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

[Aedrys]

Leaving Kyron's disappearance aside for a moment, all of these other problems are of Terri's own making.

Terri is responsible for her behavior with the Landscaper. She is responsible for her words: written, emailed, texted. or spoken. She is responsible for repeating the behavior with the Sexting Friend only FOUR days after her husband had left her and she knew police were suspicious of her....behavior that enabled police to see a "resemblance" between the two incidents.

She created all these situations with her words and her behaviors.

Now in the matters of divorce and custody, she has to answer for them. Well, that's called accountability.

Why should Kyron's disappearance be Terri's trump card not to have to answer for these behaviors in the divorce suit? Why should she get to "cover-up" her reckless behaviors again? As she apparently has done in the matter of her "courtship" with Kaine.

IMO, Terri likes to have a public persona of perfection. But this doesn't just involve silence toward awkward history...it means rewriting it with Terri as hero. She's so fabulous!

This is why the cover-story was out there that she was Desiree's devoted friend...that she unselfishly stepped in when Desiree was ill. Didn't that story come from HER MOTHER in part...or am I mistaken?

She likes people to think she was so wonderful...while in fact she does whatever she wants, takes whatever she wants...including a despicable affair with a pregnant woman's husband. (and yes, I blame Kaine here too)

But this time, Kaine is the one who was cheated on by Terri. At the worst possible moment of his life, the person closest to him...is portrayed by investigators to him... at the least, as betraying him with her sexual behaviors...at the most...despising him enough to want him murdered. They are not equally culpable in destroying this marriage.

She is in a tough spot...but she has a top attorney. That's more than many others might have.

I haven't one whit of pity for her.

ITA!!!!! The thanks button wasn't enough. You said this far more eloquently than I ever could have!

 

[Emma Peel]

Thanks for the breakdown of the situation.....it looks like she's really painted herself into a corner that she can't escape from. And, IMO, she has nobody else to blame but herself.

Yes, it seems there is something relative to the MFH story that her team does not feel it's wise to address in divorce hearings at this time.

IMO, it must be a very serious something to give it all up with no fight.

(Because one would think a parent can have adult sexting relations and adult virtual affairs all you want - without losing parental rights...)

So ... concerned the MFH thing is, likely, more incriminating than some a flirty landscaper dalliance with husband-dissing. JHMO...

 

[Susan10]

I'm thinking she's going stir crazy in that house all by herself. I can't think of that word, like when kids are cooped up all day and want to get outside but they can't because it's raining. Dang it. I'm just thinking she's going to take any opportunity she can, with lawyer approval, to get out and get some air.

Cabin fever?


============

Whoops! Sorry...I see this was answered a long time ago!

 

[Donjeta]

It may be in Terri's best interest not to have it interpreted so but IMO it looks quite a bit like Houze and Bunch didn't care to call Rackner out to provide proof for the MFH because they might be fearful that she would have it.

IMO it is a dangerous slippery slope that will lead to all kinds of miscarriages of justice on its own if we insist that the potential of being criminally charged for something needs to give a person a free pass for everything and they couldn't be sued civilly for any potentially related bad behavior while everyone is waiting if there are some charges filed or not.

IMO it cannot be the opposing side's duty to look after the other side's interests when considering whether to file for things that they have a right to file for. Everybody should have competent representation to ensure they're getting a fair hearing

 

[Billylee]

Ah, now I get it, I couldn't figure out why KH didn't file something different than "irreconcilable differences", well, in OR that is the only thing you CAN file. Here's some info on OR divorce proceedings.

Fault is not grounds for divorce in Oregon. The only grounds for divorce are irreconcilable differences. [Based on Oregon Revised Statutes: Chapter 107.025]

http://divorcesupport.about.com/od/statedivorcelaws/a/Oregon_Laws.htm


(geeze, I live here and didn't know this! course I've not been divorced here, just married, in this state anyway!)

 

[Emma Peel]

Leaving Kyron's disappearance aside for a moment, all of these other problems are of Terri's own making.

Terri is responsible for her behavior with the Landscaper. She is responsible for her words: written, emailed, texted. or spoken. She is responsible for repeating the behavior with the Sexting Friend only FOUR days after her husband had left her and she knew police were suspicious of her....behavior that enabled police to see a "resemblance" between the two incidents.

She created all these situations with her words and her behaviors.

Now in the matters of divorce and custody, she has to answer for them. Well, that's called accountability.

