an excuse is nearly as pathetic as the act itself.

That the father killed himself in no way diminishes the heinousness of the fact that he murdered his daughter. What a cowardly cop-out.

I have heard of far too many cases where one parent or the other, usually the mother, tells outright lies about the other just to hurt their former partner.

JS in SD - are you really ignorant enough to believe what you write? Where is your proof that the mother is usually the one who lies? The fathers are all honest, little angels, right? Here's a thought...maybe the fact that he was such a demented individual that he would kill his own daughter is a good reason why the court awarded full custody to the mother.

While we are on the topic, how do you explain why all those wonderful, upstanding fathers neglect to pay child support or visit their kids when they have visitation? That's what the ex-husband of a friend of mine did. They both wanted kids but she had difficulty becoming pregnant. He was there to help and support her through the surgery that she had to open her tubes so that she could have children. He was there when the baby was born, read her stories at night to help her go to sleep, etc., etc., etc.,. He did all the things that one would expect of a good father, until my friend divorced him because he was having an affair with another woman. After the divorce, he refused to pay child support and he never visited his daughter. You sit there claiming that women lie to obtain full custody of their kids but how do you explain these upstanding actions of my friend's former husband if you men are so innocent?

greycloud57 - the courts where right to give full custody to your former daughter-in-law if he is gone 4-6 months every year. Why should they give her to him if he is away half the year. Who would take care of her during that time? You? Why should you take care of her rather than her real mother?

greycloud57, there are no grandparent rights in any state. The reason that you were able to get visitation was because you were able to prove that you have an established active relationship with your granddaughter and that it was in her best interest to have you in her life. The Supreme Court ruled there are no grandparent rights back in 2000. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-138.ZS.html

statreno-3777717, That is kind of a leap to say there was evidence to back it up considering this happened after the fact. Everyone has their breaking point, and he might never have done anything like this had she and the courts been reasonable. We see it all the time: Father was a good father for YEARS (often many more than the two in this case), then divorce, and all of a sudden, they kill the kids? What changed? Take a long hard think about that.

No question, the guy bears the vast majority of the blame, but women act like the woman is always blameless...priceless.

Kevin C-752389 the father who killed his baby deserves 100% of the blame.

There is no excuse for what he did. That he killed himself afterward simply shows how cowardly he was, killing the baby shows how mental he was.

JS: try to see around your own mysogeny. The fact is the child didn't kill herself and she was with her father. Children are not "property". There are courts to make these judgements and if you don't like that system, you're in the wrong country. The murder shows just how right the court was in deciding this man wasn't fit to parent.

What a horrible article, it doesn't say whether he was an immigrant or not, legal, illegal...

How are you and I supposed to know which race to be angry with?

And if you don't think I am spot on, you have obviously never read a race related crime article on this site.

Judging from this man's actions, my guess is the mother wanted sole custody because she feared that the child might be kidnapped and never returned to her after time spent with the father. Also, I'm guessing that she delayed reporting it for a couple of days in the hopes that he would come to his senses, and, as a sort of favor to him, she left it open for him to change his mind and avoid being arrested and imprisoned. Obviously she had good reason to keep the child away from him. If he loved his child so much, he never would have harmed her.

To say, possibly, the woman had more money, or could hire a better lawyer is rather rare situation, considering that the mother has the major financial responsibility for the children, with usually less resources as a single parent, than the father. And as a rule, many, many fathers don't want the day to day responsibility of caring for children, chauffering to doctor appointments, school activities, helping with homework, seeing to their everyday needs, being tied down, etc.

There are a specific set of circumstances that must be met... and proven... in order to modify a standing custody order. You can "rail" against women, feminism and every other thing you choose to blame your impotence as a man on, however, at least do so with the knowlege that false reports of abuse will not warrant a change of custody. Such claims must be substantiated by an official agency report.

What WILL result in a modification is withholding, failure to follow orders as written, and credible risk of abduction. We were not given the background so the following is simply speculation based on "reading between the lines." But, he was a foreign national.. so, there may have been some concern regarding credible risk of abduction. He did not return the child to the mother when he was supposed to. The fact that the mother did not report it right away leads me to believe this sort of thing occurred often. That is willfull withholding as well as failing to follow current orders.

As I work in family law, I see this sort of thing on a regular basis - sans the murder, of course. And those idiots who complain about the payment of child support often change their tune once they are on the other side trying to raise a child on a pittance. Every state has statutes that forbid awarding custody based solely on whether the petitioner is the mother. Say what you like, it simply doesn't happen. If you are bitter because you have lost custody of your child to your ex, perhaps you would do better to figure out exactly WHY the judge decided your ex was a more suitable custodian.

I am a woman, I am divorced with children that I have custody of... and I work primarily with male clients looking for an equitable arrangement regarding their own children. I know this story from both sides.

Kevin, in a previous post you said your ex-wife was about to be brought up on perjury charges for her lying so apparently the court didn't buy her load of crap. I don't understand why you still think men are getting a bum wrap all over the place. Yes, everyone has their breaking point but if this man killed his child, it was so his ex wife couldn't have her. We've seen this way too often. Both women and men, never is this justified because of some "breaking point". I have been mad, very very angry and the thought of murdering my children has never entered my mind.

the court doesnt always make the right desicion, judges are morons at times, they judge solely for there own reason if a man cannot afford a lawyer or has a bad lawyer, they he'll lose everything since the woman would start crying in court, blaming everything on the man, im not saying the man is an angel, but he was the father, you take away a man child he'll snap, if he cant have his child nobody will attitude. I blame the woman 100% for trying to rob the man of his child.

The court isnt always right, ill say 60/40 chance the court is right. Even if you had evidence the court wont see your way, because the mother usually wins in the case if she starts to cry in court.

well sorry for the lost of the child, maybe the father thought, she would be raised the same as the mother so, he took it upon himself. so ladies dont take away a father his child, or suffer the consequences.

Sloppy - I confess to exerting herculean effort in suppressing my urge to name you for exactly what you are. Instead, I will attack your weak minded words in the hopes that you can comprehend, at least partially, words that contain more than two syllables.

While I will not argue that the Courts are infallible, the Courts base their decisions on the evidence presented... not who can produce the most tears. You sound as if you are a man who has lost in Court. And given your veiled threats against children because you didn't get your way, I believe the Court acted in the best interest of the child in deciding against you. If this is not your story and you do not yet have progeny, first and foremost -THANK YOU, GOD - and secondly, I do hope your obvious dislike for women will render you impotent long before you actually father a child.

This man was not "robbed" of his child. It is quite obvious he had visitation rights or the child would not be dead. Your "guess-timates" on how often a Court is right are less than impressive since you have offered no evidence other than your "bubba thinks" idea about people crying.

I'll tell you what, the next time you are arrested for the domestic violence you will undoubtably commit, turn on the water works and see how that works for you against damning evidence. If it doesn't work for you, it doesn't work for anyone. Judges have little discretion in making their determinations. There are laws and rules they must follow. To pretend the rulings are arbitrary and based in emotion shows just how ignorant you are about the process.

Judas- What the hell does race have to do with this?

A baby is dead and possibly at her father's hands.. I don't care if they are descendants of F'N zebras. I would just being pissed at the human race because no matter how you look at it, a man could have killed his child..

Just My 2 Coppers - By all means...set your herculean effort aside. Sloppy is in need of a serious what's what.

;-) Have taken deep breaths and am feeling much better. I would like to add, however, that if Sloppy is in the middle of some sort of custody action, he may want to think twice about making such veiled threats through electronic means. You have no idea how many of my clients' exes I have nailed thanks to Facebook. lol

At Judas1953669:

What does race, nationality, creed, etc have to do with murdering anyone? And if you had bothered reading the full article you would have seen in the next to the last paragraph the following:

Samaan had not been charged with a crime. According to the Bee, Samaan was born in Egypt, but is a U.S. citizen.

You sound as if you are one bite shy of committing a crime yourself.

At JS in SD:

I agree that we don't have all of the facts yet surrounding the unfortunate circumstances. Unfortunately it seems as if we have an old fashioned lynch-mob up in here today. You know, guilty as all get-out but we'll prove that after we lynch this scumbag?

Just My and Calico both are wrong on both accounts.

No im not in a battler for anything, and no ive never been in a dispute of domestic violence, ive seen it happened, and no not ON TV. like some morons you are, yes the court are fallible on many account, you saying this make you feel like your a judge or something of these courts, if not why dont you goto a civil court and sit there to watch people fight for what is thier, as i said, the man isnt an angel perhaps, but its gave no right for the woman to take away his child, by lying in court,(which she probably did) a woman will coward behind the law, saying something that didnt happened. he might be an ethic race that is violent by stereotyping people. some are good some are bad. every race has it turmoils.

so both of you get off your high horses.

so smile, and live your life.

also i have three kids and all doing way better than any of yours!

Pfft.

