Proactive Projection

Despite my title, I give her early credit for taking a stab at heading off any “drama” (as she put it) in the following email:

LM,

I just wanted to update you on S2. He still has a 103 fever. I’m going to give it till tomorrow and see if they can call something other than Amoxcicillan in. If my memory serves me, he never really responds to that. I called the Dr. this morning and they said to give it another 24 hours.

Also, I wanted to head off any holiday drama this year. Thanksgiving is mind right?

I know you get Christmas again, but that IS my week, so you will pick up on Christmas Eve and return them either Christmas Day evening or in the AM on the 26th? Please confirm pick up and drop off asap.

New years is mine this year. which falls during your week, so I am assuming we exchange new years eve and then again New years day??

Like I said. I want to head off the drama before it begins, so please respond asap.

~PEW

It’s apparently still too difficult for her to check the court order as the schedule is that clear.

• Thanksgiving is hers this year.
• Christmas is mine this year, pick-up on Christmas Eve and drop-off on December 26th.
• New Year’s is hers this year, pick-up on New Year’s Eve and drop-off on January 1st.

I did laugh a little at her contention that she is the one trying to head off the drama, considering she is the only one who has engaged in custodial interference, failing to show up for my Christmas holiday with the children in 2006. This resulted in a contempt hearing where she was found guilty of custodial interference and failure to follow other provisions of the court order in place at the time.

But hey… if that makes her feel better and she ultimate complies with the order this year… I’m okay with that!

 Subscribe in a reader

The Restraining Order Conclusion

After filing the petition for a restraining order on September 2nd, 2004, a hearing was scheduled for the following week on September 8th. PEW was appropriately served her notice and showed up with her legal representation. After lengthy discussion with my attorney, he was confident that I could handle this on my own and effectively told me to stick to the facts as I had presented them in the petition and do not deviate. Explain the story, provide your evidence (police reports and calls) and it should be granted.

Now, many attorneys do their “pro bono” work as may be required by their firms during restraining order issues. I was approached by one and decided to go ahead and take it. With a few hours to go until it was our turn, I filled him in on all of the details and he agreed that it was quite likely that I would get the restraining order.

I requested the following:

• Restrain Defendant from abusing, threatening, harassing, or stalking Plaintiff and/or minor children in any place where Plaintiff may be found.
• Evict/exclude Defendant from Plaintiff’s residence and prohibit Defendant from attempting to enter any temporary or permanent residence of Plaintiff.
• Award Plaintiff temporary custody of the minor children and place the following restrictions on contact between the Defendant and the children: “Any agreed-upon visitation requires an exchange no closer than the driveway of the marital residence with no entry into the home.”
• Prohibit Defendant from having any contact with Plaintiff and/or minor children either in person, by telephone, or in writing, personally or through third persons, including but not limited to any contact at school, business, or place of employment, except as the court may find necessary with respect to partial custody and/or visitation with the minor children.
• Prohibit Defendant from having any contact with the Plaintiff’s relatives and Plaintiff’s children listed in this petition, except as the court may find necessary with respect to partial custody and/or visitation with the minor children.
• Order Defendant to temporarily turn over weapons to the sheriff of this county and prohibit Defendant from transferring, acquiring, or possessing any such weapons for the duration of the order.
• Order Defendant to pay temporary support for Plaintiff and/or minor children, including medical support and payment of the rent or mortgage on the residence.
• Direct Defendant to pay Plaintiff for the reasonable financial losses suffered as a result of the abuse, to be determined at hearing.
• Order Defendant to pay the costs of this action, including filing and service fees.
• Order Defendant to pay Plaintiff’s reasonable attorney’s fees.
• Grant such relief as the court deems appropriate.
• Order the police or other law enforcement agency to serve Defendant with a copy of this petition, any order issued and the order for hearing. The petitioner will inform the designated authority of any addresses, other than the Defendant’s residence, where Defendant can be served.

So, my pro bono attorney meets with the other side to try to get the lay of the land and see what he can make happen. When he returns after a lengthy discussion, he informs me that the other side is willing to accept the petition with one exception – that the children be excluded from the restraint.

When I explain to him that the greater portion of my fear is that the children could ultimately be harmed by her increasingly escalating behaviors, the attorney explains that I have a solid case on the firearms issue. She will be found guilty and the court would very likely impose all of that which I have asked for, except the temporary custody of the children. I allow myself to be talked into it. We avoid the hearing by allowing everything relevant to my own protection to proceed, most importantly, her immediate turning-over of the firearms to the Sheriff’s department. And again, I get another lesson in the mother-favoritism in family court.

Another hindsight lesson for anyone in a similar spot is here. While I will always suggest that you default to listening to the attorney’s advice, I will now suggest that you follow your gut… follow your instincts… do a risk/reward analysis. I believe I made a mistake in listening to this attorney’s advice as I had nothing to lose by going to a hearing. In that situation, where there is truly no downside to proceeding – PROCEED and see if you can get all of the relief you’ve asked for. I wasn’t going to jail. I wasn’t going to be sanctioned. I had the complete upper-hand. And I gave away a potentially strong opportunity to gain primary, if not sole, custody of the children because of PEW’s criminal behavior. I let the “expert” talk me into this because of the mantra “always listen to your attorney.” Well, folks… I’m hear to tell you that attorneys can be wrong. Attorneys make mistakes. Attorneys can give bad advice. Assess each situation on its own merits and if your instincts are telling you to follow through with the hearing and there is literally no downside to trying to push through and get what you asked for – JUST DO IT!

I thought that between winning the hearing over the schooling issue followed so closely by these events and subsequent restraining order being accepted by her without a fight/defense, I had a couple of major tools needed to protect myself and gain primary custody of the children. I would be able to protect them from her madness. My confidence level was quite high.

Still, following the advice of the pro bono attorney and not following through on the hearing, even though I still get the PFA, was probably another of several big blunders on my part. My high confidence level would soon be shattered as we go through the custody evaluation and panic begins to take hold.

The restraining order was entered for a duration of 18-months. I received exclusive possession of the marital home (though she wasn’t required to make any contributions to the mortgage or upkeep, which pretty much was the same as when we were married). She was required to turn over the stolen firearms to the Sheriff’s office.

