2010.06.28 - Kyron's Dad files for divorce and restraining order

[Calliope]

A defense attorney who requires this much moolah in advance must not have much faith in his client's story. He is in it for the long run and expects to spend a lot of time and money defending her. Doesn't look good for Terri.

Ya get what you pay for.

 

[Calliope]

I'm betting it came from her mother and father's house and retirement income.

IF that's the case, Kaine is just outta luck I guess.

 

[gwenabob]

Exactly. It's what I've thought since Terri hired Houze.


Here's the court document filed today. Don't know if it's been posted, but posting because I happen to have it open lol.

http://www.koinlocal6.com/media/lib...11-4f9e-a452-6749cfed4b00/Court_Documents.pdf

I'm not so sure. Oregon has a Son of Sam law of sorts. I don't see how Terri could benefit from her crime, if she is guilty. I think this deserves a thread of its own. How do Son of Sam laws work? Could she sell the story up front as long as she is not yet charged? What happens if she is found guilty later? Does she have to pay the money she made off the story to the victims?

 

[nas212913]

IMO, that's a low blow. I get they have to disclose this information due to the divorce, but asking that she be responsible for half of his fees is just twisting the knife (per the .pdf file posted up thread).
He hired an attorney. He chose which one he wanted to hire. If he chose one with a large fee, he should eat that cost. I'm sure there are many other attorneys in their area and surrounding areas that do not require such a large fee. But she should not be responsible for his decision on which attorney he chose to hire.

Also, if her parents gave her the 350k to hire the attorney, it's not a marital asset since, according to him, he vacated the home on the 26th (or was it 24th?) and promptly filed paperwork dissolving their marriage. How can that be fair?
Basically, what that means is that if a man (sorry, just using an example) filed for divorce, moved out, and the mother went an got a job at Burger King before the divorce was final, her income would be considered marital asset, and the man who left would be entitled to half. Correct?

If they are thinking that she sold Kyron and was given this money for him, and that's how she hired this attorney, then bank records would/could prove that.
The same applies for his story...if she sold it.
But this isn't a small amount of money. It's not like 5k and she could say she sold some jewelry or cashed in a stock. And 350k would raise flags for financial institutions. My bank holds my husband's paycheck for a week before they release it....and that's less then 1k.

Putting aside the fact that she's Terri M. Horman and she's the person who everyone is looking at, if this was some Jane Doe down the street, people would be feeling bad for her. Her daughter was taken, she was forced to move, now she has to disclose where her money came from, and he wants her to pay for half.
But I get it. She's at the center of this because of Kyron. And I hope to God she did sell him so he could come home. I'm just baffled.

 

[gitana1]

Kaine thinks this money is his? Talk about dishonesty--he would know if she had this money. I'm sure he has his suspicions on where the money came from (her parents/family?). This is nothing more than harassment, IMO.

Not necessarily. I have cases where the other party has hidden marital assets and/or suddenly wastes them, leaving the other party on the hook. For example, one case I have, the parties separated and they had an equity line of credit of $250,000.00. After separation, she used the whole 250k and refuses to disclose where the money went. These are valid questions.

With the mention of "considers it marital liability" I would bet he knows or suspects that she borrowed the money and is concerned that he'll be on the hook for it since they're not divorced yet. No way would I want to pay lawyers to defend my soon-to-be ex-wife against charges she tried to murder me. Not to mention the other matter.

He should have the right to check. Although a separated spouse would likely be able to get out of such liability by claiming they knew nothing about it and that the loan or whatever was made after separation.

Just read the court doc... paraphrasing here...

Respondent has indicated in a written statement to a third party that she paid her attorney 350k

Also, says Kaine wants half of this money for HIS attorney fees and that he can't afford to support himself and the kids??

Having trouble copying and pasting from the .pdf. Can someone do a screen shot of of page 6 and post here? TIA!

