Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The high road gets bumpy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • And that's exactly what the other side wants - continual adjournments.

    Hopefully between the judge and your lawyer things can be kept on track and matters narrowed to simply setting up full unsupervised access. This is what they absolutely DO NOT want to happen. It's going to be a very lively motion. I pray you get a decent judge who can see through the garbage.

    Comment


    • I read some cases that the judge presiding over my case tomorrow had:

      Remember, OP's strategy tomorrow is "Can't make changes to existing order".

      Here's what the judge I will have tomorrow said here:

      The Respondent says the Applicant is placing stress on G., 5 years old, by asking her inappropriate questions, and making inappropriate statements as well as making access exchanges difficult, all of which is detailed in the affidavits. At the same time the Applicant is seeking more access, including overnight access. The Applicant says he understands the importance of not burdening the children with adult concerns but I’m not sure his actions reflect a true understanding of the importance of protecting the children from the parties’ relationship issues. At the same time it is common and sometimes unfair for the custodial parent to blame a child’s behaviour changes or difficulties on the actions of the non-custodial parent

      [10] Supervised access is a highly-controlled and artificial environment. It is not the most desirable setting in which to exercise access visits. Supervised access would also likely have the effect of reducing the time the Applicant actually spends with the children.

      BELOW is OP's entire case and factum:

      [11] It is very difficult to ascertain the accuracy of allegations based on affidavit evidence alone. Judges are reluctant to alter temporary access arrangements in the absence of clear evidence that there is a material change of circumstances that affects the best interests of the children. I am not persuaded that access arrangements should be altered to increase the access as requested by the Applicant or to require the Applicant’s access to be supervised as requested by the Respondent.

      So is this going to be the outcome tomorrow I wonder?

      Comment


      • ive read much of this thread but not all. courts are the worst to decide whats best in childrens development. basically ive come across in some of my volunteer work that a childs development is segregated. birth to 5 years old, its mommys time. 6 to 12 years old its daddys time. 13 to 17 years old its friends time (they dont give a hoot about their parents). 18 years old onwards theyre on their own to make decisions for themselves. it might help to have this mentality that doesnt discriminate either parent.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
          I read some cases that the judge presiding over my case tomorrow had:

          Remember, OP's strategy tomorrow is "Can't make changes to existing order".

          Here's what the judge I will have tomorrow said here:

          The Respondent says the Applicant is placing stress on G., 5 years old, by asking her inappropriate questions, and making inappropriate statements as well as making access exchanges difficult, all of which is detailed in the affidavits. At the same time the Applicant is seeking more access, including overnight access. The Applicant says he understands the importance of not burdening the children with adult concerns but I’m not sure his actions reflect a true understanding of the importance of protecting the children from the parties’ relationship issues. At the same time it is common and sometimes unfair for the custodial parent to blame a child’s behaviour changes or difficulties on the actions of the non-custodial parent

          [10] Supervised access is a highly-controlled and artificial environment. It is not the most desirable setting in which to exercise access visits. Supervised access would also likely have the effect of reducing the time the Applicant actually spends with the children.

          BELOW is OP's entire case and factum:

          [11] It is very difficult to ascertain the accuracy of allegations based on affidavit evidence alone. Judges are reluctant to alter temporary access arrangements in the absence of clear evidence that there is a material change of circumstances that affects the best interests of the children. I am not persuaded that access arrangements should be altered to increase the access as requested by the Applicant or to require the Applicant’s access to be supervised as requested by the Respondent.

          So is this going to be the outcome tomorrow I wonder?

          I don't think that there is a lot in common with your case. You guys haven't been present for more than what, one exchange? Again, your ex totally shot herself in the foot by pushing for a supervisor, having the supervisor do exchanges, launching allegations that affected you while you had a supervisor, etc.