Why should Kyron's disappearance be Terri's trump card not to have to answer for these behaviors in the divorce suit? Why should she get to "cover-up" her reckless behaviors again? As she apparently has done in the matter of her "courtship" with Kaine.

IMO, Terri likes to have a public persona of perfection. But this doesn't just involve silence toward awkward history...it means rewriting it with Terri as hero. She's so fabulous!

This is why the cover-story was out there that she was Desiree's devoted friend...that she unselfishly stepped in when Desiree was ill. Didn't that story come from HER MOTHER in part...or am I mistaken?

She likes people to think she was so wonderful...while in fact she does whatever she wants, takes whatever she wants...including a despicable affair with a pregnant woman's husband. (and yes, I blame Kaine here too)

But this time, Kaine is the one who was cheated on by Terri. At the worst possible moment of his life, the person closest to him...is portrayed by investigators to him... at the least, as betraying him with her sexual behaviors...at the most...despising him enough to want him murdered. They are not equally culpable in destroying this marriage.

She is in a tough spot...but she has a top attorney. That's more than many others might have.

I haven't one whit of pity for her.

BBM

I agree that if these allegations are true, then Terri has made her own mess.

However, I am compelled to counter your BBM above. In fact, we do not know Kaine's degree of culpability with regard to the horrible state of this marriage.

(I know that's your opinion with regard to Kaine's part in the destruction of the marriage - no problem there. My opinion is that I we simply don't know much about Kaine's part yet.)

I firmly believe it takes 2 to tango this badly. Kaine has tried to control and cover some things that we know of already. IMO, there's probably a great deal more to the story of the decline of the Hormans' marriage...

 

[Billylee]

Since OR appears to be a no-fault state for dissolution, then why can't the judge just grant the dissolution and monetary/asset portion of the dissolution and determine that custody issues be decided at a different time. The alleged MFHP would be a custody issue, not a dissolution issue, because of the no-fault. Is that correct? I guess I should be asking this stuff in the legal thread?

 

[gitana1]

I totally agree with you. However, none of that is happening here. Terris did not contest the RO and has stipulated to the divorce. No one is trying to deprive Kaine of the benefits of either action. All we are talking about here is delaying the division of assets and custodial rights. If it were the case that a delay would deprive Kaine of support payments or of custody of the baby, I would agree that there should be no delay. But the reality is that Kaine won't be receiving a penny in this divorce, he'll be paying. And it's also a reality that unless Terri is tried and convicted they will end up with some form of joint custody arrangement. So it's hard to see how Kaine is hurt by a delay that allows Kaine to hold onto his money and sole custody of the baby for a longer period.

I do not like to disagree with a fellow attorney but given that Kaine has sole custody, TH will likely be forced to pay child support. Since it is not a community property state, the assets may not be divided evenly (but then again, they may be). If this disso was allowed to proceed normally, any marital interest in their joint property would be divided. For example the house may be sold and the proceeds divided. Kaine would not be paying that, he would simply be losing part of the value of the property they own jointly, as TH would be. Kaine may end up not paying a dime, unless he chose to buy out TH's interest.
I also disagree that if TH is not tried and convicted, they would end up with some kind of joint custody arrangement. Possibly joint legal, but not joint physical. That is because TH has allowed the status quo to be created which is that Kaine is the sole caretaker of the baby. The longer that goes on, the harder it is to change, in my experience. Also, the lack of an arrest and/or conviction does not mean the allegations are false. As you know, the standard of proof is different and easier to meet in civil court and although the allegations of MFH and possible involvement in Kyron's disappearance have nothing to do with the actual disso itself, they have a lot to do with the accompanying RO and the custody orders associated with the RO and with the separate disso action. If she continues to chose to leave those allegations unchallenged, I doubt she would have any physical custody of Baby K. She would likely only have supervised visitation.
These allegations are ones that apart from a criminal case can and would be considered in connection with custody. They already have been.
I had a case where my client was almost murdered by his ex wife. There was not enough evidence for a criminal prosecution but there was enough for the court to deny the mother any form of custody.

Let me see if I can't clear up some of the issues I've read about here. Not simply your post (although it's the clearest "outline"), but of the issues that have been raised.

Oregon is a "No-Fault" state. Meaning, no-one has to prove anything at all to actually get divorced. They just file papers, and get the judge stamp, and they're divorced.

