Rabbinical Court Orders Prisoner to Grant Divorce
Translated & summarized from Ynet by baba
A rabbinical court in Jerusalem has ordered a man imprisoned for sexual offenses against minors to grant his wife a divorce. The man, serving an 11-year sentence, was convicted of rape and indecent acts against minors and violence against his children. The court ruled that his imprisonment justified compelling him to divorce, rejecting his defense arguments. If the divorce is not finalized at a scheduled hearing, his prison conditions may be worsened.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- A rabbinical court ordered a man imprisoned for sexual offenses against minors to grant his wife a divorce.
- The husband received an 11-year sentence for rape, indecent acts against minors, and violence against his children.
- The court cited legal precedent that an imprisoned, defiant husband can be compelled to divorce.
- Alimony from the National Insurance Institute does not exempt the husband from the divorce obligation.
- The court warned that prison conditions may be intensified if the divorce is not granted.
- The couple has been married for 15 years and has three sons.
A rabbinical court in Jerusalem has ordered a man serving a lengthy prison sentence for sexual offenses against minors to grant his wife a divorce, known as a "get." The man was convicted of severe charges including rape of a minor, indecent acts against her and two other minor family members, and violence against his children. He pleaded guilty to the criminal acts and received an 11-year prison sentence.
The three-judge panel, headed by Av Beit Din the Av Beit Din and including Dayanim Rabbi David Malka and Rabbi Chaim Vidal, heard the wife's petition for divorce and alimony totaling $26,000. The couple has been married for approximately 15 years and has three sons.
The court determined that the husband's imprisonment due to his criminal actions justified compelling him to divorce. The ruling referenced legal precedents, including the "Beit Meir," which states that an imprisoned husband whose actions led to his incarceration is considered defiant. If the wife is not receiving sustenance or marital relations, she is considered to be deprived of all marital rights, and the husband can be compelled to divorce.
The court rejected the argument that the husband was compelled to divorce due to his imprisonment, stating he brought this situation upon himself and is considered defiant even with a fixed sentence. It also addressed the issue of alimony payments from the National Insurance Institute, ruling that such payments do not absolve the husband of his obligation to divorce, as the institute is not acting as his agent but rather providing social assistance.
Regarding the possibility of conjugal visits in prison, the court noted that even if permitted by prison regulations, such visits lack the privacy and discretion required for marital relations and would be humiliating for the wife. Consequently, the court ordered the husband to grant the divorce, warning that if he fails to do so at a scheduled hearing, his prison conditions may be intensified until he complies.