J.S. v. M.M., 2016 ONSC 2179 (CanLII)
Date: 2016-03-31
Docket: 5448/15
Citation: J.S. v. M.M., 2016 ONSC 2179 (CanLII),
http://canlii.ca/t/gp327
Haven't read it yet but, the first point caught my attention and figured it warranted posting here considering who the justice is.
Good Luck!
Tayken
Date: 2016-03-31
Docket: 5448/15
Citation: J.S. v. M.M., 2016 ONSC 2179 (CanLII),
http://canlii.ca/t/gp327
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PAZARATZ
1. Do nude pictures of parents help judges decide who should get custody?
2. A silly question?
3. Why then, on this motion for temporary custody, has the Applicant father attached to his affidavit a series of sexually explicit “selfies” of the mother, retrieved from her discarded cell phone?
4. And why did he attach dozens of screen shots of the mother “sexting” with another man, describing her sexual preferences in graphic detail?
5. If the objective was to humiliate the mother, undoubtedly the father succeeded.
6. But how does humiliation help in family court?
7. How does irrelevant and scandalous information help a judge determine the best interests of the child?
8. More importantly -- from the child’s perspective -- what is the long-term impact of this needlessly hurtful approach to litigation?
a. How will this family ever heal?
b. How will the parents ever again be able to get along?
c. Can cheap shots ever be forgiven?
9. Separating parents are already in crisis. Our court process can either make things better or worse. And our success will hinge in part on our ability to address the modern realities of technology and social media.
10. Between e-mails, Facebook, Twitter, texts and selfies -- privacy and discretion seem a thing of the past. These days there’s no shortage of really embarrassing stuff couples can dredge up against one another -- if that’s really the path we want to encourage.
11. But what about relevance (never mind dignity)?
1. Do nude pictures of parents help judges decide who should get custody?
2. A silly question?
3. Why then, on this motion for temporary custody, has the Applicant father attached to his affidavit a series of sexually explicit “selfies” of the mother, retrieved from her discarded cell phone?
4. And why did he attach dozens of screen shots of the mother “sexting” with another man, describing her sexual preferences in graphic detail?
5. If the objective was to humiliate the mother, undoubtedly the father succeeded.
6. But how does humiliation help in family court?
7. How does irrelevant and scandalous information help a judge determine the best interests of the child?
8. More importantly -- from the child’s perspective -- what is the long-term impact of this needlessly hurtful approach to litigation?
a. How will this family ever heal?
b. How will the parents ever again be able to get along?
c. Can cheap shots ever be forgiven?
9. Separating parents are already in crisis. Our court process can either make things better or worse. And our success will hinge in part on our ability to address the modern realities of technology and social media.
10. Between e-mails, Facebook, Twitter, texts and selfies -- privacy and discretion seem a thing of the past. These days there’s no shortage of really embarrassing stuff couples can dredge up against one another -- if that’s really the path we want to encourage.
11. But what about relevance (never mind dignity)?
30. In a number of recent decisions, this court has urged parents to take a more adult and civilized and reasonable approach to resolving custody and access disputes. Simplistically, I have tried to convey the message:
31. The mean-spirited and malicious inclusion of humiliating and completely irrelevant nude pictures and texts in this case cries out for a stronger message:
Nasty doesn’t work.
31. The mean-spirited and malicious inclusion of humiliating and completely irrelevant nude pictures and texts in this case cries out for a stronger message:
Nasty won’t be tolerated.
Good Luck!
Tayken
Comment