This is important because there is NO need to defend, or prove, anyone's actions, or allegations, or thoughts. They get the divorce simply on asking for it. It is heard in Civil court, by a family court judge. Bing-bang-done.

The MFH allegations, and anything to do with Kyron, are criminal allegations, and are not part of a family court hearing, inasmuch as they do not impact on the divorce.

To use the MFH allegations, one would have to bring that up in a motion outside of a simple divorce; Kaine would have to say "because she tried to have me killed, she deserves NOTHING from me."

Best-
Herding Cats

Respectfully snipped and BBM. As I said above, the allegations that could lead to a criminal case against TH are very relevant in a connection with Kaine's civil filings, both the RO and the disso (child custody orders).

If she pleads the 5th, can that action be made available to the grand jury?

Probably not.

Interesting. I figured there might be a division in marital assets, at least money wise, but maybe not. I didn't think she'd get any property or anything. I didn't realize she might not get any money either.

So then why all the talk (I mean in the courtroom) about how much money either of them has if neither of them has to divide it with the other? Well, I guess it could be that she might be spending his money, and is not allowed to do that because Oregon isn't a community property state? Is that right?

She may indeed be entitled to part of their property. It is not a community property state but that only means that the court is not compelled to divide all marital assets equally. The court has room to maneuver as far as how the property is divided. She has a good argument for an almost equal division if all their property was acquired during their marriage, IMO. There may be arguments against such a division as well, though.

This is what's listed as grounds in the petition for dissolution between Kaine and Terri:

Irreconcilable differences between the Petitioner and the Respondent have caused the irremediable breakdown of the marriage.


That being the case, just where does the MFHP come into the divorce proceedings? Does it at all? Yes it has to do with the restraining order, but what about the dissolution itself?

Regarding the disso, it has to do with child custody and possibly attorney's fees awards and maybe even in regards to pre-judgment control of the parties' assets.
:twocents:

 

[cypress]

Everyone has wondered why Terri showed up at court. Maybe she's not going to plead the 5th. Maybe her lawyers brought her in as prep for a hearing in which she will testify. Perhaps all this home alone, with a treadmill, no phone, and no computer is to protect her and test her ability to follow her lawyers' instructions -- e.g. prove to us how much you want to see your daughter and how much you can discipline yourself by doing xyz, as preparation for following their instructions and self-discipline on the stand.

 

[cmsg2002]

All red is me.

Aedrys, I think you should familarize yourself with your State's laws on equitable distribution and marital assets. The courts do not care who earned what, who earned more, who saved money or who didn't, who's name is on an account or not....any monies earned during a marriage are marital assets period. In most states inheritances or gifts received during a marriage are not subject to distribution as long as the receiving party did not co-mingle those inherited or gifted assets. The courts do not consider the contributions of a wage-earner during the marriage to be any more than that of a stay at home parent. So it doesn't matter if one spouse made $500k and the other spouse made $0.

many, many people are not aware of this and when confronted with divorce and the law...its no wonder divorce gets so confrontational.

There is no double standard here. If Kaine came into the marrige with certain assets, in most situations he would be credited for same. However, appreciation in value during the marriage whether it be to bank accounts, real estate, retirement benefits, etc. is subject to equitable distribution. And if the spouse that had the assets coming into the marriage put the new spouse's name on the real estate, bank accounts, etc....well then, there is no credit given and its all subject to equitable distribution. Many people may disagree with that...but that's the law.

For arguments sake, if TH was loaned or given the $$ for her attorney and it was not derived from any income of hers or monies accumulated by her during the marriage....its not a marital asset, its not subject to distribution, and its not relevant to the divorce proceedings period.

 

[cmsg2002]

Oregon is a "no-fault" divorce state. Neither party needs a reason for the divorce and the judge does not need to hear any evidence of bad conduct or blame. Kaine requested the dissolution of the marriage, Terri has stipulated to the entry of a dissolution order. That's pretty much all the judge needs to know.

The trial-within-a-trial situation would occur in the context of a disputed custody determination. There are a number of ways that having the issue aired in a civil divorce proceeding could impact a subsequent criminal trial. That's why Terri has asked to delay the custodial portion of the divorce proceedings.