In an early example of PEW’s penchant for willful disregard of court orders, I received a call from her 2-weeks after this hearing. She explained to me that her neighbors told her that a couple of Sheriff’s officers were looking for her at her place earlier in the day and if I had anything to do with it. I told her that I did not.

It turns out, she hadn’t turned over the firearms to the Sheriff’s department and a bench warrant was issued for her arrest. In keeping with her ability to get out of certain trouble – she turned over the firearms shortly thereafter. Still, she had to go before the court and explain the delay in compliance. I wasn’t there for it, but I’m sure she turned on the crying faucet, made some lame excuse, and was not sanctioned for her willful disobedience of the court’s orders. She is contempt of court, she is already in violation of the PFA by continuing to hold the firearms – and NOTHING is done. No sanctions. No arrest. No penalty whatsoever. 4-years later, I’m no longer surprised when these things happen to me or anyone else.

 Subscribe in a reader

Court Hearing: Where the Children Would Go To School

Today I provide the details of the petition, the hearing, and the results of said hearing which precipitated The PEW breaking into the marital household and my subsequent filing of the petition for the filing of the restraining order.

On August 12th, 2004, PEW filed an emergency petition for the court to make the decision regarding where our children would attend school. Though we originally had an agreement, not unlike nearly every other agreement we’ve had, she decided to change her mind to feed her unquenchable thirst for chaos and combat via litigation.

She filed a petition which “further ordered and decreed that pending a hearing, LM is enjoined from removing the minor children from St. Local Catholic School.” As I start to detail the content of this petition and many others, you will notice a pattern of embellishment and flat-out lying that never seems to meet with her being punished for her unsworn falsifications to the court. This, despite the clear and convincing evidence of her having done so. Toss in a good measure of projection and you have the makings of a scary situation that would repeat itself dozens of times over the last few years.

The Petition:

You, LM, Respondent, have been sued in court to enjoin you from the removal of the minor child S1 from St. Local Catholic School and for attorneys fees for the necessity of same.

You are ordered to appear in court… [blah, blah, blah… details dates and times and courtroom.]

EMERGENCY PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF

1 – Petitioner, PEW, natural mother… [inconsequential details].

2 – Respondent, LM, natural father… [inconsequential details].

3 – Petitioner and the parties’ children moved out of the marital residence located in County on May 5, 2004 due to Respondent’s continuing harassing behavior towards Petitioner.

Comment: Here is your first complete lie. PEW set the wheels of divorce in motion in January of 2004. She voluntarily remained at the marital residence until May 5th, 2004 of her own accord and I was agreeable to that in order that she would find a suitable place of residence for herself and the children when they were with her. I had several emails which spoke to how “nicely” I treated her during that period and how “if only” I had treated her that way throughout the marriage, we wouldn’t be divorcing. This is evidence she had failed to remember existed. I never harassed her and it defies logic that she would attempt to impress upon the court that her fears and this fictional harassment “forced her” to stay for nearly 5 months. The fact is, we barely spoke to one another during that period except as a courtesy and only if it was something pertaining to the children.

4 – There are two children… [inconsequential details].

5 – Petitioner filed for Custody and Support on June 1st, 2004. Respondent filed his own petition for custody on June 9, 2004. A conference was held on July 13, 2004 and the Conference Officer made no recommendation pending the results of the counseling process.

6 – The parties’ minor child, S1, attended St. Local Catholic School last year and is currently enrolled in St. Local’s for this upcoming year. The parties’ minor child, S2, is currently enrolled to attend pre-school at St. Local’s for the upcoming year.

Comment: S1 was enrolled in pre-K, and I quote, because PEW “needed a break” from caring for the children and to keep them from “being up her ass 24/7.”

7 – Respondent is now threatening to remove S1 from St. Local and enroll him in public school against Petitioner’s and child’s wishes.

Comment: I didn’t threaten any such thing. The reason for the short duration of the hearing was this all important fact – PEW had actually been the one to register S1 for our award-winning elementary school per our agreement during the 1st-week of February 2004! This was after she had initiated the divorce process! This was the lynch-pin of my defense and I believe the one which made the judge rule in my favor almost instantaneously after testimony was complete. Further, she often speaks on behalf of the children regardless of what they actually do or say. Fact is, S1 was excited to be attending the elementary school in question. It was within walking distance of the marital household. All of his neighborhood friends were going there. That’s not to say that he didn’t enjoy his time at St. Local. However, he was excited to be attending kindergarten at the “big boy school” that was 2 blocks from our home with all of his friends.

8 – The best interests of the children are served by maintaining the continuing loving, stable environment and therefore necessitates the emergency relief sought hereby, as school begins on 9/8/2004.

9 – Respondent’s threat to remove S1 from St. Local and enroll him in public school is solely for the purposes of posturing for his position in the parties’ upcoming custody hearing.

Comment: Projection, plain and simple. The reality was that the rather significant expense of the Catholic school was being used by PEW to force me to sell the house. It was an expense that neither of us could afford and I was already paying significant school taxes for the children to attend the public elementary school. She petitioned often knowing that anything awarded in her favor would be primarily my expense due to our disparity in incomes and I was already struggling to keep up the house payments with child support, temporary alimony, and day-to-day living expenses. She was simply trying to burden me with more expenses which would force the sale of the home.

10 – Respondent has threatened Petitioner that he will “drag out” the divorce proceedings and will continue to maintain sole possession of the marital assets because he believes it will advantage him in the custody proceedings if he remains at the marital residence while Petitioner has been reduced to residing in an apartment.

Comment: I threatened no such thing. I wanted this ended quickly and as painlessly as possible. The only person that “reduced” PEW to living anywhere was PEW. She initiated the divorce without grounds (not that she needs any in our state). She moved out of her own accord and into a rather nice apartment that she took months to discover and obtain. Remember now, our original “agreement” before I was ambushed by her filing for custody of the children was a shared arrangement that was dictated by our respective work schedules.

11 – Respondent maintains sole possession of the marital residence because he is the only party with the financial ability to maintain the mortgage, however, he refuses to negotiate with the Petitioner regarding the distribution of marital assets so that she can obtain her own residence.

