Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Criminal proceedings and settlement conference

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

  • Criminal proceedings and settlement conference

    I've been reading up on the Children’s Law Reform Act and it says:

    Affidavit
    (2) An application under subsection (1) for custody of or access to a child shall be accompanied by an affidavit, in the form prescribed for the purpose by the rules of court, of the person applying for custody or access, containing,
    (a) the person’s proposed plan for the child’s care and upbringing;
    (b) information respecting the person’s current or previous involvement in any family proceedings, including proceedings under Part III of the Child and Family Services Act (child protection), or in any criminal proceedings;
    and
    (c) any other information known to the person that is relevant to the factors to be considered by the court under subsections 24 (2), (3) and (4) in determining the best interests of the child. 2009, c. 11, s. 6.


    Question: Would I need to put my dealings in criminal court against my ex's allegations in an affidavit for my settlement conference? Or just deal with that in my case at trial (which is the only place I'm headed for sure)?

    I'm still trying to whittle down my offer to settle to what is relevant, without laying down any of my arguments for trial. I don't see how a judge can give you a good legal perspective on your offer if they don't have the facts surrounding the situation. Am I mistaken here?

  • #2
    Originally posted by baldclub View Post
    I've been reading up on the Children’s Law Reform Act and it says:

    Affidavit
    (2) An application under subsection (1) for custody of or access to a child shall be accompanied by an affidavit, in the form prescribed for the purpose by the rules of court, of the person applying for custody or access, containing,
    (a) the person’s proposed plan for the child’s care and upbringing;
    (b) information respecting the person’s current or previous involvement in any family proceedings, including proceedings under Part III of the Child and Family Services Act (child protection), or in any criminal proceedings;
    and
    (c) any other information known to the person that is relevant to the factors to be considered by the court under subsections 24 (2), (3) and (4) in determining the best interests of the child. 2009, c. 11, s. 6.


    Question: Would I need to put my dealings in criminal court against my ex's allegations in an affidavit for my settlement conference? Or just deal with that in my case at trial (which is the only place I'm headed for sure)?
    http://www.ontariocourtforms.on.ca/f...1-Nov09-EN.pdf

    From Form 35.1 (which is the implementation of Rule 35.1 in the CLRA):

    (My emphasis added.)

    I acknowledge that the court needs up-to-date and accurate information about my plan in order to make a custody or access order in the best interests of the child(ren) (subrule 35.1 (7)). If, at any time before a final order is made in this case,

    a) there are any changes in my life or circumstances that affect the information provided in this affidavit; or

    b) I discover that the information in this affidavit is incorrect or incomplete,
    I will immediately serve and file either:
    a) an updated affidavit in support of claim for custody or access (Form 35.1); or,
    b) if the correction or change is minor, an affidavit in Form 14A describing the correction or change and indicating any effect it has on my plan for the care and upbringing of the child(ren).

    (Initial here to show you have read this paragraph and you understand it.)
    You have already acknowledged to the court, in an affirmation to the truth, per the wording of that affirmation that you will update the court with this information prior "at any time before a final order is made in this case".

    My recommendation is to update your 35.1 prior to the Conference with the information per your affirmation to the truth and initially to the confirmation to reading this paragraph (11) on the affirmation in question.

    If you consent to a FINAL order at the conference you want to insure that the appropriate paperwork (i.e. Form 35.1 and Form 13.1) are filed and served with all the expected information

    11.(a), 11.(b), 11.(b).(a) and 11.(b).(b) in the above quote are explicit affirmations that you will do this.

    A judge will endorse a FINAL order at a Conference on consent without an updated Form 35.1 in place but, my recommendation would be to have one served and filed in the event the evidence is needed to argue continuance to a motion (please do request it be preemptive on both parties if this happens) or the matter needs to be scheduled for trial.

    You can make your Form 35.1 look like a full out parenting plan. I have seen more solicitors doing this with Form 35.1 and the judges are really appreciating this. When children are involved the majority of Family Law justices like details and the whole purpose of 35.1 was to facilitate this.

