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

[germaine]

A circumstantial case depends on the inclination of the jury to connect the dots and make the inferences that the prosecution wants them to. Juries are much more likely to follow the prosecutor's logic when the accused is an unsympathetic, unlikeable individual. No matter how much a juror believes they can be impartial in spite of what they've heard on the news, we all know it factors into their deliberations at some level. That's what Houze is concerned about - every negative news story raises the bar he needs to clear one notch higher.
So do the likely benefits outweigh the risks? Any contest of the RO will necessarily involve arguing the MFH and Kyron allegations. The chance of this happening without Rackner putting TH on the stand is zero (KH has already said that this was more about getting TH to talk than anything else.) If TH gets on the stand and has to take the 5th on questions regarding either subject, the judge will likely make a negative inference of fact. Why contest in the first place when you know you've got both arms tied?

Again, if this were an ordinary case with no media attention and no potential capital crime, I would be with you all the way in your analysis.

sfsnbbm~

Reading your bolded comment it struck me as ironic that the fact that she retained Houze in the first place creates a very negative inference right from the get go -- someone who has not been charged with anything or named as a suspect or even a poi, runs out within days of her husband leaving and filing for an RO and divorce (both civil actions) and hires the best and most expensive criminal attorney someone's money can buy. Maybe he should have suggested she retain someone less high profile and/or a civil lawyer, and just kind of waited in the wings to see how things shook out. jmoo

 

[citigirl]

Look, there can always be unintended consequences when someone pleads the 5th. Like any other case, can't the judge tell the jury (2 years from now?) to disregard the question and not to infer anything from the defendant pleading the 5th? The danger to Terri is not at this hearing, it is at a future trial. I think Terri pleading the 5th now, as opposed to later, in front of a jury, is LESS dangerous than doing it it in a trial. And there may NEVER be a trial!

Kaine can tell what he knows, LE can give information or not give information.

It is crazy to me that a judge is is trying to imagine every possible thing that could happen two years in the future when there is nothing connecting Terri to the crime right now except Kaine's statements and Terri's own lawyer's advice that she not discuss what she did with police or the public.

 

[Donjeta]

Just my unlegal opinion but although the judges may very well see how reasonable and necessary Terri's current course of action is in view of her defense in a future trial, if any, it doesn't really change the effect of the status quo on the baby.

What I mean is, the longer the current status quo goes on, the longer the baby has had Kaine as the sole primary caregiver and the more likely it is that it is going to be in her best interest to continue to have him as her primary caregiver in the future (Assuming he's a good enough parent), due to considerations of stability and emotional security.

In that respect it doesn't really matter if Terri had the best of reasons for letting the status quo stand and everybody sees why she had to do it; having custody changed would represent another change for the baby anyway, and she's already had a few so it might be deemed unwise to cause another one.

 

[Aedrys]

Look, there can always be unintended consequences when someone pleads the 5th. Like any other case, can't the judge tell the jury (2 years from now?) to disregard the question and not to infer anything from the defendant pleading the 5th? The danger to Terri is not at this hearing, it is at a future trial. I think Terri pleading the 5th now, as opposed to later, in front of a jury, is LESS dangerous than doing it it in a trial. And there may NEVER be a trial!

Kaine can tell what he knows, LE can give information or not give information.

It is crazy to me that a judge is is trying to imagine every possible thing that could happen two years in the future when there is nothing connecting Terri to the crime right now except Kaine's statements and Terri's own lawyer's advice that she not discuss what she did with police or the public.

Let's not forget her faulty alibi, her changing stories, her wild behavior, and oh, she was the last to adult to see Kyron, just to name a few things. We don't even know what LE has so far. I doubt they're basing an entire investigation just on KH's word's. That would be a ridiculous and highly prejudicial thing for them to do. It's not good police work.

Also, I don't think any competent judge can ignore the things that have made the news, much less any evidence KH is able to offer if the judge asks for it. TH is not where she is just because of KH and her own lawyer. KH doesn't have the power to destroy another person like that, or God help our legal system. If she chooses not to fight the RO and see her daughter to not incriminate herself, that is just sad and wrong. She has the right to do that, but her daughter's needs should come before her own. Obviously, they don't.