Comment: The earliest indicator that she was “entitled” to her own single-family home and that I was responsible for providing the finances necessary for her to accomplish that. Further, as the readers may already know – I negotiated my ASS OFF with this psycho. The only one failing to negotiate in good-faith was the PEW and I had an enormous amount of evidence already to show same.

12 – This latest threat to remove S1 from St. Local’s is simply another example of Respondent’s harassment of Petitioner since it is clearly not in the best interests of the child.

Comment: Again, I threatened nothing. The children were enrolled because we agreed to it and The PEW herself did the registration, the orientation, and the back-to-school stuff necessary. It was only after June or July, when she discovered she wasn’t going to easily get her way that the schooling became an issue. All I did was follow-through on the initial registration by contacting the school, getting to know the principal and the teacher, and making the arrangements for after-school care if necessary. Turns out, it wasn’t. Not only wasn’t PEW working during the school week (a fact I’m guessing she didn’t think would matter to the court), S1 qualified for full-day kindergarten, something I worked solely with the school to obtain for him. Apparently, it was in S1’s best interests to the both of us until PEW decided for no particular reason except to litigate – that it wasn’t.

13 – S1 enjoys and flourishes at St. Local’s. He is familiar with all the teachers and has many friends. Further, after school care is available at St. Local’s. If S1 was forced to go to public school, he would then have to be bussed to a separate after-school care facility.

Comment: Lie. Aftercare wasn’t needed. Even if it was, it was local and associated with the school.

14 – Petitioner believes, therefore avers, that it would be to S1’s detriment to be uprooted from a school he knows and enjoys and to be separated from his brother. Further, the minor children are having emotional issues with the separation of the parties. To cause more transition and instability would be detrimental to both children.

Comment: Says the person who is responsible for more transitions, upsets, moves, and school changes than anyone else in this entire saga. 3 moves to residences (a 4th apparently forthcoming depending upon how her foreclosure notice is processed), 3 schools. It’s interesting that my efforts are to settle things down for the children and ensure some level of stability in their lives and yet, she pontificates about “transition and instability.” The insanity of it all is boundless.

15 – The Petitioner believes and therefore avers that she would prevail on the merits of the hearing to enjoin respondent from removing the children from St. Local’s.

Comment: Of course she does. Of course, the little matter of her explaining why she enrolled them in the public school to begin with would loom large at the hearing.

16 – To permit the minor children to be removed from their present school activities and counseling environment at this time would be damaging to the children’s education and welfare and not in their best interests.

Comment: Drama much?

The bulk of my testimony centered around the following facts:

– The lynch-pin: SHE REGISTERED S1 FOR THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL!!!

– That we had agreed to send the children to public school – our award-winning elementary school, and we did so after the divorce proceedings were initiated by PEW.

– I had spoken with many parents with students at the Catholic school and checked their facts. They had significantly declining enrollment. They were boosting tuition as a result. There was talk of the school CLOSING. These are things that the PEW had apparently no knowledge about.

– The climate surrounding the Catholic church at the time regarding the sexual abuse of children was something I mentioned. Was I concerned or had any proof that there was anyone at the church who couldn’t be trusted? Certainly not, but it had more to do with the negative perception of the church and all of the controversy surrounding that topic. It was probably partly responsible for the declining enrollment.

– Finally, we were “non-practicing” Catholics and I couldn’t remember the last time we had attended church that wasn’t for a wedding or major Catholic event (Christmas, New Year’s, Easter, Thanksgiving). So, I questioned the veracity of her extolling the virtues of the Catholic Church and the education that they provide when she couldn’t herself remember when the last time it was that she had attended church on a regular basis (let alone the last time she was there for any reason in recent memory).

My attorney (#1) buried her story on the stand. Her position and justifications were indefensible and it was clear. I was absolutely perfect on the stand under the questioning by her attorney.

THE RULING: After testimony was completed, the judge immediately gave his ruling. S1 would go to the public elementary school. S2 could attend Catholic school’s pre-K for the upcoming year but would also attend public school when kindergarten started. Further, I was under no obligation to pay for any attendance at the Catholic school because mom was “stay-at-home” during the week and it was a “luxury” expense.

The lies and embellishments would be a consistent pattern for her and despite my protestations, she was never punished or otherwise sanctioned for filing false petitions. It was a waste of my time and money, the court’s time and money, and even her time and money. However, as long as attorneys, judges, and court staff need paying – they will continue to entertain such frivolous lawsuits.

 Subscribe in a reader

The Restraining Order Petition

It’s really hard to describe the feelings that overcome one in the midst of a situation like this break-in. I call it a “break-in” because that’s exactly what it was. I had the locks changed since her move-out and made the mistake of leaving downstairs windows “cracked” when I left for work. So, she ripped-out the screen, opened the window and let herself and the children into the house.

Yes – the children.

This was the first shocker for me and I remained extraordinarily calm given the situation. I couldn’t believe she had done this in front of the children, then ages 5 and 3. I had great neighbors on a wonderful block and the most heartbreaking part of this whole ordeal was the big, bright smiles on the faces of both boys and the excitement in their voices when, during that evening when they were out front playing, they were telling our next-door neighbors, excitedly, “Yeah! Mom and Dad are getting back together and we’re so excited! This is really great!” To keep a solid face I had to work very hard to choke back tears and sadness and do the parental side-stepping that was something akin to telling them, “…oh, we’ll see, there are a lot of things that need to be discussed” …and avoid ripping their hearts out of their chest again. The PEW would take care of that the next day. I still get butterflies and sadness when I think about those couple of days when I remember how the kids were.

The details of the events are best described in my petition for protection from abuse for the dates in question (9/1 & 9/2, 2004):

My wife and I had a hearing on the morning of 9/1/2004. The judge ruled in my favor, which my PEW rather upset.

Upon returning home, I changed my clothes and went to a meeting at work. At approximately 1:45PM, my phone activated and caller ID indicated that the call was coming from my home. I removed myself from the meeting and answered the phone.

