Kids sent to juvenile detention over cold shoulder to father

[Sir Sirius]

Kids sent to juvenile detention over cold shoulder to father a 'disturbing' ruling, experts say

Michigan judge Lisa Gorcyca sent three siblings – ages nine, 10 and 15 – to a facility for not speaking to their father because they say he abuses their mother
George Washington University
Law professors from schools like George Washington University call the court’s decision ‘unprecedented’.

Ryan Felton in Detroit

Friday 10 July 2015 17.58 BST
Last modified on Friday 10 July 2015 18.53 BST

A Michigan judge may have overstepped her bounds by taking the “unprecedented” and “disturbing” action of sending three siblings to a juvenile detention facility for not having a “healthy relationship” with their father, according to legal experts who spoke to the Guardian.

The children’s detention has sparked a fierce backlash both locally and on social media. Dozens of supporters convened outside the Oakland County courthouse Wednesday to demand the children’s release.

Last month Lisa Gorcyca, a circuit court judge in Oakland County, held three siblings – ages nine, 10 and 15 – in contempt of court after they refused to talk with their father, Omer Tsimhoni. Experts were taken aback by the judge’s decision to send the children to a local juvenile facility, Children’s Village, until “you graduate from high school”.

The ruling came amid a protracted and contentious divorce proceeding between Tsimhoni and his wife, Maya, which dates back to 2009.

At a 24 June hearing on supervised parenting time, Gorcyca said the children had been “brainwashed” by their mother before ordering their removal to Children’s Village. A hearing has been scheduled for 2pm on Friday local time.

The children were removed from Maya Tsimhoni’s custody following the hearing. Gorcyca said neither the mother, nor any of her relatives, could visit the children, although their father would be allowed to.

“When you are ready to have lunch with your dad, dinner with your dad, to be normal human beings, I will review this when your dad tells me you’re ready,” Gorcyca said at the hearing. “Otherwise you are living in Children’s Village until you graduate from high school. That’s the order of the court.”

The decision to hold three children in contempt of court who were not parties to the divorce proceedings puzzled legal experts. If Gorcyca took issue with Maya Tsimhoni’s handling of the situation, then an order should be directed at the mother, they said, not the children.

Catherine Ross, a law professor at George Washington University who specializes in family law, compared the situation to journalists who are jailed for contempt of court by refusing to reveal the name of a source, where they remain until they back down.

“That’s basically what the judge did here,” Ross told the Guardian. “You can get out of prison when your father tells us that you’re ready to have a good relationship with him.” Ross said to her knowledge the decision was “unprecedented” in reported cases with established opinions of the court.

She added: “The initial threat of sending them to detention even for a weekend is disturbing enough.”

A court transcript from the 24 June hearing begins with the eldest son being asked if he was prepared to see his father or be sent to Children’s Village.

“I do apologize if I didn’t understand the rules,” the 15-year-old told the judge. “But I do not apologize for not talking to him because I have a reason for that and that’s because he’s violent and I saw him hit my mom and I’m not going to talk to him.” The father has not been charged with a crime.

“I ordered you to talk to your father,” replied the judge. “You chose not to talk to your father. You defied a direct court order. It’s direct contempt so I’m finding you guilty of civil contempt.”

“I thought there was like rules when – rules for like not, you know, not hitting someone,” said the boy.

Gorcyca said the boy had “defied a direct court order” by not talking with his father.

“You’re very defiant,” she told the boy. “You have no manners. You need to do a research program on Charlie Manson and the cult that he has.”

A 25-page report filed last year by a court appointed adviser, William Lansat, spelled out the couple’s litigious past and highlights allegations levied over the years by the children.

In August 2010, for example, a police report was filed after Omer Tsimhoni spent a day with his children unsupervised. But the meeting apparently soured shortly after, and the children called 911, alleging their father “threatened to kill them while at the park”, according to Lansat’s report.

When Maya Tsimhoni arrived, she alleged the father began “pushing her around”, the report says. No probable cause was found to arrest Omer Tsimhoni, who “has always denied making the threat”, according to the report. Maya Tsimhoni sought a personal protection order against her husband, but the request was denied by Gorcyca.

Years later, as the situation deteriorated further, Maya Tsimhoni was forewarned of potentially “grave” consequences for her children if they refused to speak with their father, court records reviewed by the Guardian show.

