View Single Post
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2013, 08:33 PM
Serene Serene is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,587
Serene is on a distinguished road
Default

Thanks every one for the reponses. The information I've obtained thus far is 100% accurate. And FYI, I've verified some of the advice with officers of the court and its bang on.

So here is my question now: If individual's are outright lying and denying statements in a request to admit, and these are simple statements that cannot be interpreted any other way, what do you do with this? For instance: "You commenced a relationship with Buddy in May 2009". And you have a document that this person recently provided to an authority that says "I commenced a relationship with Buddy in May 2009" and is signed and dated by the party (very recently signed and dated). Do you bring this up in court at the trial and ask what the confusion is since she put it in writing two months ago but denies it now?

Let me give you a little more background to the above (and this is just one example of concrete evidence to an untruth): The party is not acknowledging the relationship or commonlaw status because they were not honest when filing their taxes. They stand to lose thousands of dollars in CTB and income tax refund they have already collected. While family court is not the place to address income tax fraud, I believe this is relevant to point out that they WILL lie in court documents/to the court for monetary reasons. Further, they WILL lie in court documents/to the court to pursue their own self interests and to avoid personal repercussions.

Am I on the right path here?

I have at least 50 very factual statements like this. These are things that the individual does know but has denied them as being true. These are big things: like who the party lives with, when they commenced their cohabiting with their partner, denying very big life events, and texts that they probably didn't know we were screen shooting all along.

I also have documents that I don't think they know are in our possession such as personal and medical health information that pertains to the child that was handwritten and signed by the other party that actually lays out these statements that were denied word for word.

Again, while it would be nice if the party didn't evade income tax by being dishonest, that is another issue that is not of primary importance. I'm hoping that come trial this can all be teased out and a judge will see that A. money motivates this person to be dishonest (so much so they will not be truthful in court/legal paperwork and I'd like to go as far as to lead a judge down the garden path to determine that they will lie about appropriate access to and with the children, and deny dad access time with the kids to promote her financial situation (40% rule of course, and btw we have this in writing too that the percentage of access shall never change!!).

I would appreciate feedback and thoughts. I learn a lot from others and gain insight on where and how to focus my thoughts.