The JudgeMental Podcast – Episode 46: Happy F'ing Friday

Welcome to Episode 46 of The JudgeMental Podcast! Hosts Hugh and Christine, the minds behind judge-y, bring you another candid and insightful discussion on the realities of family court, judicial accountability, and the ongoing quest for justice.

In This Episode:

Mommy Jail Case Update: Hugh and Christine provide the latest developments in the high-profile "mommy jail" case, including the denial of emergency relief, the ongoing wait for crucial court video footage, and the challenges of obtaining records in Kentucky courts.

Due Process & Judicial Transparency: The hosts break down the importance of video records, the lack of transcripts in Kentucky, and the impact on appeals and writs. They discuss the significance of time windows for legal actions and the hurdles faced by pro se litigants.

Writs, Motions, and Legal Maneuvering: A deep dive into the different types of writs (prohibition, mandamus, habeas), the process of filing appeals, and the recent motion to disqualify a judge for appearance of bias.

Psychological Evaluations in Family Court: Christine and Hugh critically examine the use (and misuse) of psychological evaluations in custody battles, the stress and stigma faced by litigants, and the broader implications for due process and parental rights.

FOC Reports & Cross-Examination: The episode explores the role of Friend of the Court (FOC) reports, the right to access underlying data, and the importance of effective cross-examination in family law cases.

Lawyer Life & Mental Health: Honest reflections on the mental health challenges faced by attorneys, the culture of silence around anxiety and stress, and the value of open conversations in the legal community.

Listener Engagement: The hosts share feedback from listeners, discuss the realities of practicing law, and reaffirm their commitment to transparency and advocacy.

Connect with Us:

Download the judge-y app for exclusive content and community features.

Visit our website at judge-y.com for show notes, resources, and more.

LEGAL DISCLAIMER

The content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns.

Thank you for listening to The JudgeMental Podcast! Don’t forget to subscribe, rate, and review us wherever you get your podcasts.

Episode 45 – The JudgeMental Podcast

In this powerful episode of The JudgeMental Podcast, Christine and Hugh dive deep into the realities and challenges of the family court system. Drawing from their own experiences as attorneys and advocates, they discuss the trauma, frustration, and systemic issues that plague family courts—not just in Louisville, but nationwide and even globally.

Key topics include:

The emotional toll of working within and navigating the family court system

How discretion and lack of transparency can lead to injustice and constitutional violations

The impact of family court decisions on children, families, and legal professionals

The role of judges, attorneys, and third-party appointees (like GALs and FOCs) in perpetuating or solving systemic problems

The need for accountability, oversight, and reform in family courts

The importance of finality and structure in legal proceedings involving families

Christine and Hugh also share personal reflections on how their perspectives have evolved over months of investigation and advocacy. They highlight the recurring stories and trauma shared by listeners and users of the judge-y app, emphasizing the urgent need for change.

Listeners are encouraged to stay tuned for the upcoming launch of the judge-y app, designed to bring transparency and support to those navigating family court. The hosts also invite stories and feedback, especially from those in California and beyond, as the movement for judicial accountability grows.

Connect with us:

Visit judge-y.com for updates, resources, and to share your story.

Thank you for listening to The JudgeMental Podcast!

LEGAL DISCLAIMER

The content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns.

Episode 44 – The JudgeMental Podcast

In this episode of The JudgeMental Podcast, Christine and Hugh dive deep into the question: Should there be a public defender’s office—or its equivalent—in family court? They explore the differences between criminal and family court representation, the constitutional rights at stake for parents, and the real-world impact of not having independent legal counsel in family law cases.

The hosts discuss:

The current system of court-appointed attorneys in family court and its potential pitfalls.

Why the independence of legal representation is crucial, especially when judges or government agencies are involved in appointing attorneys.

The high cost of private legal representation in contentious custody and divorce cases, and how even judges themselves might not be able to afford such battles.

The challenges faced by pro se litigants (those representing themselves), including inconsistent and sometimes unclear court rules, and the way judges interact with them.

The importance of accountability, checks and balances, and protecting fundamental constitutional rights in family court.

Christine and Hugh also share anecdotes from their own experiences, including stories of problematic courtroom behavior and the difficulties faced by those without legal representation. They highlight the need for systemic reform and encourage listeners to consider what’s truly important when it comes to protecting parental rights.

Call to Action:

Have a story to share about your experience in family court? Submit your stories at judge-y.com.

Check out court proceeding clips and more on their YouTube channel: judge-y (handle: judging the judges).

