However, I lived in Tennessee for 13 years and had occasion to observe their legal system. Some of their judges are the most ignorant, lazy, stupid, ill mannered and ill bred people on earth. And this case sounds 100% like a case where the ex husband's lawyer and the judge are poker playing buddies.
Some I know had the choice of using this Judge or one in the district where his children had been absconded.
Because Swann is a known woman hater (essentially), and he had findings of fact from child protective regarding child abuse, issues of kidnapping, custodial interference, domestic abuse, family history of abuse of all sorts, this foolish person thought he would take the high road and get a judge which would not allow the other party to simply say the judge hates women (which she would have done to herself and her children).
Unfortunately for him, the unknown judge spent lots of time with her attorney, ignored several dozen instances of perjury, disregarded the CPS findings, ignored the law in numerous areas, made up his own laws, allowed farcical, nonsupported by the worksheets child support rulings, and found the father in contempt when the clerk would not take his ordered payments...
In Swann’s court, even if you feel he was biased or wrong, he goes down the list of considerations point by point to justify his positions. The father would have had his evidence considered in writing. The mother in the above case would have gotten the maximum contempt sentence for each count of perjury or obstruction.
I think he goes too far, especially with his anti smoking position and his godlike insistence on respect for the court and his decisions (i.e. this contempt issue above), but as far as East Tennessee judges go, he’s probably a straighter arrow than most.
Lessons learned: the devil you know is probably better than the devil you don’t (Obama or Clinton, anyone?).
Never take the “high road” in legal matters - it is too much of a crap shoot, and the dice are loaded.
If you can avoid court, do so at any livable cost, if not, it is life or death, fight accordingly.
“The father says the boy was crying that he “had” to be baptized. Children are very, very, very manipulative re their divorced parents. “
Now wait just a second. The boy said he “had” to be baptized.
He may have said that but in what context?
as in....
“Dad I have to be baptized” ie mom, grandparents and church are forcing this upon me.
or
“Dad I have to be baptized” ie Dad I have found God, accepted Jesus as my savior and I feel the urgent need to be baptized as soon as possible.
See my point?