Reality: Gamesmanship in Custody and Access Disptues

[Tayken]

Hi All,

Lambert v Peachman, 2016 ONSC 7443 (CanLII)
Date: 2016-12-01
Docket: 59/14
Citation: Lambert v Peachman, 2016 ONSC 7443 (CanLII), http://canlii.ca/t/gvvp9

I have often used the Honourable Mr. Justice Pazaratz's comments about "truisms" in family law but, after reading this fiasco created by the Applicant mother am seriously reconsidering calling it what this justice calls it:

Gamesmanship

I am totally 100% disgusted by the applicant mother's "gamemanship" in this matter and totally impressed with the respondent father's ability to deal with the machine gun fire of nonsense. So was the justice I note:

[29] The allegations raised by Elizabeth at trial were serious and troubling. Eric met the allegations without rancour and sought to enforce the provisions of the Memorandum with necessary amendments.

Despite the nonsense and the elaborately crafted "journal" the mother presented regarding the "domestic violence" she "experienced". The judge had "this" to "say":

Note: When reading this one note how often the judge uses "" to show judgement on the applicant mother's false allegations of "domestic violence".

[48] Having thoroughly reviewed the evidence, including the notes and letters exchanged between the parties and the internal records produced, I find that each example cited by Elizabeth does not evidence that Eric acted contrary to Matthew’s best interests. Instead, I find that it was Elizabeth whose conduct was contrary to Matthew’s best interests through her persistent and active resistance to include Eric as a co-parent equally involved in the care and welfare of Matthew.

Backing up a bit... I know a lot of posters recommend creating a journal. But, this is a PRIME EXAMPLE of what NOT to do. The judge systematically rips apart the applicant mother's journal in great detail and exposes the applicant mother's "gamemanship" attempt to "oath help".

[37] Having now read all of Elizabeth’s journal entries, I give very little weight to the contents. The journal entries are obviously prepared in contemplation of litigation and constitute a form of oath helping. The journal entries record Elizabeth’s view of the events that transpired between the parties but offer no real independent evidence that would assist in the determination of the issues.

The Applicant Mother's conduct in this case is deplorable. I usually don't say things like this but, it is horrible.

Conduct like this in para 38.c.:

It is noteworthy that Eric objected to Ms. Rossetti’s appointment as Matthew’s counsellor – even though he had no knowledge that Ms. Rossetti was also Elizabeth’s counsellor. Nevertheless, Eric’s perception that there was bias in Matthew’s counselling process was correct as was Eric’s belief that Mr. Foeller was biased. To this end, Eric’s perception and belief that Ms. Rossetti and Mr. Foeller were biased does not (as suggested by Elizabeth) constitute conduct contrary to Matthew’s best interests; rather, it indicates attention to detail and an unwillingness to be bullied where Matthew’s best interests were concerned.

Amazingly the Respondent Father had no idea of the collusion going on but, was smart enough to know something was wrong and did not allow himself to be bullied. The wording from the judge is key here.

It even gets stronger in response to the Applicant Mothers own "abusive" behaviour in the court:

[49] Further, I find that Eric’s refusal to accept the “professional” opinions of the KHCAS Family Support Worker and his refusal to accept Ms. Rossetti as the counsellor appointed for Matthew – to be representative of vigilant parenting and, ultimately, of Matthew’s best interests.

I commend this Respondent Father on his focus. So does the judge!

How you present yourself in court does indeed matter. The Respondent Father is a model citizen of court room conduct:

[50] During Elizabeth’s testimony and while giving evidence himself, Eric was composed and soft spoken. Despite the seriousness of Elizabeth’s allegations, Eric did not speak disparagingly about Elizabeth. Instead, he maintained that she was a good mother and a good person.

Considering the crap the mother was flinging at an unfathonable rate at the Respondent Father to get this kind of statement from a judge is telling.

And the journal comes back to haunt the Applicant Mother:

[64] During her testimony Elizabeth claimed to have no idea how the KHCAS became involved. However, based on the KHCAS records and Elizabeth’s journal entries, it is very clear that Elizabeth contacted KHCAS to request their involvement.

Collusion between the Applicant Mother and the CAS worker?!?!

