BC girls murdered on Christmas /custody dispute

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Stillbreathing

New member
I don’t know how to paste the article. Very sad. Two girls ages 4 and 6 found dead in a Victoria BC apartment with their father who had serious injuries.
 
Update.
Apparently the 43 year old father has been arrested and charged with the two little girls murders. Extremely sad. RIP little ones.

Divorce is horribly stressful and continues to be a risk factor in domestic homicide. Too bad nobody was close enough to the father to recognize his distress was crossing the line and get him the help he needed. He most likely had attempted suicide as well because he was admitted to hospital with undisclosed injuries.

When somebody is clinically depressed they begin to suffer from cognitive distortions. Often times sleep deprivation and self medicating with alcohol or drugs
are added into the mix which further clouds a person’s ability to think clearly.

I don’t know if this father was depressed or not . What I do know is that an acrimonious divorce is torturous for even the most sane person among us. For him or any parent to murder their children takes a person whose mind set and thinking is grotesquely distorted. The sad truth is that this does not happen overnight. An acrimonious divorce can last for years with stress added to stress added to more stress with no relief in sight. Until it mutates into either rage or despair.

In family court, if the healthier spouse raises concerns about the deteriorating mental health of the other it will be dismissed and not taken seriously.

Therefor it’s up to the rest of us to pay a bit closer attention to the people in our lives. Our friends, co-workers, the guy or gal who’s standing in line and gets frustrated with the clerk...if people are going through a divorce their whole world may be imploding. Sometimes the kindness of a stranger or the support and encouragement of a friend can be the first light of day for somebody.
 
it is appropriate for the Mother to make decisions on behalf of the children if the parties are unable to agree
Click to expand...

in simpler terms, mom get's sole custody.

In this case, the Father has had and will continue to have the children for less than 40 percent of the time over the course of a year. As a result, the Father shall continue to pay Basic Table Child Support of $1,214 per month to the Mother as set out in the Dorgan Order.
Click to expand...

in other words, dad will be marginalized as a parent and will have to pay a price for it. - and will miss out on child support benefits - all of which will go to mom.

[261] As a result, the Mother was substantially successful at trial, and is entitled to her costs.
Click to expand...

in other words, mom successfully marginalized dad as a parent, and dad will have to pay a price for that - on top of the price of being a marginalized parent.

Enough said. Merry Christmas, and a happy new year, mom - and the corrupt judge residing the matter:) I hope you are able to make some very well thought decisions for these children and hope you are able to put that child support money to good use. I am sure you will collect your costs as well.

With respect to the children, it is truly unfortunate. Everything happens for a reason however and perhaps they will be in a better place then the life they would have have had to live as result of the mother's (and the judges) actions.

In the best interests of the children, Canadian Family Law.
 
Last edited:
ensorcelled said:
This article is a really good overview of Family Law in BC in relation to this case.

Comment: Connecting the dots in family-violence cases
Click to expand...

Yes, let's give dad supervised access so he will commit suicide and kill the mother too. Counterproductive, don't you think ?

Do you think this would have happened had the courts granted joint custody and equal access?

Have a very close look at this mushmash - particularly the 6:30 PM drop off times - which is more than likely something mom wanted due to her controlling nature - if not obvious enough by wanting sole decision making power.

The Father’s parenting time is on a 14-day rotating schedule, commencing on June 1, 2017, as follows:

i) The Father will pick up the girls from School on Tuesdays and take them to School on Wednesday mornings;

ii) The Father will pick-up the girls from School on Thursdays, and return them to the Mother at 6:30 p.m.;

iii) On the first Friday, the Father’s parenting time will begin after School and continue until Sunday at 6:30 p.m.; and

iv) On the second Friday, the Father’s parenting time will begin after School and continue until Saturday at 6:30 p.m.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Cotton shared custody with her former common-law husband, Andrew Berry, Lees said. The pair had been estranged since 2013, she said.
Click to expand...

Nowhere in the case did I see anything about or close to "shared custody". Love how the Media starts off the article by making it sound like everything was fair and square.



CTV article is same non sense:

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/b-c-g...mas-were-subject-of-custody-dispute-1.3736186

During custody dispute, Cotton expressed many concerns about Berry’s parenting and told the court through her lawyer that he once threatened to “blow up the house.”
Click to expand...

Obvious BS to persuade judge to give mom sole custody and that sugar coated every other weekend mushmash screw job access to dad.

The judge awarded shared custody and spelled out who would have custody over the Christmas holiday period.
Click to expand...