          She should have dumped all of that slander on your from the beginning. You've kept your cool and continually asked for access, and she has continually denied it. That is the most important thing that the judge will focus on.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by WEC View Post
            ive read much of this thread but not all. courts are the worst to decide whats best in childrens development. basically ive come across in some of my volunteer work that a childs development is segregated. birth to 5 years old, its mommys time. 6 to 12 years old its daddys time. 13 to 17 years old its friends time (they dont give a hoot about their parents). 18 years old onwards theyre on their own to make decisions for themselves. it might help to have this mentality that doesnt discriminate either parent.
            I think those developmental pathways of attachment have many variables which makes each case extremely distinct from others. For instance, D3 was a daddy's girl. I was the one who took her to parks, sledding, swimming, for walks, etc. She would run to me to have her shoes tied up. Mom would try to put her coat on D3 would say "no .. daddy do it", and run to me. Of course I told D3 that her mom could put her coat on fine.

            My point is that it's how a child is raised in their environment and the unique experiences they share with each caregiver that shape their attachments and relationships with each parent and everyone else.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Straittohell View Post
              I don't think that there is a lot in common with your case. You guys haven't been present for more than what, one exchange? Again, your ex totally shot herself in the foot by pushing for a supervisor, having the supervisor do exchanges, launching allegations that affected you while you had a supervisor, etc.

              She should have dumped all of that slander on your from the beginning. You've kept your cool and continually asked for access, and she has continually denied it. That is the most important thing that the judge will focus on.
              Just made my night Strait. I'm nervous. Off for "enema training" (yay). But at least it will keep me distracted.

              I'm going to ask anyone who reads this tonight. First off, please say a prayer for the soldier who lost his life today and their families.

              Secondly .. please, say a little prayer for me and my day in court tomorrow. I don't know what will happen but I felt like I've done most things right. Even if you're not religious. I'll take any form of help I can get.

              Comment


              • So .. here we go.

                Courtroom etiquette:

                - Look straight ahead.
                - Look sad (won't be hard). Don't be afraid to cry
                - Don't take notes
                - Don't react to opposing lawyers comments. (No sarcasm, shaking head, frustration).
                - Look presentable (my pin stripe suit and tie with black dress shoes)
                - Don't nod your head to your lawyers points

                Body language counts for a lot.

                Just thinking out loud here .. sorry.

                Comment


                • Fwiw, I believe in prayers because I know they work ... I'll be praying for you and your kidlett, hoping for a positive outcome tomorrow.

                  Comment


                  • Another thing to remember, you've invested a lot of emotion, time, and energy into this, and you did a lot of it before your lawyer came into the picture.

                    If you thought it was difficult to give up control and trust your lawyer before, you will find tomorrow to be a who new test of your resolve, trust, and willpower.

                    I'm not saying that you should blindly entrust yourself to your lawyer, if there is a moment where you need to discretely give her direction about where you want something to go, you do it, but remember, she's going to be driving this.

                    Don't be afraid to cry, but don't rush to do it either. Sadly, men crying doesn't yield the same benefits as women crying, and sometimes backfires. Women look emotional when they cry, we look unstable. Just my opinion on that.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Straittohell View Post
                      Another thing to remember, you've invested a lot of emotion, time, and energy into this, and you did a lot of it before your lawyer came into the picture.

                      If you thought it was difficult to give up control and trust your lawyer before, you will find tomorrow to be a who new test of your resolve, trust, and willpower.

                      I'm not saying that you should blindly entrust yourself to your lawyer, if there is a moment where you need to discretely give her direction about where you want something to go, you do it, but remember, she's going to be driving this.

                      Don't be afraid to cry, but don't rush to do it either. Sadly, men crying doesn't yield the same benefits as women crying, and sometimes backfires. Women look emotional when they cry, we look unstable. Just my opinion on that.
                      Was thinking about that today. All control goes to my lawyer. She's on top of things. It will be hard for me to not want to whisper points to her while OP is talking but I'll refrain.

                      As much as I'd like to be in control of my case (because I know it like the back of my hand), I guess it feels kind of nice to have someone who has a better grasp of the laws, how to talk to a judge, etc sticking up for me for once.

                      Im pleased with our materials. Im very pleased with our factum.

                      OP's lawyer is VERY aggressive. Mine is not. But I think that may work out for me.

                      Comment


                      • like I wrote before ...there has to be "items going forward for parties after the Motion.

                        Both parties are polarized in there positions. (one with a free lawyer, hopefully a judge will be aware of that)

                        I have no idea where "change of circumstance's" is coming from, for a consent order on temporary access

                        LMAO...3 hour supervised access until when? D3 is 18?