[96] Mr. Foeller did attend at the trial of the matter to provide evidence in response to Elizabeth’s subpoena. It was clear from the testimony of Elizabeth and Mr. Foeller that they admire each other and have established a close bond that might be described as friendship. Mr. Foeller brought his notes to the trial – they had not been disclosed previously. A copy of the notes was provided to counsel and the court.

Please fire Mr. Foeller NOW CAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

a. Private emails and text messages: 30 private emails and texts between Mr. Foeller and Elizabeth; and 0 between Mr. Foeller and Eric;

End Mr. Foeller's career now please CAS!!!!!!!!

[98] Mr. Foeller clearly did not like Eric. In fact, at one point in his testimony Mr. Foeller described Eric as “terrible”. Mr. Foeller’s opinion of Eric seemed to be based primarily on Elizabeth’s interviews and disclosure as well as a belief that Eric was more concerned with litigation than his children’s health.

Personally outraged. I rarely get this way when reading case law but, this is just disgusting conduct by a "professional" child protection worker!

The judge then concludes:

[102] Elizabeth’s allegations of abuse and domestic violence were simply not supported by any independent evidence. Further, any documents or reports outlining Matthew’s recollection of domestic violence or abusive behaviour were based on information reported by Elizabeth.

As is becoming more common false allegations are being torn apart by judges. They are not only dangerous to the children involved by society as a whole. Anyone who conducts themselves as this Applicant Mother should be strung up by the women's movement as evidence of how people are getting hurt by their conduct.

This reads like a Suicidal Tendencies song... Institutionalized. My heart goes out to the child stuck in this matter. To be admitted like he has by his mother for no good reason is horrible. All he probably wanted was a pepsi... Just one pepsi and she (the Applicant Mother) wouldn't give it to him!

Again the judge addresses the Applicant Mother's false allegations:

[137] Despite the allegations raised by Elizabeth, I find that there is no evidence of any physical or emotional punishment or abuse by Eric against the child. Though Elizabeth indicated that Eric physically and emotionally abused her, she did not provide any corroborative evidence of such abuse. With respect to the physical abuse, the only incident recounted was alleged to have occurred prior to their marriage. However, I did not believe her testimony in this regard. With respect to emotional abuse, Elizabeth referred to three incidents of abuse which I have discussed in detail above. Despite Elizabeth’s testimony, I do not find that only Eric participated in use of abusive language and yelling. Both parties participated and both equally share the burden of their actions. As for the two further alleged incidents of emotional abuse, I do not accept them as being demonstrative of emotional abuse. Further, although not raised by Eric, the evidence established that Elizabeth began dating another man while residing at the home, told her children of her new boyfriend, and advised them to keep the secret from Eric. These activities could be described as evidencing emotional abuse. ...

Note to those who will complain about the final order:

The judge ordered what was asked by the Respondent Father... The continuation of the joint custody and equal access. The judge devistates the Applicant Mother's false allegations with precision but, makes a very well thought out and detailed order. I suspect that this matter will be back again.

I was horrified to see who the Applicant Mother's lawyer was... I thought more of the lawyer prior to seeing this nonsense. I wonder if he will write a CanLII connects article about this one?!?! Generally, he always posts new ones after my postings.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[Links17]

Wow..... conspiracy central. So she was banging counsellor.... what happened to bros before hoes? What trash she is.... she probably doesn't give a crap though, it's just a bit less money before a new moron starts paying for her.

[ifonlyihadknown]

So were there any negative consequences for the mother? If not, then it's a "nothing ventures, nothing gained" situation where she has nothing to loose and everything to gain.

[arabian]

I've never heard of a child admitted to hospital for stress before....

[m-chan68]

Did I read correctly? Seventeen days of trial?!!! Really?!!! I don't want to imagine the costs involved.

[Tayken]

Originally Posted by m-chan68

Did I read correctly? Seventeen days of trial?!!! Really?!!! I don't want to imagine the costs involved.

I am anxiously awaiting the costs on this one. If they don't get posted I am going to pull them and post them. I suspect the judge is going to use the costs award to put a very strong message across to the Applicant Mother in this one.

[SteelCityDad]

Good read, will have to pull some out for my final order.

Would like to see how the costs play out in this one.

[Tayken]

Originally Posted by SteelCityDad

Good read, will have to pull some out for my final order.

Would like to see how the costs play out in this one.

I hope the Judge hands the Applicant Mother a costs award (against her) that makes her really ponder what she is doing. This case is absolute NONSENSE.