Again, kid, proof or it didn't happen. And I am in civil court on almost a daily basis, so I know exactly what goes on there. The rest of your childish rant, including the incredulous "pfft" at the end will go unchallenged. Enjoy :-) ::clip clopping away on my horse:::

Really sloppy? Do you really think the courts made a mistake in taking away custody from the guy who ended up murdering the child? Because of the wife and courts this killer gets to share fault for his murder? Finally, do you really think that makes sense?

The court was spot on. This evil man was a killer. Now that you know what he was save your sympathy for someone who does not kill children. Makes me sick to see some struggling to support this dead murderer as if there is any good excuse for what he did to that baby girl.

During my divorce, I had the opportunity to speak with an ex-judge.

The question was brought up, why attorneys take women's cases for free a lot of the time. His answer, "Because women win their cases. (That's where the money is)."

Men do NOT have an equal share in the justice court system. Here are some first hand examples...

When the judge went to try and find who should have custody, a child custody evalution was done by a psychiatrist. The reason being, that it takes the decision making process off the judge, and thus less political pressure.

When the evaluation was done, it was literally skewed. Certain points brought up in tests were evaluated completely different to the same points in the same tests when it was compared mother vs father.

A specialist was brought in from literally over 1,000 miles away. Why so far away? Because, when you bring someone in locally, there is the posibility of offending some of their fellow court colleagues when discussing the reevaluation of the tests. ie, nobody wants to do it otherwise.

My $10,000 specialist pointed out ever single flaw in the tests and their assessment. It was proven to the point that the custody evaluator himself was forced to admit bias in the test assessment.

Guess which way it was biased... toward the mother. btw, the psychologist got into big doo doo with the APA for this.

Guess who lost anyways... yup, that's right. Was another evaluation done? nope.

Now... here is what happened when the economy went down and child support was asked to be lowered due to loss of job... 'referred to the D.A.s office' Even though the court had totally ability to rule right there and then. Why?

Well, it appears that the judges are scared stiff of the National Organization of Women. To the literal point that they actually had an open man-hating lesbian judge providing custody to drug addicted mothers.

When I worked for the Eighth Judicial District Court, I was once surprised to hear of a judge ordering to have her toilet completely removed and replaced because she learned that a male judge had used it. I forgot her name, just that it started with 'Z' and she was the head judge at the time.

First, I am not arguing with the anecdotal evidence you cite... however, your statement that women's cases are done for free because women win (that's where the money is) confuses me. Surely, you are not trying to insinuate the lawyers are getting awards based upon what the women win, right? Because, that actually violates both the law and the ABA. Attorneys are not allowed to represent anyone in a divorce or custody dispute for a percentage of the "win." Also, the Courts are not allowed to award attorney's fees to a party who does not actually pay attorney's fees. So, I fail to see how taking free cases helps make them money.

Sloppy...forgive the cliche', but, dude...

I'm thinking a big fat hush might keep the lynch mob, of which there are more than two members, off of you.

@F Walsh, Of course, most of us will never be pushed that far thankfully, but the point is, that when women treat men unfairly by trying to cut them out as parents (and this happens ALL THE TIME), you can never know if someone will break and do something horrific. The fact is that these types of tragedies happen quite frequently, with horrific consequences, and I don't care what anyone says, the mother is often contributory, as are the judges, who are also biased.

I don't care what sloppy says, his name speaks volumes for himself.. Sloppy is a troll that can't argue a point and i refuse to argue with a troll.

Race has nothing to do with killing a child..

However I do work with the courts. I am an advocate and counselor, my specialty is DV. I happen to agree with Just my 2 coppers, she speaks the truth because she lives it..

Laughs i have 8 kids, 3 biological and 5 adopted from parents that were like sloppy, misguided and uneducated.. ~Smiles~ I have other foster children that have graced my very happy home but were moved back to their own homes because their parents got their acts together.

I'll see your pfftt and raise you a DUH..

"I'll see your pfftt and raise you a DUH..."

Hilarious!

@PsychoDoc, clearly you are a moron if you can't see that someone outside of the actor can also be culpable. Funny, the law often charges such actors if they facilitate an act in other situations. The law recognizes that people can indeed influence other people to act, and when they can prove it, they also face charges. So why don't you grow up idiot.

In regard to THIS story, the mom originally had joint custody with the father so that shows that she did try; otherwise, she could have contested joint custody from day one. I'm guessing she isn't a spiteful ex and he probably showed signs/made threats for her to seek full custody and the courts revising the custody order after the fact would lead me to believe that there was a lot of evidence to support her claims. There are typically alot of court appearances, mediations, and ad litems involved before a revision to an existing custody order is made. It's not a decision the courts make lightly. This guy murdered his own child to spite his ex-wife...cleary, this woman was right about her ex-husband.

To answer the question about attorney's getting money for taking women's cases. Often, the male cannot afford an attorney and it is easy pickings for the attorney to ask the judge to order the male to pay for attorney's fees.

I don't know what state you live in where the court cannot provide attorney's fees where none is paid, but in Nevada they do it on a very continous basis. Sounds like a good idea, in my opinion. In my case however, I was able to scrape by enough to pay for my own attorney and the opposing attorney got left holding the bag with my paying him.

Even though the opposing attorney testified that he was taking the case pro-bono, he still asked for me to pay him. When he didn't get it, he took HER to court and made got an order to make her pay 1/3 of what he demanded that I pay.

Sorry I didn't make that more clear with my previous comment.

Miller v. Wilfong, 121 Nev. Adv. Op. 61 (2005) did provide that pro bono attorneys are allowed to ask for a return on their expenses, the guidelines required are pretty stringent. The attorney has to prove their expenses - not just their "usual rate" and this is hardly ever awarded unless it is deemed that the person who initiated the action had a merit-less claim. Hardly a "continuous basis." And for the record, it is common procedure for both sides to ask for "costs and fees" whether you are the man or the woman; whether you are Plaintiff of Defendant; and no matter who initiated the action. Browse through the family court files and you will see "costs and fees and related matters" at the end of every motion and counter motion.

Thank you for the information, it may be useful. However, what is happening is still happening. However, I think I'll forward your information to Equal Rights for Fathers, they may be able to use it.

The attorney in my case asked for me to pay him $35,000, then turned around and tried to sue her (when he didn't get it) for $10,000. Something not equal there.

Also, I noticed that the judges were hardly ever asking for 'proof' of anything, they were just making quick decision and trying to get on with the next case.

I was sued by two attorneys during my case when I couldn't pay them, and it was just a quicky 'here's the bill, now give me my order to collect'. Nothing proven or anything.

Despite my insisting and insisting and insisting... NONE of my attorneys ever did ask for court costs from her, and I had a total of three attorneys who would conveniently 'forget' at the right moment. Seemed VERY suspicious to me. The last one didn't get paid, as I felt it was unfair that he didn't even ask. He tried to collect, but hasn't been successful so far.

Oy vey! That's an expensive divorce! lol I will grant you that sometimes judges do seem to "skim" information due to the backlog of cases. That is one reason to represent yourself when you can, judges tend to be a bit more solicitous when during a pro se hearing. Now, if you have complex issues to be argued, I wouldn't recommend this. lol Good luck to you in any case... and keep an eye on your credit report. If there was a judgment that included you paying any legal fees, attorney's can take a simple step to report it to your credit agency file. Also, if you own any property - and that includes a vehicle - a lien is entirely possible.

Kevin C. please show me where I said that mothers don't lie to help their case? I said whether she lied or not it's ridiculous to blame her for her husband killing her child. You might want to work on your comprehension skills.

Never - is a very big 5 letter word . I would hope that if your children were not being raised right you would do something - the only reason would be you don't want the responsibilty and give up your time , today a lot of men have custody of the children - or half .

I commend you for your honor in not taking the children from their mother (provided ... as art-1847145 intimated ... that she is a loving mother). I hope you find a certain 'peace' as hatred is a poison which will take its toll on YOUR health. Speak gently and respectfully to your children about their mother and in time, they will understand the sacrifices YOU made for them and love you more dearly for it.

Signed,

An EX wife whose children respect me for being civil to their father under very difficult circumstances - and through whom I did not wage war against him. They are now grown and see for themselves why we could not continue as a married family and recognize the sacrifices we BOTH made to ensure their childhood was as peaceful and stable as possible. Afterall, my EX and I want THEM to be happy and to be wise parents.

I applaud you, Sofka. My parents split up when I was 12 and had a sort of joint custody (we never lived with our father any part of the time but he could have us with him almost any weekend he wanted). As the oldest sibling I was subject to many interrogations about the other parent and got to hear the blame game of why it didn't work out and I hated it. I wanted to be loyal to both but felt I had side with whichever one I was with at the time. Also, after I grew up and had my own child they could never be at the same place at the same time making it very difficult for many situations where families have get-togethers.

Sofka and statreno, I got the ire of my ex and a bad mistake inbetween the ex and my current (20 years married), and the children were raised on a steady diet of what a horrible evil person I am. I NEVER spoke evil of the mother or their new whatevers to the children. It is a weak and immature perspective that thinks to make children the ally in some battle against their mother or father.

