Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Domestic Violence

Domestic Violence Dealing with abuse and violence. Getting support and help.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 12-07-2012, 10:43 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: calgary
Posts: 190
pokeman has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

is 'social media' really the problem here ?

why are parents monitoring the other parents facebook or
watching what their children post or do on facebook for the
purpose of using it in court in some way ..

engineering and similar diciplines have something called
'root cause analysis' used to determine 'why' when something fails ...

here's my root cause analysis of 'social media' :

if parents had equal access to children then all this
bullsh** goes away .

facebook, twitter isnt the problem here ...

the legal profession is full of perjudice individuals, and the fact court favors 1 sex over the other time and time is the 'root cause'
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 12-08-2012, 10:45 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 669
Nadia is on a distinguished road
Default

The point of this thread was to warn people that use of social media does leave a footprint that can potentially be used against them in any ongoing litigation.

Providing parents equal access to the children will not "make all this bullshit go away" as you put it. Parties engaged in conflict will simply find other ways to continue to keep that conflict alive.

The ongoing conflict often has nothing to do with the children but more to do (1) with the inability of one or both party to accept that the marriage has indeed come to an end (2) difficulty with handling emotional hurt where one party or both feel they have been unfairly treated or wronged and must have this addressed by "punishing" the other party.

Often in such cases, one or both parties will go to extraordinary lengths to make themselves heard and ensure that everyone knows they are (1) the "victim" in all this (2) how disgracefully the other party has acted in all this.

Last edited by Nadia; 12-08-2012 at 11:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 12-09-2012, 08:16 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,563
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nadia View Post
The point of this thread was to warn people that use of social media does leave a footprint that can potentially be used against them in any ongoing litigation.
And that their emotional outbursts, emotional state, and other elements of their health and well being. The evidence is often used to counter highly agressive and unsubstantiated claims of "fear" for the other party.

An example, would be someone who claims that they were living in fear of the other party in the matter and then publicly posting their vendetta to create a distortion campaign against the other party. Recruiting their "friends", posting disturbing things about how their marriage and the subsequent birth of children was a "mistake" or "stupid". That the problems they are having in life is because the other parent is "all bad".

This time stamped trail of evidence is often posted to the internet and coordinates to phone calls to these "friends". In the past litigants would have to bring witnesses willing to testify to the fact that the other parent contacted them and attempted to "divorce-same" the other parent. Now, with social media, this evidence is often recorded and on the public internet for millions (billions?) of users to read.

To quote justice Quinn in Bruni v. Bruni ... "Parties are not shy about splattering their spleens throughout cyberspace."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nadia View Post
Providing parents equal access to the children will not "make all this bullshit go away" as you put it. Parties engaged in conflict will simply find other ways to continue to keep that conflict alive.
Or to lament about the other parent, the past, and demonstrate that they are unable to move on and truly feel that having children with this person was "stupid" or a "mistake". Unfortunate that these highly conflicted people often find a soap box and a crowd of similarly highly-conflicted individuals who will "cheer lead" their allegations and bad conduct. Single serving friends...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nadia View Post
The ongoing conflict often has nothing to do with the children but more to do (1) with the inability of one or both party to accept that the marriage has indeed come to an end (2) difficulty with handling emotional hurt where one party or both feel they have been unfairly treated or wronged and must have this addressed by "punishing" the other party.
(3) when one of the parties continues to try and find "closure" by projecting blame at the other parent, defaming their character, and trying to "justify" (find truth through the uneducated support and cheer leading of others) why things happened. They simply can't find closure in their life and move on. They continue to re-live their "beliefs" by posting them to the internet and having other possibly highly conflicted individuals "like" their negative projections of blame on the other parent.

It seems to fill an emotional void that the possibly highly conflicted parent has to get everyone to say bad things about the parent of their children. A parent who makes up half of their children. It also demonstrates that despite everything they may say to the court about how happy they are... in fact they are highly conflicted, upset and cannot move on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nadia View Post
Often in such cases, one or both parties will go to extraordinary lengths to make themselves heard and ensure that everyone knows they are (1) the "victim" in all this (2) how disgracefully the other party has acted in all this.
There are cases in which these people come to this very site seeking the same attention and often assistance on how to refine their distortion campaign and for validation of their "feelings" about the other parent. How awful, abusive, awful, etc... the other parent is and how hard their life is.

They want members of this community to support them blindly to the "facts" that they project as "truth" and rattle their sabers and join in on the "divorce-shaming" of the other parent.

They often don't want to hear "good advice" and are the litigants who often hire "shark" lawyers who conduct "sharp practice". Serve court documentation on the other parent at custody exchanges in the presence of minor children. Run into court with false and unsubstantiated allegations of domestic violence. Avoid disclosure because it often exposes their execution of "bad advice" from counsel.

Often, these highly conflicted litigants truly "believe" that they are the victim and cannot produce any evidence in support of their "belief".

