Update

[CJane]

What is the name of your state? MO

My home visit w/the GAL was supposed to be yesterday @ 2 pm. She never showed, never called, nothing.

I left my attorney a message around 430 when I finally gave up the vigil and had to get the house ready for my kids' bday party.

Should I call the GAL on Monday? This is the 3rd time we've had a scheduled visit and it hasn't happened... though it's the first time she hasn't had the courtesy to at least let me know rescheduling was necessary.

Once again (as w/the last times) we're screaming up on the trial date... I only have the kids 7 more days before trial, and 2 of those days are the weekend immediately prior... all other days would require late evening visits on her part.

[LdiJ]

You had better call her. There may be some mixup in the date.

[CJane]

Originally Posted by LdiJ

You had better call her. There may be some mixup in the date.

That's what I'm thinking, but I just don't see how.

The visit was scheduled on the courthouse steps after the trial was continued. My mom, step-dad, step-mom and dad were all standing there as well as my attorney. We ALL heard 2 on Saturday. I even made sure I was here at 2 today just in case she hit the wrong day on her palm pilot. She orginally suggested 930 am, but I told her I had plans with the kids that would last til at least noon. That's when she suggested 2. I didn't leave the house til 10am though, so I know she didn't accidentally show up at the earlier time.

I WILL call her on Monday, and will actually see her on Monday as well since we're taking the SMom's advance testimony @ 230.

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by CJane

That's what I'm thinking, but I just don't see how.

The visit was scheduled on the courthouse steps after the trial was continued. My mom, step-dad, step-mom and dad were all standing there as well as my attorney. We ALL heard 2 on Saturday. I even made sure I was here at 2 today just in case she hit the wrong day on her palm pilot. She orginally suggested 930 am, but I told her I had plans with the kids that would last til at least noon. That's when she suggested 2. I didn't leave the house til 10am though, so I know she didn't accidentally show up at the earlier time.

I WILL call her on Monday, and will actually see her on Monday as well since we're taking the SMom's advance testimony @ 230.

She may still have been pretty distracted about her father's (?) death. She may have forgotten to record it entirely or put in on next Saturday. Just ask her about it.

[CJane]

I talked to my attorney today. She's verra unhappy about the GAL being a no-call/no-show.

We're supposed to depose the SMom today, and as of right now, we're going to play nicey nice with her because my attorney agrees, after meeting with her briefly last Monday, that most of this legal maneuvering is her, not the ex. My attorney wants her on the stand so that the judge can obserrve her body language and hear her tone of voice, rather than just read testimony gathered in a deposition.

There's risk involved, because she COULD have the baby late, and that'd result in not having her testimony at all, or asking the judge for yet another continuance. But the risk of getting 'real' testimony from her now is that she'll have the baby on time, be able to appear in court, and she's had the benefit of being coached by ex's attorney in the mean-time.

[weenor]

If the purpose of the deposition is indeed to show her over involvement in the matter then, yes, by deposing her now your attorney would be showing your hand to other side.

[CJane]

Originally Posted by weenor

If the purpose of the deposition is indeed to show her over involvement in the matter then, yes, by deposing her now your attorney would be showing your hand to other side.

My attorney feels that she was strong armed into this deposition in chambers last Monday. The judge told her that he expects it to be done because the woman is due to have a baby on the 20th and trial is the 27th... so it's possible that she'll go late and be in labor during trial. (Though, not likely judging from her size and what her doctor has been telling her).

So, the purpose of the deposition, ostensibly, is to have tesitmony on the record in case she's not at trial. There's just a LOT of concern that she will be there and our hand re: overinvolvement will have been played.

[weenor]

I think if it were me, I would take my chances on having to continue the proceedings to have her live. To bad your attorney can't file a motion to make her have the kid by "C" section on the due date to make sure she's present at trial LOL

[CJane]

Originally Posted by weenor

I think if it were me, I would take my chances on having to continue the proceedings to have her live. To bad your attorney can't file a motion to make her have the kid by "C" section on the due date to make sure she's present at trial LOL

LOL Actually, Smom admitted yesterday that if she hasn't had the child by her due date (monday) that they'll most likely induce or do a C-section. My attorney handed her a subpeona and told her that unless she was in the hospital, she'd probably better appear in court.

Ex's attorney started the deposition, focused very heavily on the whole providing child care thing... "The truth is, you spend more time with the children than either of the parents, correct?" Things like that. SMom spent a lot of time saying that I show extreme favoritism toward one of the kids, that the youngest girl is very confused about where she's supposed to be from one day to the next (never seen that in my house, but then I have a color coded calendar hanging up in the kitchen), that I dress them inappropriately for school, that the youngest's teacher is VERY concerned about her behavior and has had 'several' telephone conferences with my ex about it. Interesting to me, because I just attended a parent-teacher conference on the 16th of Feb (ex did not attend conferences) and the teacher had nothing but wonderful things to say about this child's behavior and social progress. SMom insists that youngest child has ADHD, but she's convinced that it would be 'cured' by spending more time with dad since she 'knows there's no structure at Mom's house". She mentioned more than once that she knows there's no structure because "The kids feel way too comfortable speaking their minds to grownups instead of doing what they're told." She also told flat out lies... said I never pick the kids up before 7pm (I always pick them up no later than 6), that I yell at them constantly to get in the car when I arrive at her house (absolutely untrue), etc.

My attorney played nice, for the most part. She stuck to questions about whether or not SMom is actually qualified to diagnose a child with ADHD (no!), her employment history, how long she dated Ex before they were engaged, how long they were engaged prior to marriage, and how long she'd known the kids before becoming their daycare provider.

