Before I lose it.....

[melissa3]

Dear Socrateaser,

I have a library of photos and an army of people to rally.

The tape, from a criminal aspect, is illegal. She hid a camera in her bathroom, without my knowledge, and taped me.

According to her laywer, she tried this a few times but to my ex's disapointment, I don't take medication around my daughter, for saftey purposes.

Honesty, I believe it was entraptment. My ex and I had made an agreement that I could fix her house to make up for the child support I had missed. However, she knew that I needed to take medication for my arm while at work to minimize the pain. While working there she put a camera in the john hoping to tape me taking medication.

Later on, she never signs our agreement saying she never agreed to it.

The drug itself is not illegal. As stated, I had a serious sugery to reconstruct my arm. The catch to this whole story is although I was able to produce a valid and current prescription to the court, I didn't have one prior to or when the tape was supposedly made.

I'm self-employed and I have found health insurance does not come cheap. Regretfully, to save on cost, I went to a friend with a smiliar back problem for medication.

This is illegal, which I understand, but it does not confirm me to be an addict or an abuser. I don't take an obscene amount and definately not enough to get a "buzz"

Also previously stated, my ex never made mention of concern about my medication until after she couldn't get my fiance barred from visitation with my daughter.


Questions:
1. Why doesn't my ex have to show proof that I am hazardous while on medication?

2. If the tape wasn't viewed by the judge, and wasn't admitted as evidence, am I being ordered an evaluation because of failing a drug test?

3. (Pertains to #2) If I'm being ordered to take an evaluation because of the failed test then how come my prescription didn't mean anything?

Thank you.

[socrateaser]

>Questions:
>1. Why doesn't my ex have to show proof that I am hazardous
>while on medication?

Because it is presumed that a person who unlawfully uses drugs is a danger to his/her minor child. So, you must rebut the presumption once your ex has shown proof sufficient to raise that presumption -- otherwise, the presumption stands, and you are found to be a danger.

That's how the legal burden of proof operates; on side offers evidence that tends to prove or disprove a fact at issue before the court -- in this case, your fitness to parent, the trier of fact, in this case, the judge, determines if the evidence is logically relevant to prove what it is offered to prove, that it is legally relevant (more probative than prejudicial and not subject to a public policy exclusion), that it is authenticated to be what it is purported to be, and that it is not subject to any exclusionary rule, such as the hearsay doctrine.

In the case of the tape, it is logically relevant to demonstrate that you used a drug unlawfully, legally probative to show that your character to parent may be deficiant, apparently authenticated, or you admitted to being the person on the tape at the place and time alleged, and the tape shows you engaging in non-assertive actions, which means that the tape is a document in its original form that contains a legally operative fact, that you were seen taking a drug, which you could not prove was legally prescribed.

You apparently told your attorney that you had no prescription, thereby binding him to not lie to the court. However, you could have taken the 5th Amendment and refused to testify as to whether or not you unlawfully obtained the meds, because, it's not unlawful to use the meds -- it's only unlawful to "possess or distribute." So you could have remained silent on the issue of whether you obtained them unlawfully,  and thereby have made it impossible for the other parent to raise the presumption of unlawful use and unfitness to parent). But, as you did not remain silent, the court found you to have used unlawfully and therefore that your fitness as a parent was in question.

...and you thought that the law was easy, huh?

>2. If the tape wasn't viewed by the judge, and wasn't admitted
>as evidence, am I being ordered an evaluation because of
>failing a drug test?

You must have admitted to using the drug, or failed to rebut your ex's allegations to the court, otherwise the judge would have had no grounds to force you to submit to a drug test. But, I don't know that part of the story, so I can't answer your question -- you probably can answer it for yourself, now.

>3. (Pertains to #2) If I'm being ordered to take an evaluation
>because of the failed test then how come my prescription
>didn't mean anything?

I don't know the facts or the order/manner in which they were alleged to the court. Somehow, the judge deterimined that sufficient evidence exists to force you to submit to an eval. I don't know what that evidence is, but whatever it is, it's a little late to challenge it, because the bell has already rung.

[melissa3]

Dear Socrateaser,

Thank you for your help and your time. You really put things into perspective.

One more thing -
It's awful that I was able to get more help and more insight from you, instead of the lawyer I was paying for.

Thanks again