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

[SurfieTX]

It was the same judge though right? Judge Meisenheimer?

I had to go back and look, but yep it sure was - the same judge presiding over the divorce. I wonder how common that is?

 

[BeanE]

I cannot release that information as it is part of an ongoing criminal investigation.

I don't understand what you mean?

 

[BeanE]

There's supporting documentation? I thought Kaine "was led to believe"

I posted the RO document upthread. I don't see any supporting documentation included or referred to in it.

 

[tlcya]

technically this is about the divorce hearing held on October 7 and the issues that have arisen therefrom regarding suit monies and the retainer fee paid to Houze on Terri's behalf.

I realize that ultimately all of our debating, opining and theorizing is about where is Kyron. It is so hard to stay on topic when we all feel so passionately about this case.

 

[debs]

bbm

They always say that. It is pretty much standard language in this type of matter. His brief was really pretty ordinary, and could have been written by a junior staff member. Gitana said she even saw flaws in his argument. It really wasn't anything special.

My opinion was that some legal aide in his office wrote it.

It appears the judge found it all sufficient enough to grant a 90 day abatement, citing that Terri's constitutional rights would be violated to let the civil case go forward as pushed by Kaine's attorney. For a legal aide, not bad!

 

[desquire]

All I can say on this topic is I believe the Judge is wise to delay until January.
Hopefully by then there will be some answers about where Kyron is, and whether or not TH is involved.
If there are no answers by then , then I wonder what He (the Judge) will do then ?

If nothing has changed in the Kyron investigation, it's a safe bet that on Jan. 6 Bunch will file a motion to extend the abatement and Rackner will file a lengthy and wide-ranging discovery request. The judge can extend the abatement on a party's motion or on his own. It's possible the case could be pushed back further if the circumstances in January warrant but I think it's going to be a much harder sell the second time around. Absent some compelling circumstances at the time, my money is on the judge allowing the divorce case to proceed. If it's not extended, a trial date has to be set within 30 days.

 

[debs]

[/b]

Re: the ash cloud: International travel was shut down for weeks in April due to the volcano activity in Iceland and the ensuing massive ash cloud that covered Europe. Opinions were divided on whether it was safe to fly an airliner into the cloud or if it would cause a catastrophic engine shut down. Airlines and European governments differed. It was a massive news story,

I see a correlation between the inconvenience of Terri not seeing her child and the possibility of a tragedy if she is capable of hiring murderers and disappearing children.

In air travel and in the care of the helpless, I like to err on the side extreme caution. Baby K is not a statistic. But...just my opinion.

Ah, okay. Gotcha. So then it would be fair to state that when all these scientific people got their heads together, they still had to make a decision to fly, ergo risking everyone on the off chance that they were wrong, but nothing happened. Seems fair then to allow Terri visitation under that premise!

 

[desquire]

I believe that is called "ex parte" and is not allowed...but IANAL...

You are correct.

 

[wickedeye]

Certainly not an attorney, but I do think this: I would be shocked if Houze would risk losing his license to practice law by purjuring himself regarding source of funds for Terri. According to the argument by Bunch, Houze treated this anonymous donation as a retainer fee and put it in his trust fund. Also Bunch argues that it would be a poor precedent in Oregon law to mandate the revelation of anonymous donations for a person's defense. Not sure if he used Constitutional law but he did use case law and Oregon law to make his point. moo mhoo

Once in the courthouse and under the auspice of the law, our Constitutional rights, case law, and Oregon law prevails.

I think your question is a good one, I don't know how much power a judge has. How about putting your question on the 'verified' lawyer thread...good question. moo mho

Thanks Eyes. I wasn't implying that Houze is lying or perjuring himself, but here in Canada, when someone else pays your bills for you, you have to declare it as income or a gift in which case Kaine should be made aware, for tax purposes!

 

[SacreBleu]

It appears the judge found it all sufficient enough to grant a 90 day abatement, citing that Terri's constitutional rights would be violated to let the civil case go forward as pushed by Kaine's attorney. For a legal aide, not bad!

Perhaps it was the judges intention to grant the abatement before he even read the memo?

 

[SurfieTX]

I don't understand what you mean?

I was being silly.

Anyway, it stands to reason that Kaine had some kind of documentation to provide to the judge with the petition for the RO. This is a high-profile case and the judge's reputation is on the line. That, and I'm about 99.9% sure Ms. Racker wasn't going to petition on Kaine's behalf w/o it.

 

[Kat010]

I do not believe that LE needs to saddle up and ride and prove the parents' opinions they have stated to the media. That is just my opinion.

It, however, is evident to me that they are actively working the case and that they believe it can and will be prosecuted in the future (from the mouth of the DA... links in the forum)


This is about Kyron. This is about prosecuting the person or persons that had anything to do with what happened to him. So, in my opinion that is not up to the public the schedule, the timing or the method in which the professionals do it.

Speculation and opinions in the media are separate from LE and what they are doing to work on Kyron's case. Trust me that I too want a resolution like yesterday. But some things take time. LE will move when they are ready. LE will make an arrest when they are ready.

Sorry if I misunderstood your meaning in your post but I do not see any burden on LE to move quicker to back up the parental statements in the media.

MOO

bbm

Sorry I wasn't clearer. I meant that in general LE/the state needs to prove her guilt.

Here's the tricky part, IMHO: in this country you have the right to confront your accuser and their statements. TH had her daughter taken from her, and lost her home--along with all the other losses--based on an allegation from an unknown (to us) person (whose true name may or may not be known to her attorney, see Bunch's "alias" comment) to LE who then went to KH and said something (we don't know what) and then KH alleged all the unknown party's unproven allegations in his request for a RO.

