Finally, unconditional forgiveness was obtained last Friday. It sure give a relief of stress for the past couple of months. Now I can say it's behind and I can concentrate more on my divorce case. It was a long week as I spend most of it in Court. Why? Because my STBX that I haven't spoke, seen and heard of for the past 7 months kept on calling the prosecutor stating she was scared and was still concerned about her safety and the children. Asking that if forgiveness was granted, the same old strict conditions should remain. Of course, her concerns were not related to safety... but to custody.
The prosecutor and my lawyer were not on the same line. I've respected my commitments and was at no fault and my STBX acknowledge to this (at least). The judge could not make a decision. Final say was always adjourned.
The last day, I had enough. I ask my lawyer to confess. I did and I succeeded! Prosecutor had no question at all after my testimonial of 5 minutes.
The judge ruled based on the mother's security and threats concerns;
- no other incidents
- no charge and mist conduct in the past
- mother spend a full day in front of father on mediation day
- mother let kids to father during summer
- no security concerns
- separation agreement refused by father after mediation
- access to kids denied by mother after SA refusal by father
- safety concerns arises suddenly
Judge view: "Father respected his commitments at no fault, he seek professional help to deal with the anger and emotions, father has been trying to settle but refuses to sign a 'biased' SA. Mother has no safety concerns and when the agreement is not reached... she cuts access and now has safety concerns."
"Although the charges against the father are severe , it is important to note that the lack of criminal record in the history of the father, the commitment is to be a decisive penalty that he will remember. The father persuaded the Court that such an incident should not occur. It is clear that the fears of the mother are a reflection of the agreement that has failed and that the dispute should be resolved in Family Court."
"For these reasons I say that the verdict is an absolute discharge."
Now it's time to start a new thread with the next motion coming next week and that criminal charge behind.
The prosecutor and my lawyer were not on the same line. I've respected my commitments and was at no fault and my STBX acknowledge to this (at least). The judge could not make a decision. Final say was always adjourned.
The last day, I had enough. I ask my lawyer to confess. I did and I succeeded! Prosecutor had no question at all after my testimonial of 5 minutes.
The judge ruled based on the mother's security and threats concerns;
- no other incidents
- no charge and mist conduct in the past
- mother spend a full day in front of father on mediation day
- mother let kids to father during summer
- no security concerns
- separation agreement refused by father after mediation
- access to kids denied by mother after SA refusal by father
- safety concerns arises suddenly
Judge view: "Father respected his commitments at no fault, he seek professional help to deal with the anger and emotions, father has been trying to settle but refuses to sign a 'biased' SA. Mother has no safety concerns and when the agreement is not reached... she cuts access and now has safety concerns."
"Although the charges against the father are severe , it is important to note that the lack of criminal record in the history of the father, the commitment is to be a decisive penalty that he will remember. The father persuaded the Court that such an incident should not occur. It is clear that the fears of the mother are a reflection of the agreement that has failed and that the dispute should be resolved in Family Court."
"For these reasons I say that the verdict is an absolute discharge."
Now it's time to start a new thread with the next motion coming next week and that criminal charge behind.
Comment