    (If you need jurisprudence on some recent cases that went before the court and discussions on "lengthy" Form 35.1s let me know. I think I have some recent ones that outline what a judge expects to be in a Form 35.1.)

    So, in general if I were in your shoes I would update the Form 35.1 and attach the evidence (relevant) from the civil proceedings. My assumption based on past reading is that the criminal charges were dropped correct?

    This is VERY important and relevant evidence in my opinion. It also leads you to be able to bring "Shaw v. Shaw" into the argument. The whole miss use of the criminal court to gain an upper hand in a family law matter "stuff".

    Originally posted by baldclub View Post
    I'm still trying to whittle down my offer to settle to what is relevant, without laying down any of my arguments for trial. I don't see how a judge can give you a good legal perspective on your offer if they don't have the facts surrounding the situation. Am I mistaken here?
    You are somewhat mistaken but, not entirely. Your case sounds complex. Criminal matters, allegations, and all that awful stuff that comes with high conflict matrimonial disputes.

    What you are mistaken is that should you have an order from the criminal courts that found you "not guilty" (which is the key words you need in that matter) then it all boils down as Justice Pazaratz noted in another matter to "two people who like to fight a lot".

    Why this is relevant is that a judge will start to twist apart the other party at the conference to settle matters. You are seeking 50-50 residency with full joint custody if I am not mistaken. Your best opportunity to get this is on CONSENT at a CONFERENCE as a FINAL ORDER in my honest opinion.

    So, if you provide a basic offer to settle, that is what a judge always sees without any "weird" clauses generally I find they will beat up the party that is making all the weird and "odd" requests that require a trial for determination. The other party will be seen and treated as the "high conflict party" by the conference Judge.

    Justices like common, predictable, enforceable and "normal" offers to settle.

    Also, you may get an opportunity to answer/provide cogent and relevant evidence to answer the question / challenge that the justice in "Shaw v. Shaw" states in the first few paragraphs which is not knowing what inspired the litigant, the litigants possible lawyer, police and crow to lay criminal charges.

    (I hope so because it is a long time coming that someone brings this common "tactic" to light before the Family Court!)

    Good Luck!
    Tayken
    Last edited by Tayken; 11-11-2012, 09:28 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Wow, thanks Tayken!!!

      This is totally great information, I'll be honest with you, I've never seen, been told about or read on this forum about the form 35.1. I will fill that out asap because it does the chance to give factual information that the judge can soak up faster than going through all the past proceedings (4,000 text messages anyone?!).

      I'm going to now go through your post more in detail with questions and comments.
      Last edited by baldclub; 11-12-2012, 11:49 AM. Reason: Added some exclamation marks

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by baldclub View Post
        Wow, thanks Tayken!!!

        This is totally great information, I'll be honest with you, I've never seen, been told about or read on this forum about the form 35.1. I will fill that out asap because it does the chance to give factual information that the judge can soak up faster than going through all the past proceedings (4,000 text messages anyone?!).

        I'm going to now go through your post more in detail with questions and comments.
        You haven't filed a Form 35.1? When did the Application before the court in your matter get filed? 35.1 is recent legislation since March of 2010 and any Application after March of 2010 (someone correct me if I am wrong please) requires adherence to Rule 35.1 and the submission of this Affidavit.

        If your application is prior, it isn't a "requirement" per-say but, always a good idea. It may actually "inspire" the other party to submit one themselves which could actually put some real things on the table to negotiate.

        Also, a sworn affirmation to the truth... Key point. Although affirmations to "truthfulness" are not really "the truth" it does make people really think about what they write at times.

        Good Luck!
        Tayken

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Tayken View Post
          A judge will endorse a FINAL order at a Conference on consent without an updated Form 35.1 in place but, my recommendation would be to have one served and filed in the event the evidence is needed to argue continuance to a motion (please do request it be preemptive on both parties if this happens) or the matter needs to be scheduled for trial.
          Exactly, great point thanks.What do you mean "request it to be preemptive"? Ask that the other party present a form 35.1 also? For the settlement conference or the next phase?

