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

[sorrell skye]

As far as I'm concerned, anything that either party claims happened in the household should be subject to substantiation - i.e. witnesses and/or verifiable documentation that supports whatever it is that is alleged to have occurred.

IANAL, but without corroborating testimony of any witness(es) or some sort of evidentiary documentation (concerning the alleged observed irresponsible intoxicated behavior of the Respondent - Terri Horman - while in the family home), how can the Court accurately determine the veracity of the claims made on the part of the Petitioner?

Furthermore, since one of the parents has stated that he was present in the home during those times of the alleged intoxication of the other parent, how can the accusation that the mother was intoxicated (in the evening, according to KH's statement)) be considered grounds for denial of visitation?

I'm asking this question based on purely legal grounds - not moral grounds, since we're discussing a legal, civil proceeding in a marriage dissolution concerning parental visitation.

Question: Has KH claimed that he arrived home from work (or elsewhere) earlier in the day to find TH intoxicated/passed out and his toddler daughter unsupervised?

According to the affidavit, KH has stated he was home & was present during those times when TH allegedly became intoxicated in the evening - therefore, it appears that the toddler was not left unsupervised, since her father (her other primary care-giver) was present & able to care for her.

IANAL, but I suspect that these are some of the aspects of KH's motion that the Court will address.

Can one of our fine attorneys weigh in on this?

 

[cluciano63]

Oh...maybe I misread. I thought that Bunch said "they" were working to reach an amiable settlement and submitted such to Rackner and were awaiting a reply. Am I way out in left field...If so, I'll go sit in the corner very quietly...LOL. (As tired as I am today, I should not be using a keyboard.)

Tink, I think the "they" refers to Terri's two lawyers...may have purposely been written to sound as though the two sides are working it out, but I think it is unlikley...

 

[DreamyEye]

I really think that at this point a judge should make a decision about visitation. I don't like any back-door agreements between Kaine and Terri at all. Can't a judge view evidence in camera about the investigation that Kaine can't see? I realize LE does not have standing in this case, but can't Kaine's attorney subpoena LE and the evidence is delivered to the judge, who reviews it in private?

Kaine really doesn't have access to all the information he needs to make a decision, because Terri won't provide it to him. I do not think it would be safe for him to make a decision based only on what he knows now.

If Kaine were to decide to allow Terri to see the baby, I hope Child Services would step in to stop this. Or the judge would appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the baby.

I think you have a couple of great ideas here, and I hope that one of the lawyers addresses your post. I never thought about it before, but I would think that a judge in a case involving a juvinile would have the authority to seal anything he felt needed to be sealed, and to set things up so that he could review things submitted about TH while not turning any of that over to the other side. For one thing, I think the sext messages should have been sealed--even though we have given these a lot of thought and based a lot of opinion on them, there is really no need for the public to have known about them.

And now that you mention it, Baby K should have her own representation in this matter!

 

[citigirl]

As far as I'm concerned, anything that either party claims happened in the household should be subject to substantiation - i.e. witnesses and/or verifiable documentation that supports whatever it is that is alleged to have occurred.

IANAL, but without corroborating testimony of any witness(es) or some sort of evidentiary documentation (concerning the alleged observed irresponsible intoxicated behavior of the Respondent - Terri Horman - while in the family home), how can the Court accurately determine the veracity of the claims made on the part of the Petitioner?

Furthermore, since one of the parents has stated that he was present in the home during those times of the alleged intoxication of the other parent, how can the accusation that the mother was intoxicated (in the evening, according to KH's statement)) be considered grounds for denial of visitation?

I'm asking this question based on purely legal grounds - not moral grounds, since we're discussing a legal, civil proceeding in a marriage dissolution concerning parental visitation.

Question: Has KH claimed that he arrived home from work (or elsewhere) earlier in the day to find TH intoxicated/passed out and his toddler daughter unsupervised?

According to the affidavit, KH has stated he was home & was present during those times when TH allegedly became intoxicated in the evening - therefore, it appears that the toddler was not left unsupervised, since her father (her other primary care-giver) was present & able to care for her.

IANAL, but I suspect that these are some of the aspects of KH's motion that the Court will address.

Can one of our fine attorneys weigh in on this?

I agree with you, but TH refuses to even testify...so how can the judge ask KH to provide evidence when TH won't even provide herself?

It's possible supervised visitation would be safe with her. But until she agrees to testify and submit to a psych eval--how could a judge take a chance?

 

[ThoughtFox]

I'm really not surprised by this filing at all. They were never going to let TH go through any type of medical evaluation, period.

They pushed Kaine thinking he might give in and they didn't expect him to release those text messages. But he called their bluff and wrote a scathing affidavit about Terri's drinking.

