Timeline 2004 – Part 2

The 2nd-half timeline from 2004 continues from Timeline 2004 – Part 1.

In August of 2006, I had submitted to my attorney #2 a “timeline of events since the divorce process began” to try to get her up to speed. I also tried to coordinate this timeline to refute PEW’s oft-repeated contention that I didn’t care about the kids, just the money… an assertion that was clearly projection and could be supported specifically or through “circumstantial evidence” of her conduct (and the timing thereof).

The following timeline demonstrates the chain of major events and summarizes the motivation behind each. You will notice that PEW is consumed by continued negative engagement of me as she was throughout the course of our marriage. You will notice that the benefit of the children is secondary to the benefit of PEW and her desire to continue abuse and harass me as well as do things solely for her own financial benefit and my financial detriment.

• July 15th, 2004 – She contends that I want to be the primary custodian to avoid having to pay support. This, despite voluntarily giving her money until the details of the support order are worked out. Despite the fact that I wanted to do whatever was possible to maintain joint custody and keep things as normal as possible for the children. My position changed due to her increasingly aggressive behavior and the surprise notification that she had filed for custody of the children. Over the course of the next year – she often complains about money.

• July 23rd, 2004 she brings up the issue of sending S1 to Catholic School. I don’t agree with such a change, particularly since she and I agreed back in February and PEW registered him… that it was a good idea. Shortly thereafter, she filed for an emergency hearing on the issue. PEW initiates litigation.

• July 26th, 2004, I complain again (this time via email) about PEW dropping the boys off at 7AM, in their pajamas and unfed. She needs to do this to get to work on time but cannot afford to lose the “overnights” for fear of losing the child support. She responds unkindly. The issue was, she didn’t keep them overnight. She took the children, went out to a party, and left the children at her parents’ house. This is the extent that PEW will go to in order to minimize my time with the children and ensure she gets credit for overnights.

• July 26th, 2004 her first mention of switching to full-time day shift and mockingly mentions how much extra I will have to pay in support to her.

• July 31st, 2004 – I express to PEW that I was bothered by the fact that she took the children to see a PG-13 rated movie. Keep in mind that S1 was 5 and S2 was 3. The movie was Spiderman 2 and the level of violence and other adult situations were not suitable for young children.

• August 16th, 2004 – I send her an email about giving the kids ice cream before dropping the children off to me in the afternoons. It was becoming a daily event and it was undermining my ability to teach the children to eat right or even get them to eat a meaningful dinner. In a phone call response, she reacts harshly calling me names, as usual and telling me that she can do whatever she wants to make the kids happy.

• August 17th, 2004 – We have a short hearing regarding custody and are ordered to go through a custody evaluation. It’s at this time that PEW changes her mind regarding going to a full-time day shift, which is important to note as she uses her “availability during the full week to be with the children” as leverage during the custody evaluation.

• September 1st, 2004 – Court hearing before Judge K— regarding where the children will attend school. Judge K— ruled in my favor after hearing the details of the circumstances and S1 attended [Something] Elementary school as planned. S2 was “permitted” to go to pre-school at St. [Catholic School] if we agreed with that. We did. I return to work that morning. PEW left the courtroom extremely angry.

• September 1st, 2004 – While at work, hours later, I’m in an important meeting regarding a new start-up we’re doing in [another country]. My cellphone rings and I look at the display… it’s a phone call… from the marital residence. I remove myself to a private conference room and answer. It’s PEW. She announces she broke into the house and that she is moving back in. She claims to have fired her attorney, broke her apartment lease and that’s that. Unable to talk her out of leaving, I call the police, explain the situation and tell them that I am heading home and wish them to be present for the discussion. Discussion, cops, discussion… the police inform me that there is nothing they nor I can do to get her out since she’s on the deed (no settlement yet). She can stay. 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. The children were present for all of this. S1 and S2 think that we’re “getting back together” and even begin telling all of the neighbors that we’re “getting back together to be a family again.” This was a very difficult ordeal for the children to experience.