The law in Oregon re attorney's fees is similar yet different than ours in CA. They seem to lump a few of our statutes into one. http://oregondivorceblog.com/wordpr...-my-ex-will-have-to-pay-for-my-attorney-fees/

But, maybe I'm missing it, I see nothing about equity (fairness) or the needs of the parties coming in to play when awarding attorney's fees. Sorry to keep citing CA law, but since we are both in the 9th district, our laws tend to be very similar and CA is all I know well. In CA, like many states, awards of attorney's fees are made when one party has more money than an other, to make sure that both parties can be reasonably defended. The amount the paying party has paid to his or her own attorney can be looked at as a basis for an award to the other spouse.

I don't like either one of that pair at this point. This sounds like such typical spiteful, petty divorce stuff, just writ large because of the publicity. There's a helpless child missing, and another helpless child stuck in the middle of all this back and forth nonsense.

This is as far from a typical petty, spiteful divorce as it can get, precisely because a helpless child is missing. Kaine did not file for disso until his child went missing (and, according to him, LE implicated his wife).
If the allegations are true, both re the hit and the disappearance, this guy is doing everything he can to keep his daughter safe, keep himself safe and find out where the he!! his kid is. Obviously, Kaine thinks TH has those answers. he is doing what any parent who desperately wants his child back would do. IMO.

 

[ami]

Kaine thinks this money is his? Talk about dishonesty--he would know if she had this money. I'm sure he has his suspicions on where the money came from (her parents/family?). This is nothing more than harassment, IMO.

They're still married, so it is his business - equitable division of marital assets. And respectfully, he didn't even know that she was trying to kill him; why is it a stretch to think she's hidden marital assets? If she acquired them, he's got a right to know and ask for equitable division.

 

[Emeralgem]

*facepalm* She won't talk to the media, but she keeps telling third parties these things. Quit talking to third parties Has she not learned by now that these third parties aren't keeping quiet in the least? I hope it wasn't MC she told, good Lord...

She can't help it.. It's all part of a narcissistic psyche.. She can't resist talking about herself...In her mind It is all about her..Who knows, she may have even exaggerated the amount in writing...JMO

 

[Calliope]

However, in this case, I would not think TH is obligated to disclose in divorce paperwork, how much she paid her attorney as part of the criminal case. Nevertheless, perhaps Houze didn't think about that and lumped the fees together as one fee for both civil and criminal? Then the total amount may be stated on a form somewhere. I don't know.

s&bbm

That was where I was going in my post above.

IIRC, Houze stated he wasn't going to represent her in the civil action. I wonder if he had considered something like this (in addition to the fact that he specializes in criminal defense, of course).

 

[ami]

IF that's the case, Kaine is just outta luck I guess.

That's an odd thing to say about a man who just lost his wife and son.

 

[gwenabob]

My bank holds my husband's paycheck for a week before they release it....and that's less then 1k.
.

You need a new bank! That is outrageous!

 

[LotsaLatte]

If my child went missing and my spouse was the focus along with any hint of MFH and a divorce in the works, I would be questioning every move, action, friend, family member, historical action, lack of help finding my child, etc. that my spouse made. Period. I would not let up until my baby was found. I really think there is so much we don't know about this situation and it's crucial information.

 

[Calliope]

I think the concern is that if she took out a loan since they are still married if she gets thrown in jail he maybe left to pay the loan ( since they are married at the time of the loan.)

What is the law in Oregon regarding his liability for her debt after he leaves the marriage and files for divorce (IIRC, the news of her retaining a lawyer came after he filed)?

 

[gitana1]

IMO, the harassment comes in with the demand to pay half of his attorney's fees (when *he* filed on *her*) and statements like, "He argues that he doesn't have sufficient income or resources to pay for his attorneys and meet his other financial obligations for the children and himself." Wha...huh? She had to go to her family for money, maybe he needs to go to his.

I think Kaine knows exactly where this money came from, and to pretend not to in order to file yet another motion on Terri~especially with the claims entailed, IMO, is harassment. He could easily have quietly filed a disclosure request for the source of the funds. All of these "extras"? Not appropriate and not honest, IMO.

