CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #11

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
DAdvocate said:
We don't know squat.
Click to expand...

With respect, we know all was not well with CW. He has told us he strangled his wife and killed his son. He has told us he threw his children's bodies in oil tanks. In any place, anywhere in the world, in any language, that is as far away from normal as you can get.

I am all for keeping an open mind and looking at both sides but that should not take in any way from what we know he has done. He has carried out the most awful of crimes, there is no defending that.
 
Bill Carson said:
Gitana1, look, I've been doing this for 8 years, but rely on your own research if you want to. Do you live in a state where one parent has primary custody and the other gets visitation time? I can tell you that Colorado is much different than that, and it takes a long time to get a handle on how parenting time is divided here.

I would be careful what you read on lawyer's blogs---sometimes those blogs are written by bots at Avvo or Thompson West (or whatever the name is today). They are also written to try to lure unsuspecting clients in and get them to pay a bunch of money.

No, there are no guarantees of absolutely 50/50 parenting time. As I have said, there is not standard parenting time presumption in Colorado. I used to work in Texas, where they had a Standard Possession Order, and it was presumed that one parent had "custody" and the other got "visitation" on the first, third, and fifth weekends. Colorado has no presumptions. The judge is supposed to compare the facts in the case against "all relevant factors" including nine specific factors (as opposed to only three factors mentioned in the blog you linked to above). Here is the statute (14-10-124 C.R.S.):

(a) Determination of parenting time. The court, upon the motion of either party or upon its own motion, may make provisions for parenting time that the court finds are in the child's best interests unless the court finds, after a hearing, that parenting time by the party would endanger the child's physical health or significantly impair the child's emotional development. In addition to a finding that parenting time would endanger the child's physical health or significantly impair the child's emotional development, in any order imposing or continuing a parenting time restriction, the court shall enumerate the specific factual findings supporting the restriction and may enumerate the conditions that the restricted party could fulfill in order to seek modification in the parenting plan. When a claim of child abuse or neglect, domestic violence, or sexual assault where there is also a claim that the child was conceived as a result of the sexual assault has been made to the court, or the court has reason to believe that a party has committed child abuse or neglect, domestic violence, or sexual assault where there is also a claim that the child was conceived as a result of the sexual assault, prior to determining parenting time, the court shall follow the provisions of subsection (4) of this section. In determining the best interests of the child for purposes of parenting time, the court shall consider all relevant factors, including:

(I) The wishes of the child's parents as to parenting time;
(II) The wishes of the child if he or she is sufficiently mature to express reasoned and independent preferences as to the parenting time schedule;
(III) The interaction and interrelationship of the child with his or her parents, his or her siblings, and any other person who may significantly affect the child's best interests;
(IV) The child's adjustment to his or her home, school, and community;
(V) The mental and physical health of all individuals involved, except that a disability alone shall not be a basis to deny or restrict parenting time;
(VI) The ability of the parties to encourage the sharing of love, affection, and contact between the child and the other party; except that, if the court determines that a party is acting to protect the child from witnessing domestic violence or from being a victim of child abuse or neglect or domestic violence, the party's protective actions shall not be considered with respect to this factor;
(VII Whether the past pattern of involvement of the parties with the child reflects ) a system of values, time commitment, and mutual support;
(VIII) The physical proximity of the parties to each other as this relates to the practical considerations of parenting time;
(IX) Repealed. and
(X)
(XI) The ability of each party to place the needs of the child ahead of his or her own needs.​

So every parent can design their own parenting plan and can come into court and argue for it. But in practice (again, you won't find this in the law), will almost always start with the presumption of 50/50 parenting time (though how to implement it is open), and then they will add or subtract to one parent or the other based upon the facts of the case as applied to the factors enumerated above.

Add to that the judges' hate of child custody cases and having to make decisions, and many courts will give 50/50 parenting time in all but a few cases. And it doesn't matter as much as you might think who has been the "primary caretaker." (i.e., who feeds and bathes the kids, takes them to the doctor, etc.) Judges will say that the parents divided roles in the marriage, but that shouldn't handicap dad once the marriage is over.