The PEW identified herself to me and said, “I just wanted to let you know that I’ve broken into the house and I already check with the police. There isn’t a fucking thing you can do about it, either. I’m moving back in and I am going to make your life a living hell until you have no choice but to sell this house!”

I tried to convince The PEW to leave the home with the children. I told her that I understand that she was entitled to be there, but it didn’t have to happen today. She refused to leave and we ended the conversation.

At that time I called police radio and asked [town’s] police to send a patrol car to the home to see what was going on.

Soon thereafter, I arrived home to discover that no police had been dispatched. As PEW had stolen my firearms that I won from the home approximately 6-months ago and their return was again discussed in the morning, I asked if she had them with her and if I could have them back, at which time she replied menacingly, “Your guns? Yeah, you’ll get them back all right – you better be careful what you ask for!”

I understood that to be a threat. I again called the police and urged them to send someone over right away as I was on the premises, as was my wife and my children and that things were escalating. I believe I said that I “strongly advised” them to come to the home.

Within minutes the police arrived and spoke to us separately. They advised me that PEW was adamant about staying and that neither they nor I could force her to leave.

Later in that evening, around 10:00 PM, PEW and I had a relatively civil discussion about what transpired and of our general circumstances. PEW expressed her frustration with the situation, her living arrangements, her mounting legal bills. Of particularly serious concern to me, PEW stated specifically that she is having trouble dealing with all of this and she, “felt like ending it all” which I took as a clear reference to suicide. Furthermore, during our portion of the discussion regarding our custody issues, she said to me, “If I lose my children, I don’t know what I’d do, probably kill myself.”

This erratic behavior has me concerned for my children’s welfare, my own welfare, and even her welfare.

On Thursday, 9/2/2004, I had to run some errands in the morning. One of my stops included the police station, where I filed a report with Officer So-And-So. I informed him of my discussion and PEW’s suicide references. I further expressed to him my fear that PEW may try to hurt herself and then try to accuse me of doing it or attempt to provoke a physical confrontation. After he took my report, I headed home.

I arrived home at approximately 11:00 AM. once there, I sat down with PEW to discuss the drop-off and pick-up of S1 for school. I made a call to the after-care program to adjust my registration from full-week to drop-in.

PEW informed me that she was taking the boys to her apartment to pick-up their hermit-crabs and some other things. She returned approximately 90-minutes later without anything from the apartment. It was approximately 2:00 PM. I awakened from a nap and informed PEW of my intentions to go into work.

PEW asked me to wait, let the boys out into the yard, and she went into the bathroom. Upon exiting the bathroom, she informed me that she was moving back out. I was shocked because the boys were already very confused by the previous days’ events. They were telling our neighbors that, “…mommy and daddy were getting back together.” Now, she was telling them that they were not moving back in.

I expressed extreme displeasure at this revelation and thought this behavior could have extreme negative effects on the children. It was then that PEW charged at me and started yelling at me and she raised her hands as if she was going to strike me. Given my suspicions that she would try to engage me in a physical confrontation, I backed away from her, telling her, “Be careful! This could cost you your kids!”

She continued to yell at me, approaching me again with a raised hand. I moved towards the steps that lead to the front door. I demanded the house key and PEW refused. I told her I was going to take the van keys. I didn’t threaten PEW at any time. However, she called the police.

By this time, I had exited the marital residence and went to my vehicle which was parked across the street. The boys were in the house now, upstairs and looking out the open front window at me. PEW came storming out front and went berzerk in the driveway. In an effort to get the attention of the neighbors, PEW began shouting at the top of her lungs, all within view and hearing of the children, “DO YOU PEOPLE KNOW WHAT KIND OF NEIGHBOR YOU HAVE?!?! HE’S AN ABUSER, A FUCKING-ASSHOLE (repeatedly), A HOMOSEXUAL, AND REAL MAN WOULD HAVE LEFT THE HOUSE AND ALLOWED THE WOMAN TO STAY!!!” The language was filthy, vile, full of expletives – and S1 was clearly unnerved by what he was witnessing. When she had completed her tirade, she threw the house key in the grass. The police then arrived, including Officer So-And-So with whom I filed the report earlier in the day. Soon after a talking to by the police, PEW left with the boys.

In my estimation, this erratic behavior pattern is becoming increasingly more aggressive and is demonstrating that PEW has little regard for the welfare of the children. I am concerned for the safety of the children, my own safety, and even PEW’s safety from herself.

It is also important to note that after telling me the prior evening that she fired her attorney – during the confrontation on 9/2/2004, PEW told me that she did not fire her attorney and that the attorney had advised PEW to re-enter the home, causing all of this upset and strife for the children and me, but for what end I don’t know. I find PEW’s behavior threatening and detrimental to the children most especially.

The entire situation was surreal, there is no other way to explain it. At least I had the sense enough to file a report with the police and accurately predicted what her intentions were.

Worthy of note:

– Despite explaining to the police that she made a gun threat, they didn’t arrest her, because she apparently didn’t have the guns on her actual person. I’m absolutely certain that if the roles were reversed, I would have been arrested.

– Despite explaining that she had attempted to attack me and even despite the police witnessing some of her screaming and foul mouth, she was not arrested. I’m absolutely certain that if the roles were reversed, I would have been arrested.

Frankly, I think I was lucky that I wasn’t arrested.

At least I took the necessary steps, short of moving out, to maximizing self-protection and it appeared to have worked.

To this day, I’m astounded that his major incident was never considered by any custody evaluator as relevant to determining her stability or her ability to parent the children effectively… but this would be one of many harsh lessons I would learn over the course of the coming months and years.

Separately, learn about the abuse of restraining orders: Without Restraint – The Use and Abuse of Restraining Orders. You can also do a simple google search for “restraining order abuse” and find alarming information.

I count myself lucky that I was actually able to get one, for what little good it did me, given the circumstances. What is quite ironic was that reality is, women use them overwhelmingly as a weapon in a divorce and custody situation. Custody Evaluator 1 will dismiss my offering of same as “lawyer posturing to get an upper-hand in the custody situation” despite PEW’s acceptance of guilt to avoid a hearing. Have I mentioned that if the roles were reversed what my expectations would be?

