Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trial - Opening Statement Help Advice

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

  • Trial - Opening Statement Help Advice

    I have heard many of your previous comments, and taking them into consideration, I have come up with the following statement.

    I will be starting Trial within the next 2 weeks, after my second assignment court, just waiting for the call.

    Here is what I have so far. Some help at revising would be greatly appreciated by some of you who has had positive results from Trial.

    Thanks in advance.

    _____________________

    We are here today to protect the rights of our two children, Son and Daughter. To allow them to maintain a stable healthy environment, emotionally, academically and socially without further disrupt to their lives.

    My objective is to prevent further emotional upset, to Son and Daughter, and maintain their rights to a stable environment, and maximum time with Respondent and me, facilitating their best interests.

    Despite all of Respondent’s life changes since our separation and divorce, my wife and I have maintained a stable environment, as Son and Daughter’s primary caregivers for their day to day needs, as well as their academic, extracurricular, and medical/mental health needs. I have remained in the same neighborhood and employment, with minimal life changes, and disruption to Son and Daughter’s life.

    After 17 years of marriage, Respondent and I separated on February 1, 2008 under problematic terms, where Respondent was detached, uninvolved, and uninterested in contributing, during this period. From the time Respondent and I separated, in February 2008 until November 2008, we debated the intricate details of a 16 week co-parenting schedule based solely around her work rotations, to facilitate maximum access, in accordance with Respondent’s “parental rights”. In February 2009, I filed for a simple divorce, and included the 16 week co-parenting schedule, that was not included with the divorce, due to its complexity.

    In September 2009, Respondent disrupted the already complex and dysfunctional, yet workable 16 week access schedule, by moving 100km away to Town, near Other Town. This move put Daughter and Son into a 100km drive twice a day every 2 to 3 days in accordance to the access schedule, putting the children in a ping pong regime over such a great distance. The reason for her move was, severe financial constraints, stating she was unable to financially remain in City, even though her income exceeded $80,000 per annum. During Respondent’s sabbatical to Town, my wife and I, scheduled and attended all of Son and Daughter’s appointments, concerts, extracurricular events and parent/teacher conferences, maintaining their needs for their growth and development.

    The original application filed on September 2009, was to keep Respondent from moving Son and Daughter to Town. As Respondent has moved back to City, this creates a material change of circumstances, where as the details of Custody, Access and Child Support are still unresolved.

    As of February 2010, Son exercised his right and voice by stating that he would no longer endure the 100km drives and has solely lived with me since that time. Son was depressed with thoughts of suicide, failing school grades and a poor self image. Since his move, he got himself counseling, and attended Anger Management classes, both since has finished and has changed a great deal, holds upper 80s and 90s in all his classes, involved in sports, plays violin both in and out of school, has a job and has a great self image and is well liked by his peers.

    December 2010, Respondent abruptly moved back to City and has taken up residence in a 2 bedroom apartment around the corner that appears to only facilitate her and Daughter’s needs, but has not forethought the rebuilding of her relationship with Son with even a bedroom for him when he stays there. We have since continued negotiating Custody/Access and Child Support, facilitating Maximum Access and a Shared Parenting Regime, according to Respondent’s “Parental Rights” and what is fair.

    Daughter is a highly emotional child and is having a great deal of trouble academically, she has been put on an IEP (Individual Educational Program) which Respondent had not initially attended, addressing the matter after her results on her DRA (Developmental Reading Assessment) scores. Daughter’s school has assisted my wife and I with a home program to further help her try and catch up but am unable to maintain as she is back and forth with her mother and me during the school weeks. She has also been seen by a Child Psychiatrist, that Respondent also did not attend, who is concerned she suffers from ADD and has a follow-up at the end of February to determine all the results and options.

    While I understand that Joint Custody is ordinarily favorable, Respondent and I cannot agree on anything regarding what we feel to be the best interests of our children, even before the separation and divorce. Therefore, I am asking the Court grant me Sole Custody of Son and Daughter, with generous access that will facilitate a healthy and stable environment for both Daughter and Son.