          Originally posted by Tayken View Post
          You can make your Form 35.1 look like a full out parenting plan. I have seen more solicitors doing this with Form 35.1 and the judges are really appreciating this. When children are involved the majority of Family Law justices like details and the whole purpose of 35.1 was to facilitate this.
          Got it. Very good tip.

          Originally posted by Tayken View Post
          (If you need jurisprudence on some recent cases that went before the court and discussions on "lengthy" Form 35.1s let me know. I think I have some recent ones that outline what a judge expects to be in a Form 35.1.)
          I'll take any links to relevant jurisprudence, thank you very much.

          Originally posted by Tayken View Post
          So, in general if I were in your shoes I would update the Form 35.1 and attach the evidence (relevant) from the civil proceedings. My assumption based on past reading is that the criminal charges were dropped correct?
          Charges were stayed as the judge wanted us to settle this soonest in a non-criminal manner (8-10 peace bond). As I was arguing my case, the fact that the video testimony was not even seen by the crown and no transcript was made available to me to show the judge several serious inconsistencies (which were also made verbally in testimony that the judge herself pointed out freely), we would have had to reschedule everything. The judge suggest the peace bond and away we went.

          Originally posted by Tayken View Post
          This is VERY important and relevant evidence in my opinion. It also leads you to be able to bring "Shaw v. Shaw" into the argument. The whole miss use of the criminal court to gain an upper hand in a family law matter "stuff".
          Yes that is the intent, however the focus is on a rock-solid plan with the children's best interests first and foremost.

          Originally posted by Tayken View Post
          You are somewhat mistaken but, not entirely. Your case sounds complex. Criminal matters, allegations, and all that awful stuff that comes with high conflict matrimonial disputes.

          What you are mistaken is that should you have an order from the criminal courts that found you "not guilty" (which is the key words you need in that matter) then it all boils down as Justice Pazaratz noted in another matter to "two people who like to fight a lot".
          The problem may be that the charges are stayed not dropped. However, I believe most judges understand the significance of this. In fact, I was pleasantly surprised that my criminal court judge was in fact the judge I had dealt with in the Ontario Court before my proceedings passed on to Superior Court.

          However, there is now a lot of evidence to the unwarranted conflict that my ex has shown. I hate to be in the position to have to deal with so many allegations, but the sheer size and scope of them have created many, many inconsistencies that possibly could lead to a charge of public mischief and surely to a judge saying "enough is enough".

          Originally posted by Tayken View Post
          Why this is relevant is that a judge will start to twist apart the other party at the conference to settle matters. You are seeking 50-50 residency with full joint custody if I am not mistaken. Your best opportunity to get this is on CONSENT at a CONFERENCE as a FINAL ORDER in my honest opinion.
          Could you explain what that means a little more in detail for my uninitiated legal mind please?

          Originally posted by Tayken View Post
          So, if you provide a basic offer to settle, that is what a judge always sees without any "weird" clauses generally I find they will beat up the party that is making all the weird and "odd" requests that require a trial for determination. The other party will be seen and treated as the "high conflict party" by the conference Judge.

          Justices like common, predictable, enforceable and "normal" offers to settle.
          My offer to settle is very detailed, not basic at all, as that is what is required in high conflict situations. Yes, I think it is predictable, enforceable and normal...but not common in the sense it deals with so many aspects of the children's lives and our co-parenting relationship.

          Originally posted by Tayken View Post
          Also, you may get an opportunity to answer/provide cogent and relevant evidence to answer the question / challenge that the justice in "Shaw v. Shaw" states in the first few paragraphs which is not knowing what inspired the litigant, the litigants possible lawyer, police and crow to lay criminal charges.
          I wait for that opportunity with open arms.

