CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #17

[NC Analyzer]

How many years could it have taken? She divorced him in 1989 and he married ER in 1991.

She stated that MR dragged her through the courts until 2003/2004. He seems to enjoy court.

 

[Confusion]

She stated that MR dragged her through the courts until 2003/2004. He seems to enjoy court.

I really don't care who said what. I still haven't seen anything to show who initiated any of the court hearings. It could have been for things like back child support, or trying to get parental rights terminated or any number of things.

 

[vasportsmom]

She stated that MR dragged her through the courts until 2003/2004. He seems to enjoy court.

He seems to enjoy using the courts to harass and control his ex wives. I don't think he liked it one bit that ER moved off and took much of that power from him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[OneLove]

How many years could it have taken? She divorced him in 1989 and he married ER in 1991.

I 'believe' I saw 2003 referenced as the end of their court battles, ending with MR agreeing to exchange his fatherhood rights for her giving up the $40,000 he owed her. Then he reneged on signing his relinquishment.

So many of those years were child support nonpayment issues rather than "divorce" issues.

 

[kkdj]

I think AZ Grandma said that their divorce also took many years, if I recall correctly? So he may have spent the better part of ten or more years on two divorces.

Yes. Many many years on 2 divorces! Lots of child support owing!
Would rather pay an atty than the ex for child support????
Dylan is his final responsibility! Mom moved, got full physical custody, moved in another earner, but did not marry him yet.
I just think this comes down to money and power!
IMO!

 

[SCHMAE]

How many years could it have taken? She divorced him in 1989 and he married ER in 1991.

You can marry someone else while still fighting custody and child support issues. Azgrandma said it was 2003 or 2004 before they were all tidied up on court issues related to the whole thing. I would assume the divorce part was done before he married ER.

 

[NC Analyzer]

I really don't care who said what. I still haven't seen anything to show who initiated any of the court hearings. It could have been for things like back child support, or trying to get parental rights terminated or any number of things.

Very, very sorry to upset you but I was just answering the question that you asked?
I think the point here is that MR has no problem dragging his ex's into court years and years beyond the point of a divorce. Control issues.
Dominant theme in Domestic Abuse - Power and Control

 

[mijamawi]

Lots of interesting stuff on that maricopa website.

 

[Confusion]

Ok, I was confusing her with someone else. She isn't a friend of ER.

Lisa Bourque is a search volunteer and keeps local residents updated with her Vallecito Facebook page. She said she also believes someone knows where the 13-year-old is and what happened.

"You would have wished you turned yourself in and things would have been a lot more pleasant, so I think things will shake down here real soon," Bourque said. "Something is definitely wrong, or else you wouldn’t be here right now and people are anxious. They want to know. They want to know where Dylan is."

"Whoever has Dylan, whoever knows where Dylan is, whoever may have done something to Dylan, (the authorities) will find you, and when they do, you would have wished you turned yourself in," Bourque said.

Read more: http://www.koat.com/news/new-mexico...17591544/-/15sgq0m/-/index.html#ixzz2FBwLMco1

 

[Angelonline]

How many years could it have taken? She divorced him in 1989 and he married ER in 1991.

Well custody/child support issues can be ongoing for many years even after divorce is final. IIRC she said it was ongoing until 2003 when she let MR waive the back child support in exchange for his waiving parental rights. 1989 to 2003 that's 14 yrs of court proceedings.

 

[OneLove]

Even though ER has not publicly stated that MR was directly abusive to their sons (well, other than in the past PO ), Azgrandma has said specifically that he WAS abusive to their children. She even openly invited peeps to look up the records on it.

Since the history of the long drawn out divorce/ family court filings follows the pattern of the FIRST divorce, I tend to think odds point also to the same pattern in regards to abusiveness the second time around.

Note that I did NOT say it is evidence of abuse, just higher odds of abuse.

This is NOT a good sign.

 

[Confusion]

Very, very sorry to upset you but I was just answering the question that you asked?
I think the point here is that MR has no problem dragging his ex's into court years and years beyond the point of a divorce. Control issues.
Dominant theme in Domestic Abuse - Power and Control

My point is that just because there are numerous court hearings, it doesn't mean he's dragging things out unless you can show that HE initiates the hearings. If the ex takes him to court how is that making him responsible for the time?

 

[OneLove]

My point is that just because there are numerous court hearings, it doesn't mean he's dragging things out unless you can show that HE initiates the hearings. If the ex takes him to court how is that making him responsible for the time?

If she was forced to file in court due to HIS not paying child support, then he IS responsible for the time, IMO.

 

[NC Analyzer]

If he's the respondent, he didn't initiate it. MOO

He is the respondent. She is the petitioner. There are multiple actions but the majority of them deal with child support. He had accrued considerable arrearages.

ETA: Sorry, forgot my line of thinking. He is the respondent because she filed for the divorce and that is how they are referred to in all subsequent actions.

 

[Wild@Heart]

Good night sweet blue eyed boy, endless prayers.

 

[cluciano63]

Ok, I was confusing her with someone else. She isn't a friend of ER.



Read more: http://www.koat.com/news/new-mexico...17591544/-/15sgq0m/-/index.html#ixzz2FBwLMco1

More and more, I just think these people are stating their opinions as facts. Just my opinion. But I cannot imagine LE telling things to the admin of a FB page. Just can't.

 

[OneLove]

If she was forced to file in court due to HIS not paying child support, then he IS responsible for the time, IMO.

Of course, I can see a deadbeat parent with a history of not paying child support having a convoluted thinking process of claiming that its the filing parent's fault for keeping things "tied up in court".

But that seems pretty juvenile. :floorlaugh:

 

[Angelonline]

I'm sure that the press will just print anything someone tells them without checking it out. How silly of me to think you could believe anything that's written in MSM. :blushing:

Have you read the Connecticut thread? Because that is just what the MSM has been doing since Friday.

 

[beach]

Closed this thread for review

 

[Salem]

Okay Guys - before I back track to clean up here is a reminder: All social media comments should be paraphrased and linked and then move on. All such comments are considered rumor that posters can keep in the back of their minds and if something breaks in MSM, then they can discuss it. BUT, until there is some official word - we don't discuss it.

Now... if any of you were discussing any such comments, please go back and self-edit if you still have time, so I don't have to work so hard.

Thanks!

Salem