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

[debs]

I get that because she is the focus in a criminal investigation getting on the stand might cause her to implicate herself - but the focus put on Terri is being put on her by LE. They are the ones conducting the investigation.

What I was referring to is: how does anything that Kaine or Desiree has said in the media affect the divorce proceeding? You stated it was Kaine's fault that the abatement was granted. I don't think it's fair to blame Kaine or Desiree for that. You may not like that they are publically letting it be known that they feel Terri is responsible, but I don't think that fact played into the judges decision at all.

IMO you've made the point in the first paragraph for the question you ask in the second paragraph. This is a civil proceeding, and Terri's attorneys have asked for the information they provided to the plaintiff (Kaine) but will not provide to the respondent (Terri) in a a divorce proceeding. I ask you, how can someone use information against someone in a court of law without allowing that person to know what it is they've got against her? We all know the wild claims, but what is it they've shown Kaine? Terri is having everything taken from her without ever being able to know why

That's scary in this country.

And I didn't say it was his fault. I said because he and Desiree went on TV, the judge made his decision that she could not but be forced into a constitutional dilemma of self-incrimination, and it was the judge who abated the divorce proceedings. "(C)iting Terri Horman's Fifth Amendment right to avoid testifying in a manner that might implicate her in a crime." Came from the judge.

 

[eyes4crime]

And her attorneys say he doesn't have that right. I guess the lawyers can fight it out, but I tend toward their opinion on this particular matter. It went to Houze. Not Terri.

Most of the points Bunch made were backed up with 'case' law, Constitutional rights, and Oregon law. Bunch states emphatically that Houze took the money as a retainer and put it into his trust and that being forced to expose an anonymous donor would be a poor precedent in Oregon law. moo mho

Notice that Bunch, toward the end of his argument, states that the defense for such frivolous (his word not mine) requests is expensive and asks the court for reimbursement from Kaine for his legal fees. Bunch doesn't seem like someone to mess around with. moo mho

This is how I read the document and is my interpretation. Hopefully, this is not construed as bashing or as an indictment of Kaine. moo mho hoo and all that stuff

 

[stmarysmead]

Let's suppose any of us found ourselves in this situation.

One day, your child is gone. I mean...can"t all of us have the empathy to try to "feel" what that would be like? You are crazed with grief and worry. Now the police tell you that your spouse has tried to hire someone to kill you...and probably is the one who did harm to your child.

Let that sink in. Don't think of Kaine. Think it's you...or your son and daughter-in-law.

People you love.

Would you then...do what?

Stay in the marriage? Sleep in that bed? Just leave your ONLY OTHER child alone with the spouse that LE says is involved?

If you can say for sure, you would do that...then you can cast stones at Kaine.

If you can say for sure...that, having left on advice of LE... you would hand over gladly and without fear, your only other child...then you can advocate Kaine doing so to Terri.

I think about Kaine's situation so much. The thought of handing his only surviving child into the arms of the woman LE told him tried to kill him and hurt Kyron...however would he bring himself to do that?

Are there really people who would just whistle a tune, hand over Baby K...and drive away smiling...never having the slightest worry?

 

[RubyRed]

This is another reason for the abatement. If it's ongoing, it should get going. But meanwhile, Terri's been denied her rights as a parent.

sbbm
She brought all of this on herself. If you play with fire you get burnt. Kaine and Desiree are denied their rights to be a parent to Kyron. The reason Kaine did this is not something frivolous. LE told him she was more than likely involved and had tried to have him murdered. That is more than enough for me.

police came to him in June and informed him they had probable cause, that in their view it was more likely than not that Ms. Horman was likely involved in Kyron’s disappearance and she had hired someone to kill him.”

http://www.katu.com/news/local/104507829.html

"I" don't have a dog in this fight, but I can guarantee that K is being deprived of the loving arms of her mother,

Baby K is being denied the loving arms of a Mother who wanted Baby K's Daddy dead. And while her lawyer made this statement I don't buy into it at all because he has to defend her, he is paid too. My biggest fear is what did Baby K see the day Kyron disappeared. I get cold chills thinking about it.

