Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The "Process"

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

  • When OCL did her collaterals, the caretaker who lives in QC was one. Collaterals need to provide their names, addresses, etc. You're right. OCL knows Ex is in QC. So she called her in QC .. told us ex lives in close proximity. . .was that an oopsy?

    Ex has a job n QC I bet . for sure. It only makes sense. Caretaker .. in close proximity .. material change in circumstance stuff to live in QC.

    OCl has already decided custody.
    Last edited by LovingFather32; 09-28-2014, 10:30 PM.

    Comment


    • If OCL is so concerned about boundaries and children why not call my collateral (owner of preschool) where I looked over preschoolers daily? Took her own son to camp, did one-on-one therapy. Ive worked with children my whole life. Why not speak with this collateral? A professional. A preschool owner. Somebody who witnessed me among young children daily. You would think she would have been spoken to.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by stripes View Post

        You're not getting unconditional approval, you're getting critical feedback on the extensive material that you post. Critical feedback isn't always warm and supportive, but it can be useful. And you have the power to decide whether to take the feedback seriously or to dismiss it because you feel picked on.
        Ding ding ding! Cheerleading moment. Constructive criticism is a good thing and will help.

        Yes this is a forum. A very public forum. There are only a few divorce forums in Canada. Keep in mind this thread and your posts could find their way into court. It would not be the first time ODF posts have made an appearance in family court.

        Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
        Now she has to defend her screw up until her face turns red.
        This does not sound reasonable. It sounds somewhat vindictive.
        Yes, I have read and reviewed what happened with OCL. Tread cautiously with comments like the above. If those find their way in court, it would not bode positively or place you in a good light.

        I don't post often, but I do try to help folks - that includes you. I will not be posting in this thread again.

        I hope it all goes well.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
          If OCL is so concerned about boundaries and children why not call my collateral (owner of preschool) where I looked over preschoolers daily? Took her own son to camp, did one-on-one therapy. Ive worked with children my whole life. Why not speak with this collateral? A professional. A preschool owner. Somebody who witnessed me among young children daily. You would think she would have been spoken to.
          See? This is a part of what I was trying to say.

          You have asked this over and over on this forum, even going as far as talking about videos with other people's children in them.

          It doesn't prove anything. It does not discredit the OCL. All it does is send you on a wild goose chase and distract you from the real issues. Stop trying to blame everyone and become solution focused.

          EDITED to ADD: I have given you my opinion on why OCL did not contact them in a previous post. I am an Early Childhood Educator like the "professional" you speak of above. I also have a diploma in Social Service Work. I taught preschool for Family and Children's Services in Niagara to "at risk" children. (CAS in other parts of the province.) Sorry you find my "opinions" so invalid.

          BTW, anyone can own a preschool. No education required. The education is required to teach and work with children.
          Last edited by SadAndTired; 09-28-2014, 10:58 PM. Reason: See above addition.

          Comment


          • It's clear like non disclosure.... where Goldilocks is living is a closely guarded secret. But badly kept

            The OCL saying she only wanted to interview people around the child currently is telling. Those people were in Quebec.

            One month prior to you the LAO scumbag lawyer had OCL working on this.

            She went over everything the LAO scumbag lawyer had....and had her conclusion

            She wasn't interested in your collateral's...unless it was a police report.

            Her notes (will be a fraud) but useful.

            OCL shrink is a liar so your going to have to dig for Quebec welfare financials through disclosure requests.

            There is always deniability....OCL shrink knows the EX can move back to your city quickly. But not under threat forever, sooner or later Goldilocks has to get "settled" for status quo

            Status quo has to start sometime....but obviously won't in your town.

            When though is the question.

            LAO scumbag lawyer can't do it. Goldilocks can't

            So the OCL will....the only one that is delusional enough to do it.

            That's the Oct summary

            So preparing for it is best....I said the OCL will defend her stupid call to the death. Dumb people do that.

            Don't back off, it's just one of many ploys, OCL is a dummy but not stupid enough to NOT know (she's fired again) she may as well go all in.

            Never know a bored Judge may just believe OCL....so go for it will be OCL thinking

            Like I've always said...your lucky you've never had any rights since this matter started.

            The three amigo's are trying to make sure you never have rights

            But you do have rights, sadly for the three amigo's and the haters here
            Last edited by MrToronto; 09-28-2014, 10:55 PM.

            Comment


            • That's right Mr. T.

              She's going all in but I find it to be quite a gamble. My lawyer and I are preparing quite a compelling list of rebuttals to her antics, findings and false accusations that even CAS have already disproved.

              I still think she's making a mistake refusing to talk to collaterals who have witnessed me around children daily.

              Comment


              • Has to be short and sweet for Motion on OCL

                OP will bring crybaby stuff from OCL.....because OCL can't be there.

                But OCL will want to be there in spirit.

                She'll be recalled for Trial

                other than that for a Motion .....the main thing is CAS report...and a few points on "what a dummy she was"

                No Report. was done.

                It's jurisdiction (forgone conclusion? or three amigo's still pretending). Or mobility restriction...no access as per consent order....non disclosure.

                REMEMBER

                Just by having a clean criminal check and clean drug/alcohol tests...is all you need.

                Everything else is a JOKE. to defend against.

                You've seen a CC judge exasperated looking for even a police report!!!

