Contempt from below

[Eeyore]

S -- thank you for your input.  Now the next Q is, what would you do if you were me??

This is regards to the posting about the contempt issue as the evaluation said that he was mentally unstable and recommended supervised visitation.  

Would you push it to court??

[socrateaser]

You're holding all the cards, or so it would seem. I would imagine that a trial date has been set. If not, I'd set one, and just allow the wheels of justice to slowly grind forward -- it will either settle or it won't, but you will have an end in sight.

[Eeyore]

Q: Thoughts on his reply?


X:

I have instructed my lawyer to file contempt charges against you.

I have not yet decided how to mediate this case, but there will be some sort of attempt at mediation prior to a hearing, if for nothing else, to educate you. I doubt that mediation will be successful.

If you do not come to reality, I intend to litigate this case. I am not the least bit fearful of having your untruthful accusations, extremely dubious witnesses or especially your evaluation. Your compensated evaluator may have put his signature on your wish list, but that does not make what he says true. He still has to face cross examination.

I am not the one at risk in this action, but your attempted threat certainly was worth a chuckle. You can make all sorts of false accusations, and hire all the liars that will take you money, but when this is all over, you are still going to have to explain to DS why you paid money to prevent me from spending time with him.

In the future, confine your legal arguments to communications through your lawyer.

X

[socrateaser]

>Q: Thoughts on his reply?
>
>
>X:
>
>I have instructed my lawyer to file contempt charges against
>you.

Contempt for what?

>
>I have not yet decided how to mediate this case, but there
>will be some sort of attempt at mediation prior to a hearing,
>if for nothing else, to educate you. I doubt that mediation
>will be successful.

Depends on how much money is available. This is one of those cases where the only children that will benefit are the lawyers'!


>
>If you do not come to reality, I intend to litigate this case.
>I am not the least bit fearful of having your untruthful
>accusations, extremely dubious witnesses or especially your
>evaluation. Your compensated evaluator may have put his
>signature on your wish list, but that does not make what he
>says true. He still has to face cross examination.

True.

>
>I am not the one at risk in this action, but your attempted
>threat certainly was worth a chuckle. You can make all sorts
>of false accusations, and hire all the liars that will take
>you money, but when this is all over, you are still going to
>have to explain to DS why you paid money to prevent me from
>spending time with him.

Maybe.

>
>In the future, confine your legal arguments to communications
>through your lawyer.

Guess he doesn't want to communicate directly, huh?

There are two sides to every story. You undoubtedly believe that you are telling me the unvarnished truth, but litigants NEVER do this. That's why there are courts -- everyone improves their side of the story and the judge tries to extract the truth.

Most evaluators are objective, but if you annoy them, they may improve their story, as well. Also, psychology is anything but an exact science, and I know that psychologists can be fooled, ESPECIALLY if they become emotionally involved in a case.

This can be accomplished by threatening their self image -- usually when a patient displays to the therapist, an extreme distaste for the profession.

I can't tell from the letter that your X is anything other than angry over the divorce. Either one of you could be nuttier than a fruitcake, or you could both be completely lucid.

My advice is to settle if you can, because the child benefits most from two reasonably happy parents. If you can't, then you will either surrender or let the judge decide.

[Eeyore]

I have a parental eval that says that he has a personality disorder and severe psychological problems, & evaluator recommended supervised V

In the p-eval, he admitted to abusing previous spouses, his children from his first marriage, doing illegal drugs, abusing alcohol and suffer from depression and is ADD, X's two children from previous marriage won't speak to him, he doesn't speak to HIS parents. He admitted to being arrested for spousal abuse, not me by the way, and has been fired for cause (destroying court documents & intercepting the mail).  

He threatens about EO week to file contempt charges against me for 'parental interference', whatever that means

We have been divorced for 9 years, the judge stated that if it was brought to court that he would rule according to the evaluation, that he would not deviate much from it.  He stated that he was familiar with the evaluator that we were using, and that he was a very fair and unbiased forensic psychologist.

Me?  The parental evaluator said that I was mentally stable, there was nothing to show that I abused drugs/alcohol.

I had the full-blown evaluation done -- MMPI and all.

Personally what do I think? I cannot believe that I married this man and had a child with him -- it is beyond my comprehension what I was thinking.  However, I think that he is a freak; I am pretty normal, not perfect by any stretch.  

Now that I write this, I can see that I really have nothing to worry about, except finding MORE money to pay my attorney.  I have paid $9,700 to date and it sure sounds like it'll cost another $5 grand to have the judge rule on this yo-yo.  

What is the likelihood that the judge will rule to have him pay court and attorney fees for the hearing?

[socrateaser]

Attorney fees are usually apportioned based on each party's relative income, unless there is some showing that a party unreasonably protracted the controversy or acted in some other inequitable manner.

I realize that you believe you are giving me the objective facts, but from my experience no one, not even myself, is as objective as they would like to believe.

Your statement that you cannot understand how you could have married and had a child with this man is quite revealing. You obviously loved/lusted for him at least for a while, and now you must deal with the consequences. I have little doubt that he would say the identical things about you.

And, I could tell you stories that would stand your hair on end. Anyway, good luck to you.

