Man Ordered To Apologize To Wife On Facebook 400
New submitter Marillion writes "Photographer Mark Byron was so bothered by his pending divorce and child visitation issues that he blasted his soon-to-be ex-wife on his personal Facebook page. That touched off a battle that resulted in a Hamilton County judge ordering Byron jailed for his Facebook rant — and to post on his page an apology to his wife and all of his Facebook friends, something free speech experts found troubling."
Re:The lesson here isn't about free speech (Score:5, Informative)
At least someone is trying [wikipedia.org] to change things.
Re:Here is something.. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The lesson here isn't about free speech (Score:2, Informative)
If only this weren't true.
When I was a kid, my mom got custody of myself and my sister, and Child support. She didn't use much of the money for us kids, most of it went to help ensure that she (and her current boyfriend at any given time) had plenty of smokes, pot, cocaine and didn't have to spend too much time sober. Most of the time, she couldn't keep utilities paid (often no phone, electric and/or gas), and there was rarely enough food.
Yet, somehow, she managed to keep custody. She wonders why her kids avoid her now that we are grown up.
Re:The lesson here isn't about free speech (Score:5, Informative)
I should point out that this is definitely changing. For instance, my mother worked family law for about a decade in New Hampshire. The judges there seemed to have a basic rule of 50-50 division of the assets, joint custody of the kids, no child support or alimony. If one parent wanted to avoid custody (more common than you might think), then they'd have to pay child support.
For instance, if she claimed abuse, they'd want to talk to a coworker or somebody else who saw her regularly to see if there was a pattern of unexplained injuries. If she claimed that he was molesting the kids, they'd have the kids talk to a shrink to see if she was right. If there was a question of drug addiction or alcoholism, they'd check on that. The kids had representation in court with the power to reject custody arrangements that put the kids in a bad situation, and older kids were asked what they wanted with an expectation that this request would be followed if it was reasonable.
In other words, it was far more sane and equitable than you're making it out to be. Now, that was New Hampshire, I wouldn't be surprised if things were different in Mississippi, but don't hate on the people that are actually trying to do things the right way.
Re:Here is something.. (Score:1, Informative)
Re:The lesson here isn't about free speech (Score:2, Informative)
You idiot.
Re:The lesson here isn't about free speech (Score:5, Informative)
This is standard procedure internationally and is based on one flawed experiment conducted without the concent of the participants:-
See http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2686327&cid=39126951 [slashdot.org] for full details.
Re:The lesson here isn't about free speech (Score:3, Informative)
Some one else replied to your post with a perfect answer to that, I requote it replying to you so you can see it (since ACs stay a bit hidden here)
A good parent is, above all, a role model.
A bad husband is a bad father.
A bad wife is a bad mother.
In more general terms, anyone who breaks a close trust has no place in a position of responsibility.
A failing marriage can be ended amicably. The partners are free to hump others after this.
Re:The lesson here isn't about free speech (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The lesson here isn't about free speech (Score:3, Informative)
I am sick of the "anecdotes" bullshit. Look, if you don't believe the system is slanted to favor women then you a) don't have a penis and/or b) haven't been through a divorce. You're getting some first hand accounts...you may think the commenters are pulling your leg (hence using the word "anecdote") but I've been in similar situations with similar results and have been railroaded by the system for simply being a man. Its unfair, its bullshit. How would you examine records to see if a man or woman was treated fairly? In most divorces the "negotiations" between parties is not recorded nor transcribed. You have a lot of growing up to do.