Gorcyca’s reprimand of the children during the June hearing reflects statements made by Lansat in his 2014 report. For example, he wrote, at a court-ordered parenting session in August 2014, the children “huddled together as if they were sending messages/vibes to each other in some Manson-like behavior”.

Before the children entered a jury room at the courthouse for the parenting time, the report says, “it took at least six deputies, a prosecutor … various court personnel and finally the Judge to get those kids into the jury room”.

Lansat seemed shocked. “For minor children to evade armed Sheriff’s is absolutely appalling,” he wrote. “I advised [Maya] Tsimhoni that unless she gets these kids off the bench, there will be grave consequences – such as placement in Children’s Village.”

The court has tried “every conceivable machination of parenting time” for Omer Tsimhoni – an engineer for General Motors who primarily lives in Israel – but “to no avail”, Lansat continued.

“Consequently, the Court needs to consider, if there is to be any progress a draconian approach,” he wrote.

Lansat recommended in his report for the children to be placed “directly” into Omer Tsimhoni’s care and have parenting time without their mother for “several hours”.

He concluded: “Continuation of the status quo is simply untenable and contrary to the children’s best interest, the statues and philosophy of the various statutes on custody and parenting time.”

Lawrence Durbin, a law professor at the University of Detroit-Mercy, disagreed.

“The judge’s actions seems to run counter to the important mandate of family court jurisprudence, which is to do what’s in the children’s best interest,” he wrote to the Guardian in an email. “Whatever problems were created that caused this couple to divorce, the children should not in any way be held responsible.”

If Maya Tsimhoni in fact has alienated her children from their father, the court “should fashion a remedy against the mother”, he said.

“Don’t send the children to Children’s Village for the sins of her parents,” Durbin said.

Marsha Mansfield, a professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School and director of its Economic Justice Center, said Judge Gorcyca’s decision to hold the children in contempt for disregarding her order to have a “healthy relationship” with their father was peculiar.

“Contempt of court is intentionally violating a court order,” she told the Guardian, “and a court order would be pertaining directly to the parents, not the children. The parents might be required to facilitate placement with the children, but the children aren’t required to do that.”

Local authorities have remained mum on the situation. The office of Oakland County chief judge Nanci Grant declined to comment Thursday, citing the ongoing case.

A statement from Omer Tsimhoni’s attorney, Keri Middleditch – who previously worked with Gorcyca while both served for the Oakland County prosecutor’s office – said in a statement on Wednesday the children received court-appointed attorneys, “none of whom objected to the children’s placement” in a juvenile detention facility.

A Facebook group established to bring attention to the case has over 4,100 members as of Wednesday. A pair of petitions have also circulated – one calling for the children’s release from juvenile detention, with about 5,800 signatures; the other seeking Gorcyca’s removal from the bench, with over 5,000 signatures.

Karen Colby Weiner, the Tsimhonis neighbor in West Bloomfield township, Michigan, said the decision to send the kids to a juvenile detention facility was “awful”.

“Incarcerating them in a place where they certainly don’t belong, that isn’t an appropriate action at all,” she told the Guardian by phone.

Weiner said the children were pleasant kids. On one occasion, they came over to her house and the oldest son “happened to sit down at our piano, and he plays beautifully. I was really surprised.”

Weiner considered the impact it would have on her granddaughter to be removed from school, “yanked away and put in a place for criminals”.

“I think this was a very rash and unfortunate decision on the part of the judge,” she said. “And I hope it’s corrected soon.”

I wonder what kind of liability judges have for the consequences of their decisions. Probably none.

[Grumman]

“I do apologize if I didn’t understand the rules,” the 15-year-old told the judge. “But I do not apologize for not talking to him because I have a reason for that and that’s because he’s violent and I saw him hit my mom and I’m not going to talk to him.” The father has not been charged with a crime.

“I ordered you to talk to your father,” replied the judge. “You chose not to talk to your father. You defied a direct court order. It’s direct contempt so I’m finding you guilty of civil contempt.”

“I thought there was like rules when – rules for like not, you know, not hitting someone,” said the boy.

Gorcyca said the boy had “defied a direct court order” by not talking with his father.

“You’re very defiant,” she told the boy. “You have no manners. You need to do a research program on Charlie Manson and the cult that he has.”

