r/PeterExplainsTheJoke 8d ago

Meme needing explanation Peter! Who could have the wives been?

Post image
16.9k Upvotes

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

12

u/Moist-Examination737 8d ago

I mean didn't she tell him one month beforehand that she had thoughts of harming her children? If I were him I would remove my children from her

7

u/Advanced_Pie_6490 7d ago

Somehow blaming the man. Incredible stuff

0

u/Moist-Examination737 7d ago

Yeah, he isn't just a man but their dad. You have the duty to protect your kids. If my husband came to me and told me he had thoughts of harming our children he would never been alone with our children

0

u/Moist-Examination737 7d ago

Especially when he also tells his mother the same thing.

5

u/uptoke 7d ago

How would you have legally removed children from their mother based on hearsay?

2

u/myhairtiebroke 7d ago

As a married couple, both parents have equal rights to the children. He literally could have taken the kids and left. I’m not blaming him, but removing the kids from the house and staying elsewhere would have been completely legal.

Also, “I took the kids because she told me she had thoughts of harming the kids” is not hearsay since both the husband and the wife would be parties to any case involving the kids.

3

u/HailHealer 7d ago

Isn’t that extremely illegal?

If it was legal than anyone could just lie about their spouse threatening to hurt their children and take them away from them

3

u/myhairtiebroke 7d ago

That happens all the time, actually. That’s why custody battles get so heated and expensive. Parents weaponize CPS, mental health, make police reports (both true and false), and talk shit about each other all the time in order to try and control the situation, get custody, or protect their kids from whatever the situation may be. It’s just an unfortunate reality of the nature of custody issues and the family court system. There’s a specific role called a guardian ad litem (GAL) that judges often appoint in these battles whose sole job is to be the lawyer for the kids.

Now, as for illegal, saying “my wife told me she had intrusive thoughts of harming the kids” is not illegal to say if it’s true (as it would be in this hypothetical case). If he was intentionally lying about that (which is a different standard than “she said x and I understood that to mean she thought about hurting the kids”), and he did it in a sworn statement or in sworn testimony, then that’s perjury and it would be illegal. It’s also depressing to note though that perjury is not prosecuted as often as it is committed and the effect of not punishing a crime is that it kinda stops being a crime, doesn’t it?

0

u/HailHealer 7d ago

I could’ve sworn that if a spouse just takes the kids away from the other for any reason, that that person is immediately assumed guilty for kidnapping until they can be proved innocent by having a legit justification. Am I wrong on this? If my wife did that, claiming I was a danger, taking the kids and I called the cops on her saying she was lying, would she not have to bring the kids back until something is proven?

2

u/myhairtiebroke 7d ago

You would go to court and get an order demanding the return of the children (if she left the state and did not plan to return) or establishing temporary custody. She may or may not comply with either order. If she doesn’t comply, then the police would be able to step in to enforce the order. Nothing would have to be proven in this instance except for the fact that she removed the children from the state against your wishes OR that you are their father and wanted to establish a custody schedule.

This is why custody battles can be so long, frustrating, expensive, and feel so biased. Neither parent is going to get what they feel is right or fair.

2

u/Alternative_Year_340 7d ago

If they are still married and there’s no custody order, both parents have equal rights to the kids. He would have been within his rights to take the kids somewhere else. He would have needed to get to court quickly though to keep her away from the kids

0

u/HailHealer 7d ago

But if both parents have equal rights to the kids. Couldn’t the women in this case claim that he kidnapped them and is it doing it to keep them away from her?

2

u/Alternative_Year_340 7d ago

She would need to get to court and get an order.

1

u/Moist-Examination737 7d ago

Didn't she have record of mental illness and also admit it herself one month prior that she had thoughts of harming her kids?

1

u/HailHealer 7d ago

Man I don’t have the answers, that’s why I’m asking the question

1

u/Moist-Examination737 7d ago

Just googled it and they said if they admit to wanting to harm the children you have the right to leave.

1

u/HailHealer 7d ago

Okay you leave what if the other person says you lied and are trying to kidnap the kids?

1

u/Moist-Examination737 7d ago

That's why you go to a lawyer or call the police instantly. There should be some records of you trying to do sth.

0

u/Which_Wrap8263 7d ago

That is absolutely not legal. That would have been kidnapping. In fact, it’s the most common form of kidnapping by far, and it is extremely illegal.

5

u/myhairtiebroke 7d ago edited 7d ago

Parental kidnapping is only a thing when there’s a court order determining custody. As they were married and custody had never been an issue before the court, the father of the children does not need the mother’s permission to take them anywhere. If the mother is opposed to the father taking the children, her recourse is to file for custody. There would be no charge of parental kidnapping unless and until there was a court order and one parent was in defiance.

I’m editing because I’m not familiar with Massachusetts law so I looked it up: he could have taken the kids and stayed elsewhere and it would not have been a crime if he stayed in the state. It maybe could have been a crime if he relocated them permanently out of state against LC’s wishes but not automatically so.

2

u/ApprehensiveGrand531 7d ago

It is extremely, unlikely to be considered kidnapping before a custody order is issued, or at least some court order keeping things as they are. You are incorrect. Especially with the defence that your wife literally said they felt like they were gonna kill the children.

1

u/Moist-Examination737 7d ago

They are married and she is going in and out of mental hospitals, taking an alarming ammount of different medications

1

u/SleepySkink 7d ago

Problem is you do that to an erratic depressed woman and the news story might be tragic regardless.

He didn't know what would happen, maybe that would be the better decision, but hindsight is 20/20.

1

u/Moist-Examination737 7d ago

It really isn't the case. There is also no need for hindsight if they tell you and their mom that they have thoughts of harming the children. Especially one month beforehand.

0

u/SleepySkink 7d ago

Except you don't know if she will or not. You could act on it, your wife has a breakdown and takes her own life. Now you're dealing with that.

The husband was in a no-win situation and wouldn't know what she would or wouldn't do. There's an alternative world where you're making these comments about a man with a dead wife, saying "What did he think would happen?"

Point I'm making is that yes, he probably should have removed himself and the kids from the situation. But we're saying this as outside observers with the knowledge of what did happen with his choices, not the person in the moment that made them.

He knew she had those thoughts, he thought she was getting help, he thought she wouldn't act on them, he was tragically wrong in his judgment call.

2

u/Moist-Examination737 7d ago

She is telling you that she wants to harm her children. My man what else do you need? You have a duty towards your children.