The judge did not award shared custody - the judge awarded mom custody and to dad very limited access -and a crazy amount of child support.

Only had the courts given the parents shared custody... and a chance for both parents to be fully and equally involved... and a chance for the children to be normal children with a normal non-mom-dictated schedule ..only if ...
 
Last edited:
This is a man who hated his ex more than he loved his children. Add in some significant turmoil (losing his job, in the process of being evicted, his power being turned off) and likely depression, and I suspect he feared his children would be taken away from him. Then it became a classic case of "if I can't have them, no one can."

Family law cannot predict the future any more than criminal law can predict it. But society could be doing a much better of helping people feel able to ask for help and supporting them when they do.

Had this man felt able to reach out for help, perhaps asking for his CS to be reduced upon his job loss, or for help during his parenting time when his residence and power were being taken away, or for support when his mental health likely suffered it may have turned out differently. But he probably felt, not unjustified, that asking for such help would have led to an imputed income, or for his parenting time to be reduced or eliminated.

It's also all unknown cause and effect. Was he a marginalized parent because people involved with the case sensed the underlying instability in him that ultimately led him to commit these murders? Or did the instability develop after and because of his marginalization? You can't leap to either explanation and dismiss the other one.
 
Rioe said:
perhaps asking for his CS to be reduced upon his job loss
Click to expand...


You mean after he paid off the mom's presently owing legal costs ? Starting to sound like that other case in BC where the father comitted suicide after being ordered by a family law judge to pay child support in an amount significantly exceeding his monthly income ?

and yes, of course mom would fire back to impute income and reduce access, and father should ask for increased access and joint custody - and there we go again! Perhaps he will prevail 11 years later.

It's also all unknown cause and effect. Was he a marginalized parent because people involved with the case sensed the underlying instability in him that ultimately led him to commit these murders? Or did the instability develop after and because of his marginalization? You can't leap to either explanation and dismiss the other one.
Click to expand...

You have mentioned he was marginalized parent in both scenarios, so it was the marginalizing part.

I have posted this, and I will post it again:

Doctor Frank Williams, director of the Family and Child Psychiatry Programs at Sinai Medical Centre in Los Angeles was referring in a recent address to the American Bar Association[1] when he stated: (as quoted by His Honour Provincial Judge Alan P. Ingram in his address of 4 March 1989 to the Canadian Bar Association of Ontario)



There is the myth in some mental health, legal and judicial thinking that joint custody can only be effectively undertaken by co-operative parents. To the contrary, joint custody provides one of the best methods of stimulating a degree of significant and meaningful co-operation in warring parents who would otherwise continue years of battling to the detriment of their children.





Our experience leads to the conviction that parental identity — if strengthened in both parents — can increase co-operation and that co-operation should not be a criteria for joint custody vs. sole custody schedules for children. During the ensuing years, after custodial orders are in place, children of parents who remain highly unco-operative suffer greatly, and suffer just as much in unilateral sole custody as in joint custody arrangements.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Child murderers do not deserve any sympathy IMO

Father is a monster... if one can't deal with their problems then that is one thing but to take the life of children... it is unspeakable.

Only error here was that the mother didn't receive sole custody with a restraining order against the father. A very big error.
 
Last edited:
trinton said:
Nowhere in the case did I see anything about or close to "shared custody". Love how the Media starts off the article by making it sound like everything was fair and square.



CTV article is same non sense:

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/b-c-g...mas-were-subject-of-custody-dispute-1.3736186



Obvious BS to persuade judge to give mom sole custody and that sugar coated every other weekend mushmash screw job access to dad.



The judge did not award shared custody - the judge awarded mom custody and to dad very limited access -and a crazy amount of child support.

Only had the courts given the parents shared custody... and a chance for both parents to be fully and equally involved... and a chance for the children to be normal children with a normal non-mom-dictated schedule ..only if ...
Click to expand...

A few corrections:

-Shared custody is defined as 35%, believe it or not. I know in Canada, the table amount is 40%, but the actual division of the children's time is 35%
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeand...dy-childrens-mental-health-divorce-separation

-The mom had some serious concerns that the judge was very insouciant about and now two kids are dead. You're seriously blaming the mother for this?!

It is not up to the mother, or the judge, or anyone to make sure this father's head is screwed on straight nor is it their job to placate his ego with 50-50. There are many other 'margnialized' groups in this world with much worse circumstances who are not killing young children on Christmas Day.
 
arabian said:
Child murderers do not deserve any sympathy IMO

Father is a monster... if one can't deal with their problems then that is one thing but to take the life of children... it is unspeakable.