“It’s not in K's interest to not have contact with her mother… she’s not interested in abandoning her child.”


http://www.katu.com/news/local/104507829.html

given that no one has ever said Terri was an abusive parent. Not Kaine, not Desiree, not anyone who has ever met her.

In retrospect they didn't know. Now that all the pieces of the puzzle are coming together, it isn't a pretty picture. There have been instances in cases where the person didn't come across as abusive, yet went on to murder someone. Sadly I think that is what has happened to Kyron. If you will try to have his Daddy murdered then you won't give a crap about his son.

Basing that on Kaine's "opinion" that he "thinks" Terri did something to his son is not enough. It has never been, nor should it ever be, enough.

He is going by what LE told him. He is handling this with more class and dignity then I could. I would be a raving lunatic by now or a crumpled heap of a mess crying in a corner. I just hope Desiree and Kaine can keep up their strength because I think the worse is yet to come. moo

 

[debs]

The memorandum addresses Kaine's assertion to the court that he is owed an answer to where Terri got the funds. Bunch states that Houze received funds from a third party and those funds are placed in trust.

I don't recall seeing anywhere where those funds were given by that third party for Terri particularly. I wonder (obviously aloud) whether those funds were given to Houze and placed in a trust, for Houze to defend clients with constitutional issues.

Hmmmm. So then Houze would have no reason to reveal who that third party is, since the funds didn't even come in for Terri, per se, but for any client that might come along needing help.

Of course, all this is speculation on my part, adding one more puzzle to the pile.

 

[tlcya]

NO stone throwing here. I have said all along that my heart breaks for Kaine and Desiree.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that Kain should hand over baby K, at least I haven't seen anything like that put forth on the threads.

It is just a very complicated, interesting legal conumdrum. No matter what move Terri makes or doesn't make at this point will be an indicator of guilt or wrongdoing to some. She is damned if she dares attempt to lift the RO regarding her daugher (evil, heartless, etc.) and she is damned if she does not move to get the RO lifted or modified because really what sort of mother would just let it go and not fight to keep her child?

That doesn't make Kaine and Desiree bad for believing what they believe and I don't think anyone faced with LE saying "hey, we think Terri is all kinds of dirty in this thing" would just whistle a tune and drive away smiling.

 

[tlcya]

Ruby please edit post 328 to remove quoted material that names baby K. Thank you.

 

[Jack]

If she wanted "time" with her daughter, she should have asked for it 3 months ago. I'm sure with each passing day, the memories baby K has of her "mother" grow less and less given her age. She is far better off being kept away from such an evil person. A person who not only tried to have her father killed, but caused the disappearance of her brother, and then proceeded to have an "affair" with a friend of her father's. How anyone can justify that this woman needs "time" with her mother, I'll never understand. JMO.

If any of these things are ever proven, or even have a preponderance of evidence suggesting she is guilty of them, I would agree with you. IMO, since she has not been proven guilty or even arrested for the things you say against her then she shouls be able to see her child. IMO, it is wrong for one parent to be able to take a child completely away from the other based upon accusations that nobody seems to be interested (MFH) or able to prove. On the side of extreme caution, supervised visits should have been granted from day 1 at the very least.

 

[Dee10]

If any of these things are ever proven, or even have a preponderance of evidence suggesting she is guilty of them, I would agree with you. IMO, since she has not been proven guilty or even arrested for the things you say against her then she shouls be able to see her child. IMO, it is wrong for one parent to be able to take a child completely away from the other based upon accusations that nobody seems to be interested (MFH) or able to prove. On the side of extreme caution, supervised visits should have been granted from day 1 at the very least.

The problem is she had a chance to contest the RO and proof would have been demanded as evidence for the Judge to evaluate, but she chose not to. Can't have it both ways, she made a choice to not incriminate herself it appears and lost her daughter in the process.