 Subscribe in a reader

The Psycho Ex-Wife Breaks Into the Marital Home

On September 2, 2004 and the following days – a series of major events took place. These events gave me a tremendously high and false sense of positivity that would never come to fruition. Worse than that, the lack of consideration that these events, and many others, would garner would accelerate my education in the divorce and family court system. It was still the same-old, same-old. It actually may even be worse than it was 20- or 30-years ago for men and fathers in this country. It’s exacerbated by the proliferation or better understanding of personality disorders and how they drive family court litigation. I’m certain that this is the perfect storm that is my situation.

This is going to take a while to explain, so I offer you what I called then the “Cliff’s Notes” version (or not) that I sent a friend who was concerned about not hearing from me for a few days. This is effectively as-written back in September 2004. More details will be forthcoming…

Cliff’s notes version: (Note: she stole my guns 6 months ago and hasn’t returned them – cops: “There is nothing we can do.”)

– The first of several court cases went down on Wednesday morning. We were at an impasse over where the kids were going to school. She sued me to have them go to Catholic School. The judge ruled in my favor. She was none too happy.

– Hours later, I’m in an important meeting regarding a new start-up we’re doing in [another country]. My cellphone buzzes and I look at the display… it’s a phone call… from my HOUSE. I remove myself to a private conference room and answer. It’s my wife. She announces she broke into the house and that she is moving back in. Claims to have fired her attorney, broke her apartment lease and that’s that. Unable to talk her out of leaving: Discussion, cops, discussion… nothing the cops nor I can do to get her out since she’s on the deed (no settlement yet). I’m stuck.

So, I resign myself to the fact that, for at least the short term, we’ll have to go back to living together and try to do it amicably. I start the wheels in motion to take action against her. The sorriest thing is that my kids think that we’re “getting back together.”

– Thursday… after making arrangements with my attorney. I go to the police station and describe a conversation that my wife and I had the night before where twice she made references to “wanting to end it all” and “if I lose these kids, I dunno what I’ll do, probably kill myself.” I tell them that I fear for her, my boys, and myself and that I suspect that she COULD even injure herself and try to make it look like I assaulted her. They take the report, I go home.

– We discuss the logistics of S1 getting off to school next week. I make some calls to adjust planned arrangements for after-school care… which should no longer be necessary. She runs errands with the boys telling me that she is going back to her apartment to get the hermit crabs for the boys and some other things. I take a nap, as you can imagine, it’s been a long night.

– Upon her return, I tell her that I am going into the office and she tells me to wait… she wants to talk about something. She sends the kids in the yard… and she announces she is moving back OUT. I get really upset. I tell her that this charade is going to wreck these boys. She feigns an attack at me, in my estimation, to try to get me to put my hands on her… I retreat to my car across the street and she comes out in the driveway and at the top of her lungs (in an effort to try to get the attention of neighbors) goes into this disgraceful, expletive-laced tirade screaming to them, “DO YOU KNOW WHAT KIND OF NEIGHBOR YOU HAVE?!?!? >>>” and she’s off to the races. In the meantime, the children are in the front window witnessing all of this. I just lean against my car waiting for the cops again… (there is still nothing that they can do). During our exchange… she informed me that she didn’t break her lease and she did all of this on the advice of her attorney.

She ultimately leaves with my kids again and right now… all is quiet on the home front. I get the boys back tonight thru Tuesday morning. I got a lot of undoing of damage to try to do. I missed pretty important days at work, but by the grace of God, my boss, the CEO has been extremely understanding and flexible. I only just got back from the courthouse… I decided I can’t be “nice” anymore. I filed for a protection from abuse order this morning. If the judge accepts it, hearing Wednesday (S1’s first day of school)… and given the nature of her work, if it sticks… it will very likely cost her her job.

Against the advice of my attorney, I DIDN’T file one yesterday for fear it would “push her over the edge.” Unfortunately, after the events of yesterday afternoon… I truly am left with no choice. I can only hope that there is are some guardian angels out there watching over my boys. Part of the PFA includes the children and requests full custody of the children on a temporary basis until the custody evaluation that we’re going through plays itself out.

I think she may have scuttled any shot she had at winning that case now, too.

That’s the Cliff’s Notes version… if I filled in all the details, I think even your head would explode.

That gives you all an idea of what happened and what was going to happen relative to the break-in. DW previously posted my email to her regarding my fears and some information about the break-in.

The Restraining Order Petition

 Subscribe in a reader

So I Don’t Have to be the Bad Guy…

The wait for the reply is over. At least initially, I was pleasantly surprised and prepared to say, “I was wrong, she came back with a reply that was civil and cooperative.” She did. Unfortunately, it wasn’t long before the backslide began and old habits reared their ugly head. The old habit? An inability to just step up and “be the parent.” So, without much further adieu – the reply regarding yesterday’s request for extra time with the children.

LM,

Actually, camp ends on the 15th for the summer. I had arranged to have my friend T——‘s nephew (a teenager) watch them that week, which is fine if you’re working up here and you want to leave them with him during the day at my house and just pick them up after you get done work that’s fine too.

I think it’s only fair that I let you have them early if you want this week since you did that for me when I wanted to go away. Are you guys going somewhere?

~PEW

A couple of things are interesting in this response. That is… aside from the apparent cooperation.

The first – the irony that she has a “teenager” prepared to babysit the children. This is another one of those examples where her rules don’t apply to her, just everyone else. Of course, the first thing I remember is her outrage that I had not one, but TWO very responsible 16-year olds watch the boys for a few hours on New Year’s Eve while DW and I attended a community event. So, it’s okay for her to do that (all day long while she is at work for a full week), but not okay for me to do it for a few hours. She made mention of it in this rant about her safety concerns.

The second – this is a violation of the court order. The childcare provision of our agreement was born of a couple of issues. #1 – her repeatedly pulling the children out of agreed-upon childcare and placing them with friends while pocketing my portion of the childcare expenses. (She was ultimately found in contempt-of-court on that issue.) #2 – Her objections over my early use of a nanny (who happened to be licensed and certified). In order to avoid any more problems, a provision regarding childcare requires:

7 – Childcare: During the school year, the children are to be enrolled in aftercare associated with the school they attend preferably. If not, another licensed daycare facility is permitted as agreed upon in writing by both parties. During the summer period, the children are to be enrolled in a licensed daycare facility, summer camp, or certified nanny as agreed upon in writing by both parties.

