Crystal S., Haleigh's mother #6

[atherella]

Perhaps because she was not the petitioner in this case?

Perhaps that is a mistake in the docket, because Ron does not need to file an answer to his own petition. He is the one that FILED the Petition in the first place, why would he file an answer to HIS petition - that makes NO sense at all.

.SUMM RT 10-26-05 SVD 10-05-05 DUE 10-25-05

There is also a marking in the docket showing a return of service. Crystal was served on October 10th.

 

[atherella]

She did not live in Jacksonvile. The notice went to Jacksonville.

You might want to do some research into Jacksonville. JMO.

 

[Whisperer]

I was told that she was represented by an attorney....She was not!

 

[Whisperer]

So that place on Rita lane is owned by Ron Cummings!!!!!

 

[Whisperer]

I do not see any SSI payments so far. He listed Medicaid, that's all so far.

 

[atherella]

I was told that she was represented by an attorney....She was not!

Charles Behm, Esquire from Ponoma Park, FL represented Crystal from January 2006 until AT LEAST 2/22/2007.

 

[debs]

Charles Behm, Esquire from Ponoma Park, FL represented Crystal from January 2006 until AT LEAST 2/22/2007.

Much too late to do anything about the fiasco that happened in December 2005.

 

[atherella]

Much too late to do anything about the fiasco that happened in December 2005.

In your opinion of course, right?

 

[Whisperer]

What has happened in this court is pitiful!

 

[Shaymus at The Rock]

Shay, Page 3, post #52. this thread is the whole list of Dockets.

Thanks. How do I pull up/open the Petitioner's Financial Affidavit ?

 

[debs]

In your opinion of course, right?

Well, no. It would be fact. She wasn't represented when she went into that courtroom on Dec 27th, 2005. He was not there until January. One cannot help when one is in place after the fact.

 

[Whisperer]

So far it looks like he was given custody because he had a job. Must have just started the job in a matter of days or weeks prior. He stated the benefits would kick in in March after his 90 day probation. This is now 12-27. New Job. New House on Sharon rented for him by his mom.

 

[Whisperer]

SS...I am sitting here with the Doc in front of me...Crystal had no representation and the court made mention of it.

 

[Whisperer]

This is a very sad case. She fought the best way she knew how. She had an injunction against him. She had to drop it or he wouldn't let her see the children (before the decision and court). When she found out he had filed she went to the court to get them and didn't have the $250 with her that was required...

So so sad!

 

[Whisperer]

Pieces are coming together!

 

[atherella]

So far it looks like he was given custody because he had a job. Must have just started the job in a matter of days or weeks prior. He stated the benefits would kick in in March after his 90 day probation. This is now 12-27. New Job. New House on Sharon rented for him by his mom.

Custody was NOT given to him only because he had a job. There were more reasons than that.... including the "mother's lack of sustained contact". Let's be honest.

 

[Busylady]

The petition to determine paternity and request to receive primary resident custody of the two minor children was done on September 16, 2005.

Crystal was personally served October 5, 2005 (document R.7) The mother filed a typed answer on October 18, 2005 opposing the petition (R.12).

Both parties were mailed order of Referral to the General magistrate (R.16).

 

[Whisperer]

What a sham and sneaky move by RC!

 

[Whisperer]

I am reading the document. It is a disgrace that the court ruled that way based on a man having a job for a few days or weeks..not to mention a MH for another brief period of time.

Those kids and him moved around like Gypsies...not one thing stable in their lives.

 

[Whisperer]

Busy can you post the document of the serving of petition to Crystal? Or better yet link us up to it?