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

[stmarysmead]

Hi marysmead That sounds as if you're saying that all sexual overtures are the same, and that they can only be communicated or relayed in one way. I can tell you from personal experience that that's not so. :angel:

Let me give you an example of how the exact same type of sexual overture can be made, but communicated or relayed in entirely different ways.

Let's say my landscaper is in my house, and I stand in front of him and take off my clothes. That's a sexual overture, and it's one of a certain type, and it's relayed in person.

Now let's say I'm home alone, and I get lonely, so I fire up my cell phone and start texting my hubby's old friend from high school. I'm in the mood for love, but he's miles away, so how do I convey to him that I'm interested in some texting of a different kind?

Well, I use my sexual overture method of choice - I stand up and take off my clothes. Then I take a pic of myself and send it to him via my cell phone.

That's a sexual overture, and it's the exact same type, and it's relayed via a pic sent over a cell phone.

For the landscaper, LE knows about my sexual overture of choice because the landscaper has told them.

For my hubby's old friend from HS, LE knows about my sexual overture of choice because they have the cell phone records.

I really don't understand the insistence that because Terri made sexual overtures to both men that resembled each other, that texting was the only way to accomplish it.

Not only is it not so, I also don't understand why it matters whether it was in person, over the phone, or by... smoke signals.

In fact, I don't understand why it matters whether they were similar or not. It seems to me it would be simply the making of any sexual overtures that mattered. That alone shows a possible pattern of behavior, and I would think what LE found interesting about it (from a legal standpoint) is the possible manipulation involved.

Hi BeanE.

You are absolutely right. Actually,I went a bit too far afield and can see that now.

The point I was trying to make was that the "resemblance" implied to me that both incidents included something of a sexual nature. Therefore, LE had something more than a "he said/she said" to present to Kaine. And whatever they showed him supported the story.

But point well taken...it could be sexting, naughty photos, or a full length oil painting of Terri showing a mole in a place only Kaine should have seen.

But I do not believe Kaine just left his wife and uprooted his Baby on just the Landscapers word alone. I meant THAT to be my point of insistence. The word "resemble" linking the two incidents indicates to me there was more and it was sexual in some way.

That you for the chance to clear up my muddled post.

 

[Morag]

Not trying to make Terri into a victim, just pointing out that there is no way to force her to talk if she chooses not to, not any way to "get answers" that is legal under our Constitution. If she doesn't have that right, then neither do any of the rest of us. Unfortunate, inconvenient, but incontrovertible. Such a sad case, but the law is the law. And those of us who are concerned with "rights" are no less concerned with the well-being and recovery of adorable little Kyron. I'm idealistic- I hope he is being cared for by kindly folk who know not what they do.

 

[Donjeta]

I expect that everyone who has any say about it at court is agreed that she cannot be forced to give any answers if she chooses not to.

The thing that I am at a loss to understand is, I don't see why her having the right to remain silent, to avoid incriminating herself, to not give answers at court, if she so chooses would make it illegal and unjust for other people to file suits that might necessitate her to decide whether or not to exercise that right. I don't see what Kaine could file that would force her to speak and incriminate herself against her constitutional rights. At the most he can file civil suits that force her to make that choice that she has a right to. Her right to choose to remain closemouthed wouldn't be endangered.

 

[Billylee]

I expect that everyone who has any say about it at court is agreed that she cannot be forced to give any answers if she chooses not to.

The thing that I am at a loss to understand is, I don't see why her having the right to remain silent, to avoid incriminating herself, to not give answers at court, if she so chooses would make it illegal and unjust for other people to file suits that might necessitate her to decide whether or not to exercise that right. I don't see what Kaine could file that would force her to speak and incriminate herself against her constitutional rights. At the most he can file civil suits that force her to make that choice that she has a right to. Her right to choose to remain closemouthed wouldn't be endangered.

Well in a way, he is holding her baby hostage right now. I think that's the biggest "force" he can put on her. If she's human, that's gotta be huge pressure.

 

[Donjeta]

Well in a way, he is holding her baby hostage right now. I think that's the biggest "force" he can put on her. If she's human, that's gotta be huge pressure.

Yes, I'm sure you're right.

It seems her lawyers have so far been able to convince her to ignore that pressure because she chose not to contest the RO and not to apply for visitation or custody and they asked for the abatement of the custody issues up to two years.

Wonder what will happen if the abatement isn't granted.

