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

[Adrienne37]

Well, certainly the $350,000, for example, is already on record too, and far less critical, if critical at all, to the safety, well-being, and best interests of this baby, yet time and effort was placed into putting it on record yet again in this document.

What's most important here? To me, it's Kyron and the baby.

Again, as has been discussed on this forum many times, Kaine has every right to know where the 350,000 came from especially in light of Terri's attorney's newest motion asking for him to pay for her to have supervised visitation with baby K. JMO.

 

[ami]

Well, certainly the $350,000, for example, is already on record too, and far less critical, if critical at all, to the safety, well-being, and best interests of this baby, yet time and effort was placed into putting it on record yet again in this document.

What's most important here? To me, it's Kyron and the baby.

What's most important to his attorney is responding to Terri's requests, which were expedited/abbreviated hearing for supervised visitation, and Kaine financing supervised visitation should she be granted it. Appropriately, Kaine's attorney responded about the expedited hearing and about the financing of supervised visitation.

They can't possibly play out the entire Kyron abduction case in every family court/ baby K legal document, nor can every legal document solely focus on the most important aspects of Kyron's case. Some of them will have to be related to money or divorce or whatever they are directly responding to from Terri's lawyer.

 

[BeanE]

Actually, since Terri is requesting that Kaine pay for her to have supervised visitation with K, it is very prudent to bring up the unresolved issue of the money that Terri used to hire her high profile attorney. It is a lot different than the information provided in RO petition which has already been proven true.

I suppose if Terri's motion had mentioned that they don't believe that the RO allegations are true and Kaine failed to mention the probable cause, then that would be a different story. But the
reality is that even Terri and her lawyers have yet to refute Kaine's assertions.

If this motion were the only thing that the judge had to go on to make a decision, I could see it being a potential issue. But it's not. And it won't be. Jmo

It may well be prudent and pertinent to bring up the $350,000 in this filing.

I contend that it is every more prudent and pertinent to bring up whatever information is on hand with regards to the safety, well-being, and best interests of the baby, and keep it in front of the judge, for his consideration.

LE providing probable cause to Kaine that Terri was involved in the disappearance of Kyron is certainly pertinent to the baby's safety, well-being, and best interests.

It may not be necessary to bring it up in this document, but I think, for the baby's sake, that it's extremely important to do so. My opinion.

 

[BeanE]

Again, as has been discussed on this forum many times, Kaine has every right to know where the 350,000 came from especially in light of Terri's attorney's newest motion asking for him to pay for her to have supervised visitation with baby K. JMO.

I don't understand your point, since I didn't say, or even imply anything at all about Kaine's rights.

I've posted myself that Kaine has every right, morally, and to my knowledge, legally, to know if he has a financial obligation with regard to Terri's attorney's fee.

 

[Billylee]

Again, as has been discussed on this forum many times, Kaine has every right to know where the 350,000 came from especially in light of Terri's attorney's newest motion asking for him to pay for her to have supervised visitation with baby K. JMO.

Okay, maybe I'm just slow, but if the money ($350k more or less, no matter), came from another source, a third party, as has been stated by Terri's attorney, then what right does Kaine have to know who it came from? Turning the record over, and say Terri is asking Kaine where he got his money to fight her in court, would he have to show whom it came from if in fact it had never crossed his hands and came from some mysterious third party.

IDK, but I think this issue is really beating a dead horse. You have two attorneys, stating to a judge, (risking their careers if they're lying), saying that the money DID NOT COME FROM TERRI HORMAN, IT CAME FROM A THIRD PARTY, who for whatever reason is willing to fund her defense. It did not come from any joint assets. End of story. IMHO.

 

[BeanE]

What's most important to his attorney is responding to Terri's requests, which were expedited/abbreviated hearing for supervised visitation, and Kaine financing supervised visitation should she be granted it. Appropriately, Kaine's attorney responded about the expedited hearing and about the financing of supervised visitation.

They can't possibly play out the entire Kyron abduction case in every family court/ baby K legal document, nor can every legal document solely focus on the most important aspects of Kyron's case. Some of them will have to be related to money or divorce or whatever they are directly responding to from Terri's lawyer.