I had relationship with them, filtered through the ex-es, and I learned full well the meaning of a certain passage of scripture from the Bible in the book of Malachi (New American Standard version) which says, "'For I hate divorce', says the Lord God, 'For it covers the skirt with violence.'" I've long ago forgiven myself for what I did all those years ago, but the regret and sense of loss is mine forever. I now have an opportunity to bring change. I'm being offered a position in a location within 10 miles of where 3 of my 4 adult children live, and finally we may have relationship apart from any other's influence.

Having said that, I think perhaps there was some religious and cultural issues at play, here. Clearly he's middle eastern, I think Lebanese (?) and in those countries women just don't get divorces from their husbands. In addition, in strict Islamic societies, the father retains custody.

I don't know why anyone would go online and profess hatred for their ex-spouse. If something were to happen to that ex-spouse, u know that you would one of the first people interrogated. A search of your computer which records all your posts could possibly make u a suspect. We don't need to know how much u hate ur spouse, and it may come back to haunt you. Is it really worth it?

Scumball. I hate my ex-wife with a passion but I'd never take our children from her.

I know, children are a lot of work...

If my parents divorced when I was a minor, though, I wish my father raised me rather than be made to pay my mother on my behalf. Too bad in most divorce cases, fathers are treated as just financial providers while mothers are deemed 'caregivers' no matter what

A baby is dead and you're worried about custody rights??? Really, who raised you people?

A baby is dead and you're worried about custody rights??? Really, who raised you people?

Nothing in this news article says why and how the baby and the father died. Really, who taught you about justice system, if any, to you people who know it all and donot need one?

BTW, since it isn't clear to you people, my earlier comment above was a response to the general statement made by the (clearly) quoted one, in which the person declares his 'passionate hatred' to the mother of his kids and still deems it his nobility that he trusts such a person would have custody of his children. He, for certain, is a very selfish and irresponsible man who should never have had children in the first place.

Thats honest.

Hmmmm................hate and passion all in one sentence. "It's a thin line between love and hate" It seems to me you have some unresolved feelings towards the ex. Let it go sweetie, life is too short. As this poor toddler found out by the hand of her own father. Trust me, he did it to "get back" at his ex-wife. Yeah he really showed her!

To bad people like that even have children.

kendralke : Whatever it is that 'seems' to you, you'd better keep it to yourslf and write a comment up after reading and making up your mind on which comments you want to respond to. That way, you will be clear about it yourself.

It's ironic that people like you that are sure the father is the killer when the father and baby died, would have had no doubt that the father did it if mother and baby were found dead instead as well. It's the highly prejudiced ones like you that fail systems that are put in place for smooth functioning of society. Hope you never qualify for a jury duty. And good luck to your spouse and children if and when you have some while walking on your 'thin line'.

Another Casey Anthony scenario, except Casey was too selfish to kill herself, and let her child live.

Parents? There should be some system in order to get a profile on who will be a devoted parent or who will not be. Human sexual biology.

It is too bad, people react with their private parts first, having no brains or compassion.

This is so sad. Very sad. He left more victims than himself, and his daughter. Poor baby, an innocent child again.

my brother had two kids with this one girl, and she took them away from her, told the kids the father was a bad person, my brother loved his kids. but the mother kept drilling that their father was a bad person. actully its the oppisite. but the court ruled in her favor. he has not seen his sons in almost 19 years now.

and she drilled him for child support.

why do women do stuff like that, why.

Some women are truly scorned and spiteful, I have known a few to rake a man over the coals by using the kids because the man left her or cheated on her..

But you gotta look at the opposite side here also.. My oldest daughter's father has never paid a dime of child support and has molested a few children (supposed) in his time.. He has 9 kids in total now.. I have sole custody, she is going to be 16 in a week.. I have never said a bad word about the a-hole in-front of her. Today she hates him for promising to send presents and never following threw, for always bad mouthing me when she went to their family functions.. Kids see more than we know and they can form their own choices.

If this really happened, Sloppy, I would say your brother failed these children. First of all, alienation is against the statutes that govern family law. If your brother could prove that the mother of the children was behaving in this matter and did not address it with the Court, then he did his children a dis-service. Secondly, if it has been 19 years, then the children have obviously reached the age of majority. If he hasn't contacted them and attempted to re-connect, again, this is "his bad."

There is no Court in this country that would completely sever the ties between a parent and child without sufficient proof that it was in the child's best interest. Your brother can love the children all that he wants, that does not discount any danger he presents to their wellbeing.

And child support is a completely separate matter from custody. Why do men think that if they walk out of a child's life, they are no longer responsible for the child's welfare? Why?

True that, Calico. I have had clients with exwives that, while not raping anyone financially since there is a set rate for everyone, had made it very uncomfortable for the men to exercise visitation with their children.. for everyone involved. My advice is to stay calm, rational and say nothing to the children. The children always see the truth eventually and the calm parents ends up with greater appreciation from the child.

Just My 2 Coppers- There is more then 2 sides to most stories..

My father punished my mother and would never take us because she initiated the divorce because he was an abusive son of a btch.. She wanted us to spend time at dad's house and he refused to come near us because she wanted us, she could have us.. When he did pick us up we had to listen to the 2 day tirade of what a whore our mother was and his next scheme for getting out of child support.. My father and I have the ugliest relationship because i remember turning 18 and he said, "hahaha I no longer have to support you because YOU were only adopted." I think I have seen him twice in the last 5 years, the time before that i had to defend my brother who is 7 years younger then I am because our SOB father was going after him with a baseball bat..

Yes, ugly runs on both sides of the spectrum when it comes to parents and custody disputes.. I don't think women or men are better then each other.. If you really love your children, you have to forget all anger and love them because you don't have to love their mother or father..

Agreed, Calico. And while it is difficult to put aside some of that left over anger, it is certainly not impossible. As I mentioned in another post, I am a divorced mom with custody... and work primarily with divorced fathers. So, I really do know both sides of the coin. I believe the experience of working with dads helped me whether my own tribulations without needlessly involving the children we have in common.

Your dad sounds like a POS that doesn't deserve a minute of your consideration. I was an adult when my parents divorced, my dad did the same thing in distancing himself from his children to spite my mom. Who is the clear loser in this type of situation? lol

I hold NO love for my ex. He was horrible to me and almost cost me everything, both financially and emotionally. But my children love their dad and because of that, I will NEVER say anything about him to them. I love them too much to hurt them because of my own ego.

Sloppyjoes: If your story is accurate, the mother was/is an A$$Whole. I strongly suspect, however, based on my observation over the years of many dozens, of cases, that your version is very FFAAAARRRR from the truth. Even if I'm right, that doesn't necessarily mean the mother was an angel, either, of course. However, I doubt the dad was either. F'instance, his sons became adults at eighteen. So howcome daddy hasn't AT LEAST tried to set up a relationship in the last several years, even if she did keep them from him before they became legal adults?

Matilda, save your strength. Sloppy is a kid who wanted to try his hand at grownup coversation. lol Unfortunately, a certain maturity level is required to present your ideas without "outing" yourself as a child. He does not possess that level. :-/

There are so many scenarios in bad, abusive marriages---the woman is afraid to divorce most of the time (abusive), because she knows her boyfriend, ex, or crappy husband will kill she and her children--

The woman is held hostage by the abuser, or vice versa--it is hard to get out of one of these types of marriages, even if it is life-threatening--

It is called the Stockholm Syndrome in many of these cases---well-knowing some family members who belong out on their keisters. All of us have skeletons in our closets--

Human garbage.

Hawaii very spot on.. Many times there self esteem is so depleted they are afraid no one will ever want them (Mental)..

I have dealt with many types of abuse; physical, sexual, mental and mixes of the above named.

DV has such a huge cycle that it's sometimes nearly impossible to break for some women.. Once they do, it's hard keeping them from becoming magnets for abusive men. Also generations of DV can be a factor in ones life.

Calico:

Agreed. The victims (spouses) have been so "beaten down; no self-esteem", and/or brainwashed by the abuser. They do not know where to turn. The abused have NO trust in anyone outside of their own home-- they tell lies to protect their abusive partner.

It is sick. They don't listen to family members, because they think their "G-d" of a spouse is so protective, possessive, and knows everything--it is a sham--Sometimes they choose the spouse over the child--an enabler-co dependant.

The poor children are the real losers in families like this--then sometimes comes in to play child molestation by the abuser--no one talks about it--it is a family secret--thus protecting the abuser again--for fear there will be reprisal.

Thank you for your work and interest in this part of life--I am way too familiar with all the scenarios--everyone outside is helpless, because the family member will not cooperate with the distant relatives..

@matilda, the mother hid the children, he doesnt know where they are or if they even asked her if he still alive he knows nothing of them. he tattooed the last picture of them on his chest when they were 4-5 years old.

Calico, i was about to believe you but your spelling is way off so you have been denied. The same goes for justmy2coppers.

Just to think you would have taken anyone down, but failed. Oh well.

Talk about trolls. must be the same persons.

