Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

credibility

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • credibility

    What is the impact of challenging the ex's credibility, honesty, integrity? Can you even do it?

    Can a challenge of credibility include challenges to their credibility/honesty/integrity that would likely not impact the family law proceedings (e.g., lying to a family judge about what happened in a criminal court, lying on taxes, lying to employer and then repeating the lie in affidavit materials)?
    Last edited by now i see the moon; 10-05-2012, 07:14 AM. Reason: more examples. i know you guys are going to challenge my credibility.

  • #2
    I see the advantage of challenging the credibility of the ex, if it results in a judge giving less weight to what the ex says, even if the truth or lie of cannot really be proven.

    Maybe what I'm asking for is a general explanation of a challenge of credibility, when it can be used and its impact.

    Comment


    • #3
      Now remember that opinions are like a*&holes ,everyone has one.If he has an opinion of something that you disagree with ,tough luck.If on the other hand he has blatant lies in his affidavit ....challenge these with actual proof.Have documentation that can enlighten the judge to the true state of affairs.If you have nothing to disprove his lies its just gonna be he said ,she said, and thats not worth alot.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by murphyslaw View Post
        Now remember that opinions are like a*&holes ,everyone has one.If he has an opinion of something that you disagree with ,tough luck.If on the other hand he has blatant lies in his affidavit ....challenge these with actual proof.Have documentation that can enlighten the judge to the true state of affairs.If you have nothing to disprove his lies its just gonna be he said ,she said, and thats not worth alot.
        My question is what impact would the proof have on the proceedings assuming his lies don't related directly to the issues being discussed but are part of court documents? He has so many lies,but not all are possible to prove with evidence. If I prove the ones I can, will it weigh against him generally, and how much? Would it be better just to focus on the issues at hand? I'll be asking my lawyer of course, as relates to my specific situation, but I just wanted to get a general feel.

        Comment


        • #5
          Well I do disprove regularly and yes it does work ,if he says ive been a volunteer at this place for 2years what a good guy am i and you say he only volunteered one day....well that paints a different picture altogether.He says you spent all the money but the withdrawals are all on his bankcard... you see what Im getting at.Don't disprove everything ,don't waste time on useless stuff, but on the main points make sure to get the truth out.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by now i see the moon View Post
            My question is what impact would the proof have on the proceedings assuming his lies don't related directly to the issues being discussed but are part of court documents? He has so many lies,but not all are possible to prove with evidence. If I prove the ones I can, will it weigh against him generally, and how much? Would it be better just to focus on the issues at hand? I'll be asking my lawyer of course, as relates to my specific situation, but I just wanted to get a general feel.
            What exactly are you HOPING will happen? What do you HOPE it will affect and how are you hoping these unrelated matters will 'weigh against him' in these unrelated matters?

            Comment


            • #7
              Agreed with Blink.

              Unrelated matters and credibility in them may or not be relevant to the situation in family court. If I'm a douchebag on an online game with my friends does that mean I'm a douchebag Father and shouldn't have credibility with a judge?

              As Tayken always advises, focus on COGENT and RELEVANT evidence.

              Unrelated matters are unrelated generally.

              Comment


              • #8
                Valid points made here^ being a criminal or a tax dodger has zero to do with raising kids and being a good parent.If he had a criminal matter that related to child abuse-sure that would matter .If this isnt a custody case and this is only about money ,then maybe him hiding assets and dodging tax could matter as it would be impossible to get a honest financial statement.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Obviously, credibility in non-relevant areas should not matter at all. The question is though, if you damage credibility in a general way, can it help with the case?

                  Judges are far from perfect, as we all know well.

                  For what its worth, I have documented every single lie that my STBX has told me (often she even lies in writing, she's a bit silly that way, mostly because she doesn't see lying as a "wrong", so she doesn't understand why it can hurt her). I have also kept evidence showing how her statements were lies. Luckily, it appears that our case will not go to court, but it never hurts to be prepared.

                  I say trash the credibility. As long as you are not just pointing a finger and saying that your ex lies. If you have evidence that your ex has issues with telling the truth, I imagine that a judge would be unable to completely forget the material presented.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Think about why you want to challenge credibility. I see 2 main reasons:

                    1) Their demands are unreasonable and are based on false information... so you challenge their credibility in order to support your own position. Keep your challenges specific to the 'unreasonable demands'.

                    2) You want certain 'procedural/practical measures in place' to protect you against continuation of this behaviour e.g. mandatory exchange of income tax info, 3rd party to hold the passport, ability to meet with Dr/teachers personally, email communication only etc. Frame all of your challanges in terms of coming up with solutions to current problems.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Janus View Post
                      Obviously, credibility in non-relevant areas should not matter at all. The question is though, if you damage credibility in a general way, can it help with the case?
                      I believe a lack of credibility can help a case. It's common for some issues in Family Law to be a case of he said-she said. Overall, if you can show lies and inconsistencies in the other parties statements, then the judge may not believe anything the other party says (without proof), and give your statements more weight in his/her decision.

                      Originally posted by now i see the moon View Post
                      Can a challenge of credibility include challenges to their credibility/honesty/integrity that would likely not impact the family law proceedings (e.g., lying to a family judge about what happened in a criminal court, lying on taxes, lying to employer and then repeating the lie in affidavit materials)?
                      In regard to relevancy, I believe these examples could be relevant and used against him/her. If s/he lied to the Family Court about a criminal court issue, then the topic was addressed in Family Court and s/he felt it was in his/her best interest to lie. Lying on taxes is relevant because the courts rely on tax returns in order to determine support payments. Lying on Family Court affidavits are certainly relevant.