And I'm sorry, but I am not buying her being this meek woman that just does what people tell her to do, even a lawyer. She's only doing what he says because she agrees with it and because it's helping to CYA her. I don't care what a lawyer says, I would fight tooth and nail to see my child regardless of the circumstances. She just chooses to not fight because that is what is best for her.

God, Terri, just plead the 5th. Fight the RO and show that you love your own child. That will go further in any criminal trial than you staying silent and looking self centered and uncaring. Show some courage through action instead of perpetuating cowardice through silence and inaction!

 

[desquire]

Just my unlegal opinion but although the judges may very well see how reasonable and necessary Terri's current course of action is in view of her defense in a future trial, if any, it doesn't really change the effect of the status quo on the baby.

What I mean is, the longer the current status quo goes on, the longer the baby has had Kaine as the sole primary caregiver and the more likely it is that it is going to be in her best interest to continue to have him as her primary caregiver in the future (Assuming he's a good enough parent), due to considerations of stability and emotional security.

In that respect it doesn't really matter if Terri had the best of reasons for letting the status quo stand and everybody sees why she had to do it; having custody changed would represent another change for the baby anyway, and she's already had a few so it might be deemed unwise to cause another one.

ITA. From my perspective, Terri really didn't have much choice in the following the legal strategy she has, but setting the legal issues aside the human/emotional issues that result from her legal choices are enormous.

 

[believe09]

I am not a lawyer and I have no idea if the following is correct or not. I think it is but since I am not a lawyer... well, you get my meaning.

If TMH's parents paid the money directly to Mr Houze to retain his services for themselves and they then chose to define the services they wanted as being those that would involve defending their daughter, TMH, then I think the money would be neither a gift (since it was never in TMH's control) or a loan (since they wouldn't want to be paid back).

And Mr Houze would not actually be employed by TMH, he would actually be employed by her parents.

I am going backwards on the thread and this was likely addressed, but IIRC then it would be the parents retaining Mr. Houze and he would be representing them. They may need a civil attorney, but they likely do not need a criminal one.

 

[citigirl]

Let's not forget her faulty alibi, her changing stories, her wild behavior, and oh, she was the last to adult to see Kyron, just to name a few things. We don't even know what LE has so far. I doubt they're basing an entire investigation just on KH's word's. That would be a ridiculous and highly prejudicial thing for them to do. It's not good police work.

Also, I don't think any competent judge can ignore the things that have made the news, much less any evidence KH is able to offer if the judge asks for it. TH is not where she is just because of KH and her own lawyer. KH doesn't have the power to destroy another person like that, or God help our legal system. If she chooses not to fight the RO and see her daughter to not incriminate herself, that is just sad and wrong. She has the right to do that, but her daughter's needs should come before her own. Obviously, they don't.

And I'm sorry, but I am not buying her being this meek woman that just does what people tell her to do, even a lawyer. She's only doing what he says because she agrees with it and because it's helping to CYA her. I don't care what a lawyer says, I would fight tooth and nail to see my child regardless of the circumstances. She just chooses to not fight because that is what is best for her.

God, Terri, just plead the 5th. Fight the RO and show that you love your own child. That will go further in any criminal trial than you staying silent and looking self centered and uncaring. Show some courage through action instead of perpetuating cowardice through silence and inaction!

I agree with you, Aedrys, but from the judge's perspective there is only Kaine's word and Terri's silence. I don't see how the judge can take into consideration all these other things to make a ruling. That's just crazy to me and doesn't seem "legal." Maybe it's because in family court all kinds of stuff is allowed and a judge has to weigh it all. In that case, Kaine wins hands down.

I don't understand this judge trying to have it both ways--but it seems to me that either way TH loses--she's made her own bed.

 

[believe09]

I agree with the rest of you that believe the 350K or whatever amount is an advance from a network or a publishing house. Now, should we check and see what payouts ABC has been making? Weren't they involved in the Anthony case???

 

[Aedrys]

I agree with the rest of you that believe the 350K or whatever amount is an advance from a network or a publishing house. Now, should we check and see what payouts ABC has been making? Weren't they involved in the Anthony case???

Yes, they were - I really REALLY hope it's not them. Good Lord, if they didn't learn their lesson from the Anthony debacle...

 

[BeanE]

I agree with the rest of you that believe the 350K or whatever amount is an advance from a network or a publishing house. Now, should we check and see what payouts ABC has been making? Weren't they involved in the Anthony case???