She's sounds like a power-hungry psycho who should under no circumstances ever be given power over people.

Lawrence Durbin, a law professor at the University of Detroit-Mercy, disagreed.

“The judge’s actions seems to run counter to the important mandate of family court jurisprudence, which is to do what’s in the children’s best interest,” he wrote to the Guardian in an email. “Whatever problems were created that caused this couple to divorce, the children should not in any way be held responsible.”

If Maya Tsimhoni in fact has alienated her children from their father, the court “should fashion a remedy against the mother”, he said.

“Don’t send the children to Children’s Village for the sins of her parents,” Durbin said.

This sums up my view. Either the father really has been abusive, in which case he and the judge both need to be punished, or the mother made it up and talked the kids into helping her lie about it, in which case the mother and the judge need to be punished.

[Steve]

It sounds like this judge just got pissy that her power has been challenged.

[Edi]

Many of those juvenile detention facilities are privately run for-profit prisons and many of the stakeholders and owners in them are lawyers and judges, so I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if there turned out to be that sort of conflict of interest on the judge's part.

[Lord MJ]

It sounds like this judge just got pissy that her power has been challenged.

I think that in general when people get authority in society they get pissy when that authority is challenged. Espescially when they have gone through years of law school and probably earning their chops in lesser positions in the legal professional before they became judges. And at the risk of sounding sexist, I think it's even more the case with women because we live in a society where women have historically not been in authority and even to this day many in our culture do not respect women in authority. So they fill an extra need to assert themselves, especially if the people that are challenging them are children.

[Joun_Lord]

Acknowledging the fact we are only getting one side of the story, it seems like the judge has a conflict of interest with the father's lawyer working with her previously and could possibly be the reason she seems to be siding solely with the father. That is purely speculation though.

What isn't is the fact sending some kids who didn't want to see their dad to a kiddy jail is beyond fucked up. If the mother really was turning her kids into little cultists like she was implying then the kids need taken away and put into foster care, not locked up. And from the descriptions they don't sound like cultists, they sound like close siblings going through a tough divorce turning to each other for comfort. So shocking, much Manson, such bullshit, wow.

Its really dumb this judge is trying to legislate a relationship with their father. If someone doesn't get along with their father, fears him enough to call the cops when out of one of the court mandated visits, well guess what numbnuts they ain't going to go talk to the fuck even if a court says so.

This judge needs to be disbarred and forced to spend a month in the cutesy named but probably horrifying "Children’s Village".

[Eternal_Freedom]

What confuses me is the length of time they're being sent there. If it were a temporary thing while they found a foster home and/or relatives, sure, maybe. but until they graduate high school? One of the kids is what, nine? This thing is a gods-damned mess.

[TheHammer]

Update: http://www.theoaklandpress.com/general- ... h-children

It's got the writ of habeus corpos, and reading through that the judge definitely overstepped her bounds legally, as well is from any sort of common sense perspective.

That being said, the circumstances aren't quite as bad as they were made out - the Kids weren't kept in the same population as those convicted of crimes...

The three were being held within Mandy’s Place, an area of short-term housing within Oakland County’s Children’s Village, separated from those juveniles locked up and charged with crimes.

And apparently are now being relocated to a summer camp...

Gorcyca did not give a duration for how long the children will be held at the facility, Camp Tamarack in Ortonville, which is billed as the “premiere Jewish summer camp in Michigan.”

Had this been the original decision, as a means of getting them away from their mother, I think there wouldn't have been a backlash. Honestly, I don't know why the father wasn't simply granted custody if the Mother was such a danger. Or in lieu of that I don't know why the mother wasn't subject to some sort of contempt charge.

One hopes that this story is brought up by the Judge's opponents before the next election. That is presuming there isn't enough of a backlash to have her removed before hand... http://www.judicialselection.us/judicia ... .cfm?state

Michigan judges may be removed in one of three ways:

Judges may be impeached by a majority vote of the house of representatives and convicted by a two-thirds vote of the senate.

The governor may remove a judge upon the concurrent resolution of two thirds of the members of both houses of the legislature.

On the recommendation of the judicial tenure commission, the supreme court may censure, suspend, retire, or remove a judge. However, the Judicial Tenure Commission cannot deal with Supreme Court Justices. There is currently no mechanism to deal with misbehavior by Supreme Court Jusices.