So, issues in this divorce include allegations from an accuser. She has the right to confront the accuser and allegations.

Memo to self: next time I get involved in a divorce, have someone go to LE and allege that other party had a MFH plot, then I swoop in, grab all the stuff, kick the other party to the curb, remove right to even visit any kids, and refuse to give the other party any information to defend self from accusations, including correct name of accuser. Seems to work just fine--at least in Oregon. ;} (Note: I am not saying nor alleging or inferring nor speculating that KH had someone go to LE. I am simply using the details of this case to apply to our daily lives. Not that I have to worry as I ain't gonna get married again!)

MOO

(Still in the longest run-on sentence running, I think!)

 

[eyes4crime]

My opinion was that some legal aide in his office wrote it.

You're probably right. Doesn't take a lawyer to know our Constitution rights; back up an argument with case law; or to know Oregon law. It can all be googled. moo mho

 

[debs]

I was being silly.

Anyway, it stands to reason that Kaine had some kind of documentation to provide to the judge with the petition for the RO. This is a high-profile case and the judge's reputation is on the line. That, and I'm about 99.9% sure Ms. Racker wasn't going to petition on Kaine's behalf w/o it.

But it doesn't stand to reason. There are any number of cases where people go to judges and state this and/or that and are granted the RO with no substantiation involved. The judge, who was the signer of the RO, couldn't even reference any substantiating documents yesterday, instead relying on words like "most likely than not likely" ....if the judge had seen documentation, that would have been a more forceful statement, one rather emphatic.

 

[gardeness]

With all due respect, WHAT IF THEY'RE RIGHT!" screams a whole bunch louder. I cannot blame Kaine for being a bit over-protective of Baby K at this point in time - heck, maybe forever - given the fact that his son is missing. Honestly, if it were you, would you really take the chance with your child? I would not.

If it turns out that Terri is completely innocent and has been unjustly treated, she's a big girl and will get over it. She may even profit from it (books, lawsuits, etc.) Likewise, her separation from her daughter for this period of time will mend itself. I think of all the parents serving overseas who are separated from their children. If they can suffer through it, Terri can. JMO.

ibm
It's really not up to Kaine--Terri is innocent until proven guilty, and she has neither been charged nor indicted. IMO (based on what her attorney said about not being given access to information or to depose the people "involved" in the alleged MFH plot), Terri's lawyers were put in a position of having to wait this long for this particular trial to address the imbalance occurring. It will be interesting to see how the visitation is modified...

bbm
The fallacy of comparing Terri, or any other parent in Terri's position, to someone in the military is that the parent in the military chose to be in the military, knew that service away from his/her family would most likely be part of their commitment, and made that decision for themselves. Terri is a stay-at-home mom. Her priority was being at home with her children, and someone else has removed that choice for her. (moo--I will not credit the MFH plot until proof/evidence surfaces). mho

 

[debs]

Perhaps it was the judges intention to grant the abatement before he even read the memo?

perhaps! I was only addressing a minimizing of the memorandum as having been written by a legal aide. It seemed as though that was supposed to make the document less effective, when in fact it proved extremely effective indeed!

 

[SacreBleu]

And I didn't say it was his fault. I said because he and Desiree went on TV, the judge made his decision that she could not but be forced into a constitutional dilemma of self-incrimination, and it was the judge who abated the divorce proceedings. "(C)iting Terri Horman's Fifth Amendment right to avoid testifying in a manner that might implicate her in a crime." Came from the judge.

BBM

The basis of his decision was because Kaine & Desiree were on TV? Really?

 

[loves2bmom]

If nothing has changed in the Kyron investigation, it's a safe bet that on Jan. 6 Bunch will file a motion to extend the abatement and Rackner will file a lengthy and wide-ranging discovery request. The judge can extend the abatement on a party's motion or on his own. It's possible the case could be pushed back further if the circumstances in January warrant but I think it's going to be a much harder sell the second time around. Absent some compelling circumstances at the time, my money is on the judge allowing the divorce case to proceed. If it's not extended, a trial date has to be set within 30 days.

I agree! If there is no arrest by January I get the impression the Judge will not grant any further delays. He made this statement:

"Eventually, Terri will have to decide whether or not to plead the fifth, regardless of the timing of the proceedings," Meisenheimer reasoned.

http://www.koinlocal6.com/content/n...il-Jan-6/GonG6-VnTkmaYBikdxxq7Q.cspx?rss=1100

 

[Kat010]

(clip)
I am "fired up" on this topic....even more so... than on the topic of Terri's friend Dee laughing on her blog about abusing an animal in her care. My husband and I travel frequently for a variety of reasons. I am as scrupulous at checking out who cares for our dogs as I was once for our kids. They (OUR PETS) can't tell me, can they, if they are being neglected or hurt? I dread just such a person as Terri's friend Dede...who not only abuses the dog but sees humor in its pain. I was stunned by reading that blog post here.

(clip)

bbm

Huh? I'd like the chance to read that material, especially as I have two rescue dogs and abhor animal cruelty. Can you point me to that blog? Is it DeDe's? Wasn't her blog pulled from the web, like that of MC's wife? Or am I confusing what's on the web and quotable? That's a distinctive possibility! TIA

 

[Kat010]

perhaps! I was only addressing a minimizing of the memorandum as having been written by a legal aide. It seemed as though that was supposed to make the document less effective, when in fact it proved extremely effective indeed!

Somehow I have the notion that Bunch doesn't care about personal slaps when he won in court. Lawyers like winning! And they have pretty thick skin, too. At least the ones I know.