'No fault' State means that you do not have to prove grounds for a divorce, i.e. abuse, adultery, etc. It means that you can file for divorce just because you may simply not want to be married to that person anymore...and even if the other party does not want the divorce...that in and of itself is a 'irreconcilable difference' and the divorce will be granted. However, if there is misconduct on the part of either party or both...the courts can use the misconduct and the degree of egregiousness to awarding something other than an equitable distribution, i.e. 50/50 now turns into 55/45; 60/40, etc. Short of being an axe murderer, no party will every walk away from a divorce with nothing as long as there are assets to divide.

 

[gitana1]

Aedrys, I think you should familarize yourself with your State's laws on equitable distribution and marital assets. The courts do not care who earned what, who earned more, who saved money or who didn't, who's name is on an account or not....any monies earned during a marriage are marital assets period. In most states inheritances or gifts received during a marriage are not subject to distribution as long as the receiving party did not co-mingle those inherited or gifted assets. The courts do not consider the contributions of a wage-earner during the marriage to be any more than that of a stay at home parent. So it doesn't matter if one spouse made $500k and the other spouse made $0.

many, many people are not aware of this and when confronted with divorce and the law...its no wonder divorce gets so confrontational.

There is no double standard here. If Kaine came into the marrige with certain assets, in most situations he would be credited for same. However, appreciation in value during the marriage whether it be to bank accounts, real estate, retirement benefits, etc. is subject to equitable distribution. And if the spouse that had the assets coming into the marriage put the new spouse's name on the real estate, bank accounts, etc....well then, there is no credit given and its all subject to equitable distribution. Many people may disagree with that...but that's the law.

For arguments sake, if TH was loaned or given the $$ for her attorney and it was not derived from any income of hers or monies accumulated by her during the marriage....its not a marital asset, its not subject to distribution, and its not relevant to the divorce proceedings period.

BBM. Most of what you are saying is true but since this is not a community property state, the bolded part may not be true. Equitable distribution is different from equal distribution (which happens in community property states). Equitable means fair and I can conceive of an argument that if one spouse earned much more than another, that spouse's contributions should be given more weight in any division. I do not know how that works in practice as I don't practice in an equitable division state. Let me research and see.

 

[desquire]

I do not like to disagree with a fellow attorney but...

Please, never hesitate to disagree with me or call me out if I'm dead wrong. I don't claim to know everything - heck, some days I feel like I don't know much at all. Plus, if there were no room for different interpretation of the law or the facts, we'd both be out of a job.

I plead guilty to oversimplifying and admit that the scenarios you posit are possible. I just think that, given the length of their marriage, their relative earning capacities, and the circumstances under which Kaine has temporarily gained sole custody, the most likely outcomes all include Kaine paying something to Terri over and above the proceeds from the sale of the house and the two sharing custody of the baby. I grant you that on the custody issue, I'm assuming that Kaine has no more evidence to present against Terri's fitness than what we've learned in the press (i.e., the word of the landscaper and weak circumstantial evidence in relation to Kyron's disappearance). If that's all there is and Terri offers even a minimally credible rebuttal of the landscaper, can you really see any judge giving sole custody to the father?

 

[Donjeta]

Peter Bunch seemed to be expecting an eventual investigation of Terri and Kaine's fitness to have custody of their children. What kind of weight would the results have in the judge's decision?

 

[gitana1]

Please, never hesitate to disagree with me or call me out if I'm dead wrong. I don't claim to know everything - heck, some days I feel like I don't know much at all. Plus, if there were no room for different interpretation of the law or the facts, we'd both be out of a job.

I plead guilty to oversimplifying and admit that the scenarios you posit are possible. I just think that, given the length of their marriage, their relative earning capacities, and the circumstances under which Kaine has temporarily gained sole custody, the most likely outcomes all include Kaine paying something to Terri over and above the proceeds from the sale of the house and the two sharing custody of the baby. I grant you that on the custody issue, I'm assuming that Kaine has no more evidence to present against Terri's fitness than what we've learned in the press (i.e., the word of the landscaper and weak circumstantial evidence in relation to Kyron's disappearance). If that's all there is and Terri offers even a minimally credible rebuttal of the landscaper, can you really see any judge giving sole custody to the father?