I completely agree, ami.

 

[Adrienne37]

It may well be prudent and pertinent to bring up the $350,000 in this filing.

I contend that it is every more prudent and pertinent to bring up whatever information is on hand with regards to the safety, well-being, and best interests of the baby, and keep it in front of the judge, for his consideration.

LE providing probable cause to Kaine that Terri was involved in the disappearance of Kyron is certainly pertinent to the baby's safety, well-being, and best interests.

It may not be necessary to bring it up in this document, but I think, for the baby's sake, that it's extremely important to do so. My opinion.

I'd say that since Ms. Rackner has completed law school and been an attorney for quite a well, she is well aware of what she needs to add or omit on the motions that she files with the courts. JMO.

 

[pufnstuf]

Okay, maybe I'm just slow, but if the money ($350k more or less, no matter), came from another source, a third party, as has been stated by Terri's attorney, then what right does Kaine have to know who it came from? Turning the record over, and say Terri is asking Kaine where he got his money to fight her in court, would he have to show whom it came from if in fact it had never crossed his hands and came from some mysterious third party.

IDK, but I think this issue is really beating a dead horse. You have two attorneys, stating to a judge, (risking their careers if they're lying), saying that the money DID NOT COME FROM TERRI HORMAN, IT CAME FROM A THIRD PARTY, who for whatever reason is willing to fund her defense. It did not come from any joint assets. End of story. IMHO.

Has that matter been settled in court yet? To my knowledge, the judge hasn't made a ruling on it, but maybe I'm wrong. I understood that this was one of two motions the hearing of which was delayed until January 6th.

I know that Houze submitted a memo, but I don't believe that the judge has ruled on it yet.

 

[gwenabob]

Has that matter been settled in court yet? To my knowledge, the judge hasn't made a ruling on it, but maybe I'm wrong. I understood that this was one of two motions the hearing of which was delayed until January 6th.

I know that Houze submitted a memo, but I don't believe that the judge has ruled on it yet.

You are correct. This matter has not been settled yet and the who/what/where of the suit money issue has not yet been determined. The court will not simply take an attorney's word for something. If that were the case, there would be nobody in jail! All those super honest attorneys would simply vouch for their client's innocence.

 

[Billylee]

Nope, hasn't been settled in court that I know of anyway. That's my point, do you really think two prominent attorneys would state in their own declarations that the money didn't come from TH, but a third party, if it had?

 

[pufnstuf]

Nope, hasn't been settled in court that I know of anyway. That's my point, do you really think two prominent attorneys would state in their own declarations that the money didn't come from TH, but a third party, if it had?

I suppose the matter can't really be a dead horse if it hasn't been heard by the judge yet.

 

[citigirl]

Nope, hasn't been settled in court that I know of anyway. That's my point, do you really think two prominent attorneys would state in their own declarations that the money didn't come from TH, but a third party, if it had?

What if, say, the third party is the National Enquirer and the money was given in exchange for an exclusive article with Terri after trial? Or some pitures of Kyron? How would the judge look at Terri using the money for her defense but pleading indigent in the divorce case? That's just one possible scenario...

 

[Trt]

It may well be prudent and pertinent to bring up the $350,000 in this filing.

I contend that it is every more prudent and pertinent to bring up whatever information is on hand with regards to the safety, well-being, and best interests of the baby, and keep it in front of the judge, for his consideration.

LE providing probable cause to Kaine that Terri was involved in the disappearance of Kyron is certainly pertinent to the baby's safety, well-being, and best interests.

It may not be necessary to bring it up in this document, but I think, for the baby's sake, that it's extremely important to do so. My opinion.

That LE provided Kaine with probable cause to obtain his RO is an uncontested fact for the purposes of these proceedings. There is no need to reiterate it. The safety of Baby K and what evidence has been used to keep her away from her mother is not even at issue. It doesn't add or take anything away from the motion. It is also a matter of record that Terri is a proven danger to Kaine and her daughter and Kaine and his attorney didn't include that in the motion either. Jmo

 

[Jo in Calif]

The way I look at this whole thing is that if Kaine believes that Terri has caused "unimaginable harm to Kyron" and was responsible in any way shape or form, for him gone missing, he is going to fight with every thing possible, for Terri to have no contact with that baby in no way shape or form, supervised or not. He feels it is in the best interest and well being of that baby. IMO He will fight every motion Terri puts forth, he will fight her every step of the way. Not saying he will win, just saying he will fight for what he thinks is right for that baby.

