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

[oceanblueeyes]

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?

I am not sure they do have anything Sherbie execpt maybe a text.

Didn't Terri's lawyer say it did not come from her funds? I have wondered if so, how the court could make that person revealed? That would be like the person who donated to Kyron's reward fund anonymously. So if someone out there is willing to put up legal funds for Terri how will that be relevant in the divorce court?

Since Kaine and his attorney filed the complaint dont they have the responsibility to prove SHE paid 350k to a lawyer?

All the court is concerned with is money that came out of Terri's own pocket aren't they?

IMO

 

[desquire]

I'm wondering if this whole thread is not just the result of bad reporting. Unless there was a separate motion filed that I have not seen anywhere or heard anything about, this request that Kaine pay Terri's legal costs is just a figment of the reporter's imagination. There is nothing in the Motion for Abatement that deals with payment of legal fees nor would you expect there to be. Apportionment of responsibility for legal fees is usually one of the last things that happens in a divorce case, not the first thing. And a judge wouldn't do it without extensive discovery into the parties' financial situation. The whole point of the abatement is to put off all of that discovery and motions practice until after the media firestorm is over - one way or another.

Kaine's motion regarding the $350,000 was clearly for the benefit of the media and, from a legal point of view, was unnecessary at this stage of the divorce proceedings. I'm sure the judge was not pleased. But at least Kaine achieves a PR objective by filing unnecessary motions. Terri on the other hand, would have nothing to gain by filing a premature motion regarding legal fees and undercutting the abatement motion. So I'm inclined to believe that this is all just bad reporting.

 

[human]

respectfully sbm

When her attorney commented on his client's possible difficulty in securing employment, he was, IMO, referring to her ability to gain a teaching job, since that is her profession. Due to the ongoing investigation, it's not unreasonable to anticipate that she will not be able to secure a teaching position until/or unless she has been cleared of any allegations or suspicions.

Educated people have the expectation to be employed within their field of expertise. I think this is what her attorney was referring to, in terms of employment.

I have a friend who worked in another state than mine as a paralegal in workman's comp claims.

I know in my state as well with workman's comp, it is said that one is employable determined by the amount of disability. My friend told me of a case where the woman was a nurse and workman's comp said that she could do work at home such as making silk flowers.

My hubby's husband had sheet metal dropped on his head from several stories above as he was walking through his place of employment.

He had an excellent job. He got to be a telemarketer.

Terri can get jobs. I know people with Master's degrees that are working jobs that are not at their level, such as clerks at bookstores.

Why should Terri be entitled to a job at her level?

She can work on the farms or at a car wash.

My daughter used to work with sex offenders. Many of them worked at the car wash and at restaurants after their release.

BTW, my son and son-in-law both worked at the car wash while going to college. My son, DIL, and daughter also worked at restaurants while going to college as well, so I am not saying all are crimmies in that line of work.

My DIL still works as a waitress to supplement her teaching job.

Terri can do like the rest of us.

 

[Chablis]

I'm wondering if this whole thread is not just the result of bad reporting. Unless there was a separate motion filed that I have not seen anywhere or heard anything about, this request that Kaine pay Terri's legal costs is just a figment of the reporter's imagination. There is nothing in the Motion for Abatement that deals with payment of legal fees nor would you expect there to be. Apportionment of responsibility for legal fees is usually one of the last things that happens in a divorce case, not the first thing. And a judge wouldn't do it without extensive discovery into the parties' financial situation. The whole point of the abatement is to put off all of that discovery and motions practice until after the media firestorm is over - one way or another.

Kaine's motion regarding the $350,000 was clearly for the benefit of the media and, from a legal point of view, was unnecessary at this stage of the divorce proceedings. I'm sure the judge was not pleased. But at least Kaine achieves a PR objective by filing unnecessary motions. Terri on the other hand, would have nothing to gain by filing a premature motion regarding legal fees and undercutting the abatement motion. So I'm inclined to believe that this is all just bad reporting.

Well, imo the leaking of the 350k was a calculating move to get Kaines attention from Terri.

 

[1Chump]

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.

There are TWO separate cases here....Kyron's disappearance and the divorce.

The TWO cases have become one in the sense that EVERYTHING in the divorce case is being used to "convict" TH in the court of public opinion in Kyron's case.

Divorce cases are notoriously ugly just like this one. Yes, it could be that it is ugly because TH is involved in Kyron's. But it could also be that it is ugly because it is just an ugly divorce case with us only hearing one side.

