Update: RaP's comments
This is a comment that was made to another post but which I feel is a strong contribution to the discussion and should be read by everyone.
This is a comment that was made to another post but which I feel is a strong contribution to the discussion and should be read by everyone.
It goes beyond the question of who is telling the truth and gets into the practical reality and issues. In particular the issue of the interaction between the secular law and halacha. How does the secular judge view the manuevering on both sides regarding the get?
Do we follow the established halacha if it increases the likelihood of one party going against halacha and perhaps remarry without a get. This in fact is a halacha issue which the poskim indicate is a real issue but its significance and relevance change with time and place.
================================Dr. Eidensohn, I'm honored that you yourself chose to respond to me.So, no, I have not read every single posting on this issue on all the various websites these people have chosen to spread their dirty laundry.But it doesn't really matter, or change my opinion. Here's why:I've been involved in dozens of matters (one earlier today!) where there is a claim of criminal activity on the part of one ofththe parents (you think these two are the first to make alleged criminal activity an issue?) Prostitution, Drug sales. Money laundering. Fencing stolen goods. Weapons charges (today's matter!). OK, so this one has racketeering allegations.One of two things is the truth: either the RICO allegations are true, or they're not. Either he's been arrested and charged criminally, or he hasn't. If we assume (arguendo) he has been charged and arraigned criminally, that he's entered a "not guilty" plea. Has the Grand Jury returned their report? Did they find enough evidence to proceed to trial? That would not be good news for him. Has their been a criminal trial? Or is that still pending? I have to assume from what I have seen here, he hasn't been found guilty of anything. Or maybe the Grand Jury has not found enough evidence and the matter is to be dismissed (like the various Order of Protections that I read about).If the matter is still pending criminally, then I would have to advise him to hold off on a custody trial as any testimony elicited at a custody trial could be used against him in a criminal trial. I wouldn't take that chance. However reluctantly, I would advise him not to cut off all contact with his children and suffer through supervised visitation. Although if the RICO allegations do not contain allegations of any actual physical violence (and it's strictly a financial allegation), I'd point that out to the Court that he's not dangerous and ask for unsupervised visitation. In such a situation I admit that I might have him hold off on consenting to a Get since the civil divorce will take a year or two as the criminal matter winds it's way through the system and so time is not of the essence. It's not as if she'll be civilly divorced quickly or remarrying anytime soon. BUT the logic to hold off on the GET is not to obtain leverage in a custody matter, it merely is that there's no rush since the civil matter is taking so long due to the pending criminal case. OK, let her wait.BUT let's assume there are no criminal charges, or he's found "not gulity" what then? Well then we have a custody trial. Let them each take the stand and hurl accusations at each other. Let their attorneys enter whatever evidence they have. Is HE violent? Keep her prisoner? Beat her? The kids? Hasn't he been found not guilty of everything she's claimed about him? All Orders of Protection dismissed? RICO dismissed? Has SHE filed false Order of Protections? Filed false RICO claims? Or is she a good mother? The primary caregiver? etc... This is the stuff of custody and visitation trials. In this scenario, there is NO justification to withhold a Get. The Supreme Court judge will judge each person's credibility, examine the evidence offered, and make the decision. Custody to . . .; Visitation to . . .; Supervised/unsupervised. Overnights? etc. Again, no justification to withhold a Get if the civil divorce is proceeding according to plan, REGARDLESS OF THE ALLEGATIONS.Remember, I consider paramount not alienating the mother from Judaism. (And I'm not even orthodox!) Make her miserable enough and you increase the odds that she'll remarry out of the community, if not out of the faith. Think of the children.I have done Orthodox cases in the past. Settlements that are fairly negotiated with a ratcheting down of the hostilities can address a number of concerns. Who takes the child to school? Religious instruction? Who gets what holidays in odd years? Even years? Assurances of a kosher home. Every fear that I've seen expressed on this page (mostly fear of being marginalized in the child's life) can be negotiated and dealt with. As long as there is no "I'm going to win at all costs mentality."I remember a divorce I did years ago where during the settlement negotiations these two people argued for 30 minutes as to who should get the toaster oven! Afterwards I told my client that given what she just paid me to watch this nonsense she could have bought 4 new toaster ovens! My own client's "win at all costs", cost her money! And for what I ask you?I've been divorced for 15 years now. There was no arguing over a GET. Yes, arguing over other issues (I'm not perfect), but not that. And you know what? We never argue still over who gets what holiday (Are you taking the kids to services this week or should I? Are you doing the first night of Hannukah, because my mother is coming over??). After Court today I just spent the evening with my three daughters. Two of whom spent last summer in Israel. They are beautiful, intelligent young women. They bring me nachas daily. If any of them go to Israel next year, I'll have them look you up.
Guest post by RaP in response to latest posting by attorney Brent Albala, Esq.
Harbe shluchim yesh lo LaMakom (God has many emissaries)...well, the Stein-Weiss case may lack a "Ronnie Greenwald" but along comes a Brent Albala, a Jewish lawyer trained at Touro Law Center and in practice for over 23 years, with a big heart, who is not even frum but understands the complexity of divorces from a legal point of view in the State of New York and inserts a well-needed dollop of sanity in the feud. But he is of course only dealing with a part of the picture, albeit a central part.
He sees things in a pragmatic lawyerly way, but that is not always the way it works in the Haredi Halachic culture.
Not everything in Torah life is about figuring out a way to "please" judges or gain favor by making conciliatory moves. This calls for a level of flexibility and disconnect from a Torah lifestyle that while he admits he has a good awareness of, it still comes across as coming from someone outside the Halachic system, or at least that part of the Halachic system that Yoel Weiss is willy-nilly part of and has recourse to.
He also lacks an appreciation for how "absolutist" the two sides are at this stage -- with Rivki Stein taking on the role of a larger than life poster child for the cause of "all agunas" and Yoel Weiss becoming a local folk hero to the macho men of Boro Park, Williamsburg and beyond.
Yes the wife has already started the process or knocking out someone from the community by obtain a "ruling" from an unknown shadowy unproven so-called never heard of "bais din" that her husband is a "mesarev ledin" with the allegations that he is in "nidui" a form of excommunication from the community. So it is little surprise that what the wife faces, if it turns out she is a liar and manipulator, that she will be tossed out of the community and seen as persona non grata, and no one will have pity on her. In that regard there isn't enough appreciation of how serious this stuff really is by defying the will of a very frum community and its rabbonim. So far Rivki Stein seems to have produced photo-shopped papers, while Yoel Weiss can rely on that no rabbis in his community have told him to give a get.
In that kind of society people listen to their rabbis and not to their lawyers! No one cares what secular judges may potentially think, but everyone worries what their OWN rabbis will say. In previous cases, like in the Dodelson case the issue was aggravated because their were top rabbis on both sides that made it that much worse. In this case of Rivki Stein and Yoel Weiss it builds on that previous case by the use of the same publicists (Shira Dicker) and radical recourse by the women to unashamedly using the yellow journalism of the New York dailies to spill dirt on husbands, Orthodoxy by implication, and create what is know as a Chillul HaShem and it cannot be blamed on the husbands because everyone must accept responsibility for their actions and by hiring skilled publicists and running to the secular press is no less controversial than running to paid buffoons who beat up husbands to extort a get or anything else.
He does not address the fact the use of publicists, nor does he understand that from a Torah Halachic point of view, it is not mandatory to give a "get on demand" something you need to clarify. But he certainly has added a refreshing perspective!
0 comments:
Post a Comment