Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

4.5 hours of examination on discovery...

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

  • 4.5 hours of examination on discovery...

    Hello All

    So we finally manage to do questioning today. In total 4.5 hours.
    Transcript will be probbaly 200-400 pages (hard to say)

    All probably 90% of answers
    I do not remember.
    I do not know...

    Summary basically she do not have computer, phone, any cameras, internet for at least 6 month and pictures what she made she made with friend's camera but will not tell nothing about camera or friend because he want nothing to do with court.

    Google deleted her gmail account after she called them. She setup her internet by herself because bell tech could not do it but she do not know how to forward email because she do not computer man. And all her evidences that I hack her wireless, her gmail, her kijiji, and fabricate her IP address (so kijiji post will show her IP) which I find out from emails she sent me but she can not say which emails and when.

    And I can do all of this because I am computer programmer and have all skills for that in my job description....

    How about that??????????????????????

    And I have to pay for this circus which probably will be $800.

    Oh and just forgot she do not remember anything from 2 days when she were served and came back to court and drop dead in court. She can not be responsible for anything what she said in court that day and her med rec show that what she submitted to court. But when I told her that those record from psychic dept said your judgement was intact and thinking logical she said she lied in ER to get out from there as fast as possible... How about that?
    Last edited by WorkingDAD; 08-24-2012, 09:13 PM.

  • #2
    I think it is worth remembering to point out later that she admits she will lie to get out a fast as possible.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hey, I'll chip in $100.00, email transfer.

      You are breaking new ground with the FLA, you need to keep going.

      ETA: I don't always agree with your thought process, but I do agree with your objective.
      Last edited by mcdreamy; 08-24-2012, 09:46 PM.
      Start a discussion, not a fire. Post with kindness.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by mcdreamy View Post
        Hey, I'll chip in $100.00, email transfer.

        You are breaking new ground with the FLA, you need to keep going.

        ETA: I don't always agree with your thought process, but I do agree with your objective.
        every donor of 100$ or more will have scanned pdf?
        and every donor of 500 will have audio recording in addition ?

        is that what you meant ?

        Comment


        • #5
          Classic answers of someone that's full of it: "I don't know" and "I don't remember."

          Verrry convenient. And so transparent.

          Comment


          • #6
            Im with hadenough on this one-it is pretty transparent .As Tayken says "lies have short legs and will only get you so far".Ok the quote may not be perfect but you get my drift.She is painting a picture of herself right now that shows that she will lie to get what she wants, and she even said so! This can only be to your advantage.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by WorkingDAD View Post
              Hello All

              So we finally manage to do questioning today. In total 4.5 hours.
              Transcript will be probbaly 200-400 pages (hard to say)

              All probably 90% of answers
              I do not remember.
              I do not know...
              Originally posted by Plausible Definition
              plau·si·ble/ˈplôzəbəl/
              Adjective:
              (of an argument or statement) Seeming reasonable or probable.
              (of a person) Skilled at producing persuasive arguments, esp. ones intended to deceive.
              What I don't think the person providing disclosure understood was:

              Plausible deniability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

              Plausible deniability is also a legal concept. It refers to lack of evidence proving an allegation. Standards of proof vary in civil and criminal cases. In civil cases, the standard of proof is "preponderance of the evidence" whereas in a criminal matter, the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt." If an opponent lacks incontrovertible proof (evidence) of their allegation, one can "plausibly deny" the allegation even though it may be true.

              Arguably, the key concept of plausible deniability is plausibility. It is fairly easy for a government official to issue a blanket denial of an action, and it is possible to destroy or cover up evidence after the fact, and this might be sufficient to avoid a criminal prosecution, for instance. However, the public (sic or a JUDGE) might well disbelieve the denial, particularly if there is strong circumstantial evidence, or if the action is believed to be so unlikely that the only possible explanation is that the denial is false.
              Originally posted by WorkingDAD View Post
              Summary basically she do not have computer, phone, any cameras, internet for at least 6 month and pictures what she made she made with friend's camera but will not tell nothing about camera or friend because he want nothing to do with court.
              See above quote in RED.