                In this case....ALL police reports are made not at a 911 call to your house....but when Goldilocks sort of felt like making one.

                How the hell a Judge will view August 2013 till Feb 2014 transcripts. with non disclosure..he won't ...into the toilet.

                Some people here are challenging you and are a good test for you...they can make something out of nothing and drone on and on as if they have a real issue.....I ignore the non productive....but you need the training
                Last edited by MrToronto; 09-28-2014, 11:23 PM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by arabian View Post
                  I don't do this often but I am signing off. I can't take the idocracy here tonight.

                  No logic. No reasoning. No facts.

                  I hope Mr. T. posts come back soon.

                  Agreed Arabian! These smug, smarmy little posts that parse and twist don't add anything for me either. It's childish nonsense.

                  Comment


                  • Mr. T. Clean police record, annual vulnerable sector checks, no history of anything domestic in all 8 years with ex, work with kids, No CAS . and when OCL called them they disproved her. Ex's police report that says nothing criminal AND no concerns for custody/access for with party.

                    Being tested by the retired shelter workers who care more about ther own subjectivities than the facts of the case .. yea .. my iggy list got some members today. I thank them for the learning experience.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by arabian View Post
                      I wonder if WorkingDad had the same sort of nightmare on this forum when he was in the throws of his litigation with his ex?

                      Unbelievable really.
                      Yes. Yes he did. But, knowing him personally (in real life) he is very different and his understanding of law and relevance are quite different. I wouldn't compare him to the OP. Two VERY different people.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
                        It's a little bit unsettling that Im being grilled here tonight. Ahh well.
                        Just wait till you are cross examined at a trial. The stress of a public message form of crazy nutjobs (including myself) is a cakewalk in comparison. Being cross examined in real time viva voce is not easy. Not easy at all. A good barrister can run circles around litigants who are too detailed with responses and pick them apart.

                        I hope before you go on the stand that your lawyer does a few mock cross examinations with you. If the lawyer hasn't mentioned it ask them. Most good barristers will put their clients through the ringer and help them understand how to properly answer questions on the stand.

                        Comment


                        • "Yes. Yes he did. But, knowing him personally (in real life) he is very different and his understanding of law and relevance are quite different. I wouldn't compare him to the OP. Two VERY different people."

                          Since you don't know LF32 personally (in real life), you can't say for certain that they are as different as you think.

                          I would also respectfully point out that arabian was more likely identifying the similarities between the situations, as opposed to the people that WorkingDad and LF32 are.

                          Regardless of who they are, or how they are handling their respective cases, arabian is implying that the kind of harassment that both of them has received is quite ridiculous and completely unwarranted, and I agree. Some of the posters aren't offering advice as much as they are implying that LF32 is being dishonest, and that does not help the conversation. At some point, you have to accept certain things at face value, especially if they have consistently been conveyed for almost eight months.

                          I hope that you would agree that kind of behavior, including taunts about the lengths of the threads, does little to actually help someone who is obviously going through a tough time.

                          Comment


                          • A tough time indeed. My life is very difficult at the moment. I'm not here to be patted on the back. But at the same time I don't appreciate being pounded in to the ground. I would like to think S&T, Stripes and OhMy are simply training me for a trial. But we all know this isn't true.

                            But .. I do agree with Tayken and Mr. T that I should use their attacks and disbeliefs to my advantage. They can take a sentence about rainbows and turn me in to Ted Bundy for 6 pages. If I edit a post Im a paranoid schizophrenic who is ultra impulsive. It's quite preposterous. Laughable really.

                            Why do I even respond? This is my weakness that I have to work on. Ignore it. So again, I do thank them for a learning experience because in the end they are in fact helping me. They've tried to get me to put down shelters, women and attack back for 7 months. They cant get a negative response.

                            I just state the facts. Ex played the system .. I concentrate less on how much the system let her.
                            Last edited by LovingFather32; 09-29-2014, 08:56 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Straittohell View Post
                              "Yes. Yes he did. But, knowing him personally (in real life) he is very different and his understanding of law and relevance are quite different. I wouldn't compare him to the OP. Two VERY different people."

                              Since you don't know LF32 personally (in real life), you can't say for certain that they are as different as you think.
                              Well, considering the person in question has told me in person that he isn't interested in contributing to this thread and that the poster in question should seek out better advice and listen to more rational people... I guess we can agree to disagree.

                              Good Luck!
                              Tayken

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
                                But .. I do agree with Tayken and Mr. T that I should use their attacks and disbeliefs to my advantage.
                                Consider this forum as litigation proofing opportunity. Don't look at the community as a "support forum" but, a place to grind out and test your theory of the case. Use it to refine your argument and argument and you will do much better.

                                Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
                                I concentrate less on how much the system let her.
                                Do not use allow yourself or anyone else try to convince you to use your case to address the systemic issues in family law. This will backfire on you significantly. One poster, who's name we do not speak, a few years ago failed to heed the warnings and his case went boom really bad.

                                Although this poster thought they were being resourceful on how they were presenting their argument and trying to gain support on this forum... Ultimately, when the case law was posted... It was incredibly sad to see how harmful what happened.

                                It all starts here: CanLII - 2011 ONSC 7596 (CanLII)

                                (Click headnotes to see the other case law related to this file... There is also a failed appeal...)

                                Good Luck!
                                Tayken

                                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