Now she's being nice

[kittencaboodle]

We went to court at the beginning of the month.  It went absolutely swimmingly. Stupid woman got on the stand and basically revealed that she was not a nice person. She was snarky and defensive with our attorney, she revealed that she has no good reason to deny the kids to Chris. Well, before we got into court, Friend had to run me back to the apartment so I could get a copy of Chris's pay stub. So I came into all of this a little behind.  

But apparently, before the start of the trial, Dutt (her lawyer) approached Blanford (our lawyer) with an offer to halve the arrearage. Blanford went to Chris and said: We can take this offer, but then we can't enter any of the evidence. So Chris turned it down. Blanford also came to Chris and asked what her new husband's name was again...  Apparently, he represented Ex's new husband, "Redneck", in his "last divorce" After he said that to Chris, he immediately followed it with: "I can't divulge anything"

Anyhow, Friend and I get back. Blanford is just finishing his opening statement, and Dutt gets up with the "poor pitiful" voice, and says Blandford all but accused her of committing Fraud. Whereupon Blanford gets up and says yes he does feel the numbers were obtained in the initial order fraudulently... And he feels that he'll be able to prove it

Dutt goes on about how the initial property agreement was signed and settled and both sides had lawyers. And we really shouldn't be arguing these numbers Blah blah blah

In any case... Blanford calls his first witness...

Ex...

So she goes up to take the stand, dressed in tennis shoes, and black jeans. Not very well prepared for court. So she goes up to the stand and is immediately on the defensive.... She's cranky and snarky with our lawyer FROM THE GET-GO He asks her some questions, asks about the daycare for the boys at Noah's ark Daycare.

"How much did it cost. It says here it cost 162, is that correct? Did you ever get a statement from the daycare center?"

So she answers those questions... "It cost 162. And I got a statement at the end of the year for tax purposes."

And then he produces the tax statement from the Daycare showing that the week AFTER the divorce was finalized... The payment went down to 144. And she consistently paid 144 thereafter

She also had to admit that YSD was out of Kindergarten... And since she went into first grade at the start of the next school year and the $75 she was alleging for half-day daycare for YSD was no longer applicable. She also had to admit the healthcare numbers were wrong

She danced around the question when she was our witness. But Blanford asked her again when Dutt called her up at the end... And her initial response was: "If that's the number it says on the Support worksheet, that's what it is."

So, he pulled out the 2003 explanation of benefits and the current one she provided to us

And he said: If the price went up for associate and children from 2003 to now... Does it make sense that the price per week would have gone down by almost half?

Oh she was pissed. "Well, I don't know. I didn't do the calculations"

The number they gave us this year was 39 per week... Down from the 61 she alleged originally.

She was up on the stand and they asked her all these questions about
school...
"What time do the kids get on the bus? What time do they get off? "  Her response to all of them: "I don't know"

She drops them off at the daycare provider and then goes on to work. She has no clue what time school starts and ends. She didn't check in to before and after care programs at the school.... Because she "doesn't want to have to drive all over the place to pick up the kids". She doesn't want to drive to the daycare to pick up the boys and then to the elementary and middle schools to pick up the girls

I turned to Rick and said: "Welcome to being a parent"

The JUDGE asked Chris at the end if he had checked in to before and after care at the school. Chris said yes. He had. So the judges asked Chris: "What were the prices?" And Chris was able to tell the judge that before care was free and after care was $75

Ex had no clue but the non-custodial parent sure did

And one of the questions the Judge asked Chris was if Chris DID have a lawyer at the initial divorce hearing.

They discussed summer childcare for 2003 Because they annualized the day camp for the girls at a rate of 6 weeks for the Summer. But the statement we received shows that the girls only went to day camp for 3 weeks.  Ex got all huffy. "Well, when I received it there was a handwritten note attached because they forgot to include July"

Blanford said: "Do you have this note with you?"
Silence....
"Does your lawyer have this note"
"Well I paid for July."
Blanford: "But all it shows here is June"
"Well they forgot to include it!"

All in all, it was an amazingly shocking day. Chris did get put on the stand, he kept his answers short and to the point.  Blanford said he did a wonderful job.  

But now, Ex is acting nice at the pick-ups and drop offs.  She has, for the first time ever, informed Chris of an appointment.  She has asked to change a date of make-up time instead of outright denial.  Chris thinks she is going to try and get us to settle outside of court.  I think her lawyer told her to shape up.  Either way, I don't like it.  It isn't the norm for her to act like this and I almost feel like she's sabotaging our case.