Another alienation of affection plus child neglect.

[Isis1]

Actually I learned the phrase "assuming argunedo" from a lawyer who at the time was known to have defended more accused murdrers than any other lawyer in the us. Dad is signed up. He has been talking to you. Just wondering if there was anything "legally" which could have/should have been done about a situation like this? Doing nothing and letting an innocent 5 y/o suffer for the selfishness and stupidity of adults was not an option. Beating oneself up for an extended period doesn't seem healthy. But I guess like the saying goes "You gets what you pays for." Didn't pay nothing so didn't get nothing.

Just because you heard a lawyer say that phrase, doesn't mean it applies to you. You were not homest in your first post. Who is to say you are being honest now? We don't like hunting, researching, and citing law in addition to information for people who aren't really looking for help.

 

[Carlos Ray]

Then it's a non-issue.

It's up to a parent how they actually parent their own children. And you'd be very hard pressed to prove that Mom NEVER allowed the child to interact with anyone else or play outside.

The child said so! He knew if he could go outside and play with other kids or not.

The doctor would be a mandated reporter - had there been neglect noted, child services would have been involved.

Did that happen?

The Dr. said he saw signs of neglect.

She's legally allowed to do that as long as she's not directly exposing the child to sexual activity.

She can sleep with the entire base if she wants to.

Is it crappy parenting? Perhaps. But illegal? Nope.

The child's bed was in an adjacent room with a doorway but no door anything/everything that happened in the room was clearly visible. The child could describe the activity he saw and say that it scared him and he cried but mommy was busy and wouldn't help him.

Again, what proof is there that the child was actually present during the sexual activity?

See above. The mother admitted it, almost proudly, in the presence of the paramours's wife. The sexual activity continued over a period of 5-6 months. There was nothing to screen the child from the activity.

And...if this happened a long time ago (per your first answer) what exactly do you want to happen now?

Just curious. Kinda wondering what if?

 

[Proserpina]

The child said so! He knew if he could go outside and play with other kids or not.

A 5 year old's word is not often classed as reliable testimony.

The Dr. said he saw signs of neglect.

Not serious enough to call child services though, correct?

Hence, non-issue.

The child's bed was in an adjacent room with a doorway but no door anything/everything that happened in the room was clearly visible. The child could describe the activity he saw and say that it scared him and he cried but mommy was busy and wouldn't help him.

Again a 5 year old's testimony is not going to be worth much - unless the child was seen and treated by a professional therapist who might be able to testify that Mom's actions had directly harmed the child.

You would also expect Mom to testify that YOU and she had, at some point during the marriage, also had relations with the child inadvertently present...

See above. The mother admitted it, almost proudly, in the presence of the paramours's wife. The sexual activity continued over a period of 5-6 months. There was nothing to screen the child from the activity.

And Mom is going to say that there was a curtain over the door frame, blocking the child's view/access.

No proof of wrongdoing.

Just curious. Kinda wondering what if?

If "ifs and ands were pots and pans, there'd be no need for tinkers", as my Grandfather would say.

In other words - we can sit here and speculate for days, but since a) you haven't given us a timeline (the laws can change, for one thing) and b) it's by your own words too late to do anything, the possibilities are numerous and the discussion is probably moot.

But since I'm here answering anyway....if it happened today, Mom would not face any criminal charges unless the child was found to have been neglected or abused. And even then, as primary caregiver she will generally be given at least one chance to clean up her act before custody would be taken away from her.

Again your recourse would be to file for divorce and get a decent parenting plan put in place.

Hope this puts things into perspective a bit.

 

[cyjeff]

Just curious. Kinda wondering what if?

Oh goody. A hypothetical situation based upon someone else's truth to satisfy nothing but your curiosity.

What better use of a volunteer's time could there be?

 

[Carlos Ray]

Oh goody. A hypothetical situation based upon someone else's truth to satisfy nothing but your curiosity.

What better use of a volunteer's time could there be?

You pretending to give legal advice and you haven't been following the discussion. While presented hypothetically, everything was factual. It was NOT someone else's truth. I lived it! Not curiosity, try peace of mind. Nobody put a gun to anyone's head and made them post here.

 

[Proserpina]

You pretending to give legal advice and you haven't been following the discussion. While presented hypothetically, everything was factual. It was NOT someone else's truth. I lived it! Not curiosity, try peace of mind. Nobody put a gun to anyone's head and made them post here.

Please understand that we're ALL volunteers here - nobody gets paid to do this, and our time is usually best spent helping people who have current issues.


You're actually lucky you've received the responses you have.

 

[Carlos Ray]

Just because you heard a lawyer say that phrase, doesn't mean it applies to you. You were not homest in your first post. Who is to say you are being honest now? We don't like hunting, researching, and citing law in addition to information for people who aren't really looking for help.

How is it dishonest to state something in the third person rather than the first person?

Since the I am the person involved "assuming arguendo" that I am that person certainly applies to me!

I saw no evidence of hunting, researching, certainly no citing of law. The first responses were posted within a few minutes of my post and the subesequent responses in 2 hours or less.

Who says I'm not looking for help? Other than the question of neglect has been addressed. I didn't pay for anything so I guess I have no expectation of getting anything.

 

[TheGeekess]

How is it dishonest to state something in the third person rather than the first person?

Since the I am the person involved "assuming arguendo" that I am that person certainly applies to me!

I saw no evidence of hunting, researching, certainly no citing of law. The first responses were posted within a few minutes of my post and the subesequent responses in 2 hours or less.

Who says I'm not looking for help? Other than the question of neglect has been addressed. I didn't pay for anything so I guess I have no expectation of getting anything.

So, do your own hunting and researching. Google is that-a-way.

 

[Proserpina]

So, do your own hunting and researching. Google is that-a-way.

Ooooooooh you can certainly have my leftover rolleyes thingies

 

[Carlos Ray]

Without proof of neglect, there has been no wrongdoing.

Again, Mom sleeping with the entire base is not illegal..and you've yet to tell us what you'd actually WANT to happen.

It likely wouldn't get custody changed, if that was your angle. Nor would she end up in jail or anything else like that.

Your recourse would be via the divorce court.

Thanks for you reply. I apologize if my way of approaching this offended anyone.

 

[mistoffolees]

Actually I learned the phrase "assuming argunedo" from a lawyer who at the time was known to have defended more accused murdrers than any other lawyer in the us. Dad is signed up. He has been talking to you.

Good. Then we'll answer Dad's questions and you don't need to be bothered or to waste any more of our time.

 

[cyjeff]

How is it dishonest to state something in the third person rather than the first person?

Since the I am the person involved "assuming arguendo" that I am that person certainly applies to me!

Yeah, that's crap.

You want to play games, do it on your time.

I saw no evidence of hunting, researching, certainly no citing of law. The first responses were posted within a few minutes of my post and the subesequent responses in 2 hours or less.

That's because you didn't give us enough to go on.

You avoided every question we asked including "HOW LONG AGO DID THIS HAPPEN"?

Nope, you started playing games about how time doesn't matter.

You want full on legal research, there are people that do that for a fee.

They are called lawyers. Get one.

Who says I'm not looking for help? Other than the question of neglect has been addressed. I didn't pay for anything so I guess I have no expectation of getting anything.

I wouldn't have any expectation of getting anything anywhere, sport.

 

[ecmst12]

How old are you now?

 

[stealth2]

I wonder if OP even knows what "assuming arguendo" means.

 

[Proserpina]

I wonder if OP even knows what "assuming arguendo" means.

Frankly I thought he was referring to the Italian horror movie director.

Apparently I was quite, quite wrong...