  • #2
    Well the only thing I am qualified to say is that if the 16 week scedule is dysfunctional, then whow can it be workable? seems contratictory. Remove the term dysfucntional.

    Comment


    • #3
      grrr...I had edited and lost it all...damn laptop...I am going to try again and post shortly...as a word doc in the meantime....lol

      Comment


      • #4
        Still looping. Dysfunctional is over rated and opinionated and so is your harlequin scribe. Onus rests with the court to protect rights of the children. Trashing the other parent won't go over well, considering changes in their life since February 2008.

        I can only suggest that you review your previous thread, here: http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...ng-trial-8264/ Similar views were considered by many peers with a wealth of experience.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by logicalvelocity View Post
          Still looping. Dysfunctional is over rated and opinionated and so is your harlequin scribe. Onus rests with the court to protect rights of the children. Trashing the other parent won't go over well, considering changes in their life since February 2008.

          I can only suggest that you review your previous thread, here: http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...ng-trial-8264/ Similar views were considered by many peers with a wealth of experience.
          Thanks LV
          I really am not trying to "bash". I guess I do not understand how I can say I do this and that. A trial opening still has to say what has transpired. I mean, if she did nothing wrong, I'd not be there in the first place. I really am trying. I do not go in court to bash her and have not yet.

          I didn't go on and on about what she did wrong wrong wrong. I just felt this was a picture of what has transpired.

          I will read that thread.

          Keep the help coming. I want the help, but I don't want to walk in there and allow the judge to automatically think she is peaches and cream either....she did do much wrong, sorry, it is the truth.

          Comment


          • #6
            IPP
            Call me if you can. Was out taking daughter skating and dropped her off at her mom's house and just got back.

            Comment


            • #7
              Okay, so it still sounds bashing, even if it is facts. Okay

              Comment


              • #8
                Can't help but read your post and wonder when I will be asking the same advice.

                I agree with the bashing (if only factual). I would suggest get someone uninvolved to read it over and extract only the facts. Remove all adjectives/adverbs. It should be purely factual.

                And good luck.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by logicalvelocity View Post
                  Still looping. Dysfunctional is over rated and opinionated and so is your harlequin scribe. Onus rests with the court to protect rights of the children. Trashing the other parent won't go over well, considering changes in their life since February 2008.

                  I can only suggest that you review your previous thread, here: http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...ng-trial-8264/ Similar views were considered by many peers with a wealth of experience.

                  I am back to, LV, what happened to being indiscriminate, unbiased? I may post things that are realistic, but I try to help...
                  Last edited by Jeff; 01-20-2011, 09:16 AM. Reason: No personal attacks

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    ..........
                    Last edited by Jeff; 01-20-2011, 09:15 AM. Reason: No personal attacks

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Then why come here in your many usernames. Didn't you advise that you were leaving. Really. Live up to your word. It's unfortunate, but again it's your choice and your choice's alone. Good luck with your predicament as many have advised already.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Trial opening statement

                        I think you have to bender over backwards to avoid being perceived as engaging in character defamation.

                        The word "dysfunctional" strongly alludes to character. Try and find another word to use when describing the schedule and pin that description of the schedule to the kids' needs.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by InterprovincialParents View Post
                          I am back to, LV, what happened to being indiscriminate, unbiased? I may post things that are realistic, but I try to help...more and more, LV, I wonder why you are a moderator.........
                          IPP, What's your problem. Do you have issues, Really. My comment was to the OP, Perhaps, take the time and read the thread which was linked and consider the private message variable exchanged.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Are you fikkin kidding me????

                            I thought this was an unobtrusive forum, yet people are getting pissed off because Stacey and I sound the same...I am really irritated...We may share the same opinion, but are not the same person, and if you don't like, suck it up, baby!

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X