That's what I was leaning toward, until the legal document from Terri's attorney was released, which references the payment coming from friends and family.

http://images.bimedia.net/documents/Horman_Court+documents_10_7_2010.pdf

 

[germaine]

That's what I was leaning toward, until the legal document from Terri's attorney was released, which references the payment coming from friends and family.

http://images.bimedia.net/documents/Horman_Court+documents_10_7_2010.pdf

I just read the whole thing pretty carefully and he never says TH got her money from friends and family that I saw. I think every reference to the money paid to Houze is that it came from a third party or parties. It's only in his argument about what people in general do all the time, and why accepting KH's argument would set a bad precedent for other cases, that he talks about friends and family.

Actually, until I read that I was convinced the money came from her parents, although I wondered how they came up with $350k (if that is what Houze's retainer really was) on their apparently modest home. Now I'm thinking maybe there was more than one source, and it wasn't just the parents.

 

[BeanE]

I just read the whole thing pretty carefully and he never says TH got her money from friends and family that I saw. I think every reference to the money paid to Houze is that it came from a third party or parties. It's only in his argument about what people in general do all the time, and why accepting KH's argument would set a bad precedent for other cases, that he talks about friends and family.

Actually, until I read that I was convinced the money came from her parents, although I wondered how they came up with $350k (if that is what Houze's retainer really was) on their apparently modest home. Now I'm thinking maybe there was more than one source, and it wasn't just the parents.

Yes, I agree, it just references friends and family (makes me think of that commercial lol), as I said. But it did lead me to think the money came from Terri's parents, and Terri and her attorneys are trying to avoid bringing them into the foray.

Her parents would be a third party.

 

[citigirl]

I just read the whole thing pretty carefully and he never says TH got her money from friends and family that I saw. I think every reference to the money paid to Houze is that it came from a third party or parties. It's only in his argument about what people in general do all the time, and why accepting KH's argument would set a bad precedent for other cases, that he talks about friends and family.

Actually, until I read that I was convinced the money came from her parents, although I wondered how they came up with $350k (if that is what Houze's retainer really was) on their apparently modest home. Now I'm thinking maybe there was more than one source, and it wasn't just the parents.

Reading this again, 2 things leap out at me:

1. Why would Terri need to plead the fifth when asked where the money came from? The source of the money must somehow be connected to Kyron's disappearance. Why else would she have to plead the fifth? IF her parents paid the money there is no need for her to plead the fifth. I know others have said this--it is just remarkably glaring to me.

2. I really think this is an inappropriate time for KH to be asking about the money. It does seem as though the right time to look carefully at the source of the retainer is when property is going to be divided. The obvious intent is for KH to get TH on the stand--I would love that, too. But I don't think it is right to circumvent the normal divorce process to that end.

 

[PDXMom]

Reading this again, 2 things leap out at me:

1. Why would Terri need to plead the fifth when asked where the money came from? The source of the money must somehow be connected to Kyron's disappearance. Why else would she have to plead the fifth? IF her parents paid the money there is no need for her to plead the fifth. I know others have said this--it is just remarkably glaring to me.

2. I really think this is an inappropriate time for KH to be asking about the money. It does seem as though the right time to look carefully at the source of the retainer is when property is going to be divided. The obvious intent is for KH to get TH on the stand--I would love that, too. But I don't think it is right to circumvent the normal divorce process to that end.

ITA with your first statement, and though I don't know law at all, I'd hope the first glaring action (or inaction) would trump the second. Where'd she get the huge amount of money? Simple question which should have a simple answer. They didn't ask where she didn't get the money. I've never heard of anyone being able to hide assets at this level in a divorce. It's all out there for everyone to see, so that it can be a fair division. Maybe your point is that it should be out there, but just at a different stage of the proceedings?

ETA: It'd be less of an issue if she weren't asking him to pay her attorney's fees, but she is. She's asking him to pay her way while she can avoid divulging how she paid Oregon's highest paid defense atty.?

 

[citigirl]

ITA with your first statement, and though I don't know law at all, I'd hope the first glaring action (or inaction) would trump the second. Where'd she get the huge amount of money? Simple question which should have a simple answer. They didn't ask where she didn't get the money. I've never heard of anyone being able to hide assets at this level in a divorce. It's all out there for everyone to see, so that it can be a fair division. Maybe your point is that it should be out there, but just at a different stage of the proceedings?