LMAO sloppy your post #1.39 - Sun Aug 14, 2011 11:56 AM PDT

Okay OKay i'll take the bait troll...

I wanted the spelling and grammar police to take you down but apparently they were busy on another vine. There is so many spelling and grammatical errors I don't know what you were trying to say..

;)

isnt everyone happy now

So this justifies killing his child? What a lame response, he probably didn't fare to well in the pysch evaluation or had other inappropriate behavior as the reason he lost custody.

Scotti, I agree with you except in today's economic times it's hard to say why he lost custody. It may be he lost all his ability to support his child and himself or just himself. I know love is a very powerful thing but there is no reason to take a child or anyone's life over emotions. Things may have worked out next week, next year or maybe longer but if he had just let everything take its time he would have been able to spend the rest of his life with her. We may never know why now.

and thats a more ridiculous statement....the custody issue is fake...... most doctors are seen as authority and spend a hour judging someones life...the majority of psych doctors are very poor in profiling parents and use their authority to divide......society has a responsiblity to all children...their parents, grandparents, native and immigrant..and you accuse as well....his justification of his act is in both of your lame ignorant arguements....

The way I read the story, originally, joint custody was awarded, then she faught for [and was awarded] sole custody. I guess we should presume she had good reason to remove custody rights from him given the outcome.

Michael- I think you need to talk to someone about whatever issues you're having real soon. Your comments are starting to worry me.

"...the majority of psych doctors are very poor in profiling parents and use their authority to divide..."

Maybe so, maybe not..... SITE YOUR SOURCE if you're going to make such claims...

The article didn't say that he killed her, it said that the cause of death was unknown. Maybe they fell asleep in the car and overheated or suffocated. Or maybe someone else killed them. We should wait for the facts before we start typing our crazy opinions.

Michael sounds like he's making perfect sense to me.

I think the courts underestimate the psychological and emotional pain a father has when a institution like an impersonal court tries to separate him from his progeny, a child he loves and feels a deep sense of responsibility for.

There isn't enough detail in this story to judge what happened that resulted in the court's decision, but obviously oblivion was an appealing antidote to his deep pain and emotional distress, or more likely, a religious belief - led him to believe he could take her with him, to care for and love her, and escape the court's sentence - which to him - seemed and unbearable eternity in physical and emotional pain.

And no doubt, it included some satisfaction that his wife would be hurt and devastated, and feel remorse for what she did to him.

Courts should weigh these possibilities - and ensure a child is safe - before they make decisions that could jeopardize the child's life.

But the article does say that he kidnapped her and then cut off all contact with family members. I wish the mother had not waited to file a report, but for whatever reason, she did. Not calling her out, so to speak, because if someone is determined to do harm, they can be focused like a laser in that intent. Even and especially if they have had a psychotic break or is just mad at the world. I hope that people do not hesitate to call a report in when a child is not back when expected. Yes, sometimes (hopefully most of the time) it will just be a matter of the child arriving back late. But sometimes, it's not, it's this.

There could be many reasons for the delay in reporting; perhaps the fear of him doing something like this or, at the other end of the spectrum, the belief that although upset he'd do the right thing and is just spending time with her because of the judgement. Only the mother knows, and is certainly in hell right now; can't imagine that kind of pain.

Time will tell and time will heal.

Well, michael a ... it would seem that the court and/or doctors if involved, made the right decision. Any father who would kill a 2-year-old child because he lost custody clearly has mental issues and is not fit to have custody.

Wouldn't you think?

How do you figure they made a right decision?? I doubt this little girl would be dead right now if not for the decision.

Sandie-644591

But the article does say that he kidnapped her and then cut off all contact with family members. I wish the mother had not waited to file a report, but for whatever reason, she did. Not calling her out, so to speak,

I'll call her out, why didn't she report it immediately? I'm not in anyway accusing her of anything but I've been in this position (my ex kidnapped my daughter TWICE) as soon as he was an hour late bringing her back and wouldn't answer his phone I called, they found them within hours at his mom's house, the second time it took them 3 days to find them in a flop house with my daughter crawling around drugs and needles.

Sandie: She was probably afraid of being beheaded.

Jeanette - You're definitely on the right track. His HONOR was betrayed by the court who awarded custody to the mother. That is the WORST insult. Did you know that according to Sharia law the father (and his family) is ALWAYS awarded custody? The mother can just disappear, as far as they are concerned...

I suspect michael arcangel is a divorced parent deemed unfit for custody.

Did you know that according to Sharia law the father (and his family) is ALWAYS awarded custody?

Did you know that Sharia law does not apply in the United States?

Baddog: try to use some logic here. The girl would have been safe as long as everyone behaved and did what the father wanted??? What court would responsibly make that custody decision??

Elle, a Court's primary concern when determining custodial arrangements is the BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD; and that is as it should be. Whether or not the non-custodial parent suffers from emotional trauma as a result of the Court's decision is regrettable, but immaterial. Adults are presumed to have the capacity to sort through their own emotions. Personally, the idea of Court's taking anything into account regarding the parent's "feelings" repulsive. Simply put, when two people are fighting for custody of the child, one of them IS going to get their "feelings" hurt. That is why the Court's consideration should be limited to what is best for the child.

In any event, giving a parent a custodial award simply because you are fearful that they will "snap" under the weight of their own sorrow is tantamount to extortion, and the parent that demands such is no better than a terrorist. "Do what I want or I might hurt someone."

L S, you are right that Sharia law does not apply in the U.S. However, that does not stop men from the Middle East from applying it to the women in their families. Just a few months ago, a man killed his teenaged daughter because he thought she was to "westernized". Usually, these men run back to the M.E. where they go to court and get full custody because women are possessions of the man.

Mercury, that is simply not true. Jurisdiction is held by the child's home state. Even if the men were able to get their own country's Court to grant them custody, that Court does not have jurisdiction unless the child lives there as well.

The guys a US citizen anyway, so the point is moot. This IS his home country.

And the mother bears no blame, you don't know what initial communication she had from him. He could have asked for some extra time after the ruling, then disappeared with the child, prompting the mother to file her report once she stopped hearing from him. Most people don't call the cops on their exes the second they are late, even during a custody dispute, because most people never consider the other parent would hurt the kid. And most of the time, they'd be right.

To add to what Capt has posted, in cases of simple parental kidnapping, and AMBER alert is not issued unless the child was presumed to be in physical danger. When a parent does not return a child on time, there is an entire court proceedure that has to be followed prior to getting a "pick-up" order for the return of the child. This process can take several days. Several of the dads that I have worked with usually try to find the child on their own first, then attempt to reason with the other party... and if that fails, then a report is filed and we go to Court.

If this particular father had failed to bring the child home on time in the past and did not pose a physical threat during those times, I can understand the mother following the steps as described above.

The state receives about $1 in federal funds for every $1 it collects. So, there is a lot of incentive to rip children away from one parent in hopes of collecting from the other.

<sigh> You do realize those funds MUST be used in the collection of child support, right? The fed funds were given in response to the states' claims that the Federal mandate on child support collection would stretch their own budgets too thin to actually maintain a child support collection division. This is not money the state can spend on a whim.. it is mandated that it go only towards support collection proceedures. There is no benefit to the state to award primary custody simply to get fed funds.

Also, a small minority of child support is actually processed through the state. Most child support is given directly from the payee to the payor. The only time governmental agencies get involved is when support is not remitted, or when one party files a claim for state aid on behalf of a child. But... nice try.

Just

I'm a paralegal (though w/little Family Court exp), but I'm generallly cognizant of family court procedure and custody law, and familiar with it's fallable psychologists, social workers, stupid judges (they exist) and impersonal court environments that sometimes produce insufficient, imperfect case information, and often fail to recognize that false assumptions - like adults are always going to responsible and "emotionally stable" - is what can get a baby like this one killed.

The kind of physical and emotional pain that causes people to kill themselves and innocents with them - like children - is not well understood unless you've actually felt something like it personally. (Descriptions of clinical depression, which includes the complete absense of hope is a beginning.)

There ought to be lot of changes in our judicial systems, but one of the most important should be some awareness or sensitivity training for Family Court personnel so they can be aware it exists, and have some rudimentary understanding of it psychologically, so they can do a better job of protecting the children involved in these highly emotional cases.

Just my opinion....

Your opinion is respected, Elle, and I thank you for sharing it. :-) However, I just don't happen to agree with some of the reasoning. I have actually "been there, done that" in my own life before embarking on a career to hopefully help others avoid some of the pitfalls in the system.

And while the pain was overwhelming, and I probably would not have fought death had it come for me during this time, there was NEVER a time when I considered killing my child. I do not believe that this would cause a rational person to take the life of their child... and if they are not rational, they do not need to be unsupervised with the child.

There have been a great deal of changes within the FC systems and I am sure that there are more to come. It is unlikely to ever be perfect but it IS better and can be made better still. However, this will be accomplished through caring, prudent and responsible parents that are willing to take on the mantle of proving these changes are in the best interest of the children involved; it will not be accomplished by the terroristic threats of parents who will harm the child if he/she doesn't get what he/she wants.