• September 2nd, 2004… I speak with my attorney, who suggests that I file a Protection From Abuse Order. I explain to him that I don’t think it’s a good idea, tell him about the suicidal overtures discussed by PEW the previous night, and tell him that I was afraid that doing so might push her to follow-through. Further, given the nature of her work, filing one could result in her losing her job which would put further pressure on her. Later, I go to the police station in [town] and describe the conversation that PEW 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. 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 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 is unrelenting. In the meantime, the children are in the front window witnessing all of this. I just lean against my car waiting for the police again… (there is still nothing that they can do). While waiting, I asked her if she had brought the firearms that she stole from me (today was one of the many promised dates of the return of them). She then made the threat about the guns. 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. The police arrive and they tell me that there is still nothing they can do, not even about the firearms because they are “marital property” as far as they are concerned.

• September 3rd, 2004 – Due to her behavior and attempt to start a physical confrontation, I feel I am left with no choice but to file the PFA that [my attorney] suggested the previous day. I follow-though on that. (Later, PEW would tell me that her actions were suggested by her attorney.)

• September 8th, 2004 – Hearing on the PFA. Prior to going to trial, PEW’s attorney makes an offer to settle the matter and agrees to turn the firearms over to the Sheriff’s Department immediately. I get exclusive possession of the home, very specific exchange details, not stalking, abusing, harassing… and the well-being associated with the fact that, given her suicidal discussion, she will no longer be in possession of the firearms. Sometime over the course of the next two weeks, PEW informs me that Sheriff’s Deputies have been at her apartment looking for her and she asks me if I know what it is about. I discover that she hasn’t turned the firearms over to the Sheriff’s Department and that a bench warrant was issued. My understanding is that she had to go to court and explain why she hadn’t complied with the order to turn over the guns. Apparently, no sanctions were levied and the firearms were eventually turned over to the police.

• Between September and October of 2004, we attend multiple custody sessions with [Custody Evaluator 1]. She doesn’t want to review the evidence I have brought regarding PEW’s abusive behavior and inability to parent the children effectively. She doesn’t even consider nor does she want to talk about the circumstances surrounding the break-in at the marital residence with the children and the subsequent PFA, dismissing it as “lawyer posturing in a custody case.” PEW accuses me (without any evidence whatsoever) of being physically abusive, a drug abuser, an alcoholic, a philanderer, among many other things. In November of 2004, her recommendation comes in an it effectively relegates me to 6 days per month (during the school year), the children to go to school in PEW’s school district (despite Judge K—’s previous ruling). Part of her decision hinges on the understanding that PEW’s work schedule affords her full weekdays with the boys and the belief that my only reason for wanting custody is because PEW wouldn’t agree to settle on the house.

• November 2004 – On the advice of my attorney – I begin to negotiate with PEW for a more even custody arrangement. He tells me that the court relies “heavily” on the recommendation of the evaluator and that there was no possibility that we would be able to overcome her recommendation. Effectively, if we went to court, I would more than likely get what [Custody Evaluator 1] recommended. So, I followed his advice. Given the fact that this ruling effectively eliminated any chance of keeping the marital residence for the children’s sake and the sake of the best logistics for PEW and I to manage coparenting, we agreed (initially) on a 50/50 arrangement and to put the marital residence up for sale agreeing to split assets 50/50. This occurred on or about November 29, 2004. At some point during this time, PEW pays, on her own, to have the house reappraised. The appraisal comes back some $18,000 higher than when it was appraised in the Spring. She makes new demands based upon the new appraisal (more money) and it’s a figure I cannot accommodate.

• November 30th, 2004 – PEW begins to renege on the agreement we worked out between one another on assets. She decides that she wants the van and additional cash of $5000.

• December 2nd, 2004 – PEW begins to renege on the agreement we worked out for custody and asks for “more time” to reconsider before I have my attorney draw up the paperwork. She complains about her legal fees and how she feels she deserves more money. PEW threatens to initiate litigation. She regularly uses [Custody Evaluator 1’s] custody recommendation as leverage to alter agreements between us. Whenever she didn’t get her way, she used filing for custody and using [CE1’s] recommendation as a threat. This would continue over the course of the next month or so. At the end of this email exchange, she again agrees to the terms we had previously discussed on both matters.