So much for her alleged safety concerns and at least she remains consistent in not following court orders. Still, I am pleased with the apparent cooperation!

Well, it didn’t last long. The initial response consititutes an “agreed upon change in writing between both parties.” See my post The Greatest Custody Order/Agreement Clause post. I wrote back:

PEW,

Thanks. If you have day coverage, that would make it MUCH easier. I can cover you on the 20th & 21st. No specific plans, just wanted to have two full weekend days to do stuff. Beach. Bike training. Whatever else we can think of.

~LM

Not long after my agreement to do both, comes the change via text and then email.

Text message 1 from PEW:

The boys freaked when I said they were getting pu early they said that ur not going anywhere.

Text message 2 from PEW:

Can we do it on a weekend u have something special so I don’t have to be a bad guy?

Email from PEW:

LM,

would you like to try to talk to them about this weekend? I felt really bad because they said they feel like they don’t get to spend enough time with me.

~PEW

It was nice while it lasted. It’s astounding, given how many times I’ve been deliberately put into the position of “bad guy” because she didn’t want to parent, discipline, explain appropriately, etc. because of her. This link explains it pretty well: Why Our Sons Will Struggle with Discipline. It is one of many examples sprinkled throughout this blog. Here she is, incapable of taking advantage of a perfect opportunity to explain to the children that mom and dad are cooperating and put down their clear attempt to manipulate the situation. Again, I will not bail her out.

PEW,

No, not particularly. What I would like is for you to tell them that we’ve made a schedule adjustment, as I have for you in the past and it would be nice to just spend a weekend doing things instead of spending one of the days interrupted by an exchange.

What I won’t do is get into a situation where they’re manipulating the situation into that one of us (whether it is you or me) have some “expectation” that something “special” needs to be done for them… on their terms. An explanation that we’re cooperating with one another for a change is all the reason that they need.

~LM

At this point, I’m not sure that the early pick-up this week is going to happen. Of course, that will be another violation of the custody order and the question becomes, do I point that out and go pick up the children anyway? We know that will only escalate the situation, but I am well within my rights to do just that. Of course, it will be met with the flaming email barrage which will be ignored.

In any event…

LM,

Fine. I’ll talk to them. As for the 20th and 21st, I just need you to take them overnight on the 20th. I’ll be coming home thursday night around 7 or 8ish, so I’ll just have someone watch them till I get home. On Friday morning I’m going to take them to [parent’s vacation home] for the weekend, so just confirm, ok?

I also wanted to talk to you about school supplies. I have lists and I am wondering if you will split the cost with me this year because I am broke, as you know?

~PEW

Aren’t we all? In the same breath that she informs me she is taking off from work to drive several hours for a weekend vacation – she’s telling me to split the school supplies because she’s broke. Did you catch that?

PEW,

I’m confirming everything with one exception. I’ll pick them [up] on Thursday and take them home and feed them and we can arrange to exchange as you get closer to home.

Email me the school supplies list.

~LM

Fine LM. I have the lists at home, I’ll try to remember to bring them tomorrow.

 Subscribe in a reader

The Greatest Custody Order/Agreement Clause

Changes: All provisions of this agreement may be altered with prior WRITTEN agreement between both parties. If a deviation is agreed to by both parties, it may not be revoked or changed without subsequent written agreement by both parties. Written agreements may be accomplished via email, fax, or through other documented media.

If anyone is going through a divorce involving children, be it civil or uncivil, I have found this to be a most powerful ally in ensuring against alleged miscommunications and the likely occurrence of “he-said, she-said” situations.

I’ve struggled mightily for several years with PEW’s:

– Reneging on verbal agreements which were then revoked at the 11th-hour.

– Reneging on written agreements (usual email agreements).

– Verbalizing agreements and then failing to put them in writing or draw them up as orders (after getting burned with time and expenses of having an attorney draw them up only for her to refuse to sign them).

I’m on the record in various places around the internet with a simple assessment of a borderline’s negotiating and agreement philosophy:

#1 – There is no agreement that you can come up with that s/he will ever agree to. If you came up with it, there must be something wrong about it, underhanded about it, or you are trying to rip her off in some way.

#2 – If s/he verbalizes an agreement with you, s/he will never sign your documentation or see to it that it is documented and signed from his/her end.

#3 – There is no agreement that s/he’ll come up with that s/he’ll agree to if you agree to it. If you like it, there must be something wrong with it or she forgot something that will benefit you and rip her off.

#4 – BPD’s don’t negotiate. They pretend to negotiate, upping the ante in a disguised effort showing (falsely) they are amenable to a settlement. After you’ve gone way above and beyond what is fair or equitable in an effort to settle things, s/he will use that as the benchmark in asking the court for more when you go to the inevitable hearing.

Now I’m fairly certain that the clause opening this post is not uncommon and probably not original. However, I did come up with that all on my own. Tired of the run-around that was typically associated with “working with her” as she so often claims she does verbally but doesn’t actually do in reality – I had to come up with something that would reduce my frustration and lock her in. Vacation plans, extra custody time, exhange points, and other plans have been upset by her games. I’d swirl into a pit of begging and pleading for honoring what we had discussed, to no avail. So, that was the clause I came up with to change things. I wouldn’t beg. I wouldn’t plead. If I didn’t have it in writing, I had no agreement and I would plan accordingly. Unfortunately, it was usually without the children.

It has been instrumental in heading off some court hearings. Those it didn’t, it was instrumental in either defending myself resulting in a finding of innocence or finding her guilty of contempt. When she goes into court claiming she didn’t agree or there was some misunderstanding, I usually only have to hand the judge the email exchange showing agreement between us and the jig is up. It’s really been that simple.

I presented that clause to Judge Contempt. Not only did she like it, she put it into the order exactly as I wrote it, including the all-caps “WRITTEN.”

If your order/agreement doesn’t have this clause – get it in there the next time it is updated. If you’re in the middle of a custody case, make sure that a clause (or one with similar language) becomes a part of any final order.