[Crown]

It's the media's fault.

[biostem]

What I got out of this:

Kid: I saw my dad hit my mom.
Judge: I don't care.

[ArmorPierce]

What I got out of this:

Kid: I saw my dad hit my mom.
Judge: I don't care.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that they have a reason to believe that the kids are being manipulated and brainwashed against their father.

[Ralin]

What I got out of this:

Kid: I saw my dad hit my mom.
Judge: I don't care.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that they have a reason to believe that the kids are being manipulated and brainwashed against their father.

You are giving the judge far too much benefit of the doubt

[TheHammer]

What I got out of this:

Kid: I saw my dad hit my mom.
Judge: I don't care.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that they have a reason to believe that the kids are being manipulated and brainwashed against their father.

You are giving the judge far too much benefit of the doubt

I think you're giving the mother too much benefit of the doubt. The guardian ad litem has apparently sided with the judge and the Father in this case in that the mother needs to have her access to the children restricted.

http://www.theoaklandpress.com/general- ... -can-visit

Guardian Ad Litem William Lansat voiced his frustration with the entire situation during his five years on the case and pointed to the mother as the root of the problem.

“They cannot go back to this mother,” he told the judge. “You have to give (the) mother credit. Whatever it is she did for these five years, she has been successful at it and she has been on a campaign and she has won to some extent and she has damaged these children.”

It seems clear to me that SOMETHING is going on there for the court and the child's representatives to take that stand. It's well known that in most custody disputes the Mother is the defacto favorite and often times they have to screw something up to lose a custody battle. Since this has been a five year thing, they obviously are privy to much more information that has been made public.

Again, the Judge's method in how she went about removing the children from the Mother's custody was absolutely wrong, and I think she should be censured for it at the very least... However the decision to remove them in the first place seems like it was probably the right one.

[eyl]

I think you're giving the mother too much benefit of the doubt. The guardian ad litem has apparently sided with the judge and the Father in this case in that the mother needs to have her access to the children restricted.

http://www.theoaklandpress.com/general- ... -can-visit

Guardian Ad Litem William Lansat voiced his frustration with the entire situation during his five years on the case and pointed to the mother as the root of the problem.

“They cannot go back to this mother,” he told the judge. “You have to give (the) mother credit. Whatever it is she did for these five years, she has been successful at it and she has been on a campaign and she has won to some extent and she has damaged these children.”

It seems clear to me that SOMETHING is going on there for the court and the child's representatives to take that stand. It's well known that in most custody disputes the Mother is the defacto favorite and often times they have to screw something up to lose a custody battle. Since this has been a five year thing, they obviously are privy to much more information that has been made public.

Again, the Judge's method in how she went about removing the children from the Mother's custody was absolutely wrong, and I think she should be censured for it at the very least... However the decision to remove them in the first place seems like it was probably the right one.

OTOH, Lansat also has some gems like:

In a Nov. 23, 2014, report to Gorcyca, a frustrated Lansat wrote that "the behaviors of these children toward their father over the years is neither normal nor acceptable."

Lansat said a two-day court appearance in August 2014 underscored his concerns.

"The children would not answer any adult; they huddled together as if they were sending messages/vibes to each other in some sort of Manson-like behavior," he wrote.

Lansat noted another mental health professional indicated she saw the children "tapping their feet under the table in the jury room as if they were sending Morse codes to each other."

"When the children first came to the courthouse on that Thursday it took at least six deputies, a prosecutor ... various court personnel and finally the judge to get those kids into the jury room," Lansat wrote. "The court admonished Mother as to what the Court saw in the children's behavior on the record — at least twice. The three minor children sat outside the courtroom on the chairs. the children would not respond to me — but more important — either to the deputies or the prosecutor. For minor children to basically evade armed Sheriff's (deputies) is absolutely appalling.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Looks to me like the kids dont trust their court appointed guardian, which, given that he went along with them being illegally held in contempt of court, I can totally respect.

[Simon_Jester]

The flip side of this is that if the children are behaving consistently in ways that involve totally ignoring and disobeying court officials, there may be some underlying problem of SOME kind, involving the kids having distorted perceptions or behavior.

Although the problem is not one that is appropriately dealt with by sending the kids to juvie for the rest of their childhood.