Disclaimer:

The content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. For specific legal concerns, always consult a qualified attorney.

Listen now on the judge-y app or at judge-y.com!

LEGAL DISCLAIMER

The content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns.

The JudgeMental Podcast – Episode 43: "Crystal Clear"

In this episode, Christine and Hugh dive back into the complexities of Jefferson County Family Court, sharing updates and insights on recent cases and court decisions. Christine opens up about her recent 24-hour fast and addresses rumors, before the hosts turn their attention to the latest developments in family law.

Key topics discussed include:

The ongoing saga of a mother detained by Lauren Ogden, her new legal representation, and the push for transparency in FOC (Friend of the Court) billing and reporting.

The importance of requesting and reviewing FOC files and billing records, and the challenges attorneys face in obtaining complete and accurate documentation.

A deep dive into a recent Court of Appeals decision overturning Judge Lauren Ogden’s restriction of a father’s parenting time, and the troubling aftermath in court proceedings.

The hosts’ candid reactions to the judge’s response (or lack thereof) to being overturned, and the broader implications for families navigating the system.

The problematic role of FOCs in the courtroom, including issues with billing, testimony, and the need for greater accountability.

Listener stories and calls for more transparency and reform in family court processes.

If you have your own stories or experiences with FOCs in Jefferson County, Christine and Hugh want to hear from you! Visit judge-y.com or use the judge-y app to share your story and connect with the community.

Tune in for a frank, insightful, and sometimes jaw-dropping look at the realities of family court. New episodes every Monday!

---

Find more episodes and resources at judge-y.com and on the judge-y app.

Follow The JudgeMental Podcast for more updates and real talk on family law.

LEGAL DISCLAIMER

The content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns.

Episode 42: Sittin' in a Tree

Welcome to another eye-opening episode of The JudgeMental Podcast! This week, Christine and Hugh dive deep into the tangled web of judicial ethics and conflicts of interest in family court, focusing on a real-life scenario involving Judge Gatewood and attorney Jim Murphy.

The hosts break down how a judge being a landlord to an attorney who regularly appears before them—and is appointed to lucrative roles—raises serious questions about fairness, transparency, and the appearance of impropriety. They discuss the ripple effects this has on litigants, the legal community, and public trust in the system.

Key topics include:

The ethical gray areas when judges and attorneys have financial relationships.

The impact of undisclosed conflicts on families navigating divorce and custody battles.

The importance of transparency and disclosure in the courtroom.

Real stories from listeners and the broader implications for family court reform.

Christine and Hugh also share updates on the upcoming judge-y app and encourage listeners to visit judge-y.com to share their own stories—good, bad, or conflicted. The episode closes with a call for more accountability and open dialogue within the legal system.

Tune in, get informed, and join the conversation at judge-y.com!

LEGAL DISCLAIMER

The content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns.

The JudgeMental Podcast – Episode 41: "Put the Shovel Down"

In this episode of The JudgeMental Podcast, hosts Christine and Hugh dive deep into the latest developments surrounding Judge Santry and the controversy over her attendance at a political fundraiser. The discussion unpacks the ethical implications, the judicial response, and the broader issues of accountability in the family court system.

Episode Highlights:

Recap of the motion hour and Judge Santry’s refusal to recuse herself from a case involving a GAL running for public office.

Examination of the judge’s attendance at a campaign fundraiser, the subsequent publication of event photos, and the ethical questions raised.

Analysis of the judicial ethics committee’s opinion and the accuracy (or lack thereof) of the information provided to them.

The importance of transparency and the dangers of self-policing within the judiciary.

Personal reflections from Christine and Hugh on the impact of these events on public trust in the legal system.

A candid discussion about the financial and emotional toll of prolonged litigation on families.

Key Takeaways:

The appearance of bias can be as damaging as actual misconduct, especially in family court.

Self-regulation among judges and legal professionals often falls short of true accountability.

Transparency and full disclosure are essential for maintaining public trust in the judiciary.

The financial costs of legal battles can be devastating for families, often outweighing the issues at stake.

Resources & Links:

The full judicial ethics opinion discussed in this episode will be available in the YouTube comments and notes section.

For more information, merch, and resources, visit judge-y.com or download the judge-y app.

Thank you for listening to The JudgeMental Podcast! If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, leave a review, and share with others who care about judicial accountability.

Follow us and join the conversation on the judge-y app and at judge-y.com.

LEGAL DISCLAIMER:

The content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns.