• December 10th, 2004 – PEW informs me that [my attorney] will be getting back the agreement with some “minor” changes. One issue – instead of alimony ending immediately, she demands that it end when the divorce decree is entered so that she can continue to collect more money.

• December 16th, 2004 – I find out that the “minor” changes included reducing my time with the children from 50/50 to where I had them only 11 days per month (maximum). Additionally, she wanted me to pay alimony until the divorce decree was obtained (money). Further, there were addendums for me to pay for car repairs, essentially warrant the car she chose to keep with $5,000 cash for 90-days. I protested but was met with threats of litigation and use of [CE1’s] recommendation, so I complied believing that 11-days was better than 6-days per month. She also said that it was not about money, it was about logistics and that she had no intention of filing for a support modification if that was my concern. (Shortly after the agreement was entered, she would do JUST that.)

• December 28th, 2004 – She sends me an email complaining about the Mercury in the snow and blaming me for her decision to take the car and the cash.

• December 30th, 2004 – More car complaints. First threat to take initiate a modification of support in the aftermath of our agreement because she deserves more money.

After starting out the first year of this mess with a “win” on the school issue (my attorney was excellent during that hearing), I was hopeful. However, my hopes were crushed as every step of the way I started to realize that not much had changed since my parent’s divorce. I truly felt I had lost before I ever got started. The horrible experience with the custody evaluator only emboldened PEW to make ever increasing demands. As a result, my fears over total financial devastation and loss of the children increased dramatically and I was left scrambling trying to make the best of what was now a very bad situation – only getting worse. All the while, PEW was flexing her new found leverage with the Custody Evaluator’s Report to continue to beat me into submission.

 Subscribe in a reader

Timeline 2004 – Part 1

The month of May 2004 saw little to no documented communication and my notes on that period are scarce. In August of 2006, I had submitted to my attorney #2 a “timeline of events since the divorce process began” to try to get her up to speed. I also tried to coordinate this timeline to refute PEW’s oft-repeated contention that I didn’t care about the kids, just the money… an assertion that was clearly projection and could be supported specifically or through “circumstantial evidence” of her conduct (and the timing thereof). I’ll roll out the 1st six-months of 2004 as a review and look ahead at what would come of 2004 when the mess really ramped-up.

She moved into a nice apartment and took very little from the marital home with her. She bought ALL new furniture for the entire apartment, likely on credit card(s), based upon the belief that it wouldn’t be long before the windfall her attorney assured her she would be getting would come through.

Interestingly enough, she came to me on moving day (May 5th, 2004) because she didn’t have enough money to pay the movers. Doing “the right thing” – I bridged the shortfall for her on the promise I would get paid back (yeah, right).

We pretty much exchanged the children in May according to her work schedule and I guess she was more or less focused on getting settled in the apartment and chatting with her attorney who was definitely a negative-advocate whipping her into a frenzy.

From the book Splitting: Protecting Yourself when Divorcing a Borderline or Narcissist (which I’ve reviewed, just click this link) I offer the following excerpt detailing the “Negative Advocate Attorney.”

NEGATIVE ADVOCATE ATTORNEYS

As described throughout this booklet, anyone can be a Negative Advocate if they assist a Blamer in promoting their cognitive distortions and negative, often abusive behavior.

Some attorneys are habitual Negative Advocates. They try to take most of their cases to court. They represent whatever their client says as true, with little or no skepticism or investigation. Essentially, they are representing their client’s cognitive distortions or “negative thoughts.”

This is comparable to representing a drunk while they are still under the influence – and accepting what they say as true.

Negative Advocates focus their attention on the judge. They treat each issue as a win-lose contest, with the goal of winning the most at court. Time is spent primarily preparing for court, waiting at court and presenting (“arguing”) the case.

They generally do not have close client relationships. They often impress their clients, especially at the beginning of the case with their tough talk and seeming support for their clients’ allegations and excuses.

The methods of Negative Advocates are adversarial from the start. They are focused on advocating for their client’s “position,” rather than understanding and solving their client’s “problems.”