It won’t guarantee that your psycho-ex will adhere to the order without violation. However, when s/he does, at least you will have protection and proof should you need to go to court. Remember, when emailing, always copy yourself on every single email. Keep your paperwork filed and organized in the event you ever need to use it in court.

If you feel compelled to request a deviation from your order, do it in writing. The MOMENT you get a written agreement in reply – STOP! No more discussion. No mind-changing allowed. It is essentially an extension of the court order without having to go through a hearing for a change. Accept no substitute. If you don’t agree in writing, you don’t have an agreement, period. Follow that order to the letter and avoid deviations unless you have them in writing – agreement from the both of you – IN WRITING!

 Subscribe in a reader

November 2nd, 2007 – Thanksgiving Comes Early

Prior to November 2, 2007 – I was the “non-custodial parent” and had my children about 1/3 of the year. Every other weekend during the school year + extra time (holidays, spring and winter breaks, teacher in-service days, etc.).

November 2nd, 2007 was the latest in a long line of custody hearings during the course of the last 3-years and saw gain even more ground. After being unemployed for the better part of 9-months, I managed to secure a job, but not just any job (as future posts will detail) – a job back in my original state, which gave me the opportunity to get 50/50 custody of my children.

She had actually filed what I believe was her 6th-contempt petition against me in addition to a petition to modify custody to award her sole physical and legal custody. When I got my new job and secured housing in the state where the children reside, I exercised a clause that Judge Contempt entered into the custody order of October 13th, 2006, which read something like “…should father obtain employment and establish a residence in the state where the children primarily reside, he shall be granted 50/50 custody after a short hearing.”

I secured employment on September 4th, 2007. I secured a nice cottage house on October 6th, 2007 – only one week before my deadline. You cannot begin to imagine the series of events which had to happen to enable this dream to come true – and that they did was equally unimaginable. November 2nd, 2007 was that short hearing. I filed my counter-modification for custody on September 7th, 2007.

It was a fairly uneventful hearing. With exception of 2 provisions in my petition (items 4 and 8 – she didn’t like being ordered to meet halfway), PEW actually agreed to all of the rest of my terms. The entirety of my petition was as follows:

The Petitioner respectfully requests that the Honorable Court modify the existing Order of Court as follows:

1 – Legal Custody: Father and Mother shall have joint legal custody.

2 – Physical Custody: Father and Mother shall have joint physical custody. The schedule shall be alternating weeks, with exchanges taking place on Sundays, commencing with Father’s first available custodial week commencing after entry of this order or move-in date for the reserved [Work State] residence, whichever is later.

3 – Vacations: Vacation plans must be made by either party during their custodial time and may not interfere with the other parent’s custodial time. If vacation is to be taken, each party must provide the other a minimum of 15-days notice as to their vacations dates, locations & addresses,, and contact phone numbers.

4 – Custody Exchanges: Custody exchanges will take place at a mutually agreed upon location to be provided to the court in writing by both parties within 48-hours of this order. Exchange time shall be between 3:00PM and 4:00PM. Should father elect to spend custodial time with the children at their [Home State] home, the custody exchange shall take place at the [Exchange Point]. on Sundays, between 4:00PM and 5:00PM, unless Father is returning to his [Work State] residence, in which case, the exchange shall take place at the agreed-upon exchange point.

5 – Holidays, Special Occasions: Physical Custody of the children shall be shared by the parties according to the following schedule which takes priority over regularly scheduled periods of custody:

Thanksgiving to include the entire weekend of Thanksgiving. Father shall have custody in odd years and Mother shall have custody in even years.

Christmas to include December 24th through December 26th, Father shall have custody during even years and Mother shall have custody in odd years with the following exception: Pursuant to the contempt order entered by Honorable JC in March of 2007, Father was awarded the holiday of Christmas 2007 for the full week from December 23rd, 2007 through December 30th, 2007. Beginning in 2008, the aforementioned holiday schedule will resume.

New Year’s Holiday to include December 31st, through January 1st. Father shall have custody in odd years and Mother shall have custody in even years.

Easter Holiday shall be in accordance with the school calendar. Father shall have custody in odd years and Mother shall have custody in even years.

6 – Phone Communication with the Children: Each party shall have reasonable telephone access to the children at reasonable hours when they are in the custody of the other parent.

7 – Childcare: During the school year, the children are to be enrolled in aftercare associated with the school they attend preferably. If not, another licensed daycare facility is permitted as agreed upon in writing by both parties. During the summer period, the children are to be enrolled in a licensed daycare facility, summer camp, or certified nanny as agreed upon in writing by both parties.

Right of First Refusal – In the event that either parent cannot make themselves available to care for the children during their custody period for reasons which may include, but are not limited to; work travel, family illness, school holiday without work holiday, family emergency – the other parent will have first right of refusal to care for the children prior to any other arrangements being made. If the other parent is unable to care for the children under such circumstances, the custodial parent may make other suitable arrangements. Both the offer and acceptance/refusal must be made in writing.

8 – Child Custody Changes (Relocation): Should father lose employment and housing in the area where the mother resides with Mother at any time, all provisions set forth in the prior custody order dated October 13th, 2006 shall return to full effect if such termination affects his ability to remain a resident of [Work State] and financial circumstances necessitate a return to the [Home State] residence.

9 – Extracurricular Activities: Each party may sign up the children for sports teams or other extracurricular activities that take place during that parent’s custody time so long as that activity doesn’t require the children’s or child’s participation during the other parent’s custody time absent the other parent’s written agreement.

10 – Decision-Making: With regard to any emergency decisions that must be made, the parent with whom the children are in custody at the time shall be permitted to make the decision necessitated by the emergency without consulting the other party in advance. However, the parent making such a decision shall notify the other party of the emergency and consult with him/her as soon as possible. Day-to-day decisions of a routine nature will be the responsibility of the parent having physical custody at the time.

11 – Changes: All provisions of this agreement may be altered with prior WRITTEN agreement between both parties. If a deviation is agreed to by both parties, it may not be revoked or changed without subsequent written agreement by both parties. Written agreements may be accomplished via email, fax, or through other documented media.