Just look at the way EVERYTHING chance once the divorce case was filed.

Before divorce, none of the family members were out searching or speaking to the press. We heard over and over they wanted Kyron to be the focus and did not want to interfere with LE's investigation. We heard that they just wanted people to look for Kyron. We did not even know that Kyron was allergic go bee stings or had a birthmark on his forehead that turned red when he got upset. Two very important pieces of information that the public needed to know when looking for Kyron.

After divorce, three family members are still not searching but our speaking out. They are now talking about 'EVERYTHING" that LE alledgedly tells them. But that information is all about the 4th person who is no longer in that inner circle. Kyron is no longer the focus...all the focus is on the divorce case. None of it is leading to searches for Kyron. It does not even keep KYRON in the news because Kyron becomes an after thought, ie we are only talking about an ugly divorce because a child is missing.

How does TH alledgedly "sexting" help the "public" to search for Kyron? How does TH alledgedly plotting a MFH help the "public" to search for Kyron? How does a RO/divorce help the "public" to search for Kyron? While information gleamed from these things may help LE, how do they help the "public" to search for Kyron?

But it is really still two different cases....an ugly divorce case with one side playing out in the public which has no bearing on the most important case......

KYRON IS MISSING.

 

[Sherbie]

I am not sure they do have anything Sherbie execpt maybe a text.

Didn't Terri's lawyer say it did not come from her funds? I have wondered if so, how the court could make that person revealed? That would be like the person who donated to Kyron's reward fund anonymously. So if someone out there is willing to put up legal funds for Terri how will that be relevant in the divorce court?

Since Kaine and his attorney filed the complaint dont they have the responsibility to prove SHE paid 350k to a lawyer?

All the court is concerned with is money that came out of Terri's own pocket aren't they?

IMO

Ocean, I wasn't speaking to the truth of whether the cost was accurate or Terri or someone else had paid "x" amount. I was just saying I didn't think Kaine's lawyer would have had a basis for filing the motion if the text said only, "Houze is gonna charge me $350k." I think the text would have to indicate that some payment had actually already been made (regardless whether that's true or the amt is correct). I think Rackner would've needed to see an indication of payment vs. cost in the text msg in order to have a reason to file that motion.

As far as the monies go, I think in a divorce case, the showing of where funds have come from or were spent is not that uncommon. If it turns out someone else paid money to Houze, that's not an issue in the divorce case, so far as I know. I think the point of the motion is to find out if Terri used any marital assets or in any way signed something that might also (because they're still married) obligate Kaine to be on the hook for any of it.

I don't know how it works, but if someone else paid for her representation, perhaps Terri's atty can simply produce an affidavit from Houze and/or the person who paid and that would be the end of it. I'm not familiar at all with family court, so I don't know any of this for sure...just some guessing on my part.

 

[joeskidbeck]

I believe the only reason TH is not trying to get visitation with her daughter right now is because she would have to undergo a psych. eval. If she is ever arrested on any of the charges (mfh/kidnapping) of course the court will order one, but until that happens she will do whatever it takes to avoid one.
Also, I know everyone is concerned about "sources" reliable or not, but when I see that pc from early on (the one where TH is clutching at DY), I see a woman who looks worried (and not about her missing stepson).
One more thing, one of the sources about the failed poly was her own father. I think that's a pretty reliable source! MOO

 

[human]

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?

wow! I always thought that the person who received any amount over the exclusion paid the tax, not the giver.

So not only is the person who is giving Terri the money giving her money, they are paying the taxes as well.

 

[aim]

When you get divorced, the attorney's fees are payed for out of the marital funds. Think of it as one big pot. If the hormans have assests that total 2 million dollars and the attorneys fees for both of them cost $100, 000. Now the Hormans are worth $1,900,000 and that amount will be split accordingly.

 

[desquire]

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.

The psychological evaluation we're talking about here is a parenting evaluation to be used by the court to assess each party's parenting skills and to determine which parent is best suited to care for the child. In addition to interviewing and testing of the parents, these evaluations often involve observation of the parent's interaction with the child and interviews with third parties like, day care providers, teachers, family friends, employers, etc.
It would be kind of hard to conduct a reliable custodial evaluation when one of the parents is restrained from contact with the child and all of the third parties are potentially influenced by the media speculation surrounding the criminal case or are reluctant to cooperate for fear of being dragged into the criminal case/media spotlight.