As an older sister of a brother who, just 1 year ago, lost all rights to custody based on the outright LIES put into a statement requesting a Protective Order, and even AFTER the Protective Order was dismissed watched helplessly while his ex-wife moved and took his beloved autistic child some 10 hours away with not ONE bit of resistance by Family Court, I take exception to the statement that ANY changes have or will be made that serve to level the playing field. SHE got free legal representation because of her BOGUS claims of violence, while I paid some $15,000 to an attorney who has since been disbarred and who did NOTHING with all of the information gathered by the private detective we hired. I KNEW her statements relative to "abuse" were lies BECAUSE SHE TOLD ME SO HERSELF! How's THAT for JUSTICE!?!?!

We do not yet know how this man & his 2 year old daughter died. If he did kill her and then himself, there is NO excuse for that behavior whatsoever. But, being a first-hand witness to the emotional devastation of Parental Alienation, I FULLY understand how a disenfranchised and disregarded parent can be pushed beyond their ability to cope, why they often seem to come unraveled because there is NO ONE to help and no money to get help if it were even available, why they become despondent when their CS payments exceed their income because noone cared to look at the income statement presented them, and why some parents just throw their hands up, walk away and try to forget. I would NEVER have made these statements a year ago. I've seen Parental Alienation in action and is UGLY AND PLAIN WRONG, FOLKS! Thanks to a solid and devoted family, including 6 siblings and parents that are still living, my brother is alive today and beginning to get back on his feet, said feet being knocked out from under him by a brutally arrogant and entitlement-minded ex-wife and a court system that just didn't give a rat's fat pink ass! If I could have capture my brothers tears and the tears we ALL cried over the devastation of having that child ripped out of OUR lives, I could solve Texas' drought problems. . .TRUST me on that!

I PRAY this man did not do what we might think he did. If he did, there is absoltely NO excuse for taking the life of his daughter. In my brother's darkest hours he NEVER thought of doing ANYTHING to his son, for Rice Chex sake!!!

I agree that there needs to more done to mitigate the devastation of losing custody of a child, no matter the issues involved, and there needs to be more consideration of what the child needs and I ASSURE you, a child needs both parents in his/her life if at ALL possible. "Where's daddy?" Yeah, try explaining THAT one to a 6 year old innocent child who only gets to talk to his daddy once or twice a week. . NOT!

Askn, I would not ever claim that justice is always served in Court. That doesn't mean that improvements have not been made through the efforts of those who have worked tirelessly to promote equality in the Courts. You story is horrific and highlights where almost ALL men would have found themselves twenty years ago.

However, you have said yourself that the attorney your brother used was inept and has since been disbarred. Having an BAD attorney is much worse than having no attorney at all. I don't know which state you are in nor the specifics on the matter before the Court. But in my State, permission to relocate with the child requires evidence that the move would substantially benefit the child. While extenuating circumstances such as claims of abuse, ect. are usually brought up by people seeking to prop up their argument, it isn't required to prove that the other parent is "less than" to be granted permission to relocate.

The person seeking to stop the relocation, in turn, must prove to the Court that the child's interests are better served by remaining in the home state.. or that the other spouse is only seeking to relocate to disrupt the relationship between the non-moving parent and the child. It sounds as if the attorney used did not address this REQUIRED part of the argument and, instead, focused on the negative issues of the mom.

For example, if a parent requests permission to relocate because the child had a health issue and the proposed move would place them closer to a particular health institute, the other parent cannot base their objection on "well, she never reimbursed me for a medical bill I paid AND she is lying about not being able to find a job." The non-moving party simply did not address the reason for the move. The argument that would be more effective would be "the health facility that we have here is just as capable of seeing to the child's needs and the child's condition would be exacerbated by not having all of the family support he has here."

Having full custody does not exclude the other parent from seeing the child. There is visitation set up as well. It sounds like the court gave him visitation (he did have the child, and was suppose to bring her back at a certain time) but he wasn't having it........ When I divorced my ex-husband, I had full custody, but my son could see his dad any time he wanted, and my ex could make arrangements to come pick up our son any time he wanted.

The court gave custody to the mother for a reason, and obviously and sadly the reasons have now been manifest. He is deserving of death, but unfortunately, he took his daughter with him. He really wanted to hurt the mother. We are talking about a very sick, mentally imbalanced man. Not insane, but SICK-SICK-SICK, to harm your own little darling girl.

asknreceive: Your brother's story is vivid and painful to read, and precisely the kind of injustice I was referring to. I hope he finds some resolution and peace somehow. Thanks for sharing.

Just My 2 Coppers:

There’s nothing to disagree about :), I think perhaps, however, you have far more faith in human beings (be they parents or judges) than I do.

I’m watching today in my local area the story of a father who killed his disabled 8-year-old son. When police arrived at the home, the boy’s dismembered body was in a plastic bag on the back porch, and his decapitated head had rolled out into the street.

I cried my eyes out over the little Texas girl who was stuffed in a tiny box and left to suffocate because she took a Popsicle.

I’m glad you’re actively involved in improving the FC system, but I’m not sure how anyone knows a parent is “irrational” or “prudent and responsible’ by just looking at them.

If anyone had bothered to look into Susan Smith’s background before she let her car roll into a lake with her two small sons in it they might have suspected something, but on the outside she looked perfectly normal. She killed her children so she could be with a man.

Casey Anthony likewise smothered her 2-year-old and threw a plastic bag with her remains into a swamp 2 blocks from her house because she wanted to “live the beautiful life.”

Andrea Yates was her class valedictorian, captain of the swim team and an officer in the National Honor Society, and had two years of nursing school before she drowned her five children in the bathtub.

My point is, when you’re dealing with people, you’re not dealing with a known quantity that can always be counted on to act predictably.

I’m sick to death of hearing story after story like this one, of what parents are capable of doing to their children, and if a court (or any institution) has some window of opportunity to prevent harm to a child and isn’t structured such that it can provide that protection, I just think that’s human error, poor planning, ineptitude veering head-long into gross negligence. I just have less tolerance for Courts' privileged status of "plausible deniability if culpability" for blame in FC cases than you apparently do.

But I have no say so about it (except as a witness to events), so my opinion is very much, just that, one opinion!

I'm posting another article about this case from the Sacramento Bee below (I’m not allowed to post links..lol). The mother was a California Deputy Attorney General. I imagine there was some expectation that her ex-husband was an individual that was surely "prudent and rational."

Grandfather of slain girl blames court system

By Stephen Magagnini and Peter Hecht
smagagnini@sacbee.com

Published: Tuesday, Aug. 16, 2011 - 12:00 am | Page 1B

Last Modified: Tuesday, Aug. 16, 2011 - 6:58 am

Mourad "Moni" Samaan killed himself and his 2-year-old daughter, Madeleine Layla Samaan-Fay following a bitter custody battle that began even before the child was born, Samaan's father said Monday.

In an exclusive interview with The Bee, Dr. Makram Samaan said his son and granddaughter – found inside his son's sport-utility vehicle on Saturday evening in El Dorado County – died of carbon monoxide poisoning from the exhaust pipe. (Authorities haven't confirmed the cause of death.)

The girl's mother, California Deputy Attorney General Marcia Ann Fay, 46, has declined to comment after several requests by The Bee.

Makram Samaan – a psychologist who helps couples mediate disputes and divorces – held his hands to the heavens and cried: "I've helped thousands of people and saved a lot of families, but I failed my son – I did not see it. I did not see it! Why should it not be me?"

Samaan, who wrote his master's thesis on suicide, said he knew his son Moni was in distress, but had no inkling how much.

He blamed the courts for driving his son over the edge.

"We need to take marriage and divorce out of the courts," said a sobbing Samaan at his Fair Oaks home overlooking Lake Natoma.

The courts turn love into hate, Samaan said. "One has to win and one has to be defeated. That isn't marriage, that isn't family – it doesn't matter what the dispute is."

Samaan – a Coptic Christian from Egypt – described his son Moni, a 49-year-old engineer for Hewlett-Packard, as a devoted, loving father. "He potty-trained his daughter," he said. "He taught her how to swim and kayak and bought her a small guitar and they'd play and sing together."

"He taught her how to speak three languages," Samaan said, gazing tearfully at a photo of his joyful, curly-haired granddaughter riding her magenta bicycle. "Only in America can a little girl say, 'I love you, Grandpa' in English, Arabic and Spanish."

On Saturday, Aug. 6, Moni Samaan was spending the day with his daughter when he learned that a Sacramento County judge had awarded her mother full custody. He and Madeleine had been visiting friends on a court-approved visit in Oregon.

Samaan, 85, said his son called him to say he was scared of losing his daughter. "He said to me, 'I'm always going to be a defendant.' " Samaan tried to reassure him, saying that patience and kindness would ultimately win out.

But that night, his son took off with his granddaughter. Fay – who was scheduled to pick up her daughter that Sunday morning – reported her missing Aug. 7.

