"X drew the trump card....very long...sorry.."

[hatewelfare]

           I give you the order that alowed the a move to Iowa by my x last year. She has called the cops on me twice so far for minor disputs with transportation. Once was the end of my summer vistation I she called me the first weekend on Sat and wanted him returned. I said I had until Sunday night. (minor I know).

Now to the big one. Last weekend I went down to get my son. She never showed up. I was concerned and went to the police station to file a report and have them check for accidents. The officer let me use his cell phone to call her, she never answered. I waited until 1:15 and drove home. I called again...no answer, left message to call me back. I tried again on Sunday night at 9PM now answer...no call back.

Monday I called the X at 7:30 to try and see if she was home....no answer. I then called the school to see if my son was in school. He ended up coming late, the excuse, they overslept.

I'm now worried, I call my x at work and she won't say anything to me. I tell her I had been calling and she didn't pick up or return my calls and she said she nows that. I ask whats up and she says "I can't talk right now" I ask her if she'll be at the exchange piont this weekend and she says "no".

Come to find out she had my son in to be video taped and reported to CPS that I touched his butt. I spent many hours on the phone to find this out. I had to call the school, which wouldn't let me talk to him because of this "investagation" they did piont me in the right direction of calling CPS because I had no idea of anything going on.

Iowa police trasfered the case up to my hometown and I talked to an officer and gave my statement. Basicly the story goes that I touched his butt while we were in bed sleeping, my son said this. He didn't know the date when asked, he didn't know how many times this happed when asked. The officer knows this is a custody disput thing, he said he has seen many of them. They are still waiting for the video tape from Iowa.

Needless to say I am very hurt by these accusations and feel so sad for my son that is being draw into all this crap, just because my x doesn't want me to have visitation.

I talked with the Iowa CPS today and they said if the officer up here doesn't think nothing is going on the they will drop the order to not allow me contact with my son. The officer up here is going to call CPS toady to say just that. He can pretty much see through the whole thing, but needs to wait for the video, then it goes to county attorny. Which the officer said he can't see how I could be charged with anything.

I have many doctors reports dating back to birth about here bring my son in and blaming me for this or for that. One doctor wrote on the bottom "It seems they are trying to make a mounten out of a molehill"

I have no idea of what started all this, I did bring my son to the dentist the last visit and they said he had the start of gingivitus and they filled 2 cavities that were nearly absist. He hadn't been to a dentist in over 3 years.

My son is 9.

Now the question.

1: Do I go back to court for full custody on this?

2: How much weight do judges put on these false accustations with regards to a custody change?

3: X has tried this before about 5 years ago and it was thrown out. Does that help establish a pattern?

4: With just this small bit of info what do you think my chances are of a custody reversal are now?

Below is the order from the judge...she seemed like she didn't want to allow the move but had to under MN law. She made several comments about how we need to work together and she would like to see parents live in the same town or within 50 mile of each other.


STATE OF MINNESOTA IN DISTRICT COURt
COUNTY OF TODD SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Court File No.
Case Type: Dissolution with Children
In re the Marriage of:

the X
CONDITIONAL ORDER PERMITTING
Petitioner, PETITIONER TO MOVE TO IOWA
WITH MINOR CHILD
and


Me (hatewelfare),

Respondent.



The above-entitled matter came for argument before the Honorable Sally I-------- R---------, Judge of District Court, on January 17, 2003, for an evidentiary hearing on Petitioner's request for an Order allowing her to move to the State of Iowa with the parties' minor child, over Respondent's objection. Petitioner appeared personally, pro Se. Respondent appeared personally with counsel (My slow attorny). Also appearing was the court-appointed Guardian Ad Litem, K---- P-----. The Court gave Petitioner permission to move to Iowa with the child, subject to conditions set at the hearing and subject to further review hearing on the issue of parenting time, if the parties could not agree.

On the 12th day of March 2003, both parties appeared personally pro Se, for further hearing as to parenting time. Also appearing was the court-appointed Guardian Ad Litem, K---- Pi--------i, who had filed with the Court her recommendations as to the child's best interests.

Based upon the arguments of counsel, the files, records, and
proceedings herein, the Court makes the following:

ORDER

1. Permission to move to Iowa. Petitioner's request to move with minor child to Iowa is GRANTED. Petitioner's request is conditioned upon (1) Petitioner's full cooperation and compliance with Respondent's parenting time as set forth below,
(2) Petitioner's sharing one-half of the visitation transportation
obligation, and (3) upon the Court's express retention of jurisdiction as the child's "home state" for the purpose of custody jurisdiction.