          Originally posted by Tayken View Post
          (I hope so because it is a long time coming that someone brings this common "tactic" to light before the Family Court!)
          Exactly. "Punto e basta" in Italian, or as we say in English: "Enough is enough."

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by baldclub View Post
            Exactly, great point thanks.What do you mean "request it to be pre-emptive"? Ask that the other party present a form 35.1 also? For the settlement conference or the next phase?
            At a Conference you can request that a technical order be made to either resolve the dispute at a motion or at trial. If the justice orders it to motion... request that it be pre-emptive on both parties.

            Basically what this means is that both parties both have to file affidavits at the same time. Serve them on each other at the same time and then a clear set of Rules are set forward on when a response can be filed. Furthermore, you should request that "no further response be made after last filing".

            You want to level the playing field with highly conflicted people. Also, to end the cycle of debate that often happens in written materials. You don't want to have to file like 10 responses prior to the motion hearing.

            One affidavit... One response. Pre-emptive on both parties.

            Originally posted by baldclub View Post
            Charges were stayed as the judge wanted us to settle this soonest in a non-criminal manner (8-10 peace bond). As I was arguing my case, the fact that the video testimony was not even seen by the crown and no transcript was made available to me to show the judge several serious inconsistencies (which were also made verbally in testimony that the judge herself pointed out freely), we would have had to reschedule everything. The judge suggest the peace bond and away we went.
            Staying isn't the best option for you and a peace bond as a result isn't that great either. (Hate to break it to you.) Hopefully the crown will really seriously consider the charges and case they have and drop them.


            Originally posted by baldclub View Post
            The problem may be that the charges are stayed not dropped. However, I believe most judges understand the significance of this. In fact, I was pleasantly surprised that my criminal court judge was in fact the judge I had dealt with in the Ontario Court before my proceedings passed on to Superior Court.
            You want to press for the charges to be dropped or a finding of "not guilty" in that matter though.

            Also, you have "Shaw v. Shaw" to rely upon possibly as well in your family law proceeding.

            Originally posted by baldclub View Post
            However, there is now a lot of evidence to the unwarranted conflict that my ex has shown. I hate to be in the position to have to deal with so many allegations, but the sheer size and scope of them have created many, many inconsistencies that possibly could lead to a charge of public mischief and surely to a judge saying "enough is enough".
            Don't request the justice to say "enough is enough". Let the judge draw the negative inference against the other party to the sheer volume of allegations being made that cannot be substantiated in any material way.

            Originally posted by baldclub View Post
            My offer to settle is very detailed, not basic at all, as that is what is required in high conflict situations. Yes, I think it is predictable, enforceable and normal...but not common in the sense it deals with so many aspects of the children's lives and our co-parenting relationship.
            Rely upon the jurisprudence (case law) for parallel parenting that has been posted to this site. In fact, you can reference it directly some how in your offer to settle that is even better.

            Originally posted by baldclub View Post
            Exactly. "Punto e basta" in Italian, or as we say in English: "Enough is enough."
            But, let the judge state it. Don't try and force the judge to state it.

            Good Luck!
            Tayken

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by tayken
              Your best opportunity to get this is on CONSENT at a CONFERENCE as a FINAL ORDER in my honest opinion.
              Originally posted by baldclub
              Could you explain what that means a little more in detail for my uninitiated legal mind please?
              It is easier in my honest opinion to get 50-50 full joint custody through agreement. The litigated path leads to conflict, which leads to anger, which leads to suffering. (Yoda)

              If you are forced to have to litigate a 50-50 access schedule and joint custody... It will get ugly and fast. So, if you can get the agreement in a conference on CONSENT you are better off in the long run. Furthermore, you get a nice fat typed word "CONSENT" on your final order. Which on a material change in circumstance you can draw a negative inference against the fact that at one point the other party CONSENTED to the joint custodial order and 50-50 access. It makes any attempt for the other party on a material change in circumstance to disrupt the order.

