- Joined
- Feb 25, 2013
- Messages
- 45,186
- Reaction score
- 463,663
Maybe.
I'm sure TS has had plenty to say to various people about various people :-( But I can't really see why a civil court would intervene on those grounds. AS and LH are divorced. The law isn't going to intervene if someone says mean things about one (or both) of them or about their marriage, much less if she plans to say mean things in court later on. And in this civil action AS is the petitioner with LH the respondent. So it certainly sounds like it was initiated by AS against LH (although I suppose those terms could be left over from when he initiated their divorce )
Whatever it is, I think it is between the two of them. It could be something pro forma related to their divorce now that AS is getting another divorce (like benefits) and isn't adversarial although I don't really see why a LE witness would have been called by AS's side. But there is alot we don't know about these folks and their private lives.
JMO
I think it's the added description from the pre-trial publicity motion that is making this a bigger deal than it probably is: first, the State cites this to be about a dissolution of marriage action between AS/LH, and second, they cite the EPCS Sargeant Smith as a "material witness." We're talking about two former spouses that don't even live in the same state!