They focus on gathering negative evidence about the other party because the negative usually weighs more in the adversarial process. Subpoenas are routinely issued, depositions routinely taken, and other forms of “discovery” pursued, often with no real goal to gather information.

Intimidation tactics are common. They treat their client as “all good” and the other party as “all bad.” They often consider themselves as all good (or smart) and the other attorney as all bad (or stupid).

Negative Advocates seem to minimize contact or negotiations with the opposing attorney (or unrepresented party), as they prefer the threat of going to court.

In court, their goal appears to be to split the parties into “good spouse” and “bad spouse” in the eyes of the judge. They will raise minor issues and make them sound highly negative. They will minimize major issues and make them sound insignificant or untrue.

There is an appealing strength to their presentations and aggressive manners. They can be charming–or hostile and deceitful –to win a point. However, their tone, lack of empathy, and all-or-nothing manner may eventually be turned against their clients.

This excerpt could have been written exactly about PEW’s 1st-attorney (and quite frankly, her 2nd-attorney, too). You will see almost every single characteristic in the words/language of PEW and her attorney throughout. If you’re a regular reader, you probably already recognize the tactics in past posts. Who will win. Who will lose. Whose attorney is smarter, more experienced, whose attorney is an idiot. It’s all there, right out of the Splitting book.

The following timeline demonstrates the chain of major events and summarizes the motivation behind each. You will notice that PEW is consumed by continued negative engagement of me as she was throughout the course of our marriage. You will notice that the benefit of the children is secondary to the benefit of PEW and her desire to continue abuse and harass me as well as do things solely for her own financial benefit and my financial detriment. At this time, PEW is working every-other evening at [her workplace] as well as Saturdays and Sundays.

• January 2004 – PEW informs me that she is going to file for divorce. With her attorney encouraging her, PEW also lets me know that her attorney has informed her that she will be able to obtain “at last 60% and quite possibly 70%” of all of assets.

• Late January 2004 – we discuss the children’s future, specifically, their education. We agree that they will continue to go to [their current school].

• February 4th, 2004 – PEW registers S1 for [Something] Elementary in [where we live].

• February 2004 – I am served my divorce papers.

• February 26th, 2004 – we discuss the forthcoming appraisal and settling the house.

• April 1st, 2004 – During a phone conversation, PEW tells me that her attorney’s advice to her was to quit her job and find something that was full-time day shift so that I would have to pay daycare costs. I follow-up that phone call with an email which was saved in my sent folder and reads: After our phone conversation, I couldn’t help but wonder whose best interests either you, your attorney, or both have in mind with regard to the advice that you quit your job and find something during the day with the specific purpose of making it so that I “have to pay for half of daycare.” It’s one thing if you find a comparable job, which I’m sure you’re trying to do… and if you get it, great. But I find it unconscionable that you believe that daycare is a better place for the children… and I find it disgusting that your lawyer would recommend such a thing for the sole purpose of making sure that I had to “pay” for something that for the immediate future, wouldn’t have to (and nor would you). Neither of you have the best interest of the children in mind, that much is for sure given that this piece of advice is just over-the-top disgusting. I couldn’t let that “piece of advice” go by without telling you what I thought about it.

• May 5th, 2004 – PEW moves out to an apartment in [apartment town]. Shortly thereafter, she files a petition for child support. She also informs me that she wants to switch S1 to Catholic school. Her reasoning is because I will have to pay most of the tuition and she can just get help from her parents. She told me that she was going to do “whatever it takes” to make sure that I don’t stay in the marital residence. Sometime prior to moving out, she stole my firearms and would not disclose where they were.

• June 2nd – We have a support conference. PEW and her counsel were asking for child-support money based upon 50/50 joint custody. As PEW’s then work schedule showed and supported my notes in my calendar, I had the boys 60% of the time during the month of May. Her schedule was not slated to change and for the summer, I would have had the children for 60% of the time in June, July, and August as well. Upon discovering that given that I had the boys 60% of the overnights and she would have to pay child support, she chose to litigate the matter. Our hearing was scheduled for July 14th. PEW initiates litigation.