                        Clean drug and alcohol test is "the change" or the caution

                        There's stress on Goldilocks' maybe more....your coming to terms with this crap (but not the court bullsh!t) and looking forward to your and D3 being together.

                        For Goldilocks it's all or nothing. Each day that goes by...she sees you gaining along with the LAO scumbag lawyer telling her crap like,I dunno it's up to the Judge.

                        and guess what MORE stress for Goldilocks after the Motion, talk about self inflicted abuse for not getting along.

                        Take any small gains you get from the Motion and keep the pressure on until cracks start showing up with OP side.

                        Goldilocks is saying she lives in your town.....how long can she "bear" pretending that until she's found out?

                        Can your lawyer find a spot at the Motion to get that in the Court Transcript, and ask for updated financial disclosure with last 3 welfare pay statements.

                        1) That's a big win you got with Goldilocks pretending she's still in your jurisdiction...and bigger if she's caught lying. (better if it's in Court Record)

                        2) And you have partial disclosure....and of course you want ALL the stuff before you'll address any of it.

                        3) the best is Goldilocks was hiding that she's a doper/drinker/yeller (the original allegations against you) and won't do a drug test.

                        How the Judge views OCL vs. CAS...that's the question mark.....and the Judge views on the OCL recommendations .....LF32 going back to supervised access (hope not) does mean OCL report is dumped.

                        Judge looks at reports as reports.....but what do the parties actual think...if Judge doesn't ask the LAO scumbag lawyer directly on if they share the concern of the OCL...then your lawyer better get of her ass an ask.

                        OP has been dancing around the "OCL allegation" (but using it)....the OP must be put on Record as "having that OCL concern"..(it's written down somewhere .....that it's the OCL concern only, it's her issue.)

                        This a double edged "no answer is right" sword......OP says no, they don't share the concern..all reports are dumped...then LF32 gets access.

                        If OP says yes they share the concern (bingo into the Court Record)....OP is saying that knowing CAS dismissed it and they'll also remember they subjected the OCL to the tapes (prejudiced), and that they originally said they didn't share the concern
                        Last edited by MrToronto; 10-22-2014, 09:33 PM.

                        Comment


                        • I recall vividly first attendances at family court.

                          My lawyer was impressive from the first day on. His presence was calm, professional and he was extremely respectful to the judge and opposing counsel.

                          I agree that you should keep your emotions in check. I recall drifting off at times thinking "this is my life being dissected..." It's horrifying really. In a court room battling to see your daughter? If I were you I'd be pissed off. This shouldn't be happening - what sort of monster is this woman you married?

                          Do not stare at your ex - keep your eyes on the judge and the two lawyers.

                          All the best!

                          Comment


                          • Take lots of deep breaths. Pause to collect yourself before you speak so your words aren't garbled.

                            But overall, your whole case goes something like this:

                            Ex: LF shouldn't have access because he's a substance abuser

                            LF provides drug and alcohol tests that show he's not

                            Ex: LF shouldn't have unsupervised access because he's abusive

                            LF finds acceptable supervisor

                            Ex: LF shouldn't have access because I don't like supervisor anymore

                            Ex: LF shouldn't have access because OCL said so

                            LF gets CAS report dissing OCL

                            LF rebuts OCL report as biased

                            LF finally hears recordings that show no abuse, simply arguing

                            Ex: LF shouldn't have access because there is a history of him not having access

                            As long as you don't get bogged down in the mire of details or lose your calm, a judge should be able to see the big picture.

                            Your ex has made just about every allegation possible, and you have disproven or rebutted all of them. Your ex has nothing left except the status quo argument, which you can defuse by agreeing to gradually increasing access to help your daughter transition back.

                            You are skilled with children and not a danger to them. You and your ex are both good parents. It's in your daughter's best interests to have both parents involved in her life.

                            Remember to look at things from the child's perspective. She has had a parent pretty much eliminated from her life for no valid reason except that her mother wanted out of marriage. The child deserves to have that unilateral decision reversed so she can experience her father's love and care, as well as that of his family, going forward.

                            Good luck.

                            And focus on yourself tomorrow too; any update for us is not your priority.

                            Comment


                            • Here goes nothing

                              Comment


                              • Good luck, sending my happy thoughts and prayers.

                                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