After a call from the FBI, which had issued an Amber alert, El Dorado County sheriff's deputies – with the help of a California Highway Patrol helicopter – searched a wooded, 40-acre property near the town of Grizzly Flat where they found Moni Samaan's Toyota 4Runner containing the two bodies.

Investigators found the vehicle in a clearing beneath pine trees, some 500 yards up a winding dirt road off String Canyon Road, said El Dorado County Sheriff's Lt. Brian Golmitz. The parcel was jointly owned by Moni Samaan and his younger brother Nabil.

Dr. Samaan said his son Moni graduated from American River College and UC Davis and had a long career with Hewlett-Packard.

He loved windsurfing, fishing and kayaking and sailed solo from Hawaii to California, said Samaan, himself an avid sailor. "He saved me from drowning in the Red Sea."

About four years ago, "he said he met a beautiful woman on the Internet, she's good, she's an attorney," Samaan said. "They got married in March 2006."

The couple separated before Madeleine was born December 2008. He said Moni learned of his child's birth from his brother and sister-in-law.

Samaan said perhaps his son died for him to start a movement to take marriage disputes out of the courts. "The mother and father are mother and father forever," he said. "We need to save America by saving the family."

Well-wishers placed stuffed animals outside the mother's house Monday. A note pinned to a teddy bear read, "I'm so sorry about your loss. Let's hope Madeleine is safe and taken care of in heaven."

Elle, I work very hard at retaining my faith in humanity. lol You mentioned that you were in the legal profession, as am I. I work exclusively in family law and have seen things that would give me nightmares had I not seen even more instances in which everyone involved truly works in the best interests of the child. Out of the literally thousands of cases I have knowledge of, only a small percentage of those end up in tragedy for anyone involved. But those stories are run of the mill and do not make headlines. Stories such as this one do. While I do agree that some progress needs to be made in equality, it must be done carefully so as not play to the issues of the few at the expense of the many.

Court culpability for incidence such as this are not logical. if the former wife of the man did not suspect he was not "rational," the Courts, who are used to people exaggerating conditions for posturing purposes, certainly cannot be expected to have this foresight. Of course, a simple solution would be to mandate psychological evaluations for both parents in a custody dispute. But that solution would violate an individuals constitutional rights and I am sure someone would notice that eventually. lol

As heartbreaking as it is to read the words of the grandfather, it still sounds as if the issues were about the father's needs, as opposed to the child's. After a 2 year custody battle, most parents understand that you have to step back and realize it simply is not about you. Had the mother been an abusive parent, or somehow less that fit, you could almost understand the father's concern. However, that doesn't appear to be the case. It seems he, and those close to him, were primarily concerned with the effect a custody modification would have on the father... and that is the absolute wrong mindset.

Samaan should realize that his son did not die to "start a movement." His son died because he was self-centered and unconcerned with his daughter's best interests. In every state, the mother and father remain the mother and father regardless of divorce. Only the most egregious of offenses will cost you a relationship with your child. His call to take marriage disputes out of the courts is not only illogical, as marriage IS a legal contract, but it seeks to remove blame from his son at the expense of the lives and wellbeing of thousands of men, women and children. His son owns the responsibility for the horrific act he visited upon that family. When we, as a society, demand that individuals take responsibility for their own actions, then we will come ever closer to the elusive equality that we all seek.

<sigh>

So the people collecting the money and making the decision on how much to collect are the ones being paid even more to collect even more?

Sounds pretty neutral to me... not.

No. Those deciding the child support amount are in the family court. The district attorney's office is responsible for the collection efforts for those in arrears. The additional monies given by the feds is to aid DA's in hiring the additional staff required to collect the monies. So, you have it wrong.

Guess what... last time I tried to get a reduction in child support from the courts... it was referred, by the very judge in the very court, to the District Attorney's office.

Courts are very quick to give orders, but chicken out to lower the amounts in the orders.

You seem to know your stuff, in theory JM2C. So I mean no offence, but I suggest living on the lower end and seeing what happens. Different story down here.

"We need to take marriage and divorce out of the courts," said a sobbing Samaan at his Fair Oaks home overlooking Lake Natoma.

The courts turn love into hate, Samaan said. "One has to win and one has to be defeated. That isn't marriage, that isn't family – it doesn't matter what the dispute is."

Whoa... this person hit the nail right on the head...

I actually was getting along with my ex- until she got her attorney, who (according to her own words) promised her a lot of money to win in the case.

After that, it was cut-throat and kill, for the next three years. Her with a free attorney, and me paying through the nose, usually for incompetent ones that cared nothing for the case.

My expert witness even commented, "I think his attorney sabotaged the case."

I don't think we should take marriage and divorce out of the courts. Just an example - my ex-husband was abusive toward me. He also became a drug addict and alcoholic while we were married, refused to work to help support our family, cheated on me multiple times. During our separation, while we were going through our divorce, he was able to see our son regularly - come to find out, he was leaving our son (who wasn't 2 yet) alone, when he was with him, he wouldn't change his diaper, didn't feed him, etc., etc. In the end, I got full legal and physical custody and he got supervised visits. If divorce wasn't handled by the courts, I wouldn't have been able to get out of my marriage, would probably be dead by now due to his abuse, and who knows what would've happened to our son.

I do think family court needs work - don't get me wrong. There are things wrong in it, and many times when one parent (often times the father) gets the short end of the stick (so to speak - though woefully lacking in description).

If divorce wasn't handled by the courts, I wouldn't have been able to get out of my marriage, would probably be dead by now due to his abuse

With all due respect, that is very unlikely. One single call to the police, and your 'abusive' husband is in jail in a mili-second. Then, the next day you are called by a counselor who is offering you a free place to live, apartment and everything, along with finances to get you on your way.

Try it... you'll see I'm on the level.

J70141 in Colorado: With all due respect you're flat out wrong in this case. I called the cops on him, none of what you described happened - and this wasn't a long time ago (our divorce was in 2005). When our divorce was finalized, you want to know where he was? In jail. My attorney asked the judge for a continuance since my now ex was in jail. The judge's reply - which jail is he in? He was in county - which was across the street from the court. The judge had him brought over to the court house for the hearing. My ex-husband's attorney was present during all of this.

As far as you putting abusive in quotes - I won't go into the abuse in detail here because it really doesn't matter. Suffice it to say - it was truly abuse, physical, psychological, emotional and, yes, even sexual.

While what you are stating does happen at times, it doesn't always happen. I personally know of several women, and even a few men, that were killed by their abusive spouses - even AFTER they left. So, please, don't patronize me with a "that is very unlikely".

J, you have had a bad experience, that's clear. However, you do yourself a disservice when you paint everyone with the same brush based upon your experience. Not all men are abusive asses who cheat and refuse to support their children; and not every woman uses dirty tricks to posture before the court with claims of abuse when there was none.

The worst part about a divorce, and I am speaking from experience here, is not the endless court battles or the aggravation in trying to get a "fair deal." It is the way it changes you as a person. It is a defense mechanism when you feel "under attack" to be suspicious of anyone or anything that resembles that which is attacking you. However, when you do not let go of that 'flight or fight' reflex and begin to live as normal a life as is available to you, you will never truly get over what has been done to your life. It is why so many second marriages fail; it is why people like the one in the article do horrendous things that are not exactly in character. Your ex has taken so much from you already, why give her the rest of your life as well?

And finally, you will find that the person who is "cool as a cucumber" and is able to deal with court issues in a non-emotional manner are usually those who find success in the process.

Actually, the later didn't happen to me. It happened to my neighbor. The government gave her a nice place to stay, and even gave her money to start a farm. There are a huge number of programs that are up and ready to assist, but only women, on the fly of an accusation of abuse. I'd seen it for myself.

I've also read of many articles where men were abused and the same programs were not open to them, mainly because they didn't want to mix men and women in the same program for abuse (kinda makes sense in a way).

A condo across the way from where I once owned one was also specifically a safe-house for women in an organization called Women's Development Center in Las Vegas. They literally had a condo available all for themselves.

One illegal female immigrant that I personally know was all out of immigration options, even to the point of being deported once (then came back), until she revealed that she was abused by her husband. Now, she has a nice place to stay, and a nice legal status in the United States.

All police are required to carry a bunch of phone numbers with the names of all these organizations that help. You can even see the negative side of it all from a website called Abuse Excuse, another man that I also hired as a consultant in my divorce.

In all, I was able to literally point to 25 sworn testimonies in my ex's divorce case in which she constantly changed her story, always to try to make it better in her favor. After I pointed out each and every 'lie' on her part and provided a copy of each one of the sworn 'different' testimonies, each one conflicting the other............... nothing happened.

The judge actually admitted to not reading everything in the affidavit, then ordered me to pay the attorney's fees in this particular case.

Since the order was never written out and signed though, they are still waiting for me to pay, as I am still waiting to appeal based on the fact that the judge admitted to not going over the entire affidavit.