 

[BeanE]

That LE provided Kaine with probable cause to obtain his RO is an uncontested fact for the purposes of these proceedings. There is no need to reiterate it. The safety of Baby K and what evidence has been used to keep her away from her mother is not even at issue. It doesn't add or take anything away from the motion. It is also a matter of record that Terri is a proven danger to Kaine and her daughter and Kaine and his attorney didn't include that in the motion either. Jmo

We'll have to just agree to disagree for now, trt. I do appreciate you having this conversation with me, and offering me your perspective. You've given me some things to chew on.

Have a great night, and thanks.

 

[pufnstuf]

The way I look at this whole thing is that if Kaine believes that Terri has caused "unimaginable harm to Kyron" and was responsible in any way shape or form, for him gone missing, he is going to fight with every thing possible, for Terri to have no contact with that baby in no way shape or form, supervised or not. He feels it is in the best interest and well being of that baby. IMO He will fight every motion Terri puts forth, he will fight her every step of the way. Not saying he will win, just saying he will fight for what he thinks is right for that baby.

Absolutely... and I don't blame him one bit.

It seems that it's what any protective, loving parent would do under the circumstances.

 

[germaine]

Okay, maybe I'm just slow, but if the money ($350k more or less, no matter), came from another source, a third party, as has been stated by Terri's attorney, then what right does Kaine have to know who it came from? Turning the record over, and say Terri is asking Kaine where he got his money to fight her in court, would he have to show whom it came from if in fact it had never crossed his hands and came from some mysterious third party.

IDK, but I think this issue is really beating a dead horse. You have two attorneys, stating to a judge, (risking their careers if they're lying), saying that the money DID NOT COME FROM TERRI HORMAN, IT CAME FROM A THIRD PARTY, who for whatever reason is willing to fund her defense. It did not come from any joint assets. End of story. IMHO.

imo, it's ridiculous. Put yourself in Kaine's position, or for that matter in the position of anyone else in a normal divorce situation. You are the spouse who's asked to pay attorneys' fees. Your stb-ex buys a new house, new car, and travels to Italy staying at five-star hotels (let's just say), but is asking YOU to pay his attorneys' fees because he is unemployed and has no obvious means. I mean you, personally. Is that honkey-dory with you, or do you want to find out why all the new stuff and leisure is possible, while the attorneys' fees can't be paid. Seems like a no-brainer to me. btjmoo

 

[germaine]

Yes, I know. Didn't change how I feel when I considered that.

It's an opportunity to get important information on record and get the judge's attention to it, at a critical time, in a critical issue, with only a few more words, and the document failed to do that. It surprises me.

He's not giving up the info on this motion. Not relevant, not worth it. He probably won't give it up even it it goes to baby K's best interests. It's clear that he's relying on the conclusive DV finding and the conslusive MFH finding, imoo. The rest will come from discovery on Terri, and he won't have to tip LE's hand on the criminal charges.

 

[Trt]

Likewise, Bean. Goodnight.

 

[Billylee]

What if, say, the third party is the National Enquirer and the money was given in exchange for an exclusive article with Terri after trial? Or some pitures of Kyron? How would the judge look at Terri using the money for her defense but pleading indigent in the divorce case? That's just one possible scenario...

I'm probably just missing something here. But the issue of where the money came from for Terri to hire an attorney, as far as I can figure anyway, was only as to whether or not the money came from joint assets, i.e., Kaines. Two attorneys have said before a judge that it has NOTHING to do with Kaine's money and that in fact, the money came from a THIRD party, not Kaine's nor Terri's money. That is why it seems like they're beating a dead horse. Maybe I'm wrong, but legally, I don't think Terri has to say where the money came from at all, so long as it wasn't from Kaine and/or their joint assets.

What am I missing?