 

[stmarysmead]

We all respect each others opinions here. That is a given. But I believe it is within the rules to present forcefully a perspective.

If one is arguing that Kaine should turn over the only other child he has, perhaps we should try to "feel that" before demanding it. Is that making rules? Of course not.

It's advocating for empathy.

I am "fired up" on this topic....even more so... than on the topic of Terri's friend Dee laughing on her blog about abusing an animal in her care. My husband and I travel frequently for a variety of reasons. I am as scrupulous at checking out who cares for our dogs as I was once for our kids. They (OUR PETS) can't tell me, can they, if they are being neglected or hurt? I dread just such a person as Terri's friend Dede...who not only abuses the dog but sees humor in its pain. I was stunned by reading that blog post here.

Though there were some opinions who differed, of course. And it made for a spirited debate.

I think of elder abuse and child abuse...and the helplessness. I cannot imagine leaving someone I love in the hands of someone I did not trust...not to mention, that LE thought capable of these crimes!

I do write emphatically...and may sometimes use an rhetorical device. But if it concerns empathy...I hope you'll bear with me. It's not personal.

I understand that many here believe Kaine should just hand over Baby K to Terri. I am speaking from my heart. I do feel his fear. Must be close to terror. But I am willing to consider all arguments..of those who believe he should not be concerned. I'm even curious to hear them. That's why we are here...no?

 

[SurfieTX]

If any of these things are ever proven, or even have a preponderance of evidence suggesting she is guilty of them, I would agree with you. IMO, since she has not been proven guilty or even arrested for the things you say against her then she shouls be able to see her child. IMO, it is wrong for one parent to be able to take a child completely away from the other based upon accusations that nobody seems to be interested (MFH) or able to prove. On the side of extreme caution, supervised visits should have been granted from day 1 at the very least.

Terri still has the option to petition the court to amend the restraining order about visitation. That's well within her rights and has been since day one of the RO.

 

[RubyRed]

If any of these things are ever proven, or even have a preponderance of evidence suggesting she is guilty of them, I would agree with you. IMO, since she has not been proven guilty or even arrested for the things you say against her then she shouls be able to see her child. IMO, it is wrong for one parent to be able to take a child completely away from the other based upon accusations that nobody seems to be interested (MFH) or able to prove. On the side of extreme caution, supervised visits should have been granted from day 1 at the very least.

bbm

We don't know that LE can't prove them. They have way more than we know. The risk is too great IMO. Even with supervised visitation, there is no telling what devious plot could be hatched, to get Baby K away. Better to err on the side of caution especially with one child already missing. TH has already proven she lacks good judgement just based on the sexting fiasco. While that isn't a crime in itself when everything else is put together, I wouldn't want her around my child either. It isn't normal IMO to be sexting and wasting that energy when Kyron whom she supposedly loved is missing. moo

 

[Kat010]

I am just catching up... but why on earth would LE have to prove the bio parents opinions/allegations they made in the media? LE has never named her a suspect. Not once.

bbm

BINGO! She not only hasn't been arrested or charged, she's not even named as a suspect (although, as Houze points out, she's being treated like one.).Yet, according to KH & DY, and tons of onlookers, TH is guilty, guilty, guilty.

So, someone needs to saddle up and ride and prove that. Until then, it's all just gossip, rumor, and, in some cases, darned close to libel and defamation of character. If she's not guilty, boy howdy, I see some lawsuits a'comin'.

 

[Mylou]

All I can say on this topic is I believe the Judge is wise to delay until January.
Hopefully by then there will be some answers about where Kyron is, and whether or not TH is involved.
If there are no answers by then , then I wonder what He (the Judge) will do then ?

 

[debs]

StMarysMead posted--

1:45 p.m. Judge: “The court recognizes Mr. Horman finds himself in middle of any parent’s nightmare, any human’s worst nightmare, and that is true by just the fact than his son has disappeared, but to add to that worst nightmare is that police came to him in June and informed him they had probable cause, that in their view it was more likely than not that Ms. Horman was likely involved in Kyron’s disappearance and she had hired someone to kill him.”