• June 9th – she informs me that she had her schedule changed at work that effectively had her working 2nd-shift on Friday, a double-shift on Saturday, and a double-shift on Sunday. Her motivation for working such a grueling schedule was to ensure that we had no choice absent a formal custody agreement but to manage a 50/50 schedule, which I was agreeable to. I had no choice, PEW would be gone all weekend long so she kept the boys overnight during the week and I kept the children all weekend and every other Monday night to ensure I had the boys 50% of the time. Her motivation for the change to such a grueling schedule was to ensure that she received child support money. She also sued me for full custody of the children. PEW initiates litigation. Her motivation for doing so was to be able to try to get even more money and, knowing how much I loved our children, losing them would have a devastating impact on me. I countersued for primary custody approximately one- to two-weeks later. Also, in an effort to avoid court, I enter into an agreement to pay child support according to PA Guidelines for a 50/50 custody arrangement. She informs me that she is intending to switch to full time day work when the children start school and that S2 will be put into daycare.

• June 23rd, 2004 – PEW calls me distraught over not being able to handle the children. She says she wants a settlement of $30,000 and will give me primary custody of the children.

• June 25th, 2004 – I inform PEW that I want primary custody of the children (in addition to discussing settlement possibilities. She refuses all offers (both documented and undocumented) vowing to “never let me keep that house.” She claims this despite our discussion that litigating the matter will only result in both of us ending up with less than what the settlement offers would yield (and this ultimately proves true), but she succeeded in making sure that the children and I would need to be uprooted again instead of maintaining the same schools, neighbors, friends, logistical simplicity, etc.

• June 28th, 2004 – I inform [my lawyer] that PEW has changed her mind about settling and giving me primary custody of the children.

The highlighted areas above demonstrate two main points: 1 – Who was responsible for initiating most of the litigation. 2 – Who was making their moves based upon trying to get the most money.

The June 9th entry is where I make one of my first major mistakes (that’s to say… during the divorce and custody proceedings). I actually did have a choice. I didn’t have to simply adjust the custody schedule because she changed her work schedule. However, I was a bit green when it comes to matters such as this, and I also didn’t know at that point that, in addition to changing her work schedule, the same day she filed for custody of the children. Also, my attorney failed to consider that I didn’t have to do any such thing, either, but he was operating on my (completely wrong) feeling that, other than a few details, this still wasn’t going to be a very lengthy process.

If that doesn’t set off alarm bells for anyone reading this situation, I don’t know what would. The reality is, had I agreed to pay child support at that conference based upon a 50/50 schedule rather than point out that I already had primary custody of the children based upon the month of May and the anticipated schedule until school started, I might have faired better. Hindsight is always clear, but the reality is, it was a struggle to maintain the household and pay child support at the number I was paying it and pay temporary spousal support (which was a crime, she made good money, but that’s the way our “system” works), and so on.

I was still hopeful of sharing custody and at no time did I ever consider that she would be filing for sole/primary custody of the children. I can remember getting that notification and it was like a karate kick right in the stomach. Obviously, from there it just escalated and I filed a counter-petition a week later for the same. The war had begun.

Fast-forward to Timeline Part II.

 Subscribe in a reader

The "Secret" Motorcycle Story – EXPOSED!!!

I’ve threatened to tell this story and will do so now. Other than DW, I don’t believe I shared the circumstances that allowed me to buy a motorcycle. When PEW filed for divorce, I decided that I was going to do something “just for myself” and not allow PEW’s rants and raves to prevent me from doing so. Still, a motorcycle wasn’t possible financially, especially with a divorce looming.

As PEW is want to do – the root cause of any negative situation that she has encountered is the last most recent event via which she can blame it on me, whether it makes sense or not. She blames my purchase of a motorcycle, selfish as that allegedly was, as the final straw for divorce. Nevermind that I didn’t purchase a motorcycle (nor did I have any plans to) until April of 2004 and only because I was lucky that my father provided me an opportunity to obtain it. In fact, he essentially purchased the motorcycle for me.

The early timeline is as follows:

– She filed for divorce in January of 2004.
– She takes until May 2004 to search for and obtain an apartment.
– Motorcycle purchase occurred in mid-April of 2004.