IMO money has to be a pretty significant pressure factor for anybody with no available income and assets as well. Not because of greed or anything but just because a person's gotta live with something and if she considers any of the marital money rightfully hers it must be very stressful to be broke. But she asked for the money matters to be postponed as well.

 

[BeanE]

IMO it might matter quite a lot because if it was in person or by smoke signals it's just a matter of he said she said by now but if it was sexting LE have proof.

I suppose that could be the insistence.

 

[Dee10]

Not trying to make Terri into a victim, just pointing out that there is no way to force her to talk if she chooses not to, not any way to "get answers" that is legal under our Constitution. If she doesn't have that right, then neither do any of the rest of us. Unfortunate, inconvenient, but incontrovertible. Such a sad case, but the law is the law. And those of us who are concerned with "rights" are no less concerned with the well-being and recovery of adorable little Kyron. I'm idealistic- I hope he is being cared for by kindly folk who know not what they do.

I truly agree with what you stated in theory of the Constitution, but it is there is a problem with lawsuits to the State that hampers things now, etc. It is the victim that gets lost these days IMO. I am not worried about Terri, she is afforded all her rights; she has an excellent attorney and apparently she is indeed exercising her rights. No need to worry about Terri's rights IMO.

BBM I am glad to realize you are being idealistic, because according to statistics the outlook is not positive, but I am glad Terri is being taken care of. :angel: Abstract: What about Kryon's rights?

 

[Donjeta]

I suppose that could be the insistence.

I am a bit torn whether Rackner used " ...resembled..." because sexts sent to one guy are very much like sexts sent to another, or "...sexual overtures..." because it is more general than sexual text messages and encompasses a wider range of sexual behaviors.

I could see both.

 

[BeanE]

I am a bit torn whether Rackner used " ...resembled..." because sexts sent to one guy are very much like sexts sent to another, or "...sexual overtures..." because it is more general than sexual text messages and encompasses a wider range of sexual behaviors.

I could see both.

Ms. Rackner had no compunctions about using the slang 'sexting' in a legal document. Because of that, I think if there had been texts or pics from Terri to the landscaper, Ms. Rackner would have just let it fly, using the same sort of language.

 

[Donjeta]

Ms. Rackner had no compunctions about using the slang 'sexting' in a legal document. Because of that, I think if there had been texts or pics from Terri to the landscaper, Ms. Rackner would have just let it fly, using the same sort of language.

Maybe but if there were no records of any of the sexual overtures between them it would be more difficult to decide for certain whether they resembled the ones made to MC or whether they happened at all. It could be that there were no sexts or it could be that there were sexts and some other type of overture.

Suppose we won't find out any time soon since Terri didn't contest the RO and there's no reason to present the evidence for the time being.

Are we getting OT?

 

[gardeness]

Well, it says the
"sexual overtures resemble ..."THOSE'' made."

In parsing that sentence, the word "those" clearly refers to the words "sexual overtures."

It can't mean "the sexual overtures resemble THOSE (casseroles) made...or the sexual overtures resemble THOSE (bookcases) made.

He might well have written "the sexual overtures resemble those sexual overtures made...but it is customarily not to be redundant.

What do you think "those" means used in the context of that sentence?

I'm respectfully most interested in your alternative interpretation....

Am I understanding correctly--IYO, sexual overtures = texts?

 

[desquire]

I expect that everyone who has any say about it at court is agreed that she cannot be forced to give any answers if she chooses not to.

The thing that I am at a loss to understand is, I don't see why her having the right to remain silent, to avoid incriminating herself, to not give answers at court, if she so chooses would make it illegal and unjust for other people to file suits that might necessitate her to decide whether or not to exercise that right. I don't see what Kaine could file that would force her to speak and incriminate herself against her constitutional rights. At the most he can file civil suits that force her to make that choice that she has a right to. Her right to choose to remain closemouthed wouldn't be endangered.

Imagine yourself in Terri's shoes. And imagine that you are completely innocent in whatever happened to Kyron. Even though you are innocent, it's clear that police and prosecutors are 100% focused on you as the perpetrator. Even though you are innocent of any crime, you are no Mother Theresa, you've done dumb things and you've done things you aren't proud of. That's a description that fits just about every adult I know; the difference is that for you, every wart and blemish is magnified, published on the front page, teased and broadcast on the 6 AND 10:00 news, and then twisted in ways you never imagined to see how it might be relevant to that crime you didn't commit.