              Originally posted by WorkingDAD View Post
              Google deleted her gmail account after she called them. She setup her internet by herself because bell tech could not do it but she do not know how to forward email because she do not computer man. And all her evidences that I hack her wireless, her gmail, her kijiji, and fabricate her IP address (so kijiji post will show her IP) which I find out from emails she sent me but she can not say which emails and when.
              See above quote in RED.

              Originally posted by WorkingDAD View Post
              And I can do all of this because I am computer programmer and have all skills for that in my job description....

              How about that??????????????????????
              See above quote in RED.

              Originally posted by WorkingDAD View Post
              Oh and just forgot she do not remember anything from 2 days when she were served and came back to court and drop dead in court. She can not be responsible for anything what she said in court that day and her med rec show that what she submitted to court. But when I told her that those record from psychic dept said your judgement was intact and thinking logical she said she lied in ER to get out from there as fast as possible... How about that?
              In civil court the burden of proof is based on the balance of probabilities. If the person in question is opting to put their mental state in question they should really think twice before doing it.

              For insanity a defendant must not know at the time that what they were doing was wrong. In a matter like this I am of the strong opinion that the court should order a forensic psychologist for further evaluation and for an assessment to make the determination unless, there is so much evidence prima facia against the party denying everything. (Per Mess' comment and observation.)

              Searching to see if anyone in a Family Law matter has ever claimed mental health (temporary insanity) as a defence on CanLII.

              Good Luck!
              Tayken

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by murphyslaw View Post
                Im with hadenough on this one-it is pretty transparent .As Tayken says "lies have short legs and will only get you so far".Ok the quote may not be perfect but you get my drift.She is painting a picture of herself right now that shows that she will lie to get what she wants, and she even said so! This can only be to your advantage.
                I agree 100% with both Hadenough and Murphyslaw on the matter:

                "Lies have short legs and will not carry you far."


                Oh what a tangled web we weave
                When first we practice to deceive.

                - Sir Walter Scott (Marmion, 1808)
                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marmion_(poem)

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think the real issue here, as I've stated many times in this forum, is that what are the consequences here? This is what's wrong with family court. Its not a gender issue..its an issue with litigants who abuse the court process like this. They blatantly lie under oath, they file useless motions, they block the other parent from seeing their children, they bring the children into divorce matters, they refuse financial disclosure, they don't pay costs even when they've been ordered to...they basically cause whatever havoc they can to the entire process and think they can get away with it...because oftentimes, they do!

                  There is a point at which the court gets sick and tired of litigants like this and starts penalizing them for their behavior but the tipping point is wayyyy to high, in my opinion.

                  It will be very interesting to see what happens here.

                  Funny enough...my stbx's lawyer (high conflict attorney) answered around 50% of the questions for my stbx during one of the questioning sessions and later it was found out that since my ex had deceived his lawyer, the lawyer ended up basically lying for his client under oath. The judge has already chastised him in court for answering for his client in refusing to provide a paystub but it will be interesting to see what happens in our upcoming motions.

                  What is the real penality for lying under oath?

                  Guess you'll be figuring out the answer to that question too Workingdad. Hang in there.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                    I think the real issue here, as I've stated many times in this forum, is that what are the consequences here? This is what's wrong with family court. Its not a gender issue..its an issue with litigants who abuse the court process like this. They blatantly lie under oath, they file useless motions, they block the other parent from seeing their children, they bring the children into divorce matters, they refuse financial disclosure, they don't pay costs even when they've been ordered to...they basically cause whatever havoc they can to the entire process and think they can get away with it...because oftentimes, they do!

                    There is a point at which the court gets sick and tired of litigants like this and starts penalizing them for their behavior but the tipping point is wayyyy to high, in my opinion.

                    It will be very interesting to see what happens here.

                    Funny enough...my stbx's lawyer (high conflict attorney) answered around 50% of the questions for my stbx during one of the questioning sessions and later it was found out that since my ex had deceived his lawyer, the lawyer ended up basically lying for his client under oath. The judge has already chastised him in court for answering for his client in refusing to provide a paystub but it will be interesting to see what happens in our upcoming motions.

                    What is the real penality for lying under oath?

                    Guess you'll be figuring out the answer to that question too Workingdad. Hang in there.
                    I agree with you 99%. As I said before liers and absent of repercussions is #1 problem in family court in Canada. I have a feeling that his Honour in our case is going to do something about that this time... and I have a lot to help him to do right thing and protect not only out little boy from destruction but whole system from total collapse...