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 12-09-2012, 01:07 PM
baldclub's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 456
baldclub is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
To quote justice Quinn in Bruni v. Bruni ... "Parties are not shy about splattering their spleens throughout cyberspace."
And again to quote Justice Quinn:

"Presiding over a family trial, with many issues, where the parties are selfrepresented (Mr. Leduc did not participate in the areas of property and support) is a solitary and unfulfilling experience. What evidence was not brought forward because the parties failed to appreciate its relevance? What evidence that was introduced would have been recast under a skilful cross-examination?"

That could be said by any common-sense driven participant of the Family Court system! The Judge is outstanding in his feedback.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 12-09-2012, 01:27 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,563
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by baldclub View Post
And again to quote Justice Quinn:

"Presiding over a family trial, with many issues, where the parties are selfrepresented (Mr. Leduc did not participate in the areas of property and support) is a solitary and unfulfilling experience. What evidence was not brought forward because the parties failed to appreciate its relevance? What evidence that was introduced would have been recast under a skilful cross-examination?"

That could be said by any common-sense driven participant of the Family Court system! The Judge is outstanding in his feedback.
They should hand out copies of Bruni v. Bruni and other substantial cases at the mandatory information sessions that identify the total irrationality of litigants and require everyone write essays about why the judge did what they did and ordered what they ordered.

Even a declaration that both parties will not bring irrelevant matters before the court and understand that should they they will have to pay substantial costs if found to be irrelevant to the matters being argued.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 12-09-2012, 01:52 PM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,961
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

Even a declaration that both parties will not bring irrelevant matters before the court and understand that should they they will have to pay substantial costs if found to be irrelevant to the matters being argued.[/QUOTE]

I like this one^ - I'd be wealthy right now for the past 3 yrs I've been dragged to court for useless, irrelevant crap.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 12-09-2012, 01:54 PM
baldclub's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 456
baldclub is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
They should hand out copies of Bruni v. Bruni and other substantial cases at the mandatory information sessions that identify the total irrationality of litigants and require everyone write essays about why the judge did what they did and ordered what they ordered.
Amen!

The mandatory information sessions do no do a good enough job in explaining the litigation process, the costs (of all kinds), the suffering of the children --- at least in my humble opinion.

I can personally attest to having made mistakes in the litigation process and I recently found myself writing why I thought the judge was correct in her reasons for decision in 2010! The judge decided based on the law as it is and based on the relevant evidence given to her, no more no less.
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 12-09-2012, 02:50 PM
baldclub's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 456
baldclub is on a distinguished road
Default

Have to quote this one to by Justice Quinn, lol!

[70] On fourteen occasions, within eighteen months, the parties drew the police into their petty disagreements – a sad commentary on their inability to get along and a shocking abuse of the Niagara Regional Police Service. Although this statistic probably sums up all that one needs to know about the parties, I will elaborate for the doubters.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 12-09-2012, 04:46 PM
baldclub's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 456
baldclub is on a distinguished road
Default Cyber-libel

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
I also remind everyone who has matters before the public court system that it is a public system. When two parents fail to settle their matters in a private setting between themselves, mediation or through arbitration, your public Tweets, Facebook comments, SMS messages, emails and other social media use may become evidence in court.
Another thing to consider when using social media, etc.:

Definition of Defamation in Ontario Law - Toronto Defamation Lawyers

"Cyber-libel is when someone has posted or emailed something that is untrue and damaging about you on the internet. The internet has created the easy ability for almost anybody to communicate with almost anyone. This ability has a dark side – the average person’s reputation or a small business’s hard-earned goodwill can be harmed in a serious way.
Unfortunately, cyber-libel is becoming more common. In the past, only famous people had libel and slander issues. Today, it is the common person who must deal with this issue. For example, a disgruntled consumer, an angry ex-spouse, a competitor, or a peddler of gossip can now “vent” their frustrations about their victim cheaply, easily, and seemingly anonymously. A Google search of the victim’s name usually reveals the poisonous words for anyone that is interested.
The harm to reputation and character is real. A malicious customer review by a competitor could destroy a small business. A false accusation of adultery on a social networking site could destroy a marriage. An allegation that someone is a “crook” could be read by a potential employer or business partner."
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 12-09-2012, 05:04 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,563
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

First, excellent find on that site baldclub! Haven't seen the materials posted there before.

I found this article really interesting...

Law Society Complaint Sparks Defamation Lawsuit - Defamation Lawyers

Quote:
The background to, and details of, the complaint are unimportant. I don’t know if the law society complaint was justified, or filed in bad faith. I don’t know if Mikitchook is guilty of professional misconduct. Those issues will get sorted out in due course. Right now all we’ve got are allegations.

But just imagine if the defamation lawsuit proceeds or is successful. It would create a mockery of the self-regulation of lawyers by making it dangerous for complaints to be filed with a law society. If people become afraid of filing complaints, or might be in legal jeopardy for filing complaints against lawyers, how can any law society effectively govern its lawyers? Outside regulation would be necessary.
...

Quote:
Malice is commonly understood, in the popular sense, as spite or ill‑will. However, it also includes any indirect motive or ulterior purpose that conflicts with the sense of duty or the mutual interest which the occasion created. Malice may also be established by showing that the defendant spoke dishonestly, or in knowing or reckless disregard for the truth.
Law Society Complaint Sparks Defamation Lawsuit - Defamation Lawyers
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:21 PM.