              Good Luck!
              Tayken

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                You haven't filed a Form 35.1? When did the Application before the court in your matter get filed? 35.1 is recent legislation since March of 2010 and any Application after March of 2010 (someone correct me if I am wrong please) requires adherence to Rule 35.1 and the submission of this Affidavit.
                All court proceedings have been initiated after March 2010. I never saw her lawyer ever produce such a form nor anyone at the court house ask for one. It seems like a very good piece of documentation regardless.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                  It is easier in my honest opinion to get 50-50 full joint custody through agreement. The litigated path leads to conflict, which leads to anger, which leads to suffering. (Yoda)

                  If you are forced to have to litigate a 50-50 access schedule and joint custody... It will get ugly and fast. So, if you can get the agreement in a conference on CONSENT you are better off in the long run. Furthermore, you get a nice fat typed word "CONSENT" on your final order. Which on a material change in circumstance you can draw a negative inference against the fact that at one point the other party CONSENTED to the joint custodial order and 50-50 access. It makes any attempt for the other party on a material change in circumstance to disrupt the order.
                  So on CONSENT means with her in agreement. To get this at a settlement conference would sure be gold. However, she's asking for sole custody, has brought up supervised access, called the police about five times, and the list goes on and on.

                  I'm here because of the high conflict, I'm not able to get any agreement, or any response for that matter regarding access, decision making, school info, medical info and more, from my ex.

                  The litigated path sucks, but it's all I have right now. The sooner this matter goes to trial, or motion, the better.
                  Last edited by baldclub; 11-12-2012, 03:10 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                    At a Conference you can request that a technical order be made to either resolve the dispute at a motion or at trial. If the justice orders it to motion... request that it be pre-emptive on both parties.
                    Great, I'll submit a point in the settlement conference brief, form 17C, under number 14 where it asks whether there are any further procedural orders required in this case.

                    "I ask that a technical order be made to either resolve the dispute at a motion or a trial in case there is no consent at conference as a final order. If the Justice orders it to motion, I would request that form 35.1 (Affidavit in Support of Claim of Custody or Access) be pre-emptive on both parties"

                    Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                    Basically what this means is that both parties both have to file affidavits at the same time. Serve them on each other at the same time and then a clear set of Rules are set forward on when a response can be filed. Furthermore, you should request that "no further response be made after last filing".

                    You want to level the playing field with highly conflicted people. Also, to end the cycle of debate that often happens in written materials. You don't want to have to file like 10 responses prior to the motion hearing.

                    One affidavit... One response. Pre-emptive on both parties.
                    Perfect, I would appreciate that.

                    Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                    Staying isn't the best option for you and a peace bond as a result isn't that great either. (Hate to break it to you.) Hopefully the crown will really seriously consider the charges and case they have and drop them.

                    You want to press for the charges to be dropped or a finding of "not guilty" in that matter though.
                    I agree, I didn't go there for negotiation, I went to have the charges dropped. Those with more knowledge of criminal matters (the great lawyer who had advised me in the past, and her boss when I called up to get an opinion on the peace bond) were ecstatic about the peace bond. Also, twelve months after the initial bond, all charges are dropped and a request can be made to have everything removed from databases, as far as I understand.

                    Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                    Also, you have "Shaw v. Shaw" to rely upon possibly as well in your family law proceeding.
                    I have been wondering how to weave the words of Justices Pugsley and Pazaratz into my offer to settle. How to make an offer to settle without focusing on the conflict, to show I am committed to the children. How to make an offer to settle without giving wind of my arguments for the motion/trial to come, because it will come.

                    Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                    Don't request the justice to say "enough is enough". Let the judge draw the negative inference against the other party to the sheer volume of allegations being made that cannot be substantiated in any material way.
                    Exactly my plan. However, it seems a bit of a conflict to let the judge inference on his own while possibly providing the lead of previous case law, is it not?

                    Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                    Rely upon the jurisprudence (case law) for parallel parenting that has been posted to this site. In fact, you can reference it directly some how in your offer to settle that is even better.
                    Again, gold. But how? Hmmm.

