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

[SacreBleu]

Whoa. I don't think an attorney can just get up in front of a judge and lie boldfaced! Besides, the affidavit filed today states that copies of this were given to Kaine's attorney, which says to me they are entered into the case files.

I do agree. Nobody is going to risk their license to practice law for TMH. JMO.

 

[germaine]

Whoa. I don't think an attorney can just get up in front of a judge and lie boldfaced! Besides, the affidavit filed today states that copies of this were given to Kaine's attorney, which says to me they are entered into the case files.

Did bunch or houze submit the affidavit of how Houze's fees were paid? And fwiw, I don't think most lawyers make a habit of blatantly lying to the court. Many will do what they think they can get away with without flat out lying, imo. I don't know that bunch has the personal, first-hand knowledge of the amount of Houze's fees were paid. He can't make an affidavit that is sufficient proof is he doesn't. He can make an affidavit based on what his client or Houze told him, but that wouldn't be sufficient proof. I woudn't amount to lying to the court, either, though. Having reviewed certified copies of the documents of the transaction might be enough, again imo, but IANAL. I'd like to see the affidavit. Is it out there somewhere in the msm?

 

[Barry]

It is painful sometimes, to see legalities get in the way of the truth, especially when many believe such legalities are impeding the truth. However, I don't think we can just say "lets suspend it, just this one time". If we go that route, we might as well just suspend it all, let them lead her away and torture her until they get the answers they want.

The judge is obligated to maintain his position in this matter. This is how our legal system is set up. It can't be turned off for special circumstances. It doesn't always make everyone happy. It doesn't make me happy. But I don't like the alternative.

If TH is guilty, they will get her soon enough, with in the framework of our legal system.

mooo

 

[debs]

Bunch's point was to say that through the affidavit submitted by Houze to Kaine's attorney that the money paid to him came directly to him from a third party and was never in Terri's control, therefore was not marital asset or property, nor was it a gift.
Under any one of those circumstances, let alone all three, Kaine is not owed an explanation as to where the funds came from. Bunch further states that, because it's not marital asset or property and was never in Terri's control, it will also not be relevant when they do divide property, because at the time Terri attained her defense attorney, Kaine had already filed for divorce, rendering them legally separated and making null his right to know for marital asset/property rules.

Saying "why doesn't she just tell Kaine where she got the money?" is ignoring the point that the money went to Houze, NOT Terri at all.

 

[gwenabob]

Bunch's point was to say that through the affidavit submitted by Houze to Kaine's attorney that the money paid to him came directly to him from a third party and was never in Terri's control, therefore was not marital asset or property, nor was it a gift.
Under any one of those circumstances, let alone all three, Kaine is not owed an explanation as to where the funds came from. Bunch further states that, because it's not marital asset or property and was never in Terri's control, it will also not be relevant when they do divide property, because at the time Terri attained her defense attorney, Kaine had already filed for divorce, rendering them legally separated and making null his right to know for marital asset/property rules.

Saying "why doesn't she just tell Kaine where she got the money?" is ignoring the point that the money went to Houze, NOT Terri at all.

It went to Houze for the benefit of Terri.

 

[tlcya]

Exactly, thanks for helping me to make my point debs. The memo argues that "she" did not "get" the money from anyone. The argument is that the money did not come from Terri but from someone else (third party) and was conveyed directly from the third party to Houze.

 

[debs]

It went to Houze for the benefit of Terri.

for the benefit of Terri's defense. yes. But never into her hands, never in her control, and never anywhere but from the third party to Houze. They stipulated to that, and that answered the question.

 

[JBean]

No, not a family trust controlled by TH. Controlled perhaps by other family members, and she could possibly have access to the $ if she could show cause. The third party in that case would be the attorney who administers the trust. In other words, her parents could have a controlling interest in a family trust.She needs the $. I'm guessing that her parents would not allow her to control the $,so it would not "flow down to her personally ". The attorney who is handling the trust pays Houze et al, making him (or her ) a third party for the purposes of this hearing.... MOO

Well that would still be an asset of hers and she could not make the claim that it was not an asset. if she has interest in a trust that is an asset.

 

[tlcya]

so is something conveyed on Terri's behalf with no expectation of repayment considered a marital debt or asset?

IMO not. That seems pretty vague, I am not a fan of slippery slopes.

 

[debs]

I don't see a slippery slope. I see where Kaine believes he's owed something, and in fact, he is not. The law does not include a person's right to know information when it does not pertain to his case, which in this instance, is Kaine's divorce from Terri. The money wasn't hers, it's not his business.

 

[i.b.nora]

Here's the official court document that TH's lawyer filed today. It's quite, errr...terse.

http://images.bimedia.net/documents/Horman_Court+documents_10_7_2010.pdf

Originally posted by Kat010, the official court document.

 

[JBean]

Well, January 31st is not that far away!!

Hey they have all the way until 2/1 LOL!

 

[Calliope]

Originally posted by Kat010, the official court document.

I just read it.



Bunch knocked it out of the park.

Holy cow.

 

[germaine]

Originally posted by Kat010, the official court document.

does anyone know who signed the original declaration reference in this document about where the retainer did not come from? Was it houze or bunch?

 

[cj1132]

A little boy is missing. I find it sad that it has to come down to this.

 

[Kimster]

I don't see a slippery slope. I see where Kaine believes he's owed something, and in fact, he is not. The law does not include a person's right to know information when it does not pertain to his case, which in this instance, is Kaine's divorce from Terri. The money wasn't hers, it's not his business.

I may be more of a cowgirl than some, but if I thought TH took my child I'd be filing on her daily if I could. I just can't even imagine wearing his shoes.

 

[liz b.]

Well that would still be an asset of hers and she could not make the claim that it was not an asset. if she has interest in a trust that is an asset.

Interesting question, could be interpreted in a couple of ways IMO... A family trust that TH has no controlling interest in at all is not an asset. If,for example, one or both of her parents, or other family members, have the controlling interest in a trust, that is their asset, not TH's.... just as their house,their bank accounts, etc., are all their assets. Not TH's assets at all... MOO

All JMO

 

[tlcya]

I'm referring to the slippery slope that is - Where'd "she" get the money? and how I think if the court does rule in Kaine's favor it starts us down a slippery slope because I genuinely believe from a strictly LEGAL standpoint this question IS compeletely not relevant to the divorce proceeding and further I do not think that Kaine in any way shape or form thinks for a moment that the retainer is a marital asset or debt. I think a decision by the court in Kaine's favor would be the wrong decision.

I think Kaine is a greiving father who wants answers and is using whatever means possible, grasping at whatever straw possible to try to force information out of the person he beleives is responsible for the disappearance of his son.

I think I would probably be doing exactly the same thing. My disagreement with the suit money petition is on the merits - not because I think Kaine is evil or the devil incarnate.

I cannot imagine the pain he and Desiree live with daily. By debating the merits of the case, I am in no way vilifying Kaine.

 

[JBean]

I found this to be the most intersting part of the argument. can anyone speak to this?

 

[JBean]

Interesting question, could be interpreted in a couple of ways IMO... A family trust that TH has no controlling interest in at all is not asset. If,for example, one or both of her parents, or other family members, have the controlling interest in a trust, that is their asset, not TH's.... just as their house,their bank accounts, etc., are all their assets. Not TH's assets at all... MOO

All JMO

Then it is, in essence, just the same as the parents giving her the money.