Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others.

My very conservative parents said they'll vote for him if he's the republican candidate, but that if he wins, they'll feel deep shame for our country. Conservatives confuse me.

Couldn’t some simple scale-like display device (similar to a glass bathroom scale?) be used to prevent this? Any sudden weight change would immediately set off an alarm.

The behavior she’s trying to compel is to love someone they don’t love. That is not behavior you can control or demand. You are not in contempt of court for not loving someone, no matter what she says. And like others have said, the only two people she’s allowed to really order around are the two parents, not the…

Contempt of court is ALWAYS indeterminate since release is predicated on the choices of the person held in contempt. The entire purpose of such a finding is to compel behavior consistent to what the court orders.

She jailed them for an indeterminate amount of time because of contempt of court, with “when they get out” being set by a random time period. That’s unconscionable, and probably illegal (“I’m holding you for...I dunno how long, we’ll figure that out IN A FEW MONTHS”).

She threatened that people would “watch them pee.” Doesn’t sound like the “good” side to me.

Oddly enough, if I found out the mother was just like Charles Manson I would want HER punished. Not her kids. And the father’s action’s have been telling, no matter how bad the mother may have been.

Some of us are attorneys, some are family lawyers, and some have actually clerked for judged working a family court calendar (raises hand). And yeah, we know her behavior is unusual and fucked up.

OK, I’ll bite. Why, then, should the kids be sent to juvenile detention? Please explain based on your intimate knowledge of the facts of this case. Help us to understand why a judge would liken a party in a family dispute/divorce/custody/whatever to Charles Manson. After all, it was the intemperate language that…

The fucking mother can be held in contempt you moron. The only people who can be held in contempt of court are those subject to the court’s authority. And those are either (a) the parties before the court, or (b) someone with some type of evidence relevant to the controversy at issue, who can be ordered to turn over…

The parties to the case can be held in contempt: that is to say, the parents.

“So because the judge used the power she had to hopefully get some distance between the mother and the kids she is brainwashing, she should be condemned?”

Getting sent to a juvie-adjacent Children’s Village rather than juvie is a fine fucking distinction when a) the judge intended for it to be a punishment and ranted about people watching them pee and b) the court lacked jurisdiction over the kids and had no authority to send them anywhere.

No, she can hold people in contempt for not following reasonable orders that are within her authority to make. She’s a judge, not a Queen, her authority has limits, and she seriously overstepped them.

We understand quite well. Just about everyone has said the case might be complex and there may be a need to de program or something similar . This is al debatable. What is not debatable, what we like to call facts:

Did you look at the history? The 15 year old doesn’t want to see his father because he has witness his father beating his mother. Of course the judge says this fact doesn’t matter because it has been proven in court that it happened. Children can make up their own damn minds about who they want to spend time with.

“The kids were found to be in contempt of court for refusing an order by the judge. That’s why they were sent to Children’s Village. As a judge she has every legal right to hold anyone in contempt who doesn’t follow her orders.”