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

[Angel4u2Whisper2]

IMOO I would think that it would be the upmost importance to baby K to have time with her mother (more so if she is innocent and will remain a consent in her life). I don't buy that it is for her saftey so there for we are not going to fight for it at this time, maybe later? Why would a lawyer not fight this ASAP, as it would show his client is claiming innocence and demands her parental rights to her child she loves and adores?

Gosh sakes they have vistations in jails, social services offices. They could do it if they wanted to "think outside the box".

So if this is for baby K then I pose the question where are the supervised vistation arrangements? Demand protection or supervision to continue to see your daughter. Why not file a request to ask for all types of information to mandated by the court to have her and rights to all information on her current medical concerns or well child visits and so on?

This would require her to go to court and be subject to evaluations and possiably testimony in front of the judge? Small price to pay.

A birthmother that loves her child rather she was feeling it would be granted or not wouldn't put her child on the backburner in any situation. Again, IMO

 

[21merc7]

Baby K. Right now TH's attorney is asking to hold everything off, except the Final Decree of divorce, because of the mess that has TH a "poi" in the missing Kyron case, and a "poi" in an alleged MFH case. No custody issues will be addressed for 2 years. That does not mean if things calm down in a few months that TH's lawyer will not request proper visitation.

TH's attorney does not want her, (and also not Kaine I would presume), being evaluated at this time. TH cannot get a job b/c of all the "poi" mess and death threats, she is probably having a nervous breakdown as she has lost everything in her life. KH is probably in the same boat. So, TH's attorney is asking to hold off on family evaluations until everyone can get their lives together, and, until LE can find Kyron or a perp, and hopefully remove the possible arrest, unemployable status, and poi/death threat status from TH.


As for asking for the other party to pay attorney fees, that is completely standard, and I really don't care who pays them, as long as it will follows the rules of Oregon and the United States.

 

[Emeralgem]

But it's not the court saying that she shouldn't be evaluated, but Terri and her attorney. It has nothing to do with the bias or non-bias of the evaluator - the defense just doesn't want her to undergo any kind of examination.

------------------------------------------


IMHO..Last thing TMH and her attorney want are the results of any psych evaluation ever revealed in a court of law..JMO

 

[ThoughtFox]

But it's not the court saying that she shouldn't be evaluated, but Terri and her attorney. It has nothing to do with the bias or non-bias of the evaluator - the defense just doesn't want her to undergo any kind of examination.

------------------------------------------


IMHO..Last thing TMH and her attorney want are the results of any psych evaluation ever revealed in a court of law..JMO

Yes, I totally agree!

 

[Emeralgem]

Yes, I totally agree!

O/T..BTW.. I'm in Tennessee also.

 

[Kat010]

Just speculating but if he took a photo as evidence that he'd seen it I think he might have had an ambition to become "a reliable source" and needed the evidence to show to a reporter

Good morning, glories!:detective:

Donjeta, you made me laugh! I think that MC is not very bright, thinks he is, and has interjected himself into this whole mess for reasons other than "gee whiz I'm gonna drop everything and help my old HS buddy who I haven't seen or been with for all these years." I don't think he was doing undercover work for LE.

There are always those who seek to interject themselves into major criminal investigations, in various ways. Maybe it's being "part of the action" and gettting attention, or becoming "important" (remember Drew Peterson's now-former-sidekick who became mildly famous--or infamous? Rick? hmm).

Or there might be more nefarious reasons. I still think MC is hinky and i hope they're checking out not only his background, but his timeline that day.

And thanks, grandmaj, DrFessel, and A News Junkie for getting the title, etc. sorted out for this thread!

 

[21merc7]

But it's not the court saying that she shouldn't be evaluated, but Terri and her attorney. It has nothing to do with the bias or non-bias of the evaluator - the defense just doesn't want her to undergo any kind of examination.

------------------------------------------


IMHO..Last thing TMH and her attorney want are the results of any psych evaluation ever revealed in a court of law..JMO

I have to respectfully disagree.

I think it would be a gross injustice for either parent to be evaluated for the purposes of custody at this point. Gross injustice is an understatement really.

 

[Patty G]

They can want and wish all they want.. However I don't think they will get it and hope they don't. He has already lost his son ( until he is found) Why in the world should he have to pay her attorney fee's when most likely she is the reason his son is gone? Add the sexting on top of it I don't need a Judge making him pay. IMO

It is not unusual for the party that didn't file for the divorce to ask the other party to pay for the divorce.

In Kaine's divorce papers, he indicated that both parties should pay for their own divorce as long as the divorce was NOT contested and IF contested, Kaine expected to be paid for his attorney fees and related costs.

 

[SmoothOperator]

O/T..BTW.. I'm in Tennessee also.

OT, as well. Sorry couldn't help but notice and add that I'm in Tennessee, also.. lol. forgive me for just "butting in" and adding this, just haven't seen many Tennesseeans here on WS...