The GAL seemed quite out of patience with SMom by the time she started asking questions. She asked if the kids were in daycare prior to Smom becoming child care provider. Smom acknowledged that was true. GAL asked about the schedule of daycare - Smom acknowledged that the schedule was essentially the same. GAL said "So, really, all that's changed in the past 2 years is WHO is providing the daycare, correct?" Smom said "No, now a parent is caring for them." GAL raised an eyebrow and changed the subject to religion. Asked SMom what she tells the kids re: my spiritual beliefs, SMom said "I tell them that we should pray that she lets Christ into her heart so that she can join the children in heaven someday." GAL asked if SMom thought that having parents of differing faiths was detrimental to children, and Smom said 'absolutely'. GAL asked why SMom seemed to think that if the kids needed to experience only one spiritual belief, it should be the Christian one. Smom said "It's the only one that makes sense."

Obviously, there was more, but that's the gist of it.

The GAL missed my appt on Saturday because she got the directions messed up and had the wrong phone # for me. We got it all straightened out and she's coming Sunday @ 6.

[Ithildriel]

I'm no expert, but it sounds like stepmom opened her mouth and inserted her foot pretty deep.

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by Ithildriel

I'm no expert, but it sounds like stepmom opened her mouth and inserted her foot pretty deep.

I would have to agree...I suspect that she truly blew things for her husband with the GAL.

[Zephyr]

Originally Posted by CJane

LOL Actually, Smom admitted yesterday that if she hasn't had the child by her due date (monday) that they'll most likely induce or do a C-section. My attorney handed her a subpeona and told her that unless she was in the hospital, she'd probably better appear in court.

Ex's attorney started the deposition, focused very heavily on the whole providing child care thing... "The truth is, you spend more time with the children than either of the parents, correct?" Things like that. SMom spent a lot of time saying that I show extreme favoritism toward one of the kids, that the youngest girl is very confused about where she's supposed to be from one day to the next (never seen that in my house, but then I have a color coded calendar hanging up in the kitchen), that I dress them inappropriately for school, that the youngest's teacher is VERY concerned about her behavior and has had 'several' telephone conferences with my ex about it. Interesting to me, because I just attended a parent-teacher conference on the 16th of Feb (ex did not attend conferences) and the teacher had nothing but wonderful things to say about this child's behavior and social progress. SMom insists that youngest child has ADHD, but she's convinced that it would be 'cured' by spending more time with dad since she 'knows there's no structure at Mom's house". She mentioned more than once that she knows there's no structure because "The kids feel way too comfortable speaking their minds to grownups instead of doing what they're told." She also told flat out lies... said I never pick the kids up before 7pm (I always pick them up no later than 6), that I yell at them constantly to get in the car when I arrive at her house (absolutely untrue), etc.

My attorney played nice, for the most part. She stuck to questions about whether or not SMom is actually qualified to diagnose a child with ADHD (no!), her employment history, how long she dated Ex before they were engaged, how long they were engaged prior to marriage, and how long she'd known the kids before becoming their daycare provider.

The GAL seemed quite out of patience with SMom by the time she started asking questions. She asked if the kids were in daycare prior to Smom becoming child care provider. Smom acknowledged that was true. GAL asked about the schedule of daycare - Smom acknowledged that the schedule was essentially the same. GAL said "So, really, all that's changed in the past 2 years is WHO is providing the daycare, correct?" Smom said "No, now a parent is caring for them." GAL raised an eyebrow and changed the subject to religion. Asked SMom what she tells the kids re: my spiritual beliefs, SMom said "I tell them that we should pray that she lets Christ into her heart so that she can join the children in heaven someday." GAL asked if SMom thought that having parents of differing faiths was detrimental to children, and Smom said 'absolutely'. GAL asked why SMom seemed to think that if the kids needed to experience only one spiritual belief, it should be the Christian one. Smom said "It's the only one that makes sense."

Obviously, there was more, but that's the gist of it.

The GAL missed my appt on Saturday because she got the directions messed up and had the wrong phone # for me. We got it all straightened out and she's coming Sunday @ 6.

Can I prepurchase a ticket to your court hearing???? please front row?!?!?!

[CJane]

Originally Posted by Zephyr

Can I prepurchase a ticket to your court hearing???? please front row?!?!?!

You should have been at the deposition. Every time she told a lie or stretched the truth, I'd just shake my head and glare at her and she'd backtrack.

At the beginning, she kept looking to the ex before she answered anything. He'd nod his head or shake his head and she'd answer appropriately.

After about 5 minutes of that, the GAL said "I'll need you to turn and face the court reporter please."

[weenor]

Yeah I would agree- I find the questions from the GAL to be interesting...especially the one about the only thing that's changed in the last two years...that is a cross exam question I would have expected from your attorney. Plus, even in the bible belt the Alabama Supreme Court recently admonished a parent about religious discussion and ordered that the issue of who was going to hell for what was not to be discussed with the children. Of course there was a dissenting opinion -this is Alabama after all. She's going to keep digging herself a whole and fall in...

[Zephyr]

Originally Posted by CJane

You should have been at the deposition. Every time she told a lie or stretched the truth, I'd just shake my head and glare at her and she'd backtrack.

At the beginning, she kept looking to the ex before she answered anything. He'd nod his head or shake his head and she'd answer appropriately.

After about 5 minutes of that, the GAL said "I'll need you to turn and face the court reporter please."

I am sure when she started on the answers about religion he just wanted to stand up and scream....."Jaysus Woman you're killin me here!!!!"