So they had to backpedal and withdraw. :back:

If it was some kind of strategy on the part of TH's attorneys, I think it failed miserably. JMO

 

[cluciano63]

The baby will not need her own lawyer...since her mother is not fighting for visitation.

 

[sorrell skye]

And now that you mention it, Baby K should have her own representation in this matter!

sbm

I agree, and have been thinking this for some time.

IMO, until the Court reaches a decision in the marriage dissolution & parenting plan, I think it is in the best interest of Baby K to be appointed a Guardian ad Litem.

JMO

 

[gwenabob]

Oh...maybe I misread. I thought that Bunch said "they" were working to reach an amiable settlement and submitted such to Rackner and were awaiting a reply. Am I way out in left field...If so, I'll go sit in the corner very quietly...LOL. (As tired as I am today, I should not be using a keyboard.)

Well, he did say they have been working on a back room deal for visitation, but at this point, Kaine holds all the chips and Terri has none.

Kaine doesn't have to give her anything at this point. If Terri started cooperating with LE and told them the truth about what happened to Kyron, maybe some visitation in jail might happen, but what has Terri done to show she deserves any consideration as to what she wants at all? All she has done is expect Kaine to give into her whims, her desires, without giving one little thing in return.

 

[gwenabob]

I really think that at this point a judge should make a decision about visitation. I don't like any back-door agreements between Kaine and Terri at all. Can't a judge view evidence in camera about the investigation that Kaine can't see? I realize LE does not have standing in this case, but can't Kaine's attorney subpoena LE and the evidence is delivered to the judge, who reviews it in private?

Kaine really doesn't have access to all the information he needs to make a decision, because Terri won't provide it to him. I do not think it would be safe for him to make a decision based only on what he knows now.

If Kaine were to decide to allow Terri to see the baby, I hope Child Services would step in to stop this. Or the judge would appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the baby.

It is not up to a judge to make a decision about visitation because there is no question before the judge at the time. A judge is not going to butt in and settle a question that has not been put before him/her. The motion has been withdrawn. As it stands now, Terri is not asking for visitation, and Kaine is assumed to be a perfectly good parent for the baby. There is nothing to be settled at this point. Baby lives with dad full time. End of story. For now.

 

[DreamyEye]

It is not up to a judge to make a decision about visitation because there is no question before the judge at the time. A judge is not going to butt in and settle a question that has not been put before him/her. The motion has been withdrawn. As it stands now, Terri is not asking for visitation, and Kaine is assumed to be a perfectly good parent for the baby. There is nothing to be settled at this point. Baby lives with dad full time. End of story. For now.

What you say makes sense, but my focus goes to your last two words: "for now." Today's filing mentions trying to work out an arrangement behind the scenes. It makes me nervous, and I still think it's a great idea to appoint someone whose sole purpose is to watch out for the interests of that child. At this point I'm not even sure I'd leave it up to Kaine to "allow" Terri visitation. I don't think he would allow it if he had a say ... but I'm not sure the state should leave the matter up to him either way. There should be someone with a little clout in this matter who has no other dog in the hunt whatsoever other than making sure someone's looking out for that little girl.

 

[shergal]

I'm am NOT saying that I think these things!

I'm saying that maybe it was a strategic move.

And yes, they have now made it public record that Kaine is not trying to give baby-K motherly contact...something that I'm sure most childhood experts would agree is essential (regardless of guilt)...PARTICULARLY since she is so young.

She cannot seperate these things.

And they don't have to make any sort of arguements...

It's already been granted or agreeed to, whatever the correct terms are...that Terri should not have to testify or whatever...the basis for the divorce being put off.

Everyone seems to agree, it's not in her best interest. No one expects it. No one is going to make her. Kaines' attornies may try, but her attornies will squelch it. It's not going to happen.

HOWEVER...they have been able to present information to the court that basically suggests that Kaine is being uncaring in terms of K's needs for her mom without testifying.

Also, in terms of Kaine's potential contribution to the neglect...I don't think that Terri's attornies need to say anything.

Frankly, I thin Kaine's attornies were kind of (unusual) in their wording...they basically said he witnessed this and didn't act as a parent. I'm betting Terri's attornies won't say a word...it's pretty much unnecessary.

But it does beg the question...sorry if I'm the only one to ask it OUT LOUD (sorta)...why the heck didn't he put the baby to bed at 7 or 8 or 9...why did he allow her to sleep next to a passed out drunk on the couch?

In terms of his responisbility as a husband...I have questions there too...but MOSTLY if he was noticing all this with the children, why didn't he intervein?

There's got to be a reason...