 

[Tuffy]

What is considered a gift?
Any transfer to an individual, either directly or indirectly, where full consideration (measured in money or money's worth) is not received in return.

http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=108139,00.html

Okay this is what I found. If Terri's parents transfer money to Houze (example here) and they get 'full consideration' in that their daughter is defended on a criminal charge, does that exclude paying tax? Opinions?

Wow, good question. I am not a tax accountant, and I don't even do my own taxes, but that sounds kind of iffy.

I was not at all clear on how cash gifts are handled tax-wise, and had assumed that the person receiving the money would have to pay taxes on it, like it was income. Not true, I found out.

If your gift exceeds the $12,000 annual exclusion, you will have to file a form 709 to determine if the Unified Gift Credit protects your gift from taxation. So, sometimes it is, sometimes it is not.

The giver of the gift over $12,000 pays the gift tax. I think this is right?

 

[Tuffy]

IMOO I would think that it would be the upmost importance to baby K to have time with her mother (more so if she is innocent and will remain a consent in her life). I don't buy that it is for her saftey so there for we are not going to fight for it at this time, maybe later?

Gosh sakes they have vistations in jails, social services offices. They could do it if they wanted to "think outside the box".

So if this is for baby K then I pose the question where are the supervised vistation arrangements why not ask for all types of information to mandated by the court to have her and rights to all information on her current medical concerns or well child visits and so on?
This would require her to go to court and be subject to evaluations and possiably testimony in front of the judge. Small price to pay.

A birthmother rather she was granted it or not wouldn't put her child on the backburner in any situation. Again, IMO

No, I agree with you, the lack of any type of visitation with TH is not about safety. I participated in a supervised visitation arrangement with my ex-boyfriend. His ex had supervised visitation with their daughter.

She had a serious drug and alcohol problem and had proven to be a danger to her daughter. She was allowed supervised visits with her daughter as long as she passed drug tests ahead of time.

When we dropped the baby off at the facility we went through metal detectors manned by two armed police officers. The parking lot was under video surveillance. The mother, along with a social worker, would have time to visit with the baby at the facility only.

 

[Aedrys]

I find it ironic that they don't want a psych eval done now, but if she's charged and she goes to trial, what's the first thing they're going to do? A psych eval to go with some kind of mental defense, I'm sure. In the Casey Anthony case, they put that off for a seriously long time. And who visits her a month ago? A mental health professional that specializes in abused children. I'm betting there will be a psych eval when it's needed for TH's defense, and they'll probably bring in someone that specializes in battered wife syndrome, or something like that (I am not downplaying battered wife syndrome, I just don't see it in this case).

Basically, they don't want it if it makes her look bad, but when the time comes, they'll want it to excuse what she did, or get time off of her conviction, or avoid the death penalty.

 

[gwenabob]

Spot on! She can't possibly claim to be indigent while paying at least 100K to an attorney (IMO, I think the amount of 350K is hugely exaggerated). After all, didn't CA pay JB like 5K to get the ball rolling. Of course the state of Florida will pick up the rest.

I believe when hearings begin (if any) the truth will come out. The judge will make them disclose how much has been paid and who it was paid to, and where the resources came from -- That's if they proceed with asking the State for assistance.

And, why not, get a public defender if she has no money? If she borrowed the money, she most certainly will have to pay that back somehow. Perhaps she's relying on movie/book deals -- who knows. If she's cleared/or never tried, she could probably make a book deal (though I would never buy it).

This is a tough circumstantial case thus far. Unless they find Kyron, it looks like she could walk away (unfortunately). Just like SP -- he was only arrested after the bodies of Laci and Connor were found.

We may be waiting quite a while unless someone comes forward.

All the best,

Mel

The Petersons paid Geragos over $1 million, and it still wasn't enough.

 

[STEADFAST]

Sounds spot on for California, especially Orange County. Ever see the Housewives of the OC. Good Lord, there are actually folks out there who do everything posted. Like Gretchen who attached herself to the terminally ill older gentleman and had everything she ever wanted. Of course, the poor guy keeled over and she received a LOT of money. Karma now has a low life sponging off her right now.

Sorry to get OT, but I see it all the time. My sister stayed with her 2nd husband just long enough to get 1/2 his retirement and a new home. Let me tell ya, the grass isn't greener. Current hubby doesn't even have a job.

So I see no good coming out of this kind of behaviour. I hope TH doesn't get away with it either.

Do we know how long they were married. I think it's 10 years in CA to get alimony, but child support is a date of birth kinda thing.

Anyway, my vote is for KH on this one.

MOO

Mel

They were married in 2007, but I don't know what month -- so somewhere between 2 1/2 and 3 1/2 years.

 

[debs]

It's SOP in divorces for this sort of motion to be filed. Just like Kaine filed to have Terri pay HIS fees.