                    I just hope I will be able to put it together this time as I am really tired and worn out. Good thing Costco has good price on pack of red bull...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                      I think the real issue here, as I've stated many times in this forum, is that what are the consequences here?
                      Going beyond the concept of "legal consequences" of perjury which, as you identify later in your posting is a major issues before the "Family Court" being "acceptable" one would question the other consequences?

                      1. Loss of income to parties that are continually drawn into unnecessary and irrelevant matters before the courts? (Loss time at work, loss of employment because their personal matters have impacted their professional responsibilities.)

                      2. Loss of time for those who need the court system to resolve "real" disputes and problems? (People who truly need the services of the court may not get them because time, energies and efforts are being spent on irrelivant, unnecessary and frivolous claims from litigants who have no evidence other than their own personal "belief" that they have been wronged some how and expect the court to "believe" them when no other professional they contacted prior did.)

                      For example:

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

                      3. What about the "bad advice" that people are given by the "professionals"/"friends"/"family" that a litigant runs to court with? (i.e. Bad advice that grandparents have rights etc...) Specifically the negative advocates that contribute to "beliefs" (unsubstantiated/false allegations) made by the litigant in sworn statements to the "truth":

                      http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...-access-11615/
                      http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...isputes-10638/

                      Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                      This is what's wrong with family court. Its not a gender issue..its an issue with litigants who abuse the court process like this. They blatantly lie under oath, they file useless motions, they block the other parent from seeing their children, they bring the children into divorce matters, they refuse financial disclosure, they don't pay costs even when they've been ordered to... they basically cause whatever havoc they can to the entire process and think they can get away with it...because oftentimes, they do!
                      Add to this laundry list, abduct children, file motions in the wrong jurisdiction, make false allegations of all sorts of things sighting nothing than "personal beliefs" that no other professional (Read:Police, CAS, et all...) have "believed".

                      The use of the term "abuse" may be very appropriate in matters such as these. The conduct of litigants who do this fits the clinical definitions of "psychological abuse" in my opinion. Just because they are using the legal system doesn't really make it any better... In fact, considering the points above... It makes what they have done "worse". They attempt to "justify" their irrational behaviours, allegations and "beliefs" and sell them as "facts" when they are not... They are false allegations.

                      False allegations of abuse are abuse!

                      Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                      There is a point at which the court gets sick and tired of litigants like this and starts penalizing them for their behavior but the tipping point is wayyyy to high, in my opinion.
                      I agree. Their needs to be a serious course correction on how and what can be presented as "facts" (evidence) before the court and there needs to be clear statements on how "beliefs" should be handled and what happens when something someone puts into an affidavit as a "belief" is based on factitious statements. Perjury is not found... Their conduct is white washed as a "mistake". It doesn't improve the system of family law and only exposes the significant need to integrate Family Law with the health care system.

                      People who lie need mental health help. They can be helped but, allowing them to leverage the court system is not *helping* them. It is only allowing their possible mental health issues to compound and go unchecked.

                      Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                      It will be very interesting to see what happens here.

                      Funny enough...my stbx's lawyer (high conflict attorney) answered around 50% of the questions for my stbx during one of the questioning sessions and later it was found out that since my ex had deceived his lawyer, the lawyer ended up basically lying for his client under oath. The judge has already chastised him in court for answering for his client in refusing to provide a paystub but it will be interesting to see what happens in our upcoming motions.
                      Because the judge often changes... The lawyer will try the same game and hope the new judge doesn't notice.

                      One family... One judge... In all "high conflict" disputes before the Family Court I say...

                      Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                      What is the real penality for lying under oath?
                      So far, nothing other than legal bills and possibly "winning" by grinding out the other parent with piles of lies.

                      Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                      Guess you'll be figuring out the answer to that question too Workingdad. Hang in there.
                      I can only hope.

                      I also forgot to mention the most important point of all this... How does this kind of conduct impact the most important people in all this... Children?
                      Last edited by Tayken; 08-27-2012, 03:02 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by WorkingDAD View Post
                        Good thing Costco has good price on pack of red bull...
                        I hear that stuff doesn't always give you wings these days!!

                        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