                      From my perspective, if you can prove that s/he is full of lies, then that should bode well for the he said-she said situations. I have seen such scenarios in case law, where the judge gave the liar little credibility, and believed the party who showed honesty and consistency.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Teenwolf View Post
                        From my perspective, if you can prove that s/he is full of lies, then that should bode well for the he said-she said situations. I have seen such scenarios in case law, where the judge gave the liar little credibility, and believed the party who showed honesty and consistency.
                        My recommendation would be to seek an order for oral discovery and cross examination on affidavit evidence. The request would be for a viva voce hearing for which the other party and all witnesses who have submitted affidavit evidence can be cross examined on that evidence.

                        You want to see credibility and the house of cards fall apart in affidavit materials... Call the witnesses. You can do this at any time and the request to do so is all based on narrowing the issues before trial.

                        Discovery is *expensive* so don't do it to try and destroy credibility on say the other party making statements of "belief" that are clearly irrational. (I.e. the other parties attempts to destroy your credibility saying you bribed other witnesses, are a Satanist, spray pea soup while screaming in bed, etc...) That is for the other party to prove on the balance of probabilities is truthful statements they made. They are destroying their own credibility and demonstrating their complete and utter irrationality by even putting them to paper in an affidavit.

                        One miss representation of the truth in an affidavit will not be the "winner takes all situation" that some highly conflicted litigants "believe" it will be.

                        Highly conflicted people use terms like "my children", "always", "never", and stick to black and white (binary) objectives in their statements in affidavits. They never see grey in matters. This is because they cannot see the compromise in anything and nor can they see past their "emotional reasoning" and cognative dysfunction. They often *truly believe* in the "always" and "never" statements they are making in their affidavit materials.

                        To put it simply, often they are delusional to their own conduct and see matters as win/lose, good parent/bad parent, etc... Their delusions are often so strong that they truly believe in what they are stating as "fact" and often can't figure out why no one "believes" them.

                        For example this poster in the following thread who identifies themselves as "KayD" states:

                        http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...tml#post101063

                        Originally posted by KayD
                        I only wish my ex made it as easy but he's smart enough to keep his temper behind closed doors. He perpetrated every kind of abuse except leaving bruises on me, which I wish I had now, because that is the only kind anyone (read: police) ever takes seriously. I'm worried for our child but since I have full custody (due to geography, not the way he treated us), I just have to keep the faith that the values I impart in her will be enough to carry her through when he explodes on her.
                        This is an improbable statement of "fact" premised on a personal "belief" that something horrible happened to the poster. Clearly the poster by stating "police" in the message had contact the police regarding their matter. No doubt that the court was involved in the matter. No one possibly "believed" this poster's allegations of "every kind of abuse except leaving bruises on me". Which is followed up with an incredibly concerning statement: "which I wish I had now".

                        The courts, police and everyone in Family Law does consider psychological abuse. There is piles of jurisprudence in case law to the fact. Yet, this poster, continues to "believe" that they were the victim of "intimate partner abuse" and that their child is in danger. The claim they are making to custody and access is based, as stated explicitly is "due to geography, not the way he treated us".

                        I would suspect that a poster who makes such claims, noted that the police didn't do anything and that their resulting custody and access order was the result of geography and "not the way he treated us" may be a delusional thinker. In that they have built up a world in fantasy in which they were are a helpless victim and have a history of allegations of every person whom they have been intimate with was "abusive" to them.

                        To take apart the credibility of someone who relies on "emotional reasoning" takes a strong understanding of the psychological and cognative functioning of the person making delusional statements. It isn't hard to do as they often just make generalized statements of "belief" that are personal but not reflected in cogent and relevant evidence.

                        The downfall to people who claim that their children are in danger yet, the police, CAS and courts have done nothing to protect them and their children is more concerning as they are possibly exhibiting highly anxiety and irrationality in their cognative functioning. Mental health help is more appropriate than court proceedings and writing affidavits for assisting a litigant like this to be a better parent.

                        Key point being:

                        1. Identify that which is a "statement of belief".
                        2. Drive for the particulars on the "statement of belief" to demonstrate it is relying upon "emotional reasoning" and not cogent and relevant evidence.
                        3. Bring to light that although the person in question is talking with conviction the rationality is driven purely on the emotion and not the facts of the matter.

                        This will bring credibility to light to the judge. Judges make decisions that are based on logic, ration and reason (cogent, tangible and relevant evidence). Not because one parent "believes" the other parent is dangerous. They do so when the other parent *is* a danger and not because someone and their gang of negative advocates "believe" it.

                        Good Luck!
                        Tayken

                        Good Luck!
                        Tayken
                        Last edited by Tayken; 10-07-2012, 06:42 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
                          What exactly are you HOPING will happen? What do you HOPE it will affect and how are you hoping these unrelated matters will 'weigh against him' in these unrelated matters?

                          I am hoping a judge will think of him as unreasonable and place less weight on his suggestions, which generally are not well thought out, not cohesive, not consistent. I realize now what I really meant to ask, in my first post, was whether the apparent MORAL INTEGRITY or RATIONALITY of someone would weigh against them in making a decision, given two alternatives.

                          (oh, and there are blatant lies, but more evidence against his moral integrity (cheating the system).)

                          and I realize i'm not sounding terribly rational myself at this particular moment so I'll just go read a story to the kids.

                          Comment

                          Our Divorce Forums
                          Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                          Working...
                          X