 

[cakegirl0905]

How DARE she ask for this?!? Let's see, murder for hire, adultery, suspected in the disappearance of her stepson. What makes her think SHE is in the wrong here? What a narcissist.

 

[tlcya]

He is the employed spouse, she was the homemaker spouse. Until there is some sort of substantiating proof that Terri has been charged with a crime in regards to the disappearance of Kyron, their assets are considered marital, meaning partly hers.

I do not know if the case here shares any similarity to my divorce but I will say that my first husband was extremely controlling. I am not saying Kaine is as I do not know that.. He was employed and I a homemaker most of our marriage I did not even have a vehicle and was not allowed to drive his. He controlled our finances absolutely and I had to justify each and every time I wanted money by explaining exactly what it would be used for. How humiliating to have to explain and justify to your husband why you need money because you need to get razorblades and tampons. It was extremely demeaning and made me feel like a child. Probably a big factor in the end of my marriage, who wants to have sex with "daddy" after all? I am not in any way suggesting Kaine behaves in this way within his own marriage but simply laying the background for the point I am about to make pertaining to a wife in a situation where she has no access to funds.

After I became employed he became even more overbearing, feeling he was losing that control over me. I did not make much money but what money I did make I was expected to insure and maintain my own vehicle, buy my own toiletries, clothing and whatever clothing, team fees etc were needed for our son. When I decided I wanted out of the marriage, he would not give me any access to our finances. I had to live there for months saving every nickel and dime in order to afford first months rent, deposit, utility deposits etc. I was too passive to insist upon my right to access OUR money that he controlled. I could not even afford to hire a laywer, so I just did what needed doing. Eventually I was able to move and our divorce finalized, but I walked away from a lot by not insisting on an equal distribution of our marital assets.

Had I been unemployed our unemployable I would probably still be there, under his thumb.

I realize it seems the worst sort of insult to injury that Terri is wanting access to the family finances but the law is pretty clear about such matters. The law says it is not unreasonable to expect Kaine to help pay for divorce proceedings as he was the wage earner in the marriage.

Now when and IF Terri is ever criminally charged with either Kyron's disappearance or attempts on Kaine's life a court may decide those circumstances are exigent and require an unusual ruling barring her access. Until that time it is not an unusual request on the part of her attorney.

Bottom line if Terri is guilty of wrongdoing she is morally wrong but legally within her rights.

 

[Sherbie]

Kimster closed the 350k Retainer thread and asked that we post here about it instead. Cypress, I was trying to answer your post when that thread was closed, in response to your comment that TH might have texted that it was gonna cost $350k vs. having actually paid that amount.

I don't think Kaine's atty would have had a basis to file the motion if they'd only had a text saying the case was going to cost "x" amount. I think there had to be an actual statement of money having been paid (or arrangements made therefor) in order for Rackner to have had the foundation to file the motion.

Maybe there's another option I'm not seeing, but I believe they must have a text saying or implying that TH had already actually paid (or made arrangements to pay) her atty. Thoughts, anyone?

 

[Wrinkles]

Per the other closed thread. Someone said that there was a ruling on the "show cause." That left me baffled, I am not aware of a ruling, and would like refreshing on the particular "show cause."

Does someone have a link to substantiate that there was a ruling on the "show cause" yesterday?

Also...bringing over this message:
Additionally, I will be hugely interested to see what the judge rules on the request for abatement. It is my hope that the judge has and shows great wisdom.

My personal hope for the situation is that the judge rules that it is in the best interest of a parent suffering the "loss" of their child (until it is shown otherwise), and the knowledge that their marital partner attempted to put out a contract on their life to expedite this divorce, clean, cut and dry. I believe that to allow the abatement of this divorce would be very cruel under the circumstances. I believe that equitability in the divorce can be shown to Terri despite the cloud that hangs over her. Both parties need to show what they have of marital property and get it equitably split. Both have new challenges in life and will need all of the funds they can rescue from being diminished by legal costs.

 

[BeanE]

I agree. The court documents are clear to me that the written statement was that Terri had already paid that amount. IANAL, but I don't think there would be grounds for a motion like this based on someone saying "I think 'x' is going to cost me 'amount'". I think it is specifically an assertion in the written statement that the monies had already been paid that formed the basis of the motion.

Kimster closed the 350k Retainer thread and asked that we post here about it instead. Cypress, I was trying to answer your post when that thread was closed, in response to your comment that TH might have texted that it was gonna cost $350k vs. having actually paid that amount.

I don't think Kaine's atty would have had a basis to file the motion if they'd only had a text saying the case was going to cost "x" amount. I think there had to be an actual statement of money having been paid (or arrangements made therefor) in order for Rackner to have had the foundation to file the motion.

Maybe there's another option I'm not seeing, but I believe they must have a text saying or implying that TH had already actually paid (or made arrangements to pay) her atty. Thoughts, anyone?