ETA: It'd be less of an issue if she weren't asking him to pay her attorney's fees, but she is. She's asking him to pay her way while she can avoid divulging how she paid Oregon's highest paid defense atty.?

Yes, that's my point. Although maybe Rackner felt that if TH had not paid Houze yet, it was best to file the motion now so that half could go to Kaine (if it were a marital asset) before Houze gets it. At this later stage, Houze can use that "disgorgement" argument to say KH is trying to interfere with TH's right to counsel.

 

[Aedrys]

ITA with your first statement, and though I don't know law at all, I'd hope the first glaring action (or inaction) would trump the second. Where'd she get the huge amount of money? Simple question which should have a simple answer. They didn't ask where she didn't get the money. I've never heard of anyone being able to hide assets at this level in a divorce. It's all out there for everyone to see, so that it can be a fair division. Maybe your point is that it should be out there, but just at a different stage of the proceedings?

ETA: It'd be less of an issue if she weren't asking him to pay her attorney's fees, but she is. She's asking him to pay her way while she can avoid divulging how she paid Oregon's highest paid defense atty.?

That's what gets it for me. If she wasn't asking for a handout with one hand while hiding the other behind her back, I might actually think it's inappropriate for Kaine to be asking. But I don't think it's right that she's wanting money from him for her lawyer when she already has this mysterious source of funds she won't reveal. Why can't she get more money from that source? She's the one that made this an issue by wanting Kaine to pay her lawyer's fee and then refusing to say where her money came from. She can't have it both ways like that.

And I don't blame Kaine for wanting to know where that money came from before handing over any of his. The thing that kills me is that if it is from her parents or friends, I really don't think Kaine would care. I don't think he wants to make this divorce any harder or more complicated than it has to be. If she, however, got money from people involved in Kyron's kidnapping/murder, then I can see how Kaine would be very concerned about it. I think that is what worries him the most, and that is totally understandable. The ball is in her corner. Her attorney needs to quit whining about LE and just say where the money came from. I don't know why is this an issue at all, much less as a big of an issue as it is unless where she got the money from is directly tied to Kyron.

And Lord, if this is a big issue to her...she has no CLUE what she's in for when she's finally arrested. This will seem like small potatoes once that happens.

 

[Billylee]

I wonder if KH & his attorney are sorry now that they dropped the contempt of court action. ?

 

[Calliope]

I wonder if KH & his attorney are sorry now that they dropped the contempt of court action. ?

heh

Probably not.

 

[gitana1]

Is it fair for me to assume that you then formulate what you believe to be the best legal strategy based on your judgment of your client's credibility?

I understand that clients are not forced or obligated to follow their lawyer's advice (no one can keep a person from being a fool) but I think the average person doesn't know enough about the law to fully understand all the considerations that go into recommending a certain course of action or all the ramifications possible of following that course of action.

If they did, they'd be lawyers! And they'd still be fools if they were personally involved in a criminal or civil suit and didn't have their own lawyer.

Exactly. But I lay it all out for the clients, what their options are, what the ramifications of those options are, and the hurdles we face depending on what strategy we use. What I do can be painstaking, depending on the client because if I think we have a bad position or case, I have to find a way to get them on board with my strategy without saying, "Hey, loser, it's obvious you have serious problems. No way are you getting custody." I use a lot of psychology (even though I'm not trained!) and work with them until they understand. I'll present different scenarios to them and explain why what they allege or how they explain away allegations, has holes, and what the court or custody evaluators will think of that, etc. But in the end, the choice is always the clients to make.

 

[gitana1]

Couldn't the hearing proceed with Bunch just asking Kaine what he knows? What LE told him? That is a matter of public record now. I suppose it would be nice to verify if it was the truth. But if f it turns out that LE lied to Kaine, the visitation/custody order could be amended at that time. Isn't that better than continuing to put off the divorce? Or granting a long abatement?

And does not set some bizarre precedent that other couples and LE will face as a result of this unusual case?

Unless Kaine knows what he knows from first hand observation, then merely testifying as to what LE told him, is hearsay and can and should be objected to. It won't fly.