Legal beagles, your starter for ten

[dgs49]

The implication HERE is that the abortion was dispositive of the custody issue.

One could certainly take the position that it was not relevant, and maybe the judge exercised poor judgment on that issue, but is it reasonable to assume that other than the abortion she would have gotten custody?

not enough info to say

[Lord Jim]

I think this judge's decision was outrageous, but I'd be remiss if I didn't admit to finding it amusing that the judge in question turns out not to be some backwoods Good Ol' Boy who had clung to the bench past his sell by date, but rather a relatively young female Democrat serving in New York City....

A person who from her bio, would seem to perfectly fit the profile of a "Northeast Liberal"...

I guess she wanted to smash the stereo-type....

[Sue U]

Yeah okay, this is what happens when you put a shark into the tank; from Guin's Above the Law link:

[T]he argument is not the backward claim that she can’t possibly love her kids if she had an abortion. Rather, the argument is that she demanded custody of the kids over a weekend when she knew she was going to dump them off with a sitter so she could undergo a medical procedure.

***

The Daily News explains the building blocks of an attorney’s despicable strategy:

The explosive topic was first raised last week by Manuel Mehos’ lawyer, Eleanor Alter, who discovered it after subpoenaing his ex-wife’s medical records. She used it in an apparent attempt to paint Lisa Mehos as a hypocrite for having asked to have custody of their two young kids over Easter weekend in 2012.

“[At] the time that she told him that he couldn’t have the children for Easter because he was an atheist, she was having an abortion,” Alter said, a court transcript shows.

A divorced parent neglecting kids on the weekend he or she has them is a fair issue in a custody hearing. However, the children were left with their grandmother during Lisa’s procedure, and honestly visiting with grandma is not neglect. Which brings us to the real issue here. Eleanor Alter of Kasowitz Benson — who represented Mia Farrow against Woody Allen — is super smart, and knows how to get the best for her client. In this case that involves playing to reptilian impulses (or being “aggressive and innovative,” in Kasowitz-speak).

Alter said she should also be allowed to question Lisa Mehos about the procedure because “this is a woman who complains that she’s under great stress only caused by Mr. Mehos. I would be the first person to acknowledge that having an abortion, especially a two- to three-month late abortion, would be stressful.”

She said she also wanted to know whether the kids “were exposed to this man, how it all came about.”

“If this man was coming in the house, if she’s out of the house to see him, if it was date rape, that’s relevant,” Alter said.

So there’s a couple things to unpack there. First, check out the hysterical woman who’s troubled by all her lady business! See, it’s not the man who might have punched her a few months ago, it’s the ovaries.

Second, the abortion is just the setup for a thorough-going “slut shaming.” Could a divorced woman have a… boyfriend?!? Oh no! Alter adds the possibility of date rape because, I guess it’s supposed to be generous to imply that rather than have a consensual sex life, maybe Lisa was taken advantage of? Maybe?

I know the Kasowitz firm as litigators representing the tobacco and asbestos industries in mass tort products liability cases; I didn't even know they had a matrimonial department, but the tactics used here certainly fit right in with the firm profile.

Oh, counsel for the ex-missus is no slouch, either. Emily Jane Goodman used to be a NY trial court judge and handled a lot of high-profile cases; she's not exactly a shrinking violet. Also, she has been a favorite target of the NY Daily News (and NY Post) while on the bench, so it's kinda funny to see the News (more or less) on her side in this fight.