                    Thanks Tayken for the perspective, sweet awesomeness.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I'm not all that up on Crim Law. But I think if your charge has been stayed, and you have signed a Peace Bond, the original charge has been dealt with and should not really matter anymore. A solution was found. Just don't break the conditions of the Bond - and they won't be able to revisit the original charge.

                      Stay of Proceedings

                      A Stay of Proceedings is the stoppage or suspension of the proceedings against the accused without a determination of the merits of the case. The case is stopped before an acquittal or conviction is entered, but since everyone is innocent until proven guilty the end result is that the accused person is innocent and is removed from jeopardy. A stay is typically entered because of procedural unfairness to the accused person. His or her rights were violated in some fashion that was severe enough to deny him or her the ability to have a fair trial. Examples of this are cases where the delay in trying the case is so great that the right to a trial within a reasonable time has been denied. Denial of the right to counsel, misconduct or abuse of process, the loss or unavailability of evidence, or some combination thereof might also result in a stay of proceedings. With regard to criminal proceedings a stay of proceedings is a win for the defence.
                      Last edited by wretchedotis; 11-12-2012, 05:28 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                        Staying isn't the best option for you and a peace bond as a result isn't that great either. (Hate to break it to you.) Hopefully the crown will really seriously consider the charges and case they have and drop them.
                        Originally posted by wretchedotis View Post
                        I'm not all that up on Crim Law. But I think if your charge has been stayed, and you have signed a Peace Bond, the original charge has been dealt with and should not really matter anymore. A solution was found. Just don't break the conditions of the Bond - and they won't be able to revisit the original charge.
                        Remedies Pursuant to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (ss. 24 and 52) Toronto Criminal Lawyers Blog

                        According to s. 24(1), “Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances”. This provision gives the judge a lot of discretion in deciding what remedy to use. However, for an individual facing criminal charges the most advantageous remedy ordered under s. 24(1) is a “stay in proceedings”. The s. 24(1) “stay” remedy effectively puts an end to the trial against the defendant. Although, technically the prosecution may be reinstituted within a one year period, generally speaking, it rarely is. The Crown would only reinstate the proceedings if the police found new and extremely compelling evidence against the accused. Otherwise, a stay effectively ends the trial.

                        Though the accused is not technically acquitted, the Supreme Court of Canada stated in R. v. C.I.P. that a stay of proceeding is “for all intents and purposes, an acquittal”. A “stay of proceedings” does not constitute a criminal record and is viewed by defence lawyers as a successful ending to the prosecution.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I was reading the comments about Shaw vs Shaw and like Baldclub I face the same BS assault charge. I am being helped in the crimminal with the final semester student lawyer from the queen's legal aid here and I did print and show him the info, explained the principle in family law and that I am here because my ex went nuts on me - not the other way around. Having him admit to evidence this case law and drive home the point of shear advantage in the family aspect alone - would that actually benefit the criminal defense? His intitial thought was no as it did not directly apply to the event being charged, although he has not communicated back - he was to present the idea to the two senior criminal lawyers that oversee the clinic. I gave it to the family lawyer as well although it has not come up in the courtroom or her avidavits... Ok, except she is more scared of me with each new sumbission - now requesting that I never be allowed back in my house as of yesterday at the SS motion, even with police escort!

                          But as far as the solid question, the criminal end of things, he first thought was that the Shaw case really does not help defend against what I am there for. How would either be argued to really have the effect desired - the truth to false DV charge motivation?

                          Not related to this thread, for those who have helped re my DV charge;
                          The crown dropped the initial case last month I was told, now are proceeding with a second avenue they felt they could convict - coming this January!. Although the student did say the crown dropped the "altercation" and is now only proceeding with the white plasic grocerie bag (full of bird poop I would find out!) as it was a much more ambiguous issue to defend. Touching the bag in her hand is assault even though it was a defensive move on my part as she began to swing it to my head - my hand was there, she put it right into my hand and I obviously closed my hand on the very corner... she then violently pulled it away and th ebag broke - bird poop all over me, my head, the stairs.... I was told they felt the incedent that perceeded the bag was in my work shop when she did manage to get me off balance (not hard to do with my legs) but there was no evidence to continue. The white plastic grocerie bag broke - hence their evidence??