Again...just wondering if this is THEIR reasoning...

You said: "HOWEVER...they have been able to present information to the court that basically suggests that Kaine is being uncaring in terms of K's needs for her mom without testifying."

I'm not following your argument here, to me Kaine has shown he is very caring by working hard at keeping K away from TH.

 

[germaine]

What you say makes sense, but my focus goes to your last two words: "for now." Today's filing mentions trying to work out an arrangement behind the scenes. It makes me nervous, and I still think it's a great idea to appoint someone whose sole purpose is to watch out for the interests of that child. At this point I'm not even sure I'd leave it up to Kaine to "allow" Terri visitation. I don't think he would allow it if he had a say ... but I'm not sure the state should leave the matter up to him either way. There should be someone with a little clout in this matter who has no other dog in the hunt whatsoever other than making sure someone's looking out for that little girl.

why would the court step in and usurp KH's parenting authority? He has sole custody of baby pursuant to a fapa r/o and there is no evidence whatsoever that he's not a good parent. I don't get this thinking at all. He's her father, he has sole custody and there is no evidence that he's done anything even slightly wrong wrt to baby. She should stay with him absent some evidence that he's a danger to her, which is not bloody likely to be forthcoming, imo.

 

[gwenabob]

What you say makes sense, but my focus goes to your last two words: "for now." Today's filing mentions trying to work out an arrangement behind the scenes. It makes me nervous, and I still think it's a great idea to appoint someone whose sole purpose is to watch out for the interests of that child. At this point I'm not even sure I'd leave it up to Kaine to "allow" Terri visitation. I don't think he would allow it if he had a say ... but I'm not sure the state should leave the matter up to him either way. There should be someone with a little clout in this matter who has no other dog in the hunt whatsoever other than making sure someone's looking out for that little girl.

There is no way Kaine is going to allow TH to see the baby outside a court order. That would void the RO. Not going to happen.

The lawyers can wrangle a deal if they want, and if Kaine agrees to it, they can take it before a judge for approval which would keep the RO intact with the only change being the agreed upon visitation schedule. But if Kaine refused to come an agreement for the last 3 or 4 months, why in the world would he change his mind now? He is on top right now. He would have nothing to gain. And personally, I don't think the baby would either.

I think it is the state's policy to assume parents are fit so long as there is no evidence to the contrary. There is no evidence Kaine is unfit, so no reason for the state to intervene on the baby's behalf. That would be a misuse of the state's power, in my opinion.

If Terri wants visitation, it is up to her to prove to the court she is fit for it now. She has decided it is not in her best interest to do so. There is nothing more for the court or state to say. They are out of it. Baby stays with dad, who is assumed to be a perfectly fit father. Millions of single parents out there doing just fine.

 

[gwenabob]

sbm

I agree, and have been thinking this for some time.

IMO, until the Court reaches a decision in the marriage dissolution & parenting plan, I think it is in the best interest of Baby K to be appointed a Guardian ad Litem.

JMO

I have to disagree. There is no reason in this case to appoint a guardian ad litem. Kaine is a perfectly proper parent in every way. If he were also in legal trouble, or suspected of disappearing a child, or showed a serious substance abuse problem, or some other reason he could not be a proper parent, then maybe so. But the court does not have a policy of interfering in family business when it is not needed. There is no custody haggling here. In fact, there is no visitation question here anymore, either.

I really have to wonder if there would be any of these arguments at all were the genders of Kaine and Terri reversed. What if a step father were accused of disappearing his stepson? Would we be wanting to interfere with the relationship between the remaining child and her mother? Would we be fighting for the accused to see the remaining child? Would we be saying, "Oh, she needs her daddy or she will never be whole!" Totally unreasonable!

 

[mauirain]

I think the lawyers may have recently figured out that Michael Cook was possibly a set up by LE after the failed MFH sting. JMO There has to be something more in those text messages. Maybe releasing some but not all was the warning shot fired over the bow.

All my humble opinion only.

I was thinking the same thing!!!

Also, I was just wondering if an attorney would file a motion they don't think is in the best interest of their client, but at the clients persistence, files anyway????

I am just pondering this because TH's divorce attorney stated that TH was still holding out some hope that Kaine would agree to visitation without litigation.....(not a quote) Just sounds to me like TH may have some unrealistic ideas and beliefs that Kaine would let her see their daughter despite the RO. And if she has some altered idea of reality, is it possible that her attorneys filed the original motion because she made them do it???? I have never been in any type of court, nor do I have an attorney, so I don't know if this can happen....anyone know????

 

[mauirain]

Off topic...sorry

I was doing some research on capitol punishment in Oregon, and it seems that the last two people to be put to death were in 1996 and 1997 under Governor Kitzhaber.........well guess who just won his 3rd term as Governor.