Only error here was that the mother didn't receive sole custody with a restraining order against the father. A very big error.
Click to expand...

But...but...all mothers who don't want 50-50 are controlling! Vindictive! Manipulative! Marginalizing!

RIP to those poor babies :(
 
Nobody kills their kids and then attempts suicide who is in their right mind.

With crushing CS, loss of access, job loss, powerlessness and poverty and possible depression, no wonder his mind snapped.

While I never was in a place to consider anything remotely to physically hurting my kids, I do remember the absolute frustration and feelings of hopelessness as everyone around me was either taking from me or deciding for me what I was to do with the rest of my life. I woke up every morning and started to cry realizing what I had to face yet again that day.

It is a tragic thing have happen. I just think that unbelievable stress COULD be a factor. Too easy to write this off as just being the work of a monster.
 
arabian said:
Child murderers do not deserve any sympathy IMO

Father is a monster... if one can't deal with their problems then that is one thing but to take the life of children... it is unspeakable.

Only error here was that the mother didn't receive sole custody with a restraining order against the father. A very big error.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The father has my full sympathy. I don't blame him at all given his situation - and completely blame the mother and our family law legal system - and the judge (for not giving him 50/50). I would love to see more of this when father's are denied 50/50. I do feel bad for the children but am sure they are happier now then they would have been in given the mizerable situation the judge setup for their father. If their father is being painted and setup as a criminal having to pay a price- then he might as well be one.

Mother is a monster - a control freak - and a golddigger - wants sole custody and limit fathers access and have child returned at 6:30 PM and full guideline child support. If the father is to be a monster - then he is a monster that was created by the mother and the judge.

Mother did in fact get sole custody - I never understood this whole "the father can motion to reverse a decisions he doesn't agree with " non sense. What ....mother makes a decision for surgery for the child and the father has to file a motion to be heard few months later to put back the child's tonsils that were taken out months ago? Or to de-inject a needle that was injected months ago ? Give me a f**cking break -- mom HAD sole custody. Now she's got nothing and I'm laughing. Spit in her face.

Restraining order against the father - really? Come on now Arabian. I am not even surprised given your posting history re: women's shelter homes.

God bless this father for making some noise and pushing for family law reform - not to cut fathers out right off the bat based on false and merit-less allegations of abuse solely intended to cut the father out - but to start with 50/50 right off the bat.


Father's actions were spontaneous given the judge's order for mom to have sole custody, and dad very limited access, and to pay an arm, a leg, and his spine for child support.

False allegations of abuse are a norm in family law, and can't automatically assumed to be true just because the father did something really bad after the fact. To be frank, a lot of us dad's here had some sort of bizzare FALSE alllegation thrown at us - wasn't LF32 accused of sticking his finger up his child's anus by mom and OCL or something like that ?
 
Last edited:
Trinton,

Maybe dial that back a bit (or a lot)! I'm bitter too, but not completely over the edge.

The sad part is that most mothers who behave that way actually think they are in the right.

It is the law that allows people to be totally unreasonable. Because it is law, they think it is OK to be impossible.
 
piggybanktoex said:
Trinton,

Maybe dial that back a bit (or a lot)! I'm bitter too, but not completely over the edge.

The sad part is that most mothers who behave that way actually think they are in the right.

It is the law that allows people to be totally unreasonable. Because it is law, they think it is OK to be impossible.
Click to expand...

It is not law. Bur rather just biased and corrupt opinions and conduct by our judges (and the OCL)
 
Last edited:
"...Mother did in fact get sole custody - I never understood this whole "the father can motion to reverse a decisions he doesn't agree with " non sense. What ....mother makes a decision for surgery for the child and the father has to file a motion to be heard few months later to put back the child's tonsils that were taken out months ago? Or to de-inject a needle that was injected months ago ? Give me a f**cking break -- mom HAD sole custody. Now she's got nothing and I'm laughing. Spit in her face.

Restraining order against the father - really? Come on now Arabian. I am not even surprised given your posting history re: women's shelter homes...."

This is, indeed, a totally over-the-top post which seethes anger and pure hatred for women. If you can't control yourself then you should seek some form of intense counselling/therapy.

The bottom line is what happened to those children is very, very sad.
 
arabian said:
Father is a monster... if one can't deal with their problems then that is one thing but to take the life of children... it is unspeakable.

Only error here was that the mother didn't receive sole custody with a restraining order against the father. A very big error.
Click to expand...


This is, indeed, a totally over-the-top post which seethes anger and pure hatred for men[/U]. If you can't control yourself then you should seek some form of intense counselling/therapy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top