Not all men are abusive asses who cheat and refuse to support their children; and not every woman uses dirty tricks to posture before the court with claims of abuse when there was none.

So very true.

Also, I agree with the rest of your statement - wish I could vote it up many times :)

Not all men are abusive asses who cheat and refuse to support their children; and not every woman uses dirty tricks to posture before the court with claims of abuse when there was none.

So very true.

Also, I agree with the rest of your statement - wish I could vote it up many times :)

Sorry for the double post - stupid Newsvine glitches.

lol 's ok and thank you :-)

J- I am definitely going to check out that website. I have had a client who's ex DID do the "domestic violence citizenship route".. and believe me, we called her on it... repeatedly. Made a big enugh issue of it, the judge couldn't ignore it. lol Interested in seeing what other issues I have run across.

do you know the man? or his pain or trouble, yet you condemn him to hell because you see death as a crime....friend hell is for accusers and judges....like you.

@michael arcangel, You are actually defending this piece of garbage??!! May you burn in hell along side him!

arc angel ... change your name, it doesn't apply anymore because if it did, you would have been there to not let that innocent girl die far too young at the hands of a sick, twisted individual.

Michael ... what the man did does indeed earn him the name of puke. How can you quarrel with that?

Suicide is the selfhish, selfcentered act of a loser. Taking one childs life because he lost custody, proves he did not deserve custody, the judge was right, but the child is gone and the mother must live without her baby, because no one saw how crazy this man was. System failure again.

Michael: you are sick...how does "what this man was going through" justify murder of a child? Get help...(and stay away from children).

What pain? Other than the fact that his machismo self was castrated by the court. He is a murderer and I'm tired of the liberal views that as long as you are a minority, you can murder and rape since your environment around you makes you feel depressed or your cultural norms are different. Live by the laws of the land.

lifeflight: EVERYONE breaks both legal and moral laws and rights! EVERYONE! If you are "plugged" in or "linked" in you are protected by your "peers". Casa workers lie and break laws EVERYDAY, and cause children harm. So take your case of live by the laws of the land to everyone and make ALL obey the laws!!! You cannot do it. Judges BREAK LAWS, and so do lawyers. They get away with it EVERYDAY. Make them obey. Bet you wont try to do that! So actually the blame lays on our own society of biggots and lawmakers who are also lawbreakers.

Lifeflight, you and a poster in an earlier posting blame liberals. YOU ARE BOTH WAY WRONG!!! The liberals I know would never, ever say that someone is right because of their background. If you live in this country, then you abide by its rules, right or wrong.

BTW. my ex-sister-in-law is "conservative" and a lying biotch to boot. She stole her daughter's college funds to buy a condo for herself and beat my niece and the dog. (A neighbor saw her beat the dog, but did not report it to authorities.) My brother was able to get the dog, but his daughter was afraid to tell her therapist that her mother beat her, so she got the major share of custody. My niece now has many mental problems because of her mother.

your a veteran? and you dont understand revenge or lose of faith? have you killed in battle..adults who used to be children,,but thats different?

@michael arcangel, you are truly an idiot. How can you POSSIBLY defend a man who would kill his own child, and then have the audacity to compare it to killing adults in a war?

By it's very nature, discussion forums will attract those that wish to argue, wish to stir shyt, will flip-flop supposed beliefs and all else to do so..... most call them 'trolls'.

I'm not sure why some have this need, but for whatever reason they come on discussion boards for no other reason than to get a rise out of people, anonymously run their mouths.......just start shyt. Could be issues in their own lives, whatever.....

Most times they'll go away as long as they're not getting the attention and rise they're looking for. Michelle angel will, too, if ignored. Also, school is starting soon.....

Darryl:
"How can you POSSIBLY defend a man who would kill his own child, and then have the audacity to compare it to killing adults in a war?"

Because they live by the same rulebook.

realy? you can justify wacking the ex? Who gives you the right to make the call on who is worthy and not worthy of life? So,a child then could grow up parentless bc one was wacked and the other in prison... glad I dont know you personally.

Michael...get help!

You can ALL go "get some help" and WAKE UP AMERICA. The biggest lawbreakers are judges and lawyers.....but most of you are so stupid, you don't know when it is being done, because you put you "faith" in mankind and the laws they make for only "SOME" go obey. So you All need to "get some help"!

I'm pretty sure lawyers and judges aren't the BIGGEST law breakers.

michael arcangel is just this kind of monster

Perhaps he was born here? And you only reveal your own ignorance and sickness with this post.

Perhaps he was born here?

Oh, another anchor baby turned criminal.

And you only reveal your own ignorance and sickness with this post.

Why thank you. Thank you very much.

lol...

harry ... harry ..HARRRY! it's dark inside your brain, isn't it? Stinks, too, eh? remember people that lol their own comments lol alone.

Littleoldlady, go back and read the article in its entirety. It states that the man was born in Egypt and became a citizen. If you had read the whole article, you would have known this.

harry ... harry ..HARRRY! it's dark inside your brain, isn't it? Stinks, too, eh? remember people that lol their own comments lol alone.

Purnell Meagre you yourself are pretty meager as far as the brain cells go. Your kissing this murder's ass is both sickening and pathetic. The guy wasn't even born here which again confirms life is cheap as far as towel_heads are concerned.

I share my lol's. You need to appreciate that. Do it now. ;)

Some people deserve hate

It is up to God to forgive, not me.

I'm not devine

or divine.

But at least this guy offed himself. Skanky still walks among us. Too bad she wasn't his daughter.

What a stupid concept.

This is understandable because the world is corrupt?

That child did not deserve this and the parent had no right to do this

It is the "arcangels" of the world that have messed up the world for the rest of us. God help anyone under the present or future care or guidance of a michael arcangel and hopefully he has not/will not procreate.

According to Christians, Jews, and Islamics, Michael arcangel is described as the "great prince who stands up for the children of Daniel's people........."

PLEASE change your name! You are a complete disgrace to Christians, Jews, and Islamics. I am Agnostic and you are a disgrace to me as well but a disgrace as a human being.

You are incredibly misguided. None of the excuses you served up are valid; the flaws of our society have little or no bearing on the "whys" of this man's actions. The man was a coward and selfish. It doesn't help your cause that you write like a fifth grader and can't be bothered to use the spell check tool provided.

You are truely a real dork, Michael.

No doubt michelle's a mega-dork, but by replying you're givin' her what she wants.

sorry about this Moderation, but the commenter's name is Michael, not Michelle

That was the thought I had. Maybe something for the courts to note in future -- don't tell the parent... who is currently keeping the child... that they've lost custody of that child until the child is safely back in the hands of the other parent. Or serve that notice with deputies in tow to take the child back to its other parent.

It's inconceivable to me that a mother or father could kill their own child just to keep him/her away from the other parent. How could you end the life of your own baby? Some crucial pieces were missing in this man's soul.

I agree.

Yes, I agree. What were the people thinking who had him served with papers saying he lost custody while the 2-year-old was in his care????????

You need to know your enemy and how your enemy thinks. Of course he's going to keep the child in fear that he'd never see her again. Guess this guy also thought, "If I won't be able to see her again, neither will you!" But, I don't know that for sure, and I guess I never will.

My ex- was a heroin/methamphetamine dealer. People needed to know how to interact with him to prevent disastrous outcomes. Our living room used to be encircled with boxes of semi-automatic weapons that he sold, too. So he was dangerous and armed.

This event needs to be added to a continuing education class for those who order custody papers served (attorneys, perhaps?).

So sad. Poor child. I can't imagine the mother's pain. I had often feared that outcome in my situation.

Agreed

when they send the papers they dnt think about that. If they really thought the child was in danger they wouldn't of, but they have no way of predicting whats going to happen once they deliver the paper unless the father showed signs that he could harm the child. - but anyways a very sad story.

Because he hated his ex-wife more....another innocent angel lost!

Narcissistic personality. Viewed his daughter, and probably his wife too, as just extensions of his own person and ego.

Why such people cannot go off and just quietly off themselves is incomprehensible to most people, but to them, their actions seem quite justifiable.

Tragic outcome.

People who follow the world's most popular religions believe in a fair-tale afterlife. Once you convince someone life after death is going to be a thousand times better than life on earth, committing suicide and taking a loved one with you becomes a valid option for some.

Granted, we don't know the extent of the story or the intimate details, but I would guess that he's probably not a savory person. Just from the details of how they found them both dead, it sounds like a thought running through his head could have been "if I can't have her, neither can you". Which doesn't sound like love to me one bit.

roadhunter - is your militant animosity against religion causing you to forget that most of these religions have concepts of heaven, hell, and retribution for the misdeeds of this life?

Anybody who is truly Christian (or of any of the other major religions) who committed such a crime, would do so knowing they are facing some from of divine vengeance in the after life, not some euphoric existence.

I'm not religious myself, but I don't buy the idea that religion causes crimes like this one. Chances are, this was just a sick, sorry individual looking to strike out at his ex-wife, through the harshest means he could imagine.