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by ddol1 View Post
                            I was reading the comments about Shaw vs Shaw and like Baldclub I face the same BS assault charge. I am being helped in the crimminal with the final semester student lawyer from the queen's legal aid here and I did print and show him the info, explained the principle in family law and that I am here because my ex went nuts on me - not the other way around. Having him admit to evidence this case law and drive home the point of shear advantage in the family aspect alone - would that actually benefit the criminal defense? His intitial thought was no as it did not directly apply to the event being charged, although he has not communicated back - he was to present the idea to the two senior criminal lawyers that oversee the clinic. I gave it to the family lawyer as well although it has not come up in the courtroom or her avidavits... Ok, except she is more scared of me with each new sumbission - now requesting that I never be allowed back in my house as of yesterday at the SS motion, even with police escort!

                            But as far as the solid question, the criminal end of things, he first thought was that the Shaw case really does not help defend against what I am there for. How would either be argued to really have the effect desired - the truth to false DV charge motivation?

                            Not related to this thread, for those who have helped re my DV charge;
                            The crown dropped the initial case last month I was told, now are proceeding with a second avenue they felt they could convict - coming this January!. Although the student did say the crown dropped the "altercation" and is now only proceeding with the white plasic grocerie bag (full of bird poop I would find out!) as it was a much more ambiguous issue to defend. Touching the bag in her hand is assault even though it was a defensive move on my part as she began to swing it to my head - my hand was there, she put it right into my hand and I obviously closed my hand on the very corner... she then violently pulled it away and th ebag broke - bird poop all over me, my head, the stairs.... I was told they felt the incedent that perceeded the bag was in my work shop when she did manage to get me off balance (not hard to do with my legs) but there was no evidence to continue. The white plastic grocerie bag broke - hence their evidence??
                            Hi ddol1,

                            I don't think the Shaw vs. Shaw case will have any bearing on your criminal trial. You can refer to that case later in family court when you relate your specific high conflict situation to evidence of her behaviour.

                            What will be asked of you is exactly what happened that one specific time, how it happened, what you did and what she did. They typically don't care about what happened hours before or hours later, just during the alleged altercation you speak about.

                            Have you seen any witness video testimony yet? Police reports and any witness statements or other evidence?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Have you seen any witness video testimony yet? Police reports and any witness statements or other evidence?
                              For me I believe it is simple, a plice report written by a constable with an agenda of screww me over, stating things I did not say or do. The the witness statements he took on scene for each family member - again I would learn the by the answers that the officer asked leading questions, all NOT RELATED TO THE EVENT - something I am told an officer is not allowed to do. It is supposed to be an objective investigation that only surrounded the actual event (no I think my dad could hurt her answers - of course I could hurt her, and she I - anybody can stab another.... but that is the witness statement that in a way hurts the most but as my family lawyer stated, they need to put on record how poisoned the attmoshphere had been for such a long time - this is what is being expressed.

                              Finally there will be my medical doctor whi will make an avidavit as to the state of my medical issues, all which take away form her as I was the one trying to get a way from her. The student lawyer also pointed out for the first time, that my ex did not only go down once to make an altercation with me but twice - something that goes against her I am scared story - and shows that she was trying to bait me - when I did not fall for that is when she really went nuts and the rest is history!!!

                              What am I worried about today, my ex has evolved into a wonderfully skilled liar (who truly believes her versions to be all truthful as she builds her guilt defense for her personal needs; second, my state of health put me at great disadvantage then and following the arrest, stopping 4 different meds that are not to be stopped suddenly - call it purposefully withholding my medication for over 24 hours did wonders for my event sequencing - I have all the bits and pieces, just not the big picture on some points.

                              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