I get this a lot from my new clients. They think who filed first is important or who did what to cause the divorce is important in support and fees decisions. OR is a no fault state, so it is not important.
Although I do believe she got the money from family, that has not yet been determined.
Attorneys must be careful in what they file and how they do it because if they are found to have "harassed" the other party, they can be forced to pay sanctions/penalties in the form of attorney's fees to the person they harassed. This is true in OR from what I have reviewed. We'll see if the court considers it harassment or not. My bet? Kaine's attorneys are good. They know what they are doing and are working in concert with detectives and possibly the DA. There will be no award of sanctions against Kaine. IMO.

 

[Calliope]

It's an interesting tactic. Part of it may be the LE/DA side may not like the idea of going up against Houze with a circumstantial case. So, it may serve two purposes. One, to find out if the money was obtained in connection with Kyrons disappearance, and secondly, an attempt at separating TH from such a powerful lawyer.

My personal opinion is that the money likely came from her parents retirement, as gwenabob said.

bbm

makes me curious about what I posted on page 1 here.

I think the attorney may have made a major mistake in this motion by claiming Terri disclosed this to a third party. Seems that gives Houze even more basis to argue this disclosure would interfere with her possible criminal defense.

 

[Mamietwo]

I think the concern is that if she took out a loan since they are still married if she gets thrown in jail he maybe left to pay the loan ( since they are married at the time of the loan.)

But what would Terri use as collateral for a loan that size? She doesn't own anything except maybe the Mustang---if it's paid for and it wouldn't even get close to the amount of the loan anyway.

First my question was going to be how did Kaine know the amount she has supposedly paid her attorney, did she declare that on her list of assets and debts?

Secondly, if her parents mortgaged their house and cashed in their retirements to help her, SHAME ON HER for letting them do that. I realize that parents want to do all they can to help their children and would cash in all they could to do this but they worked hard to have what they have and in their senior years can never hope to do it all over again and sometimes the kids just have to say NO to the folks. Now if they're wealthy that would be a horse of a different color.

 

[Calliope]

Well, I'm glad she is talking to them.

It could be MC, but I'm thinking it is likely to be one of the three people whose houses were searched recently, because KH is responding to it now.

If this information came from LE, then I KNOW his attorney made a major mistake.

 

[daisy7]

The law in Oregon re attorney's fees is similar yet different than ours in CA. They seem to lump a few of our statutes into one. http://oregondivorceblog.com/wordpr...-my-ex-will-have-to-pay-for-my-attorney-fees/

But, maybe I'm missing it, I see nothing about equity (fairness) or the needs of the parties coming in to play when awarding attorney's fees. Sorry to keep citing CA law, but since we are both in the 9th district, our laws tend to be very similar and CA is all I know well. In CA, like many states, awards of attorney's fees are made when one party has more money than an other, to make sure that both parties can be reasonably defended. The amount the paying party has paid to his or her own attorney can be looked at as a basis for an award to the other spouse.

Respectfully snipped by me.

I understand about one party paying the other's attorney fees, depending on the situation. And, from what I understand from the court filing, he is not trying to claim this $ as a marital asset and only wants half of it for his attorney's fees. Am I correct in this?

It's seems that 175k to pay an attorney to represent him in the RO and divorce is more than a bit excessive. JMO.

 

[gitana1]

Putting aside the fact that she's Terri M. Horman and she's the person who everyone is looking at, if this was some Jane Doe down the street, people would be feeling bad for her. Her daughter was taken, she was forced to move, now she has to disclose where her money came from, and he wants her to pay for half.

.

Respectfully snipped by me for space.

I would not feel bad if such a person failed to even try to defend themselves and get some kind of visitation with their child, at the least. I would assume, in the absence of even an attempt at a defense, that there was a good reason why her child was taken and she was forced to move, etc.

 

[Calliope]

That's an odd thing to say about a man who just lost his wife and son.

I think it's obvious I was talking about this particular issue and his motion to have her pay half his attorney fees.

 

[gitana1]

s&bbm

That was where I was going in my post above.

IIRC, Houze stated he wasn't going to represent her in the civil action. I wonder if he had considered something like this (in addition to the fact that he specializes in criminal defense, of course).

He is representing her in the civil action.