[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Oregon[/ame]

Mods...please delete if inappropriate...

 

[Donjeta]

I see ZERO indication that her lawyers have quit. In fact I see quite the opposite right here:

Respondent does not, and will not, give up her right to seek legal custody and unfettered contact with K. Petitioner's efforts to withhold all parenting time is completely contrary to K's healthy development. However, under all of the circumstances, issues regarding parenting time will need to wait for another day, when additional facts can be obtained and presented."

I too, think that just perhaps, Terri's attorney's achieved their goal. Though not being a lawyer, I have no idea what that might be.

JMO but the red part is made pretty much moot in the green part which says to me that they need to have depos to present additional facts but they'll agree to have depositions another day when the hell has frozen over.

While she may not give up her RIGHT to seek contact with the baby she is not doing anything worth her lawyers' while to actually GET that contact if it requires any truth-telling.

I could say that I haven't given up my right to obtain a passport but I haven't filed for one since my last one expired and don't have any plans to for now so the issue is moot.

PS: the post I quoted needs to have the baby's name edited out.

 

[Donjeta]

Part 12 is a pretty cheap hit at Kaine. He's unreasonable and unwilling to compromise because he hasn't answered Terri's very reasonable offer to compromise although he still has time left to do so. :waitasec:

 

[Trt]

Any *behind the scenes* arrangement would place BOTH Kaine and Terri in contempt of court if there is no NEW motion filed to modify the FAPA RO as it relates to parenting time. Terri's lawyers know this and their legal language is trying to make it seem as if all they have to do is come to an agreement behind the scenes and present it to the judge. There still has to be a formal hearing (with a request filed by either petitioner or respondent) and the judge can take their agreement into consideration, but is under no obligation to abide by it, considering that Terri has been labeled and abuser and as such LOST contact with her daughter.

They are blowing smoke, IMO.

 

[BringKyronHome]

You said: "HOWEVER...they have been able to present information to the court that basically suggests that Kaine is being uncaring in terms of K's needs for her mom without testifying."

I'm not following your argument here, to me Kaine has shown he is very caring by working hard at keeping K away from TH.

TH's attorneys have filed documents that state that Kaine is being completely inflexible.

The documentation suggests that TH is concerned about baby K's development, and has made numerous attempts for visitation.

These 2 statements together SUGGEST to the court (and as another poster pointed out, to the public as well) that Kaine's inflexibility is a reflection of his interest in baby K's emotional development.

Certainly anyone could agree that her safety is paramount, and until we have facts in one direction or another, that his parental responibility is to protect her at all costs - that is 100% understandable.

However, any reasonable person can see that there is a way (many in fact) to meet both these needs!

Keep her safe as well as reestablishing that motherly connection.

And we all know that Kaine, a very logical person, can find a way to make this happen.

Since he is unwilling (as is claimed by TH's attorneys)...the conclusion is:________________________________________



NO I'M NOT DRAWING THIS CONCLUSION!!! I'm simply saying that it's been painted in the filings.

Additionally, I'm not buying, hook line & sinker all his accusations about Terri in his filings either!

There is something DRASTICALLY wrong with his stories. On one hand he was sideblinded by this, on the next she's emotionally disturbed. On one hand she's a good mother on the next she's a irresponsible neglectful drunk. On one hand she is irratic on the next it was due to PPD. On one hand they had some issues like all marriages, but on the next he thought they had worked them out in a possitive way and felt his marriage was good.

I honestly don't know what to believe.

I think, for one thing, that TH's attornies are not arguing or commenting on any of this, because Kaine is really talking himself into a hole. With I think D's help...we can't know what the real truth is (which usually lies between 2 perspectives) because wwe haven't heard any details from TH's side. Sometimes silence is louder than words.

You COULD assume that her silence is an indication of her guilt. Or you could assume that she's not choosing to sling mud.

How do you think the court will see it...when the day comes.

Afterall...who do you think is being hurt most by the release of these statements and the texts?

From where I sit, it looks like a MUCH harder punch to J, K & K. Imagine having to face your friends with this out there. Terri may be embarrassed...but adults whisper behind backs, etc. Kids are MUCH crueler.

How do you suppose family court will view the name calling. Under most circumstances it would be Same crap different day...but this isn't a normal circumstance...everything these 2 (and anyone around them) do, it's in the media. Under these circumstances, releasing dirty laundry is harmful, at minimum, to the minors.

Not passing judgement...I'm just thinking that this COULD be their strategy.

A judge doesn't get cought up in rumor and gossip - they look at what is submitted to the court.