Rachel, who is suing her parents for 'abandoning' her has made sensational claims that her mom calling her 'fat' and 'porky' led to her suffering bulimia and that her former police chief father dad used to get her drunk and kiss her inappropriately. The judge denied any immediate claim for cash and adjourned to a later date - but warned her there appeared to be insufficient evidence to support her claims so far.
The judge added: 'what is the next step...are we going to open the gates for a 12-year-old to sue for an Xbox, a 13-year-old to sue for an iPhone... what about a 15-year-old asking for a 60 inch TV?' Her mother and father, Sean, broke down in court as details of how their family was torn apart were read out.
The judge today blasted Rachel for being disrespectful to her parents. When Judge Peter Bogaard read an expletive-laden and vicious answerphone message left by Rachel to her mother, Elizabeth, in which the girl said: 'I wanna s*** all over your face', he said: 'Have you ever in your experience seen such gross disrespect for a parent? I don’t see it in my house.’
The judge, sitting at Morris County court added that Rachel had given her mom and dad, Sean: ‘The proverbial f you’. He also warned he must consider the 'slippery slope' where 'we open the gates for a 12-year-old to sue for an Xbox, a 13-year-old to sue for an iPhone… what about a 15-year-old asking for a 60 inch TV?'
The judge added: 'what is the next step...are we going to open the gates for a 12-year-old to sue for an Xbox, a 13-year-old to sue for an iPhone... what about a 15-year-old asking for a 60 inch TV?' Her mother and father, Sean, broke down in court as details of how their family was torn apart were read out.
The judge today blasted Rachel for being disrespectful to her parents. When Judge Peter Bogaard read an expletive-laden and vicious answerphone message left by Rachel to her mother, Elizabeth, in which the girl said: 'I wanna s*** all over your face', he said: 'Have you ever in your experience seen such gross disrespect for a parent? I don’t see it in my house.’
The judge, sitting at Morris County court added that Rachel had given her mom and dad, Sean: ‘The proverbial f you’. He also warned he must consider the 'slippery slope' where 'we open the gates for a 12-year-old to sue for an Xbox, a 13-year-old to sue for an iPhone… what about a 15-year-old asking for a 60 inch TV?'
Rachel, who is suing her parents for ‘abandoning’ her has made sensational claims that her mom calling her ‘fat’ and ‘porky’ led to her suffering bulimia and that her former police chief father dad used to get her drunk and kiss her inappropriately.
In shocking legal documents submitted to the court, the honor-roll student said her parents’ behavior contributed to her developing an eating disorder at a young age and saw her weight plummet down to 92 pounds.
Rachel, who has two younger sisters moved in with the parents’ of a friend and is now suing for child support, medical bills, college expenses and legal fees.
She states that her parents have a combined yearly income of between $250,000 and $300,000 and she is entitled to $654-a-week in child support. Her parents have also refused to pay $6,000 owed in school fees for her Catholic High School.
Her parents claim their daughter ran off to stay with friends when she turned 18 because she refused to abide by rules they had set down, including to stop dating her boyfriend.
But today the judge clearly took a dim view of the lawsuit. He said: ‘What kind of parents would the Canning’s be if they didn’t try to set down some strict rules?
‘I’m not going to put myself in anyone’s shoes, he’s (father Sean) trying to raise a child. It’s clear to me all the positive qualities Rachel obviously has, in terms of sports and academics, but I’m not going to step on a father for how he tries to get his child on the right tracks when she has obviously come off the tracks, to put it mildly.’
When summing up later he denied all immediate financial claims, including monthly maintenance, private school payments and legal fees.
Summing up, Judge Bogaard said: ‘The court was called upon to find whether immediate financial relief was needed… It is not necessary….
‘We have to ask ourselves, do we want to establish a precedent where parents live in constant fear of enforcing the basic rules of the house. If they set a rule a child doesn’t like, the child can move out, move in with another family, seek child support, cars, cell phone and a few hundred grand to go to college.
‘Counsel, also needs to ask themselves, what is the next step…. Are we going to open the gates for a 12-year-old to sue for an Xbox, a 13-year-old to sue for an iPhone… what about a 15-year-old asking for a 60 inch TV….
‘I want both counsels to think of the potential slippery slope here.’
He added: ‘I think everyone needs to take a step back and realize this family and Rachel in particular is well worth the effort to salvage or attempt to.
In shocking legal documents submitted to the court, the honor-roll student said her parents’ behavior contributed to her developing an eating disorder at a young age and saw her weight plummet down to 92 pounds.
Rachel, who has two younger sisters moved in with the parents’ of a friend and is now suing for child support, medical bills, college expenses and legal fees.
She states that her parents have a combined yearly income of between $250,000 and $300,000 and she is entitled to $654-a-week in child support. Her parents have also refused to pay $6,000 owed in school fees for her Catholic High School.
Her parents claim their daughter ran off to stay with friends when she turned 18 because she refused to abide by rules they had set down, including to stop dating her boyfriend.
But today the judge clearly took a dim view of the lawsuit. He said: ‘What kind of parents would the Canning’s be if they didn’t try to set down some strict rules?
‘I’m not going to put myself in anyone’s shoes, he’s (father Sean) trying to raise a child. It’s clear to me all the positive qualities Rachel obviously has, in terms of sports and academics, but I’m not going to step on a father for how he tries to get his child on the right tracks when she has obviously come off the tracks, to put it mildly.’
When summing up later he denied all immediate financial claims, including monthly maintenance, private school payments and legal fees.
Summing up, Judge Bogaard said: ‘The court was called upon to find whether immediate financial relief was needed… It is not necessary….
‘We have to ask ourselves, do we want to establish a precedent where parents live in constant fear of enforcing the basic rules of the house. If they set a rule a child doesn’t like, the child can move out, move in with another family, seek child support, cars, cell phone and a few hundred grand to go to college.
‘Counsel, also needs to ask themselves, what is the next step…. Are we going to open the gates for a 12-year-old to sue for an Xbox, a 13-year-old to sue for an iPhone… what about a 15-year-old asking for a 60 inch TV….
‘I want both counsels to think of the potential slippery slope here.’
He added: ‘I think everyone needs to take a step back and realize this family and Rachel in particular is well worth the effort to salvage or attempt to.
SOURCE:AFRICANEWSPOST
No comments:
Post a Comment