Now imagine that you have to fight with your husband over custody of your daughter and division of your marital assets in a pretty acrimonius divorce. Nobody in a divorce fight comes away looking good. But so what? You're innocent, you have nothing to hide, your husband has his own warts, blemishes and skeletons in the closet; so sticks and stones, right? Wrong. The ugly things that will be said about you won't be left behind deposition room doors or buried in motions only the judge and his clerk reads, even though your dirty laundry will be national news. What's the real harm you ask? It's not like any of it incriminates you or is even relevant to what happened to Kyron. Except every negative, relevant or not, is another damaging brush stroke on the horrible portrait that has been painted of you in the minds of potential criminal trial jurors. Not only that but criminal trial witnesses are hearing all of this too and their recollections will be colored and might even be distorted by what they hear. People who might have spoken up for you stay quiet because, really, who wants to put their reputation on the line for such a bad person. It doesn't even have to be something unflattering that hangs you, look at how you were pilloried when you made the perfectly normal and routine request for money from your marital assets to pay for your move out of the house. What will happen when you ask for spousal support.

You may be innocent but ocassionally innocent people get convicted and if you fight for a fair division of custody and assets in a divorce proceeding with the criminal charges hovering over you, you only increase the risk of losing everything, including your freedom. If, on the other hand, avoid controversy in the divorce proceeding in order to maximize the effectiveness of your defense in the looming criminal case, you risk giving up parental rights and financial security that you could ordinarily expect to receive.

Heads you lose, tails, you lose.

 

[gardeness]

Yep, it sounds to me like the big bad police department in Portland has a vendetta against Terri Horman. They are trying so hard to make her guilty and I just can't imagine why. I mean, we have a pillar of the community here. A dedicated gym enthusiast, a former body builder, a sometimes substitute teacher, like I said just a gem of a character. The police have come up with some half-baked plan to accuse her of a murder-for-hire plot against her husband resulting in his leaving his marriage and taking their child with him and not allowing Terri to see her. Oh, the injustice of it all. Someone set her up and sent all of these "sexting" messages to her husband's high school friend and then took her picture (provocative from what we understand) without her permission to send to this other upstanding member of the community, you know the one who was out day after day hanging all of those fliers up about Kyron's disappearance. This dedicated step-mother was running errands the whole day of Kyron's disappearance after trying for a great amount of time to get her daughter who was suffering an earache to be comfortable. She was so dedicated to that daughter that she even drove to two stores looking for just the right medicine for her. They have subjected this woman to at least two but possibly three polygraphs, held her down and strapped her in no less, wouldn't surprise me to hear that they even went so far as to drug her to make her take them. Through no fault of her own, she has had her photographs printed and distributed on two different fliers from the police department and sent around all over the community spreading gossip and rumors about her possible involvement in the disappearance of her beloved stepson Kyron. She is now penniless, has neither of her children, has no means of transportation, and no home to call her own but she does have one thing....she has a high-priced attorney and bodyguards surrounding her because she has received so many death threats. To top all of that off, now her husband is demanding to know where she got the money to pay for her attorney, how dare him. He should know without a shadow of a doubt that his beautifully buff wife wouldn't dare take a penny of money that belonged to him to pay for this attorney. Kaine, you are just too stupid my man, I mean really, can you have any more nerve??? Yep, poor innocent Terri. I just feel so incredibly sorry for her......NOT!!! :sick:

Terri's case makes me grateful for the judicial system in America. Terri is innocent until proven guilty, no matter the spin in the media. And, if she's proven guilty in a court of law, she's guilty--I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with anyone being tried by the public with no evidence to back it up.

 

[mmmagique]

And however that coin lands, Kyron and all those who love him lose as well.

 

[kappy50]

Imagine yourself in Terri's shoes. And imagine that you are completely innocent in whatever happened to Kyron. Even though you are innocent, it's clear that police and prosecutors are 100% focused on you as the perpetrator. Even though you are innocent of any crime, you are no Mother Theresa, you've done dumb things and you've done things you aren't proud of. That's a description that fits just about every adult I know; the difference is that for you, every wart and blemish is magnified, published on the front page, teased and broadcast on the 6 AND 10:00 news, and then twisted in ways you never imagined to see how it might be relevant to that crime you didn't commit.