2. Respondent's Parenting Time. Unless the parties otherwise in the best interests of the child, Respondent have parenting time with the minor child:

a. Every other weekend, beginning at 11:15 a.rn. Saturday until 4:00 p.m. Sunday, with the exchange taking place at Windom, MN. Because of the travel time and the need to exchange at a mid-point, each party shall be prompt in meeting at the exchange point and shall advise the other immediately of any weather conditions which may make travel inadvisable.

b. Summer vacation as follows: from the third week in June through the end of the first week of August, at which time Respondent shall return minor child to Petitioner. Petitioner shall have one weekend of parenting time in June and one weekend of parenting time in July. The parties will mutually decide upon the particular dates for Petitioner's parenting time; if they cannot agree, it will be the last weekend in June and the third weekend in July.

c. Alternating holidays as follows: Easter, Memorial Day, Labor Day, Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas (Respondent to have parenting time for one-half Christmas vacation every year), and the minor child's birthday.

d. Petitioner shall have the minor child for the weekend of Mother's Day; however, if this causes Respondent to miss a regular weekend visit, the missed visit will be made up within two weeks, unless the parties agree otherwise.

e. Respondent shall have the minor child for the weekend of Father's Day as part of his summer parenting time.

3. Other and Additional Times As Agreed to by Parties. The parties are free to agree to additional parenting time as needed for special family occasions and events. Both parties shall cooperate with each other and be flexible in dealing with unforeseen scheduling issues and any other matters that may arise, affecting the parenting time agreement. Both parties shall take all appropriate steps to avoid conflicts with the schedule, but shall accommodate whenever possible requests for changes so the minor child can attend important family and social events with both parents or with his friends and school.

4. Shared Oblicjation for Transportion. Petitioner and Respondent shall share equally the costs and time associated with the transportation required for Respondent to exercise his parenting time.

5. No Interference. The parties are hereby advised that this Court will view any persistent failure to cooperate, unreasonable denial of parenting time, failure to provide prompt transportation, unreasonable failure to be prompt for exchanges, or any other obstacles or patterns of resistance to parenting time, as intentional interference of parenting time. In accordance with Minnesota law, such conduct could result in a change of custody of the minor child and/or revocation of this Conditional Order permitting Petitioner to move to Iowa with the minor child.

6. Duty of Good Faith. The parties shall use the utmost good faith in dealing with each other as to issues of visitation and other matters involving the couple's minor child. Neither party shall vilify or speak badly about the other parent in the presence or earshot of the child, and neither shall allow the child to be in the presence or earshot of any other person who vilifies and speaks poorly of the other parent. Each parent shall assist the child in making adjustments to the move, and other major changes in the home or living arrangements of the parent.

7. Suspension of Child Support in July. Provided that Respondent remains fully current in the payment of child support throughout the year as previously ordered (on October 26, 2002, as corrected in part on January 4, 2002), his child support obligation shall be suspended and not payable in the month of July every year, to allow for the additional expenses he will have for childcare during his summer parenting time, and also for the additional expenses of transportation occasioned by Petitioner's move to Iowa. This suspension of child support for one month each year is in the child's best interests as it will foster the parent and child relationship with the parent who does not have physical custody during the school year and needs funds to exercise parenting time. Court Administration shall serve a copy of this Order on Todd County Social Services, who shall not withhold child support in the month of July each year, provided that Respondent is current in his payment of support.

8. Retention of Jurisdiction. This Court shall retain jurisdiction of this matter as Minnesota is deemed the child's "home state" for purposes of child custody jurisdiction regardless of the child's move to the State of Iowa, until further Order of this Court. The Petitioner has made various representations to the Court as her lack of intent to deprive the child's father of parenting time and her ability and intent to assist with transportation needed to continue to foster the parent and child relationship between the child and his father. Petitioner's mother made this same representation to the Court in sworn testimony. This Court would not have found the move to be in the child's best interest were there not continuing jurisdiction to assure full compliance and cooperation with Respondent's parenting time.

9. Guardian ad Litem. The Respondent shall pay one-half of the total costs of the Guardian ad Litem on a schedule to be arranged with Todd County Court Administrator --------; the Petitioner, having proceeded In Forma Pauperis, has no present ability to contribute to said costs. The Guardian is hereby discharged from further duties in this case, with the thanks of the Court and the parties for her services in this matter.

10. Service of this Order. A copy of this Order shall be served upon the parties, the Guardian ad Litem, and Todd County Social Services Support Collection Officer (referencing suspension of support in July as per paragraph 7 above).


Dated this 3rd day of April, 2003.

BY THE COURT:



SALLY I----- R------
Judge of District Court
DISTRICT