[General Zod]

Using conspiracy cult bullshit to describe the children's behavior instead of coming to the conclusion that they're scared of the court officials really tells you a lot about the mindset of the court. How is it these people have any power?

[TheHammer]

Using conspiracy cult bullshit to describe the children's behavior instead of coming to the conclusion that they're scared of the court officials really tells you a lot about the mindset of the court. How is it these people have any power?

How do you know its bullshit? Apparently there are volumes of information from court appointed specialists, video etc. Its not like this was early in the process. During the 5 or so years this has been going on, the events have turned the entire court against the Mother. So either she's been doing things, or they are all in a conspiracy "out to get her".

The flip side of this is that if the children are behaving consistently in ways that involve totally ignoring and disobeying court officials, there may be some underlying problem of SOME kind, involving the kids having distorted perceptions or behavior.

Although the problem is not one that is appropriately dealt with by sending the kids to juvie for the rest of their childhood.

I suspect this whole scenario was designed for maximum shock value, with no real intent that kids would be in Juvie for the "rest of their childhood." Again, she was wrong in how she went about it, but as I dig deeper I think I see the real intent. This was sort of a "last resort" step to try and get some change in the behavior of the children when all other methods had failed, more than it was a judge on a power trip...

[General Zod]

Using conspiracy cult bullshit to describe the children's behavior instead of coming to the conclusion that they're scared of the court officials really tells you a lot about the mindset of the court. How is it these people have any power?

How do you know its bullshit? Apparently there are volumes of information from court appointed specialists, video etc. Its not like this was early in the process. During the 5 or so years this has been going on, the events have turned the entire court against the Mother. So either she's been doing things, or they are all in a conspiracy "out to get her".

Gorcyca’s reprimand of the children during the June hearing reflects statements made by Lansat in his 2014 report. For example, he wrote, at a court-ordered parenting session in August 2014, the children “huddled together as if they were sending messages/vibes to each other in some Manson-like behavior”.

This quote doesn't exactly fill me with confidence. Why is it more reasonable to interpret their behavior as cult induced rather than simple fear?

[TheHammer]

Using conspiracy cult bullshit to describe the children's behavior instead of coming to the conclusion that they're scared of the court officials really tells you a lot about the mindset of the court. How is it these people have any power?

How do you know its bullshit? Apparently there are volumes of information from court appointed specialists, video etc. Its not like this was early in the process. During the 5 or so years this has been going on, the events have turned the entire court against the Mother. So either she's been doing things, or they are all in a conspiracy "out to get her".

Gorcyca’s reprimand of the children during the June hearing reflects statements made by Lansat in his 2014 report. For example, he wrote, at a court-ordered parenting session in August 2014, the children “huddled together as if they were sending messages/vibes to each other in some Manson-like behavior”.

This quote doesn't exactly fill me with confidence. Why is it more reasonable to interpret their behavior as cult induced rather than simple fear?

Perhaps that's been their experience? Again, 8 volumes of information accumulated over five years formed their opinions. We've only get a few days worth of whatever leaked/interview information has been made available. And it seems that this view is a consensus of multiple people, apparently everyone involved in the case except the Mother's representatives.

They're the ones with the experience, so I don't know why you're so quick to be dismissive without significant information of your own from which to form an opposing opinion.

[General Zod]

Perhaps that's been their experience? Again, 8 volumes of information accumulated over five years formed their opinions. We've only get a few days worth of whatever leaked/interview information has been made available. And it seems that this view is a consensus of multiple people, apparently everyone involved in the case except the Mother's representatives.

They're the ones with the experience, so I don't know why you're so quick to be dismissive without significant information of your own from which to form an opposing opinion.

I don't see anything in the articles that leads me to believe they reached that conclusion on anything more than gut instinct.

[TheHammer]

http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/colu ... /29998085/

But the June 24 hearing was only the latest skirmish in a 51/2-year custody brawl that has generated a jaw-dropping 465 court filings...

...

Like many of the other consultants who the court has engaged in the case, Lansat sees Eibschitz-Tsimhoni — a distinguished eye surgeon noted for pioneering work in the treatment of infants — as the author of a concerted campaign to sabotage her children’s relationship with their father, a traffic-engineering expert who has spent most of the last seven years working in Israel for General Motors.

...