So you are right, there is no guarantee that CW gets 50% parenting time, but if the parents live in close proximity, then it's going to be pretty close to 50/50, unless there's a good reason why it shouldn't be. Again, this assumes that they live in close enough proximity to make it workable. And also, I am answering this based upon what we knew about CW and SW before the deaths.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. I'm not reading or linking to lawyer blogs like Avvo. I linked to a news article published today indicating that the legislature of Colorado is right at this moment considering a 50/50 law making that be the standard. Which means it is absolutely not the presumption now.

I also linked to law firm websites in which they discuss parenting time, primary parents and the law regarding those issues.

You cited the code. It is almost identical to the best interest standard in my state and nowhere does it remotely indicate that equal parenting time is the rule, the law or even the standard.

In my state there is actually a codified provision that joint custody is presumed as in the best interests of the kids. And that is defined much like in Colorado. It has to do with legal custody (decision making) and is a legal term of art when it comes to physical custody, that makes things like move aways harder.

We also call it parenting time here and have moved away from "visitation".

I don't see many differences between my state (CA) and Colorado.

We do have the ability here for one parent to be the primary custodial parent and the other to be secondary. That happens when one parent works much more often or if other criteria make that in the best interest of the children.

Are you an attorney? You should get verified!

All I know is the code does not state that equal parenting time is standard in CO and every CO lawyer website I have visited discusses how to fight for time with the kids so while it appears judges there favor equal sharing of the kids it is clearly not a given and CW likely would've not assumed he would be granted 50 %. Especially not with his hours.

Few judges, I believe, would think it's in a toddler's best interest to give a parent who works 10 hour days when the other is more flexible and available, equal parenting. He or she would not be able to take the child to appointments, to and from preschool, or spend much time with them. The kid would be warehoused in paid child care instead of with a parent.

It makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
bluesneakers said:
Pyramid schemes are illegal. MLMs are often simply product-based pyramid schemes.

Pyramid Schemes are, however, fraudulent schemes, disguised as an MLM strategy. The difference between a pyramid scheme and a lawful MLM program is that there is no real product that is sold in a pyramid scheme. Participants attempt to make money solely by recruiting new participants into the program. The hallmark of these schemes is the promise of sky-high returns in a short period of time for doing nothing other than handing over your money and getting others to do the same.
Multi-Level Marketing vs Pyramid Schemes - South Dakota Consumer Protection

Opportunity or Scam? Multi-Level Marketing vs. Pyramid Schemes
Multi-Level Marketing vs. Pyramid Schemes
Click to expand...

Thanks. I didn't know that.
 
ethoma12002 said:
Wow - $140,000 in a month? That sounds like a lot, but I guess that would be about $300 of product to 15 different people every day, which doesn't sound outlandish - but you would still need 15 different people every day to get those sales. Are you sure that's not her whole team's sales? That would be more accurate. If she had the potential to make $15,000 a month in commission, why would CW derail the gravy train? I thought it was financial stress, but now its stranger to me.
Click to expand...

I just went back and searched Isalybra’s posts but Idk how to quote from older threads. She said SW April sales were $130,000. So I apologize for being off on that. I do not know if those were team totals or her totals. It’s not out of the realm of possibly that she had hundreds of people under her. If she got in on the ground floor when the company started exploding she would be in a great position a couple years later. IMO.

What if CW was jealous of SW being the breadwinner? Could that be possible if she was making more than he was? Another possible financial motive? Or maybe jealous she got to work from home and take tons of trips or what he considered downtime? Maybe another angle to consider.

All speculation and IMO. Again, we don’t know actual totals and percentages.
 
I am concerned that it appears some don't think it is a big deal, if CW "only" killed his wife and his son. Personally, I have no doubts that he also killed his daughters. But even if I am wrong about that....we DO KNOW that he confessed to killing his wife INTENTIONALLY, and that would have been with full knowledge he was also killing his son. PLUS what he admits to doing to their bodies afterwards is a crime in itself. So we do know squat, and squat is very very bad.
 
Back in the day, people who were enthralled with and wanted to defend mass killers could write them love letters in jail, and boy, did they. The famous mass murderers like Ted Bundy could count on adulation to ease the "rejection" which is why he is said to have killed women in the first place. Nowadays the internet is the communication method of choice, but poor CW, he may not have DSL or even dial up in the slammer. He can probably get snail mail, though.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 176 more.
Total: 421 (members: 177, guests: 244)

Online statistics

Members online
177
Guests online
244
Total visitors
421
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,936
Messages
18,247,841
Members
234,510
Latest member
Sarcon
Back
Top