 

[TxLady2]

I read the thing about the reason for putting your address on a RO was to let the person know where they are NOT supposed to go. That's B.S., IMO. If someone is determined to hurt somebody, they're not going to be worrying about where they're not supposed to be. I can just see some crazy bully looking it over and saying, "Ok, I can't go here or there or there.... " Riiiiiiiiiiight! Putting their address on a restraining order is like issuing them an invitation!! "Come on and get me, dude!"
You can't ever assume someone else is going to obey the law, because criminals just don't!

 

[wondering1]

I'm wondering if this whole thread is not just the result of bad reporting. Unless there was a separate motion filed that I have not seen anywhere or heard anything about, this request that Kaine pay Terri's legal costs is just a figment of the reporter's imagination. There is nothing in the Motion for Abatement that deals with payment of legal fees nor would you expect there to be. Apportionment of responsibility for legal fees is usually one of the last things that happens in a divorce case, not the first thing. And a judge wouldn't do it without extensive discovery into the parties' financial situation. The whole point of the abatement is to put off all of that discovery and motions practice until after the media firestorm is over - one way or another.

Kaine's motion regarding the $350,000 was clearly for the benefit of the media and, from a legal point of view, was unnecessary at this stage of the divorce proceedings. I'm sure the judge was not pleased. But at least Kaine achieves a PR objective by filing unnecessary motions. Terri on the other hand, would have nothing to gain by filing a premature motion regarding legal fees and undercutting the abatement motion. So I'm inclined to believe that this is all just bad reporting.

I haven't gone back and looked, but I think that TH's filing was part of the response to the "where did the $350k come from" motion.

 

[STEADFAST]

I fully believe that Terri did something with Kyron and that she explored a MFH plot against Kaine. However, since she hasn't been charged with either crime, in fact NO crime, I don't see how either of those things would be taken into consideration in a ruling about who pays what in her divorce.

When I was a stay-at-home mom, it would never have occurred to me or my then husband that the money WE had was more my husband's than mine. When I divorced him, we paid our attorney's fees out of our money.

I can see how it's completely galling to Kaine to pay for anything for Terri, considering what he suspects her of, but I don't understand how the money in their bank account is more his than hers.

 

[debs]

There are TWO separate cases here....Kyron's disappearance and the divorce.

The TWO cases have become one in the sense that EVERYTHING in the divorce case is being used to "convict" TH in the court of public opinion in Kyron's case.

Divorce cases are notoriously ugly just like this one. Yes, it could be that it is ugly because TH is involved in Kyron's. But it could also be that it is ugly because it is just an ugly divorce case with us only hearing one side.

Just look at the way EVERYTHING chance once the divorce case was filed.

Before divorce, none of the family members were out searching or speaking to the press. We heard over and over they wanted Kyron to be the focus and did not want to interfere with LE's investigation. We heard that they just wanted people to look for Kyron. We did not even know that Kyron was allergic go bee stings or had a birthmark on his forehead that turned red when he got upset. Two very important pieces of information that the public needed to know when looking for Kyron.

After divorce, three family members are still not searching but our speaking out. They are now talking about 'EVERYTHING" that LE alledgedly tells them. But that information is all about the 4th person who is no longer in that inner circle. Kyron is no longer the focus...all the focus is on the divorce case. None of it is leading to searches for Kyron. It does not even keep KYRON in the news because Kyron becomes an after thought, ie we are only talking about an ugly divorce because a child is missing.

How does TH alledgedly "sexting" help the "public" to search for Kyron? How does TH alledgedly plotting a MFH help the "public" to search for Kyron? How does a RO/divorce help the "public" to search for Kyron? While information gleamed from these things may help LE, how do they help the "public" to search for Kyron?

But it is really still two different cases....an ugly divorce case with one side playing out in the public which has no bearing on the most important case......

KYRON IS MISSING.

Thank you.

 

[1Chump]

I have a friend who worked in another state than mine as a paralegal in workman's comp claims.

I know in my state as well with workman's comp, it is said that one is employable determined by the amount of disability. My friend told me of a case where the woman was a nurse and workman's comp said that she could do work at home such as making silk flowers.

My hubby's husband had sheet metal dropped on his head from several stories above as he was walking through his place of employment.

He had an excellent job. He got to be a telemarketer.

