can i bring text messages as an evidence to court

[Ohiogal]

It appears the question to ask would be can these text messages be authenticated. I'd talk to a lawyer. I doubt anyone in these forums is an expert on the admissibility and authentication of text messages, especially given the fact that introduction of this type of evidence is so groundbreaking/new.

YOu need to quit posting. Text messages can be admitted however the weight given to them is dependent on various things -- what the content states, how relevant it is, whether there is evidence presented that confirms who sent the messages.

Text messages alone are NOT going to result in a change of custody. Doesn't mean the standard required to change custody.

 

[LdiJ]

that she denied about 7 visits foe me to see my son.. is that enough for me to win 50/50 custody on physical part or would they just give her a warning?

On a first time contempt, yes, its very possible that she would get a stern warning, with no changes.

Is your child an infant? That tends to make 50/50 even more unlikely because it can be hard on infants.

And yes, as someone else already told you, if you make three times the income that mom does, you are going to be paying child support, even in a 50/50 situation.

 

[AlmostALawyer]

YOu need to quit posting.

Please tell me that wasn't directed at me. I believe your answer echoed mine regarding authentication, but added the issue of relevance. Probably not something the OP will be able to understand or competently explain at her hearing. That brings us to my second sentence that she should talk to an attorney that might be able to represent her.

 

[Artemis_ofthe_Hunt]

Please tell me that wasn't directed at me. I believe your answer echoed mine regarding authentication, but added the issue of relevance. Probably not something the OP will be able to understand or competently explain at her hearing. That brings us to my second sentence that she should talk to an attorney that might be able to represent her.

WHO... not that... WHO...

 

[stealth2]

Please tell me that wasn't directed at me.

Given that it was in direct response to your post, I can't believe you needed to ask this.

And yes, it is "who", not "that". Basic English skills are important. Whether one is almost a lawyer or not.

 

[Artemis_ofthe_Hunt]

Given that it was in direct response to your post, I can't believe you needed to ask this.

And yes, it is "who", not "that". Basic English skills are important. Whether one is almost a lawyer or not.

I'm thinking not. But ya know... he might have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night...

 

[AlmostALawyer]

Given that it was in direct response to your post, I can't believe you needed to ask this.

And yes, it is "who", not "that". Basic English skills are important. Whether one is almost a lawyer or not.

In English, we also put the comma inside the quotations. I guess you made a minor mistake, as did I.

 

[stealth2]

In English, we also put the comma inside the quotations. I guess you made a minor mistake, as did I.

Actually, the placement of commas and other punctuation are debatable, depending on the style guide used. People are always "who" and never "that" - always.

 

[AlmostALawyer]

You missed the boat there stealth. The point was that I made a mistake. I don't proof these posts like I would a contract. I am in the legal profession. I work for a firm and I'm about to graduate law school. Additionally, I did a memo on the subject above. Turns out different jurisdictions treat the admissibility of texts very differently. If it makes you feel better acting as the grammar police and attempting to take cheap jabs. That is certainly your right. However, it doesn't take away from the content of my contributions.

 

[stealth2]

You missed the boat there stealth. The point was that I made a mistake. I don't proof these posts like I would a contract. I am in the legal profession. I work for a firm and I'm about to graduate law school. Additionally, I did a memo on the subject above. Turns out different jurisdictions treat the admissibility of texts very differently. If it makes you feel better acting as the grammar police and attempting to take cheap jabs. That is certainly your right. However, it doesn't take away from the content of my contributions.

Well... expect to be judged on how you present yourself, regardless of the venue.

Regardless, the admissibility of the texts isn't all that important. Again - did OP actually attempt to exercise his ordered visitation? Or did he shrug and not bother? The former would be denial of visitation. The latter? Would not - he has to actually attempt to get the kid. You should know that.

 

[AlmostALawyer]

I just spoke to what I actually knew regarding the text messages. Unlike some posters, and I'm not implying that this includes you or anyone else on this thread, I don't guess as to what the law is. If I don't know, I generally don't address the question or that part of the question.

I'm aware that in many arenas I will be judged. However, a message board? I'm sure I could go through your 35,000 posts and find sentences that aren't grammatically correct, but I wouldn't begin to attack you or discount your advice. You clearly know something, or you wouldn't have posted 35,000 times. I'm not here to attack anyone. I'm just here to help.

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

... You clearly know something, or you wouldn't have posted 35,000 times...

You "clearly" are new to the interwebz if you really believe that somebody(NOT directed at stealth) couldn't post 35,000 times without knowing something.

A high post count doesn't make you right. It makes you prolific and verbose...

 

[LdiJ]

You "clearly" are new to the interwebz if you really believe that somebody(NOT directed at stealth) couldn't post 35,000 times without knowing something.

A high post count doesn't make you right. It makes you prolific and verbose...

I have to disagree with that. Anyway who has been on these forums long enough to have a high post count, has to be reasonably accurate in what they post. Otherwise the admin would have booted them long ago.

 

[CJane]

I have to disagree with that. Anyway who has been on these forums long enough to have a high post count, has to be reasonably accurate in what they post. Otherwise the admin would have booted them long ago.

How many posts does Kelly have again?

OP -- a change in custody requires a change in the circumstances of the child. Mom "denying" you visits does not rise to that level in most instances. Especially if you did not arrive at the designated pick up location and attempt to retrieve the child (and can PROVE that you did so).

Also, 50/50 custody is difficult enough to work out over the long haul when parents get along really well. It's impossible when there is contention, anger, resentment, jealousy, or 100 other emotionally driven things going on. Can you adequately articulate why you believe 50/50 would be in the best interests of this particular child, give what are clearly issues between you and Mom?

How old is the child?
How near do you and Mom live to each other?
Are you in the same school district?
Are you able to get kiddo to school, daycare, etc on your days if you have kiddo 1/2 the month?

 

[alleonm]

I have several police reports filed already and yes i came to my x's place and that's when & where i filed the reports.... but this is the first time i'm takin her to court for several contempts... now i just received a letter fr. the court for a mandatory mediation on july 2010. why is the court wanting me do mediation when i already filed for contempt charges?? should i bring up the police reports i filed to the mediator or will she even consider this or should i bring it up to the judge instead??? my x is telling me that i violated court order by picking up my son fr. the preschool on fridays while shes at work. it specifically says on the court order that i visit my son every fridays at her place but how can i do when she's at work on fridays and my son is at a preschool. and this is why i pick him up and stay at my place instead fr. 3pm to 7pm as it states on the court order. am i really violating the court order on fridays????