You are a sweetheart Desquire! (Nice play on words with your name, by the way!).
If Kaine has no more than what you cited above, as to the MFH plot, it would likely not be enough to be awarded sole custody. But there is more. Two things stand out. One, part of the RO application allegations was that TH is somehow involved in the disappearance of Kyron in a criminal sense. That would also be considered and frankly, I think that is likely the much stronger case of the two alleged. I get the sense that there is not much proof of the MFH besides the landscapers assertions and depending on how credible he is and TH is in rebutting it, that likely won't lead to any kind of indictment, IMO, and would not, on it's own, play a part in a sole custody decision. Taken with other things though, like Kyron's disappearance and anything else Kaine may have to show that TH is not stable, it would play some part in custody.
Additonally, there is the status quo that is being created. If the status quo is sole physical to TH, it will be difficult to change that, in my experience.
TH may have an argument that things have changed, she is no longer under a cloud of suspicion, she has been cleared, whatever. But the longer the status quo is maintained, the harder it will be for her to change it. So yes, I could see sole custody being maintained by Kaine even if everything you said occurs.
Finally, in my state DV ROs against a party create a rebuttable presumption that the abusing party should not have sole or joint custody. Of course, if TH can later show that she felt she could not contest the RO because she feared possible prosecution, so that is the only reason the RO was issued against her and now she no longer fears prosecution, she would be more likely to be able to rebut the presumption in California if she addresses the underlying allegations. She is in OR, though and I don't know who it works there.

 

[gitana1]

Peter Bunch seemed to be expecting an eventual investigation of Terri and Kaine's fitness to have custody of their children. What kind of weight would the results have in the judge's decision?

A lot of weight. And there is much more leeway in such child custody evaluations and investigations when it comes to evidence. The evaluators consider hearsay and other, otherwise inadmissible evidence. They also conduct psychological evaluations on the parties and their spouses, like the MMPII, and talk to numerous peripheral witnesses. Criminal records and past CPS involvement is also considered. I put a monumental effort into preparing my clients for these investigations and evaluations for the very reason that the results will make or break a custody case. BTW, sometimes the investigations are used not to determine custody, but to determine whether domestic violence has occurred.

 

[Aedrys]

Aedrys, I think you should familarize yourself with your State's laws on equitable distribution and marital assets. The courts do not care who earned what, who earned more, who saved money or who didn't, who's name is on an account or not....any monies earned during a marriage are marital assets period. In most states inheritances or gifts received during a marriage are not subject to distribution as long as the receiving party did not co-mingle those inherited or gifted assets. The courts do not consider the contributions of a wage-earner during the marriage to be any more than that of a stay at home parent. So it doesn't matter if one spouse made $500k and the other spouse made $0.

many, many people are not aware of this and when confronted with divorce and the law...its no wonder divorce gets so confrontational.

There is no double standard here. If Kaine came into the marrige with certain assets, in most situations he would be credited for same. However, appreciation in value during the marriage whether it be to bank accounts, real estate, retirement benefits, etc. is subject to equitable distribution. And if the spouse that had the assets coming into the marriage put the new spouse's name on the real estate, bank accounts, etc....well then, there is no credit given and its all subject to equitable distribution. Many people may disagree with that...but that's the law.

For arguments sake, if TH was loaned or given the $$ for her attorney and it was not derived from any income of hers or monies accumulated by her during the marriage....its not a marital asset, its not subject to distribution, and its not relevant to the divorce proceedings period.

You're right, I don't know since I've never been through a divorce and my husband and I have separate accounts for everything. So thanks for explaining to this me. But I wasn't responding to what division there should be, or that there should be no division. What I was responding to is that some people seem to hold an opinion that it is Kaine leaving Terri penniless and that it is Kaine withholding money from Terri. He is being painted as a big bad with lots of wealth who doesn't want to share. And because of that, poor Terri is penniless.

I'm saying that yes, the marital assets will be divided, but if Terri is penniless at this moment, she has no one to blame but herself. Her bad decisions and low ambitions in life have led her here. Kaine is not to blamed because Terri is in the poor house, nor do I think a judge should side with Terri just because she has no money. Well tough tooties, she should thought of that before all of the bad decisions she's made. She acts like Kaine owes her a bunch of money and he should just hand it to her or it's his fault she's in the poor house. That just isn't true. What is to be divided, and who's name is on what will be determined by the court. And how they do that, basically legal stuff, I don't know much about. But I'm learning a whole lot here thanks to people like you and I appreciate that.

I just don't like Kaine being lambasted because Terri made poor choices and now she's isolated in a home with no cellphones and internet, and on top of that, has no money. NONE of that is his fault! TERRI is the one that painted herself into a corner, and now SHE has to deal with the consequences. Kaine shouldn't face consequences for Terri's actions. I'm hoping he was smart enough to not have put her name on anything. He's going to regret it if it he did. I'm sure the court will consider the bad decisions she's made and where she is right now financially before awarding her anything.