“The behaviors of these children toward their father over the years is neither normal nor acceptable,” Lansat observed in a report submitted to the court last November. The report described supervised encounters in which the children refused to make eye contact with their father and recalled one occasion when they had resisted the efforts of multiple court personnel — including six sheriff’s deputies — to escort them to a jury room for a court-ordered visit.

Its not gut instinct, or knee jerk. The characterization with "Manson" may be flawed, but there is clearly something going on...

[General Zod]

http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/colu ... /29998085/

But the June 24 hearing was only the latest skirmish in a 51/2-year custody brawl that has generated a jaw-dropping 465 court filings...

...

Like many of the other consultants who the court has engaged in the case, Lansat sees Eibschitz-Tsimhoni — a distinguished eye surgeon noted for pioneering work in the treatment of infants — as the author of a concerted campaign to sabotage her children’s relationship with their father, a traffic-engineering expert who has spent most of the last seven years working in Israel for General Motors.

...

“The behaviors of these children toward their father over the years is neither normal nor acceptable,” Lansat observed in a report submitted to the court last November. The report described supervised encounters in which the children refused to make eye contact with their father and recalled one occasion when they had resisted the efforts of multiple court personnel — including six sheriff’s deputies — to escort them to a jury room for a court-ordered visit.

Its not gut instinct, or knee jerk. The characterization with "Manson" may be flawed, but there is clearly something going on...

It seems like the sort of behavior you would expect from . . . oh, I don't know, an abuse victim, maybe? This isn't all that dissimilar from the behavior by communities in rape cases where everybody rushes around the accused attacker if he's popular and well liked. There doesn't have to be any kind of grand conspiracy going on to explain it.

[TheHammer]

http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/colu ... /29998085/

But the June 24 hearing was only the latest skirmish in a 51/2-year custody brawl that has generated a jaw-dropping 465 court filings...

...

Like many of the other consultants who the court has engaged in the case, Lansat sees Eibschitz-Tsimhoni — a distinguished eye surgeon noted for pioneering work in the treatment of infants — as the author of a concerted campaign to sabotage her children’s relationship with their father, a traffic-engineering expert who has spent most of the last seven years working in Israel for General Motors.

...

“The behaviors of these children toward their father over the years is neither normal nor acceptable,” Lansat observed in a report submitted to the court last November. The report described supervised encounters in which the children refused to make eye contact with their father and recalled one occasion when they had resisted the efforts of multiple court personnel — including six sheriff’s deputies — to escort them to a jury room for a court-ordered visit.

Its not gut instinct, or knee jerk. The characterization with "Manson" may be flawed, but there is clearly something going on...

It seems like the sort of behavior you would expect from . . . oh, I don't know, an abuse victim, maybe? This isn't all that dissimilar from the behavior by communities in rape cases where everybody rushes around the accused attacker if he's popular and well liked. There doesn't have to be any kind of grand conspiracy going on to explain it.

[Joun_Lord]

It seems like the sort of behavior you would expect from . . . oh, I don't know, an abuse victim, maybe? This isn't all that dissimilar from the behavior by communities in rape cases where everybody rushes around the accused attacker if he's popular and well liked. There doesn't have to be any kind of grand conspiracy going on to explain it.

One of the articles did say one of the kids called the cops on the dad during a visit because the dad was threatening to kill them. I'd probably not want to be looking in the eye of somebody like that or cooperating with fucknuts who seem to be taking his side like the judge and Lansat are.

Now that said, we are only seeing one side of this. Lansat seems.......well like a fucking quack who should be forced to where a duck suit for a year to make the fact evident and the judge seems like a power mad tyrant, its impossible to say for sure just on the information we have whether or not the kiddies are really little mini-Mansons tapping out Morse code messages with their feet because their mommy told them to. Stranger things have happened, probably.

Divorce cases usually do have a parent turning the kids against another parent. Usually not to the extremes of Manson cult kids though. Cases will have kids hating a parent because the other parent filled the kids head with lies and pretty much brainwashed them into believing bunk.

We don't know for certain if thats not the case here, if the mother didn't teach her kids that daddy was an evil, evil man and terrible and not good.

I just have a really fucking hard time believing that the mother turned them into little cultists when what we've heard it sounds like relatively normal kids who are afraid of their dad who is said to be abusive, close to each other in a trying time, and will tap their feet when nervous.

Hey I tap my feet when nervous, I wonder who I'm communicating with?