We had a court date yesterday. As of now I have full legal and physical custody. It turned out the ex was not abiding by the previous order and admitted to trying to contact me several times and that he just does not like the accused person. The judge came down on him with fire and brimstone for wasting time and making false reports. Apparently this is becoming a common epidemic. The judge told me (after ex was kicked out.) that he is not the first person to make false allegations and he will be facing criminal charges for his actions and possibly for perjury. I recommend that anyone who is dealing with a situation like this get an attorney immediately. Had I not, I would not have thought of the correct questions to ask that made my ex reveal his true intentions.
In all this, I don't understand why a police investigator was not also involved (as normally it would be in cases of alleged sexual molestation). Police would have seen through the BS more quickly than a CPS caseworker (I've been through the same thing -- see my recent posting on CP, slander, and harassment)/
Likewise, in my case, CPS was lax in enforcing the law, when, while the case they were investigating was ruled out, and CP (I am NCP), was caught on a DWI with child on board, CPS sent the child not to me but to a member of CP family living as far as I do. Why? Perhaps because CPS still had doubts on the case? They didn't believe the police investigator who presented overwhelming evidence that the charges were false? Didn't believe the child's therapist? Didn't want to get involved in the civil case for custody? (probably, it was the last reason, though CPS is normally VERY cautious when such grave allegations are made -- so, best is to get the police involved as well; cooperation with police also makes the alleged perpetrator look in good standing).
As to personal judgments in this thread, yes, I was struck too. Why not give Louise some credit for what she says? If she is absolutely sure that her mate doesn't do such things, so be it. Even more striking, all this stuff about "common law marriage" and distinction of rights. This (the right to have the child) should be between the two parents, no? And if one of the parents dates someone, the other parent should not be allowed to slander one or the other, whether they are married or not. In other words, marriage should not be the point, but rather the conduct of one of the parents (if slanderous) or of the "companion/spouse" (if criminal).
The religious motives of a judge also, frankly, st#nk. If anything like this should happen again, do as I (also an atheist) did: get an ACLU lawyer who will give them hell.