And as for the attorney payment, the court will determine if it's part of marital assets or not. She won't admit where it came from, so it's impossible at this point for any of us to say whether it's a marital asset or not. We don't know what kind of access she had to accounts and other things. Or, it could be that this was a gift from someone. We just don't know what it is or heck, even how much it is at this point.

 

[cmsg2002]

Equally respectfully, YOU are wrong. In a criminal case a fifth amendment plea CANNOT be used as evidence against her. The jury CANNOT use it as evidence of guilt and will be so instructed by the court. It's just that simple. If you truly believe that I am wrong about this, please let me know what you're relying on.

I am sorry, but you are wrong. In a criminal case a defendant may plead the 5th and it cannot be construed as evidence of guilt. However, in a civil case, such as the divorce, if the 5th is taken, the court CAN infer that as evidence of guilt. It is a much lesser burden in the civil arena.

 

[ami]

You're right, I don't know since I've never been through a divorce and my husband and I have separate accounts for everything. So thanks for explaining to this me. But I wasn't responding to what division there should be, or that there should be no division. What I was responding to is that some people seem to hold an opinion that it is Kaine leaving Terri penniless and that it is Kaine withholding money from Terri. He is being painted as a big bad with lots of wealth who doesn't want to share. And because of that, poor Terri is penniless.

I'm saying that yes, the marital assets will be divided, but if Terri is penniless at this moment, she has no one to blame but herself. Her bad decisions and low ambitions in life have led her here. Kaine is not to blamed because Terri is in the poor house, nor do I think a judge should side with Terri just because she has no money. Well tough tooties, she should thought of that before all of the bad decisions she's made. She acts like Kaine owes her a bunch of money and he should just hand it to her or it's his fault she's in the poor house. That just isn't true. What is to be divided, and who's name is on what will be determined by the court. And how they do that, basically legal stuff, I don't know much about. But I'm learning a whole lot here thanks to people like you and I appreciate that.

I just don't like Kaine being lambasted because Terri made poor choices and now she's isolated in a home with no cellphones and internet, and on top of that, has no money. NONE of that is his fault! TERRI is the one that painted herself into a corner, and now SHE has to deal with the consequences. Kaine shouldn't face consequences for Terri's actions. I'm hoping he was smart enough to not have put her name on anything. He's going to regret it if it he did. I'm sure the court will consider the bad decisions she's made and where she is right now financially before awarding her anything.

And as for the attorney payment, the court will determine if it's part of marital assets or not. She won't admit where it came from, so it's impossible at this point for any of us to say whether it's a marital asset or not. We don't know what kind of access she had to accounts and other things. Or, it could be that this was a gift from someone. We just don't know what it is or heck, even how much it is at this point.

Aedrys I so often agree with you, but the bolded part... eh.. she has made poor choices in a lot of parts of her life, but she also made the choice to raise Kyron and baby K as a SAHM, which led to no outside job, which led to less money than Kaine. Without getting into the discussion about SAHM-hood, I just want to interject that she was doing something valuable for the family and saving the cost of daycare (which can sometimes equal a working salary) besides. I mean an innocent Terri that is (clearly if she's guilty I can hardly paint her as a valuable family asset, but then the alimony discussion will be moot anyway...). It's different (IMO) than being willfully unemployed without contributing ANYthing to the family...

 

[ami]

A lot of weight. And there is much more leeway in such child custody evaluations and investigations when it comes to evidence. The evaluators consider hearsay and other, otherwise inadmissible evidence. They also conduct psychological evaluations on the parties and their spouses, like the MMPII, and talk to numerous peripheral witnesses. Criminal records and past CPS involvement is also considered. I put a monumental effort into preparing my clients for these investigations and evaluations for the very reason that the results will make or break a custody case. BTW, sometimes the investigations are used not to determine custody, but to determine whether domestic violence has occurred.

Incidentally, I dated someone who had just gone through an ugly divorce and custody battle including two separate evaluations. They were rigorous! There were psych evaluations, home visits, interview of family and friends... I was really impressed with the depth of their investigation. It was not superficial. And the results of the psych exams were fascinating. Not that they'd ever be made public, but I'd be interested in hearing the results of Terri's test, should they go the evaluation route in the future.