Kaine did not conjure up out of malice the idea that his wife wanted him dead and that his wife probably was responsible for the disappearance of his son. LE came to him and informed him.

highlighted mine:

LE came to him with a probability, a maybe, a more likely than not. Not an assertion of truth, not a claim of evidence, not a significant demonstration of fact.

And Kaine made a decision to protect (although his attorney made the statement yesterday that "timely resolution was his focus for his daughter's well-being, not protection) his daughter with that, stripping her from her mother based on a maybe.

WHAT IF THEY'RE WRONG screams out at me when I see this.

 

[Kat010]

Thanks BeanE.

I'm assuming Terri's parents are at or near retirement age. They had an $86,000 mortgage and now have had to go further in debt with this refinance...essentially almost doubling the size of their debt at this time in their lives.

If this refinance was used to help pay for their daughter's attorney, this is certainly nothing to hide. Rather this is an understandable act of family love....admirable even. So, why not say so?

End of story.

End of further unfortunate (for their daughter ) speculation.

Speculation like...was this refinance used to help Terri out of some OTHER trouble? What has Terri been doing that might involve her needing large sums of money? Did this "need" tap out her parents resources...thereby necessitating a third party WHO MUST BE ANONYMOUS (to protect Terri) putting up the attorneys fees?

If the answer is simple and admirable...i.e. loving parents went into further debt to help their daughter...why avoid it as if it is some scandal?

Why avoid it at all?

bbm

Yikes! There's other trouble re: Terri? What kind? I'd really like to know more about this. Can you point me in the right direction? TIA

As to why not just say "my parents hired Houze" (if they did), there are ample posts here discussing the legal reasons why not, including the reasons on a larger scale. And some of 'em are brilliant! Read along, you'll enjoy the depth of knowledge some here have. I sure am.

 

[wickedeye]

This question for any legal eagles out there--Can the judge ask to see the source of the funds given to Houze without disclosing the third party to Kaine's lawyers in order to determine whether the funds need to be disclosed or not?

 

[BeanE]

I don't think I've ever in my life seen/heard someone say that something was more likely than not to be likely. Not more likely than not to be, but more likely than not to be likely.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around that one.

 

[debs]

I don't think I've ever in my life seen/heard someone say that something was more likely than not to be likely. Not more likely than not to be, but more likely than not to be likely.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around that one.

It's more likely than not that you will never most likely ever get your head around it

 

[stmarysmead]

StMarysMead posted--highlighted mine:

LE came to him with a probability, a maybe, a more likely than not. Not an assertion of truth, not a claim of evidence, not a significant demonstration of fact.

And Kaine made a decision to protect (although his attorney made the statement yesterday that "timely resolution was his focus for his daughter's well-being, not protection) his daughter with that, stripping her from her mother based on a maybe.

WHAT IF THEY'RE WRONG screams out at me when I see this.

That is always possible. But...BBM...we do not know what evidence they shared. We heard yesterday that Kaine's attorney has "reams" of evidence about this case that Terri's attorney wants to see.

If there is THAT much to see, maybe LE has even MORE held back. Sounds like they have a great deal. We simplydo not know what LE knows or Kaine knows.

If they are wrong and Teri is innocent , that is sad. If however, they are RIGHT, and Terri still gets Baby K...that could be a potential tragedy.

The two things are not equal IMO. They should err on the side of a helpless child's safety.

If I'm getting on a trans Atlantic flight, I don't want to hear that the mechanics think maybe the engines are safe enough to leave. It's sad if I'm delayed and miss a day of my trip but it's could be tragic if they take chances.

And I'm speaking of one who was stuck for 10 days in London under the Ash Cloud. I did not want to be on the first flight out testing if the Cloud thing was over rated.