The story goes something like this…

I had really given up the hopes that I would get a motorcycle anytime soon. Though EE, PEW’s dad, had a friend who had a nice one in storage that was a steal at the price – $3,000 – I simply didn’t have it and couldn’t justify such a purchase at that time (divorce or not). I had forgotten about it until my father told me during a phone conversation in March of 2004 – he was selling his boat. A nice boat. A boat he hardly used.

Knowing lots of people who were into boating and a couple of people who were looking for a boat – including psycho-FIL – I came up with an ingenious idea. Being an avid eBay seller and having several friends who were members of “Yacht Clubs” – I would offer to help my dad, for a price.

I asked him how much he needed to get for it. The number was $19,000. I floated the proposal: “Dad, since I’d really like to get that motorcycle, I was wondering if you would consider this idea. If I can get more than the $19,000 that you need to get for the boat, can I have the difference up to the total price of the motorcycle?” He laughed and said, “Sure.”

So I went about my business of marketing the boat. Produced color flyers with plenty of photos and a price of $25,000. My research indicated that this boat was a steal at even that price and gave me plenty of buffer in negotiations to still possibly get the entire bike paid for. My friends took the flyers to their boat clubs. Then I heard that my psycho-FIL was looking to upgrade from his old dinghy.

Another opportunity.

[Break in the story]

At this point, I’m sure you’re questioning how the hell any of this was even possible given that it was already common knowledge that PEW and I were divorcing. I don’t know. I do recall keeping direct discussion to a minimum, preferring instead to allow him to deal directly with my father except for a single negotiation session. After all, my dad was a “least-hassle” kinda guy and I couldn’t afford to have him just bail and get his $19,000. Also, the boat was more important to FIL than absolute allegiance to his daughter (at that time).

[Back to the story]

So, after several visits and EE trying to use his soon-to-be non-existent leverage as “family” to cry poor-mouth, he acknowledged that the $25,000 price was more than fair as explained to him by his boating cronies who went to see the boat with him. Still, a bit steep for his pocketbook.

I told my father that I was going to do this once… negotiate… and tell FIL that he was only willing to move a little bit, and split the difference between his purchase price limit and the asking price. $22,500. Then I left it in fate’s hands… and my father’s hands.

Then came the news. After several weeks of back-and-forth, visits, test-drives, a deal was struck and the agreed-upon price was:

$22,500. Beautiful.

Dad sells the boat to FIL for $22,500.

Dad agreed to give me anything over-and-above, up to the price of the motorcycle, his must-have price of $19,000.

The difference: $3,500.

The price of the motorcycle: $3,000.

My father bought the motorcycle for me (He essentially gave me the cash with the stipulation that it go for the motorcycle and for nothing else. It wasn’t for the divorce. It wasn’t for anything other than his feeling that I should do something for myself for once and everything and everyone else be damned… things weren’t going to get better for me.)

The irony of this story is obvious. My father didn’t buy me the motorcycle that seemingly became the lightning rod of the marriage (at least in her delusions). HER father bought me the motorcycle. He bought my father’s boat for himself and he bought me my motorcycle.

Up until this day, I’ve shared the secret only with DW. I do take some small measure of glee in that fact and thank them for helping me out with that purchase… both my own father and PEW’s father.

I didn’t get to drive it too much those first few months. Given the circumstances, I thought it best to store it at a friend’s house as I didn’t want to come home from work one day to find it destroyed. I didn’t bring it to the house until after she had moved out. Anyway, I still have it today, and given the price of gas, I’m thrilled that I do!

If not for the reality that the motorcycle was (essentially) a gift from my dad which I worked hard to make a reality, I probably still wouldn’t have one. Also, I have absolutely no guilt whatsoever. I came up with the idea and did the work to make sure it happened.

The motorcycle would become a bone of contention in court, however, a simple affidavit from my father scuttled their claim that I “hid” marital assets (cash) and used it to buy the motorcycle. He confirmed it was a gift from him without the reality of how that gift came to be, which is why the story is still a “secret.” (In reality – I don’t know why I’ve still kept it a secret.)

Anything for the extra buck with her.

 Subscribe in a reader