[Eeyore]

nm

[Eeyore]

S -- thank you for your input.  Now the next Q is, what would you do if you were me??

This is regards to the posting about the contempt issue as the evaluation said that he was mentally unstable and recommended supervised visitation.  

Would you push it to court??

[socrateaser]

You're holding all the cards, or so it would seem. I would imagine that a trial date has been set. If not, I'd set one, and just allow the wheels of justice to slowly grind forward -- it will either settle or it won't, but you will have an end in sight.

[Eeyore]

Q: Thoughts on his reply?


X:

I have instructed my lawyer to file contempt charges against you.

I have not yet decided how to mediate this case, but there will be some sort of attempt at mediation prior to a hearing, if for nothing else, to educate you. I doubt that mediation will be successful.

If you do not come to reality, I intend to litigate this case. I am not the least bit fearful of having your untruthful accusations, extremely dubious witnesses or especially your evaluation. Your compensated evaluator may have put his signature on your wish list, but that does not make what he says true. He still has to face cross examination.

I am not the one at risk in this action, but your attempted threat certainly was worth a chuckle. You can make all sorts of false accusations, and hire all the liars that will take you money, but when this is all over, you are still going to have to explain to DS why you paid money to prevent me from spending time with him.

In the future, confine your legal arguments to communications through your lawyer.

X

[socrateaser]

>Q: Thoughts on his reply?
>
>
>X:
>
>I have instructed my lawyer to file contempt charges against
>you.

Contempt for what?

>
>I have not yet decided how to mediate this case, but there
>will be some sort of attempt at mediation prior to a hearing,
>if for nothing else, to educate you. I doubt that mediation
>will be successful.

Depends on how much money is available. This is one of those cases where the only children that will benefit are the lawyers'!


>
>If you do not come to reality, I intend to litigate this case.
>I am not the least bit fearful of having your untruthful
>accusations, extremely dubious witnesses or especially your
>evaluation. Your compensated evaluator may have put his
>signature on your wish list, but that does not make what he
>says true. He still has to face cross examination.

True.

>
>I am not the one at risk in this action, but your attempted
>threat certainly was worth a chuckle. You can make all sorts
>of false accusations, and hire all the liars that will take
>you money, but when this is all over, you are still going to
>have to explain to DS why you paid money to prevent me from
>spending time with him.

Maybe.

>
>In the future, confine your legal arguments to communications
>through your lawyer.

Guess he doesn't want to communicate directly, huh?

There are two sides to every story. You undoubtedly believe that you are telling me the unvarnished truth, but litigants NEVER do this. That's why there are courts -- everyone improves their side of the story and the judge tries to extract the truth.

Most evaluators are objective, but if you annoy them, they may improve their story, as well. Also, psychology is anything but an exact science, and I know that psychologists can be fooled, ESPECIALLY if they become emotionally involved in a case.

This can be accomplished by threatening their self image -- usually when a patient displays to the therapist, an extreme distaste for the profession.

I can't tell from the letter that your X is anything other than angry over the divorce. Either one of you could be nuttier than a fruitcake, or you could both be completely lucid.

My advice is to settle if you can, because the child benefits most from two reasonably happy parents. If you can't, then you will either surrender or let the judge decide.

[Eeyore]

I have a parental eval that says that he has a personality disorder and severe psychological problems, & evaluator recommended supervised V

In the p-eval, he admitted to abusing previous spouses, his children from his first marriage, doing illegal drugs, abusing alcohol and suffer from depression and is ADD, X's two children from previous marriage won't speak to him, he doesn't speak to HIS parents. He admitted to being arrested for spousal abuse, not me by the way, and has been fired for cause (destroying court documents & intercepting the mail).  

He threatens about EO week to file contempt charges against me for 'parental interference', whatever that means

We have been divorced for 9 years, the judge stated that if it was brought to court that he would rule according to the evaluation, that he would not deviate much from it.  He stated that he was familiar with the evaluator that we were using, and that he was a very fair and unbiased forensic psychologist.

Me?  The parental evaluator said that I was mentally stable, there was nothing to show that I abused drugs/alcohol.

I had the full-blown evaluation done -- MMPI and all.

Personally what do I think? I cannot believe that I married this man and had a child with him -- it is beyond my comprehension what I was thinking.  However, I think that he is a freak; I am pretty normal, not perfect by any stretch.  

Now that I write this, I can see that I really have nothing to worry about, except finding MORE money to pay my attorney.  I have paid $9,700 to date and it sure sounds like it'll cost another $5 grand to have the judge rule on this yo-yo.  

What is the likelihood that the judge will rule to have him pay court and attorney fees for the hearing?

[socrateaser]

Attorney fees are usually apportioned based on each party's relative income, unless there is some showing that a party unreasonably protracted the controversy or acted in some other inequitable manner.

I realize that you believe you are giving me the objective facts, but from my experience no one, not even myself, is as objective as they would like to believe.

Your statement that you cannot understand how you could have married and had a child with this man is quite revealing. You obviously loved/lusted for him at least for a while, and now you must deal with the consequences. I have little doubt that he would say the identical things about you.

And, I could tell you stories that would stand your hair on end. Anyway, good luck to you.

[Eeyore]

nm