If he did in fact kill himself and his child, my opinion is, he didn't do it because he loved his daughter so much he couldn't bear the thought of living without her, he did it to hurt the mother.

1 SGF, although that does seem like a good explanation that you ruled out.

american I'm just speaking from experience since I've been through this myself thankfully the police were able to find my daughter, my ex straight up told me, "I don't really want her (meaning my daughter) I just want you to be miserable"

Honor killings take many faces.

lee your mom said stop being a bum and do whats right sunny boy

You're joking, right?

There is others reasons why joint custody changes to full custody.

Scheduling, living arrangements, job requires to relocate ect. It is not always because one is considered unfit.

Apterix: I admit I cannot prove you're wrong. Can you prove you are right ???

The child went missing on sunday, was not reported till tuesday.

Yes, she wasn't reported missing until Tuesday....and yet why no Amber Alert until Friday?

That a is good question, considering even with a amber alert no charges had been pressed

I don't know if it is still true, but it used to be that a person, even a child, had to be missing anywhere from 24 to 48 hours before the police would take a missing persons report.

If the child is 17 or younger and there is reasonable belief that a crime has occurred, an Amber Alert is issued immediately.....in ALL states.

Amber alert was not issued immediately

You're probably the only one who can read, ep1237. The others are likely trailer park trash who can barely read the amount printed on their food stamps. Nowhere does it say he killed the child or himself.

If it is ultimately shown he did kill the little girl, the most unfortunate result will be that it's highly unlikely that the Old Hags & Bitches Club will still continue to use children as pawns for their selfish ulterior motives in divorce cases and drive the other parent to despair.

You make a valid point. However, had he not kidnapped his child, she would be alive right now. So whether or not he physically killed her is irrelevant. His actions caused her death. Butterfly effect.

ep1237, I never knew the state hospital allowed patients to use a computer with internet service, or have you broken into your doctor's office again, and jumped on line. Please take your Lithium like a good boy and go back to your room before you are missed.

Joe C, your comment below,

If it is ultimately shown he did kill the little girl, the most unfortunate result will be that it's highly unlikely that the Old Hags & Bitches Club will still continue to use children as pawns for their selfish ulterior motives in divorce cases and drive the other parent to despair

The most unfortunate result here, if he did do it, is that a baby is dead. Your hatred (Old Hags and Bitches) has you twisted up like a Snyder's pretzel. Whomever may have done something to you for you to respond in such a manner is unfortunate. The fact that you let it get to you like that, is even worse. Hope it gets better. I'm sure I will get an absolutly torching response from you but I am sincere. I know, I know, I know, like you give a rat's a**.

Raising a child is very hard work. Most parents are not using their children as pawns to get more money like somemen (I'm assuming, by names such as joe, michael, etc) on this post seem to think. Most divorced women struggle financially after a divorce even when awarded spousal or child support. Look at all the children who go without because their fathers don't or can'tsupport them. Most mothers love their children more than they love money or freedom from responsibility. Being awarded half of a minimum wage salary won't grant any woman the privilege of living a leisurely life of luxury. Woman want their children just because they LOVE them.

So I guess in your trailer park the one thing you actually did accomplish was attend the weekly ESP Psychic Powers class. Congratulations, asshat.

rlray did not state a fact. He made an assumption; a hypothesis. If he blatantly said that the man killed his daughter your point may be valid. Looks like someone needs a science course refresher....

venomous, not "venomed."

It's not quite that simple, I have sole custody, but with forced visitations (or at least I DID back then) if I wouldn't have to shown up to hand her over (the judge issued orders that we do the exchange at the police station) they would've come and arrested me, just like the two times he didn't show up to bring her back they hunted him down and arrested him. I wouldn't have been any good to my child if I was sitting in jail, that would give him MORE time with her.

Sorry he didn't see that. (correction)

Feel for you, and am glad for the eventual positive outcome. I think everyone knew what you meant, but beware.... there are some here and now that have nothing more profound to say, nothing more important to do than elect themselves members of the Vine Spellcheck Authority.

The self-appointed Vine Spellcheck Authority members perform a vital service to humanity. We would all perish without them.

My ex did the same to me and when my son turned 18 he moved in with me full time.

Baldenario,

When people take the acts of one person and say the immorality of that person's conduct is attributable to his religion, it's called religious bigotry. And you, sir, are a classic religious bigot. Moreover, the kind of legislation you propose would be struck down as patently unconstitutional by any court in this country. You remember, it's called the First Amendment. So, you're a constitutional idiot as well.

You might also consider that there are over 1 billion Muslims in the world, including those who live in this country, and your attempt to revive the crusades will utterly fail. Park your authoritarian hatred somewhere else.

Let me expand on that, Baldenario. Defining a religion as a cult does not remove it from protection under the First Amendment. The Muslim faith has existed since the 8th Century, has over a billion adherents, and is the fastest growing religion on Earth. Any court would strike down your plodding attempt to circumvent First Amendment protections as a profoundly stupid.

I know this, Baldenario, because I have an advanced degree in Constitutional Law from Stanford Law School, and I'm betting you have no comparable credentials to expound on the United States Constitution. You wouldn't lecture others on mechanical engineering or medicine, but you arrogantly presume you're capable of telling others how courts would treat your harebrained ideas. Try learning more about law before you start lecturing others on it.

I feel that the religious and cultural beliefs of the parents should be taken into consideration when custody is granted by the courts. If there is a religion/culture involved that may put the child's life in danger, keep the child away from that parent. (Please note that this is just my opinion.)

The suggestion to declare Islam a cult is laughable: it won't - it can't - happen! If Islam were to be declared a cult, then all the other major religions would have to be declared cults as well. That would undermine one of the main premises our great country was built on, that of religious freedom. Michael is right about the ramifications of making such a declaration, by the way: even those groups that are declared cults are protected by our Bill of Rights and our Constitution.

As for you, Michael L. Marowitz, please do research on Sharia Law! Look for information on the prevalence of its enforcement here in the USA and also in Europe.

That said, I will state this: the cause of the deaths has not been released. There is a chance it was accidental. (Remember, folks, "innocent until proven guilty.")

Baldie - youi are one mean-sprited bigot. Pray to whatever God you believe in for forgiveness. And no, I am not muslim. Hope I didn't make any fat-fingered typos for all you lonely people.

@Michael:

You wrote this:

You wouldn't lecture others on mechanical engineering

Actually, I not only would but just did provide a detailed overview of the reasons the stage rigging collapsed at the Indiana State Fair . . .

http://world-news.newsvine.com/_news/2011/08/13/7367986-stage-rigging-collapse-kills-5-at-indiana-state-fair?threadId=3198528&commentId=57034200#c57034200

Regarding the specific process of defining the cult of death, destruction, and hate called "Islam" to be what it is--specifically a patently evil CULT--and thereby removing all of its self-perceived protections, this is well within the authority and power of the Congress, which is the federal legislative entity that begins the process of amending the Constitution:

The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. None of the 27 amendments to the Constitution have been proposed by constitutional convention. The Congress proposes an amendment in the form of a joint resolution.

[SOURCE: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution/ ]

The states also have this ability, but it is faster and more practical when the Congress initiates the process, and once the Amendment is ratified by the required number of states, it becomes the law of the land, at which time every court including the U. S. Supreme Court honors it . . .

There are other ways to achieve the same goals on a temporary basis, as was done during World War II, but doing it by Amendment is the preferred strategy, absent a condition of overwhelming chaos, which typically is best handled by the President declaring martial law . . .

The facts of the matter are (a) that the cult of death, destruction, and hate called "Islam" has as its primary goal the destruction of the state of Israel and the elimination of all Jewish people on this planet, (b) that the cult of death, destruction, and hate called "Islam" has been pursuing this goal for over 15 centuries, and (c) that the cult of death, destruction, and hate called "Islam" will continue pursing its patently evil agenda until the cult ceases to exist and all records of its existence are expunged from history . . .

If possible, cult members should be deprogrammed, but if not then the solution is to deport recalcitrant cult members to one of the remaining cult caliphates where they can be isolated from the civilized people of this planet until such time as the cult destroys itself since, as should be obvious from reading daily news reports, when the cult is unable to terrorize infidels it turns inward and terrorizes itself, really . . .

Really! :-o

Michael L. Marowitz is a court whore who defends every type of scum this world offers so of coarse he would defend this guy. Michael himself is degenerative from San Francisco and as such do I need to tell you what sexual preference he chooses. He think he is such a great lawyer but the sorry thing is, he is the only one that shares that oppinion, so don't listen to anything this idiot has to say. Go defend your child molesters dumb F---.

I must have missed something... or perhaps you are simply imagining it, William - but at no point did Mr. Marowitz defend this man's actions. He simply defended YOUR constitutional right to believe whatever you want as it relates to religion. To say that this man killed his child because he is Muslim is, frankly, ridiculous. Following the OP's logic, every Christian should be judged by Andrea Yates's actions in drowning her children in the tub. The vicious bile spewed by the OP against Islam is, indeed, worthy of the title "bigotry."