- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 17,909
- Reaction score
- 297,609
We're live. Jury entering.
Defendant has introduced a new variation on beige -- camel jacket.
Defendant has introduced a new variation on beige -- camel jacket.
YeahIt’s actually not uncommon for divorcing parents to be precluded from having new significant others present when the kids are. Jennifer was also precluded from having a new boyfriend around (not tgat she had one, or had time for one) when she was with the kids. And she had the kids most of the time. But she particularly did not want Michelle and her daughter present, because of some behaviors that may have been related to her by the children.
I don't disagree with you on this at all.It’s actually not uncommon for divorcing parents to be precluded from having new significant others present when the kids are. Jennifer was also precluded from having a new boyfriend around (not tgat she had one, or had time for one) when she was with the kids. And she had the kids most of the time. But she particularly did not want Michelle and her daughter present, because of some behaviors that may have been related to her by the children.
I possibly no outgoing calls?I get the feeling that something is coming up that JS doesn’t want to come in.
Was MT reading some of these messages on FD’s phone?
Agree.Yeah
The no bf/gf rule was likely boiler plate. And it's easier to start that way on new visitation and loosen it than vice-versa.
Insofar as it was specific to this case, it was specific to Fotis' behavior of telling his children to lie about her. That's worse than anything MT could have said, because the children should have been confident in Fotis' guidance far more than MT's.
IMO
From Andreas? I don't think I caught it.Watching a video message
"A. You can spend the rest of your life with your wife or B!"
Do we know this for a fact? Or is it just speculation?Agree.
Just to be clear though MT was involved with having the children lie and she also used her daughter to communicate with the Dulos children on behalf of the couple when FD lost access.
MOO
True- MT actively supported his emotionally abusive parenting. But the judge only held the responsible party (responsible for parenting his own offspring) accountable for stopping it.Agree.
Just to be clear though MT was involved with having the children lie and she also used her daughter to communicate with the Dulos children on behalf of the couple when FD lost access.
MOO