The orders of January 11, 2005, August 28th, 2006, and October 13th, 2006 shall remain in full force and effect except as modified herein.

The Petitioner does pray and request that the Honorable Court will grant the Modification as stated herein on an Emergent Status. The reason for the request for emergent status is to allow the Petitioner to expedite the final plans for living arrangements suitable for the family and to permit the father the custody time to which he is entitled and fervently desires as quickly as possible.

Respectfully Submitted,
LM
————————
On item 4, the judge made me responsible for the full trip should I take them to my home in my home state (about 4-hours away) since I now have a residence and will usually be coming back to PEW’s home state.

The judge revised item 8 to exclude everything and call for a hearing because “many other circumstances may have changed as well and I would want to review the issues that may exist at that time.”

Neither wholly unreasonable. I got my 50/50 and that was all that truly mattered at that point. When asked on no fewer than 3 occasions by JC if she read and understood all provisions of the petition that were about to be entered as her order with the aforementioned changes, PEW answered, “yes.”

She’ll conveniently forget all of these details when she files her next contempt petition in an effort to destroy another holiday – Christmas 2007 – less than 45-days later… I’m in Contempt of the Future

 Subscribe in a reader

Christmas 2006 Part V – Conclusion: The Contempt Hearing

I have to offer a little more groundwork for you readers. Up to this point, I had an attorney and had spent damn near every dollar to my name fighting for my kids only to not get them. I had them about 1/3 of the year for my investment. It was the best I could do and I relish every moment of it. She has done very well for me despite significant odds against us.

By the time the contempt hearing rolled around March 30th, 2007, my funds were exhausted. Complicating matters, in January of 2007, my workplace relocated across the country and I was out of a job. However, given that we were averaging anywhere from 6 to 15 visits to the court per year (conferences and hearings) – I didn’t want to cut my attorney loose. I still have her “in reserve” so to speak, so when truly important bullshit arises, I can bring her in to handle it. If there are trivial issues which PEW has escalated to hearing status and my attorney believes I could handle it on my own, she would serve in an advisory capacity. In her words, I’ve always prepared for court extremely well, took an active role in my case (which everyone should do), and paid close enough attention to understand the basics… how to object on hearsay, relevancy, evidence – fairly straightforward Legal 101.

This hearing would be my first foray into “semi pro-se” representation. In court, I was on my own. Now pro-se herself after firing her second attorney in as many years (an expensive one at that) – PEW, fancying herself a would-be attorney, was now representing herself as well. I was counting on her inability to maintain a coherent line of questioning and her uncanny ability to screw herself when things weren’t going her way.

I was looking for three things:

– PEW to be found guilty of contempt of court for failing to put S6 into the agreed-upon childcare facility as agreed to in the summer of 2006 and was re-affirmed in the custody hearings of October 2006.

– PEW to be found guilty of contempt of court for custodial interference on her failure to show up at the ordered exchange point so that I could have my Christmas Holiday and winter break for 2006.

In terms of sanctions, I wanted reimbursement to the tune of $1200.00 for legal fees in preparing for the litigation and peripheral expenses associated with same. Additionally, I want the future schedule to be altered to award me the Christmas Holiday and winter break for 2007 before resuming our regular schedule.

Neither of these requests were unreasonable. Give me back what I lost because of her latest round of bullshit. As I had been through the legal wringer for the better part of 2-years at that point, I had prepared myself for no relief and, if that were the case, I wasn’t going to fight for much more of anything. I was on the edge of having completely lost faith in the legal system.

JC would surprise me this day.

She had already laid most of the groundwork for her “alibi” as detailed in the previous posts (Parts III and IV).

In court, she would try to use the excuse that she was “sick.” She would “prove” this by having an affidavit signed by her supervisor that she missed work on December 19th. She was in work on the 20th and 21st, though – but it didn’t stop her from trying. She tried to bolster her argument with a “doctor’s note.” It was dated December 26th. Neither was convincing to the judge. In fact, it aggravated JC. She saw it for what it was – an obvious attempt to give herself an “alibi.” The judge blew it out of the water.

The judge’s ruling as written from the transcript:

Judge Contempt (JC): So, ma’am, with respect to the issue of day care, there’s no question you’re in contempt for not following the day care provision that I imposed, because there is an issue of who he could use down in [LM’s State]. And so I said both of you have to do licensed day care providers.

And on that issue, Mother is to notify Father in advance if she wants to change any day care arrangements, and the parties have to agree in writing. And counsel fees will be imposed if Mother is found in contempt in the future of this — of this provision.

With respect to Christmas 2006, I find Mother’s in contempt. Hand down. She did not do what she should. And that’s the issue that is going to cost her counsel fees.

I direct that within 30-days of today’s date, Mother is to pay the sum of $675.00, which represents three hours at $225.00 for [LM’s attorney] for the petition; that she is to pay $675.00 to Father by check and keep a record that he’s cashed it and that you get it back. Thirty days, $675.00.

Further, Mother and Father, they have to do the makeup for Father’s missed Christmas in 2006. Therefor, the Christmas schedule is modified to say that Father has the next Christmas. Then you go back to whenever the schedule would say. Father will have Christmas schedule in ’07 and then we go back to whatever should happen.

That’s my order.
——————
And my faith in the system continues on it’s upswing. After getting the bulk of what I wanted (absent primary custody) in the October 2006 custody hearings, the judge finding her in contempt and imposing sanctions against PEW – was another step up in this three-ring-circus.

Believe it or not, after repeatedly failing to follow the judge’s orders in various ways over the prior few years – she failed to pay me the money the court ordered in 30-days. On day 30, I called the court and she was summoned for another contempt of court hearing for failing to heed the latest order. This isn’t me filing for contempt, this is effectively the JUDGE filing for contempt. Upon her notification of another hearing, she quickly paid me the $675.00 by check.

She asked me to call the court on her behalf after she paid me, which I refused to do. My hope was that despite the payment, because it was late, the already pissed-off judge would go nuclear on her. However, when she provided Domestic Relations with the proof of her payment – the court withdrew the petition.

Too bad.

When Christmas 2007 rolls around… she’ll try to destroy them again…

 Subscribe in a reader