Terri can get jobs. I know people with Master's degrees that are working jobs that are not at their level, such as clerks at bookstores.

Why should Terri be entitled to a job at her level?

She can work on the farms or at a car wash.

My daughter used to work with sex offenders. Many of them worked at the car wash and at restaurants after their release.

BTW, my son and son-in-law both worked at the car wash while going to college. My son, DIL, and daughter also worked at restaurants while going to college as well, so I am not saying all are crimmies in that line of work.

My DIL still works as a waitress to supplement her teaching job.

Terri can do like the rest of us.

IMO, divorce cases are different. The amount of money you are required to pay in alimony and/or child support can be determined by the wages you are capable of earning, not necessarily the wages you do earn. There are people who will take lower paying jobs or cash under the table jobs strictly to avoid paying alimony and/or child support. Therefore, the Judge determines if the wages used for alimony and/or child support should be the actual earnings or the capable earnings.

IMO, in this case, the biggest factor in all the speculation about TH is the divorce and/or RO papers. However, most of the allegations are unnecessarily included in the divorce papers. The Order for Contempt on showing sealed papers to MC has absolutely nothing to do with allegations of MFH and/or "sexting" yet they were included in that document. By including unnecessary allegations in documents, Petitioner has played a huge part in making TH unemployable in her field or any field. Yes, he believes that she had something to do with his son's disappearance. Maybe she has but maybe she hasn't. At this time, she has not even been charges and is "legally" considered innocent of any wrong doing. Therefore, TH's attorney is agruing Petitioner should not be able to have it both ways....help to make her unemployable yet refuse to help her financially.

IMO, I understand those who feel TH should not be allowed to have anything in her divorce. Devil's Advocate....what if they charged/convicted a stranger in Kyron's case. However, this was after the divorce court made their rulings based on all this speculation than found out someone else did it. TH would lose EVERYTHING when she did nothing wrong.

 

[aim]

I thought that a motion to abate could only be filed by the person who filed for divorce. Doesn't this mean that the if the abatement was granted, the divorce would be put off until the criminal matters are cleared up? That would be totally unfair to KH.

 

[1Chump]

I thought that a motion to abate could only be filed by the person who filed for divorce. Doesn't this mean that the if the abatement was granted, the divorce would be put off until the criminal matters are cleared up? That would be totally unfair to KH.

IMO, yes it would be totally unfair to KH if TH had something to do with Kyron. But it would be totally unfair to TH if she had nothing to do with Kyron.

IMO, the divorce court's only concern should be being fair to both parties in the divorce. If it is unfair to KH one way but unfair to TH in another way...it is not fair to both parties either way.

 

[DairyGirl]

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

And SP still got the DP.

 

[aim]

Thanks. I agree that it has to be fair to both parties, but even if she didn't have anything to do with Kryon's disappearence, she still was carrying on with other men and KH should be able to divorce her in a reasonable amount of time. If she isn't going to contest the divorce, then why does she need to abate the proceedings. She just doesn't want to reveal where the retainer money came from because it is probably a big clue in the criminal case.

IMO, yes it would be totally unfair to KH if TH had something to do with Kyron. But it would be totally unfair to TH if she had nothing to do with Kyron.

IMO, the divorce court's only concern should be being fair to both parties in the divorce. If it is unfair to KH one way but unfair to TH in another way...it is not fair to both parties either way.

 

[wondering1]

IMO, I understand those who feel TH should not be allowed to have anything in her divorce. Devil's Advocate....what if they charged/convicted a stranger in Kyron's case. However, this was after the divorce court made their rulings based on all this speculation than found out someone else did it. TH would lose EVERYTHING when she did nothing wrong.

They were married for like 3 years, tops, iirc. Personally, I don't think that length of time qualifies her for much of anything alimony/asset wise regardless of the circumstances. I also think she would be unemployable pretty much to the same extent, even if KH and DY had kept their mouths shut. In fact, some here and elsewhere have suggested that KH and DY's recent *approach* in the media has actually turned the tide of public opinion slightly more against them, and slightly more in favor of TH. I think that's probably true. And prior to them speaking, public opinion was based solely on what we learned about TH from LE, the media and other members of the general public, so it was what is was -- and it wasn't good. If anything, it seems like KH has improved her public image by airing her dirty laundry, and also by tarnishing his own image. Of course his attorney's never going to argue that, so it's probably a moot point lol