False harassment charges

[quincy]

Of course, sometimes the ex is not as nuts as painted...

Yes. That is always a possibility. And cognitive dissonance could still be a factor.

 

[stealth2]

Yes. That is always a possibility. And cognitive dissonance could still be a factor.

LOL Quite true.

 

[vh5150]

You got exactly the reaction I expected. Your letter was an exparte communication which a judge is not allowed to read. The judge allowed himself to read it by serving copies of it to the other involved parties. You may yet see further action.

Unfortunately this was exactly the response that I expected as well. The judge made it very clear that he was taking no other action, so my only hope is that the Commissioner researches and re-thinks his decision, and voluntarily makes a change. I have a hard time believing that I have any chance of this with the obvious conflict of interest that is present, and with what was demonstrated in his last order.

 

[vh5150]

What your ex is doing can be seen as a normal human reaction to decisions that have been made. It is called in psychological terms "cognitive dissonance."

A person often needs to find support for a decision that has been made by finding fault with the other choices that were available but not chosen. With a divorce, the worse you are made to look in her eyes (or in the eyes of her community), the more justification your ex has for the divorce.

Here is a semi-easy-to-understand overview of cognitive dissonance: http://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-dissonance.html

Perhaps if you look at your ex's actions as normal responses to stressful situations, this could help you examine your own responses to her.

Good luck.

I think this sums it up perfectly. Due to her psychological issues I was granted sole legal custody of our child and I also cared for her two other sons whom she also left behind when she moved out. One was 18 and has moved out on his own since that time, and the other was 17 at the time and still remains with me at age 19, while he attends college locally and is active in the Army reserves locally. She put a lot of pressure on him and treated him very badly, even once calling the police in an attempt to have me picked up for harboring a runaway, which they rightly refused to do.

I have considered carefully why she is doing what she is doing, and I have put a lot of focus on my decision making with regards to my responses. To this point I have not had to address this legally, but feel as though I have no choice now, as she shows no signs of discontinuing this damaging behavior.

I will read the info via the link you provided, and appreciate the information.

 

[quincy]

It seems to me that your best course of action is to hire an aggressive attorney to work for you, so that the nonsense will stop. I quite frankly do not see any other way this can be accomplished.

I wish you good luck.

 

[vh5150]

It seems to me that your best course of action is to hire an aggressive attorney to work for you, so that the nonsense will stop. I quite frankly do not see any other way this can be accomplished.

I wish you good luck.

Thanks for the well wishes, much appreciated.

I would have done that already if I had the resources to retain a lawyer, but I simply do not at this point. I am hopeful I can get the ACLU to take this on, at least with respect to the social media issue. If I can get this corrected, then maybe, just maybe, it will be enough for her to realize that her baseless claims are not going to go unanswered. Doubtful, but it is the only place I have to start at this moment.

The truly sad part of all of this is that I have been fair, I have offered for her to take our child over his summer school break, I am even willing to negotiate a reduction in support in order to show good faith, however her mentality for the last 2 1/2 years is that ANY communication is too much, and harassing. I do not see this changing any time soon.

Hope you all have a great weekend, and thanks again for all the feedback.

 

[vh5150]

Hi everyone,

My injunction request was denied yesterday in Brown County, but not all was lost. In this hearing the commissioner stated specifically that Facebook posts would not be allowed to be submitted as evidence by me, as they were not direct communication from the ex. These were posts ABOUT me on her wall, not posts posted TO me on my wall - the same scenario as was her evidence that was accepted by her county.

He also answered my request for a ban on the ex with regards to social media, by replying that the court does not have the power to restrict someones liberties and First Amendment rights; at least not without action on their part that is harassing or threatening via that same venue, first. This is good news at least in the sense that I now have another Counties opinions to submit back to Oconto County, in an attempt to get them to overturn this nonsense order against me.

I'm obviously very disappointed that the 2 1/2 years of history and evidence that I was able to submit was not considered threatening or harassing enough for an injunction, as there were direct threats made against me.

Keeping positive in the sense that I can hopefully get the Oconto County courts to undo this ban, now that I have another courts opinion on record showing that it is not something within their power to do.

Best wishes to you all, and happy Friday !!

 

[vh5150]

One final piece of advice needed, please.

My latest writing asking for a reversal of the social media ban has been in the courts hands since last Thursday 08-18. I am cautiously optimistic that this means they are giving it a greater consideration now that another County has offered a conflicting opinion with regards to the social media ban.

While I await a response, and with the 'hope for the best but plan for the worse' mindset; is there a strategic benefit to filing a Notice of Appeal and getting this on record with Oconto County, while they are reviewing this?

 

[vh5150]

Got my own question answered, just by waiting it out. I got a reply from the courts, and they did not act upon my mailing due to this not being an active hearing or a request for an action within an active hearing.

I filed for and got a De Novo hearing which is scheduled for Sept 09, so now I switch gears and prepare to address this back in court one last time. If this fails, then I have no option but to file with the DIII Appellate Courts, and this Sept 09 hearing is a few days before my 45 days expires for that, so the timing works out OK.

So, for the De Novo I have a couple questions if anyone is able to help out a bit.

1) Can I expect this to be a new hearing as if the last one had never happened? Or are they going to review the last one, and then ask my objections to it?

2) If it is just like a new hearing, does the petitioner (ex) have to being her evidence back in to have it heard again? And can she bring additional evidence in, that what was not used in the last hearing?

Thanks again in advance, I truly appreciate everyone input on this.

 

[vh5150]

Final update on this. I think, lol.

