Straight Up with Sherri

Tuesday, April 12, 2005

Beth Gaddy Attempts to Hold Mae Hostage?

The Headline may sound "over the top," but it sure sounds right on the money to me!
Kenneth Mullinax shared with me yesterday that he was trying to handle the visitation issue with a deal that would be agreeable between both parties and avoid dragging it into court again.

This was the response Kenneth, Ruth, and A.B. were given:


Beth's compromise for visitation

Attorney Daniels, speaking for Beth Gaddy, told our attorney, Jack Kirby yesterday that Beth would be willing to allow us access to Mae Magouirk, if and only if

"Kenny would not give another media interview or speak to another blogger or do anything, either passive or proactive, which will give information or shed public attention to the case of Mae Magouirk."



My interpretation: "Stop telling everyone what I did. Stop talking bad about me, or Mae pays the price." This is JUST like those parents that use their children as pawns when their relationship falls apart! IT IS SICK! IT IS WRONG! IT IS IMMATURE!


Beth Gaddy is comfortable with denying her grandmother the comfort of her family and attempts to wield her power as a weapon?

What on earth is this woman thinking? Her silence was suspicious enough. I understand she is feeling the heat of the bright spotlight shining down on her. I get that. But it is clear to me that she does not have MAE'S BEST INTERESTS IN MIND! SHE HAS NO BUSINESS BEING A GUARDIAN FOR ANYONE! This is pure selfishness.

I have PLENTY more thoughts on this- but I will stop before I go into a FULL BLOWN RANT!

Oh, and go ahead trolls, I can't wait to see the mental hoops you jump through to defend this behavior. CAN'T WAIT!

14 Comments:

  • Sherri,
    What? No typos? Who wrote this, really? /sarc off
    Great breaking story!

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 11:16 PM  

  • LOL one can be said to jump through mental hoops, not mental loops.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:12 AM  

  • LOL!!

    I AM BUSTED! Thanks-- I will go change it!

    OY!

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 12:26 AM  

  • Oooh ... malapropism.

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 12:31 AM  

  • - This is the part of "court assignment custodial rights" that lacks any credibility, and no one seems interested in visiting this aspect of our aged and infirm populations rights. If it were up to Me I would pass a law that says the court will assiagn a third party, court appointed officer bound by all the normal judicial rules and pass on every request by family members, regardless of who it is, especially close relatives. There are just too many possible conflicts of interest, most of all inherentences, to allow people that kind of life and death power when the person of note is in no position to defend themselves. Why this is allowed to stand is baffling.

    By Anonymous Big Bang Hunter, at 1:14 AM  

  • There is no defending her behaviour and if she indeed is withholding them any update on Mae's condition what so ever then clearly it's done with bad intent.

    Then again, Ken did publish her personal details all over the internet and lied in his initial emails, that was also done with bad intent. And he seems first and foremost determined to portray himself as bad off as possible and let the situation simmer before doing something about it.

    Right now, what's in Mae's best interest isn't him admiring how he looks on TV or sounds on the radio. It's to make sure he can see her with his own eyes and get updates on her situation. If that comes at the expense of media silence, then so be it.

    He already accused Beth of trying to starve Mae to death so I can't imagine any arguement why he wouldn't pursue *any* avenue to make sure she's alright.
    If that means the only way to do that is to play Beth's silence game, go along with it.

    "Telling the story" can happen at any point but when he tries to do that at Mae's expense, I'm sorry, then he's no better off than she is.

    By Anonymous Vanessa, at 4:35 AM  

  • Vanessa,
    You do not have a clue, girl. I have a feeling you have either done this, or it's lurking in your future.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:34 AM  

  • Beth reminds me of a cockroach running from the light. Personal details such as Mae suspecting that Beth is spending money unauthorized from Mae's checking account should be enough for more light to shine and more cockroaches to be exposed before Mae is the one exterminated. The more Beth tries to hide the more the light should shine.

    By Blogger Alnot, at 6:32 AM  

  • Anonymous:

    If Ken and the others for one moment seriously believed that Beth was and is intent on killing Mae, then by all means please tell me why they agreed to have Beth as temporary guardian by voluntarily dropping their opposing petition on April 4th?

    By Anonymous Vanessa, at 8:50 AM  

  • Vanessa,

    They were afraid that they would lose the hearing and Mae would end up staying in hospice--so they did a deal.

    Gaddy's attorney will argue that the family will release protected health information if they are allowed to visit. The privilege for this information is Mae's and Gaddy will argue that it's release is detrimental to Mae's interests.

    This is a hypertechnical argument about a subject that Mae--most likely-- could care less about at the moment. Kirby should argue that Mae's welfare is better served by the presence of loving relatives who want her to live.

    By Blogger Sue Bob, at 9:44 AM  

  • It still doesn't make a whole lot of sense for them to agree to have Beth as guardian.
    I would have understood if they'd argued that a third party should gain temporary guardianship over Mae until the allegations of financial fraud and against best interest were resolved.

    Is there any definitive information about Mae's mental state? Both parties claimed she was mentally disabled and in no position to make decisions for herself but there seems to be doubt as to whether that's due to her current medical condition or more permanent?

    If at some point in time Mae will be able to decide for herself, to me, a third party guardianship would make a whole lot of sense.
    It keeps her safe and cared for, and the rest can argue and fight in the court or media all they like.

    By Anonymous Vanessa, at 11:35 AM  

  • Vanessa,
    I agree with your concerns. However, we must admit to having learned a very important lesson from Terri Schiavo; once the victim dies, the whole issue for her becomes moot.
    It is my understanding that the sole interest of Kenneth Mullinax, Ruth Mullinax, and A.B. McLeod was to make certain that Mae Magouirk would be removed from hospice and returned to medical care.

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 11:48 AM  

  • I don't think anyone is going to get killed.FBF8963

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:10 PM  

  • FBF8963,
    I don't think anyone is going to get killed.

    There is a woman who is not comatose, not vegetative, and able to have her malady treated without surgery.
    She is placed in a hospice, denied treatment of any kind, and not given sustenance. I cannot understand how you can make that statement.

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 3:38 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home