The JudgeMental Podcast – EP 41: Mommy Jail

In this gripping episode of The JudgeMental Podcast, Christine and Hugh break down a shocking incident in family court where a mother was abruptly jailed by Judge Ogden. The hosts recount the courtroom drama, including the judge’s reaction to claims of due process violations, the role and neutrality of the Friend of the Court (FOC), and the controversial use of psychological evaluations as punitive measures.

Key Topics Discussed:

The events leading up to a mother being remanded to jail during a motion hour.

The judge’s handling of courtroom decorum and due process rights.

The FOC’s emotional response and questions about neutrality.

The use of psych evals in family court and their impact on parents.

Broader patterns in Louisville Family Court, especially regarding the treatment of Black mothers.

The importance of transparency, accountability, and the need for reform in family court practices.

Christine and Hugh invite listeners to share their own stories and experiences with family court, Judge Ogden, or FOC conflicts. Connect with the show and join the conversation at the judge-y app or visit judge-y.com.

Disclaimer: The content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Always consult a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns.

Listen now to get the full story and join the movement for justice in family court!

LEGAL DISCLAIMER

The content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns.

The JudgeMental Podcast – Episode 39: "Society Loses"

In this episode of The JudgeMental Podcast, hosts Hugh and Christine—two lawyers on a mission to bring transparency and accountability to the courts—dive into one of the wildest days in family court. They break down the drama surrounding a high-profile recusal motion, the culture of courtroom banter, and the sometimes shocking realities of judicial conduct.

Key topics include:

A behind-the-scenes look at the denial of a recusal motion in Shelly Sentry’s courtroom

The impact of judges appearing remotely and how it affects courtroom dynamics

The “good old boy” culture and its effect on public trust in the legal system

The role of guardians ad litem and the ethical dilemmas they face

The importance of zealous advocacy and the challenges attorneys encounter when pushing for judicial accountability

Reflections on how courtroom behavior shapes perceptions of fairness and justice

Hugh and Christine share candid critiques, personal stories, and sharp insights—always with unshakable honesty. Whether you’re a legal professional or just fascinated by the inner workings of the justice system, this episode offers a compelling, unfiltered perspective.

Mentioned in this episode:

The “judge-y” app and website: your tool for holding judges accountable and sharing your courtroom experiences.

Subscribe to The JudgeMental Podcast for more episodes that pull back the curtain on the legal world, and don’t forget to check out “judge-y” for more ways to get involved.

Welcome to another episode of The JudgeMental Podcast! In this episode, we dive deep into the world of judgment, decision-making, and the stories that shape our perspectives. Join us as we explore thought-provoking discussions, real-life scenarios, and expert insights that challenge the way we think about right, wrong, and everything in between.

Highlights from this episode include:

Engaging conversations with our special guests about the nuances of judgment in everyday life.

Practical tips for using the judge-y app to navigate tricky situations and make more informed decisions.

Listener stories and questions that spark lively debate and offer fresh perspectives.

A behind-the-scenes look at how the judge-y website is helping people connect, share, and grow through honest feedback.

Whether you’re a longtime fan or new to The JudgeMental Podcast, this episode is packed with valuable takeaways and plenty of moments that will make you think twice. Don’t forget to check out the judge-y app and website for more resources, community discussions, and exclusive content.

Tune in, get judge-y, and join the conversation!

The JudgeMental Podcast – EP 37 Become the Media

Episode Notes

In this episode of The JudgeMental Podcast, Christine and Hugh dive deep into the troubling lack of transparency in the family court system, focusing on recent emergency orders and judicial decisions that have gone unpublished and unchecked. They discuss the case of Judge Lauren Ogden, highlighting repeated interventions by the Court of Appeals and the alarming consequences for families caught in the system.

Key topics include:

The hidden nature of emergency court orders and the barriers to public access

The role of the media and the legal community in holding judges accountable

Real-life impacts on families, including financial and emotional tolls

The ethical obligations of attorneys and judges to report misconduct

The broader implications for due process and public trust in the judiciary

Christine and Hugh also share their personal reactions to the cases, discuss the importance of transparency, and call for greater accountability within the legal system. They encourage listeners—especially those in the legal field—to take action and demand openness from the courts.

Connect with us:

Visit the app and website at judge-y.com

Follow us on all platforms: @judge-y

For more from Christine: @KentuckyChristine

Thank you for listening to The JudgeMental Podcast. If you have feedback or stories to share, reach out through judge-y.com or on social media. See you next time!