I had my De Novo hearing today and thankfully the Judge did the correct thing and dropped the social media ban as well as the restrictions on frequency and length of posts allowed within Our Family Wizard.

Thought it was all over and I was finally done with this, until he ended the hearing by stating that he was placing an injunction against me for four years. All based on the same complaint that I post too many messages in the system we are required to use for communication, and with absolutely no evidence being provided by the ex wife.

Taking the good out of this and walking away knowing that at least they stood up and took notice of the Unconstitutional bans and corrected them, and convinced that this was a trade off to teach me a lesson about questioning their courts decision. No legal affect on me, and I control my destiny now, so it's all good. I knew this was a risk with the De Novo request, but hoped that I would get someone open to the truth and not swayed by the small town mentality, unfortunately this was not the case.

Thanks again to everyone who offered information as I took this journey, and best of luck to you all !!

 

[quincy]

Final update on this. I think, lol.

I had my De Novo hearing today and thankfully the Judge did the correct thing and dropped the social media ban as well as the restrictions on frequency and length of posts allowed within Our Family Wizard.

Thought it was all over and I was finally done with this, until he ended the hearing by stating that he was placing an injunction against me for four years. All based on the same complaint that I post too many messages in the system we are required to use for communication, and with absolutely no evidence being provided by the ex wife.

Taking the good out of this and walking away knowing that at least they stood up and took notice of the Unconstitutional bans and corrected them, and convinced that this was a trade off to teach me a lesson about questioning their courts decision. No legal affect on me, and I control my destiny now, so it's all good. I knew this was a risk with the De Novo request, but hoped that I would get someone open to the truth and not swayed by the small town mentality, unfortunately this was not the case.

Thanks again to everyone who offered information as I took this journey, and best of luck to you all !!

Thank you for the update, vh5150. It sounds as if there was more positive than negative to come from the hearing. Good luck going forward.

 

[vh5150]

Thank you for the update, vh5150. It sounds as if there was more positive than negative to come from the hearing. Good luck going forward.

Thank you for the feedback quincy. It is positive in the sense that it is finally done in Oconto, but I am still shell-shocked that an injunction was placed against me..

My first instinct was to go to an appellate review, but time, effort and financial considerations will likely not allow that. I do not think that is something I can take on individually and without representation.

The ex has voiced opinions in several hearings regarding a GAL and attempting to get custody back, as well as placement, and it is now only a matter of time until she does that. Now that she has something to try to use against me, I'm sure it is coming. This would be in our case in Brown County however, and they have been absolutely fair to this point, so I am hopeful that this injunction will not give them cause to make any changes. The danger she put her kids in will hopefully be the focal point, combined with her non-compliance of seeking counseling and medications after the Counties oversight of her, post-suicide attempts. Her moving in with a convicted child sex offender is already on record in our divorce hearing, and there is an active no contact order between he and our son, so at least the history is documented and known to the courts here.

Thanks again for the feedback, it was all very appreciated.

VH

 

[eerelations]

I think all grownups should eschew facebook. How ridiculous is it to yap about your life to the general public?

My Mother taught me to be careful of what I write, and to avoid writing anything I did not want to be published in the local newspaper, on the front page. She did me a great service with that one. You should consider it.

FB is a tool, nothing more. And as with all tools, the outcome depends on how you use it.

I have many good friends who have dispersed around the world and FB is the way we communicate with each other all at once. For us, FB is a blessing. We also keep our privacy settings in such a way that only we see what we "yap" about. Our lives are richer because of the way we use FB.

 

[LdiJ]

Thank you for the feedback quincy. It is positive in the sense that it is finally done in Oconto, but I am still shell-shocked that an injunction was placed against me..

My first instinct was to go to an appellate review, but time, effort and financial considerations will likely not allow that. I do not think that is something I can take on individually and without representation.

The ex has voiced opinions in several hearings regarding a GAL and attempting to get custody back, as well as placement, and it is now only a matter of time until she does that. Now that she has something to try to use against me, I'm sure it is coming. This would be in our case in Brown County however, and they have been absolutely fair to this point, so I am hopeful that this injunction will not give them cause to make any changes. The danger she put her kids in will hopefully be the focal point, combined with her non-compliance of seeking counseling and medications after the Counties oversight of her, post-suicide attempts. Her moving in with a convicted child sex offender is already on record in our divorce hearing, and there is an active no contact order between he and our son, so at least the history is documented and known to the courts here.

Thanks again for the feedback, it was all very appreciated.

VH

Placed an injunction against you for what? What is it that you are restrained from doing?

 

[vh5150]

Placed an injunction against you for what? What is it that you are restrained from doing?

Her sole claim was that I messaged too much within the Our Family Wizard tool. This was court ordered by the same county, and allowed and required communication on placement, visitation, shared costs, among other items, or as stated in the order "includes but is not limited to...."

With no evidence presented, the judge determined that it was too many messages, stated her testimony was compelling enough, and even refused my request to have the courts view said communication online, before making a determination. This was also written into the initial order, and exactly why this was enacted, so the courts would have record of communication there, in order to determine what was going on.

I am convinced that this was the courts way of telling me that they did not appreciate the De Novo request, but it is done, and a district III appeal is my only other option.

EDIT: The restrictions are simple, avoid personal contact, no contact other than by a lawyer, and continue to use the OFW system with regards to any topics regarding our child. They lifted the social media restrictions, and lifted the limit I was imposed on how many messages I could send in the OFW system, then placed an injunction on me based on number of messages there..... I can't make this stuff up.