Now imagine that you have to fight with your husband over custody of your daughter and division of your marital assets in a pretty acrimonius divorce. Nobody in a divorce fight comes away looking good. But so what? You're innocent, you have nothing to hide, your husband has his own warts, blemishes and skeletons in the closet; so sticks and stones, right? Wrong. The ugly things that will be said about you won't be left behind deposition room doors or buried in motions only the judge and his clerk reads, even though your dirty laundry will be national news. What's the real harm you ask? It's not like any of it incriminates you or is even relevant to what happened to Kyron. Except every negative, relevant or not, is another damaging brush stroke on the horrible portrait that has been painted of you in the minds of potential criminal trial jurors. Not only that but criminal trial witnesses are hearing all of this too and their recollections will be colored and might even be distorted by what they hear. People who might have spoken up for you stay quiet because, really, who wants to put their reputation on the line for such a bad person. It doesn't even have to be something unflattering that hangs you, look at how you were pilloried when you made the perfectly normal and routine request for money from your marital assets to pay for your move out of the house. What will happen when you ask for spousal support.

You may be innocent but ocassionally innocent people get convicted and if you fight for a fair division of custody and assets in a divorce proceeding with the criminal charges hovering over you, you only increase the risk of losing everything, including your freedom. If, on the other hand, avoid controversy in the divorce proceeding in order to maximize the effectiveness of your defense in the looming criminal case, you risk giving up parental rights and financial security that you could ordinarily expect to receive.

Heads you lose, tails, you lose.

Now Imagine Teri's story!

 

[debs]

How can she incriminate herself if she is innocent? And why should Kaine have to wait years to protect himself and his daughter, not to mention get answers to the questions about Kyron's disappearance if she is involved?

Should they ever charge Terri with some involvement with Kyron's disappearance, Kaine should only have to go through the channels of the law to get results. But he should not be allowed to try Terri in a civil court before any criminal charges are brought forth.

 

[debs]

"the little boy is gone somewhere and people who love him miss him and want him home. But that isn't the point being argued here".

I understand your point and respect that we differ.

But here we disagree. To me, getting information is the only point that matters. If Kaine can find a way to get information from this divorce case that helps find Kyron and bring some modicum of peace...I say"Go for it!"

In another situation, a normal divorce situation, I would no doubt agree with you. But I believe in LE at this point, not Terri.

I believe, as Desiree does, that Terri is hiding something. I also want Baby K protected till this MURDER FOR HIRE thing is totally discredited. Frankly, I also want Kaine protected too. Being "cheap"/and or "controlling" does not allow your wife to decide to order a death sentence.

If you are right, and they "don't get to ask those questions in the divorce proceedings"...then ..THEY WON'T. So we needn't even debate it. It won't happen.

But if they find a way to legally do it...I'll be very pleased.

Kyron first.

Terri is an adult with a great attorney. Kyron is a small child God knows where.

We need every bit of information we can glean.

Kyron first.

With every respect intended, Terri is afforded the right to A) not incriminate herself; and B) have the State prove its case against her. What the State and Kaine Horman are NOT afforded is to strong-arm Terri, by use of divorce and custody status, to admit to anything which would somehow end up in a criminal case.

 

[Amster]

:boohoo:

For poor, poor dear Terri. That big, bad mean Kaine is just being sooo unfair! He actually thinks that silly MFH thing was for real?? Oh, please! LE probably just made that up! Terri and the LS were just messing around.....just like Terri and MC. Kaine is too uptight.

This divorce farce is Kaines way of getting back at Terri for spending HIS money, I bet. :innocent:

Kyron, Bless your heart, someday your stepmothers woes will take a backseat to finding out where you are.

 

[Dee10]

I expect that everyone who has any say about it at court is agreed that she cannot be forced to give any answers if she chooses not to.

The thing that I am at a loss to understand is, I don't see why her having the right to remain silent, to avoid incriminating herself, to not give answers at court, if she so chooses would make it illegal and unjust for other people to file suits that might necessitate her to decide whether or not to exercise that right. I don't see what Kaine could file that would force her to speak and incriminate herself against her constitutional rights. At the most he can file civil suits that force her to make that choice that she has a right to. Her right to choose to remain closemouthed wouldn't be endangered.

Thank you for your post and I am at a loss too in understanding as well. Each person has their rights & lawyers to protect them. :waitasec:

 

[debs]

IMO it might matter quite a lot because if it was in person or by smoke signals it's just a matter of he said she said by now but if it was sexting LE have proof.

Exactly. Do we have any evidence of ....... he said?