We previously discussed the bizarre case of Heath Campbell, who ran into a bit of trouble when he tried to get a store to prepare a birthday cake for his son Adolph Hitler Campbell. It turns out that the parents gave all of their kids Nazi-related names. After the “mein cake” controversy, the state appears to have placed the couple under investigation and then took away their children. The New Jersey neo-Nazi is now fighting to get back his kids. He did it however in a curious way — he and his new fascist Frau showed up in full Nazi uniforms to court. This raises a significant free speech issue. Most of us view this Nazi obsession to be weird and unbalanced. However, it is also a form of political expression. While the state insists that there is a history of violence in the family (including an “anonymous complaint”), there have been no details of the extent of this history. Should this bizarre conduct and hateful belief system be considered on the custody question.
The little Bavarian brood includes Adolf Hitler Campbell, 6, Joycelynn Aryan Nation, 5, and Honszlynn Hinler, 4, and, Hons Campbell, 2. Hons was reportedly taken from the couple immediately after his birth. The mother has since waived her parental rights.
Campbell appeared with a new woman, fellow Nazi Bethanie White dressed in her own Nazi garb. He insisted that their choice of clothing should not have an impact on custody or visitation, noting “I’m going to tell the judge, I love my children. I wanna be a father, let me be it. Let me prove to the world that I am a good father.”
Do you agree? Can the court take judicial notice of the outfit in finding that visitation is not in the best interests of the child?
I am concerned that the couples political beliefs were the cause for the initial investigation, but I have not been able to find any description of the claim of violence in the household.
Source: Daily Mail
This could be considered political speech, the most protected type. Unless he’s a provable danger to his kids, he should have them back. This Nasty thing was decided long ago in Skokie, which just proves the law is an ass.
Jokes aside, this guy is not simply displaying Nazi symbols or adhering to Nazi political beliefs. He’s _dressed_ in a Nazi _uniform_. That’s prima facie evidence of delusion.
What Mespo said. I can only imagine what the judge thought when he/she saw this pair walk into the court room. Yikes.
A damn shame. Had he showed up in the costume of the Home Team, he would have been offered unqualified praise and discounts at the gift shop.
Arthur Randolph Erb – “Likewise no judge would allow a stripper to come before the bench in her costume unless it was germain to the case at hand.”
Are you suggesting this Nazi uniform ISN’T important to the case? The same case where he lost his rights as a parent for the beliefs that are related to his uniform?
Do we take children away from Muslims due to their being unsuitable as parents do to their beliefs, especially if the children are daughters? How about so many Blacks, who pride themselves on their antisocial and exilic lifestyles? No! Then why attack a White man for the same thing?
Face it, if these two were Black as the back end of Hades and dressed up in New Black Panther or Nation of Islam getups, no court would do a thing about them, nor would any agency bother with investigating them to any degree.
I’m not real comfortable going down the road of the judge looking at political speech and beliefs, no matter how crazy, to take away someone’s child. Now, if this were a custody dispute between mom and dad, I think I’d be okay with the judge taking things like this into consideration. But, if the state wants to take away your kid, I think they need more than the guy acts like a fool and has repugnant political beliefs.
“What this does show is that the father is more interested in making a political point and statement than getting his kids back. Thus this shows a clear dispostion towards not being overly concerned about the childrens welfare.”
I think Arthur makes a good point here. While I believe that his dress is a matter protected by the first Amendment, this is a child custody hearing, which is somewhat different than a criminal/civil trial. In ruling on his fitness as a parent the Judge must take a whole range of information into account. His choice of outfit, while well within his Constitutional rights, does indicate that he cares more for his political views than his children. I’ve worn a beard for 50 years now, but for my children I would shave it off without qualms as I did for my daughter’s wedding at my family’s request. His dress indicates that he isn’t serious about being a part of hid children’s lives.
Also truly, naming your kid Adolph Hitler Campbell, seems child abuse on its face.
Free speech! If I was the judge, I would have two court reporters at the courthouse steps to take down everything that they say. Put them on the stand under oath and tell them to have at it. Yak away Adolph. Have it on video. When the kids are grown the video tape and the transcripts can be shown to the kids who will have grown up in a safer home.
Wootsy’s still a cat, yep. ):
As for fitness one has to wonder about their mental status that they would choose to come dressed that way when they know it will be viewed negatively, and possibly as an indication of mental instability. At the least they have shown they do not know how to make a competent decision when it comes to doing what they need to to get the Court to take them seriously about wanting the kids back.
Only 1 word matters to me today for New Jersey… Senator Frank Lautenberg……DAMN DAMN DAMN ! How dare he die…..
As all the lawyers on this site know, every state has guidelines for the Courts to follow in custody cases. Most are similar, but not identical. There is also the issue of fitness of both parents if there are dependency and neglect issues.
Without researching the New Jersey standards, there are all kinds of red flags here, no pun intended. In this particular case, I see some folks who need their heads examined….literally. Most states have a provision for best interest of the child based on lifestyle of the caregivers.
I hope somebody follows this case to see what the Court does as a final decision.
Oskar Schindler was a member of the NAZI party but that did not stop him from becoming a hero by rescuing Jews from NAZI death camps.
In NA cases… Yes they can…. But, maybe the guys onto something…. Just getting dressed for success…..
He’s getting the negative attention he craves, just like a child.
I think that the judge made an error in allowing this dress in his/her courtroom. From what I understand, courts are not to be used as entertainment or for clown shows. There would be no problem if he had been tossed if he wore a KKK outfit with a hood, and this is no different. Likewise no judge would allow a stripper to come before the bench in her costume unless it was germain to the case at hand.
What this does show is that the father is more interested in making a political point and statement than getting his kids back. Thus this shows a clear dispostion towards not being overly concerned about the childrens welfare. Thus I have no problem with denying him custody of his children. I am sure that there are other issues than his politics given the fact that the mother gave up her rights to her last child. So I have seen nothing at all that would overrule the courts opinion. The ruling should stand absent other information not at hand.
I feel sorry for the kid…
Dress for success? Of course. the court can look at anything that bears upon your judgment and maturity in determining visitation rights.
How many Americans detest anything Muslim/Islamic, black, Hispanic and want to see most “unAmerican” types placed under surveillance or lock and key, to say nothing of those who want them all annihilated? How about the imprisoning and torture of those in Guantanamo? Should there also be a “who do you hate” question for any prospective parents? While this guy is a freak, at least you know where he’s coming from.
Fellow is an idiot (and so it appears is his new wife), but once we open the door, where do we stop – take away kids from Tea Partiers?