I assume this is normal...

[CJane]

What is the name of your state? MO

So, I picked up the answers that SH's attorney filed today.

It's a lot of blah blah blah... "Petitioner admits to the assertion in the first paragraph" which is the paragraph in which I quote the order. "Petitioner denies the assertion in the second paragraph" which is the one in which I made my allegation.

EXCEPT.

He admits that he left me off of medical forms "Not maliciously or wantonly" but in the best interests of the minor child and to prevent me from interfering with their right to seek medical care.

He also admits that he left me off the school forms because I had not informed him of my work phone number (he KNOWS I was unemployed and I can prove that) and that my cell phone was not in working order (a TOTAL LIE). If I can get my cell phone co to cooperate, I can prove he called me AFTER alleging to CPS that my phone didn't work... which was the end of July and just before school started. I just need to get copies of my cell phone bills.

In response to my allegation that he didn't inform me that Unruly had been referred to the children's hospital, he states that I knew he wanted to seek treatment for her and that I know the name of the hospital. But... I know the NAME of St. Jude's too. Does that mean he doesn't have to tell me if he takes her there? I know the names of LOTS of Dr's offices and hospitals. Is it just me, or is this the stupidest excuse ever? He used the same excuse for the pediatrician that he's been taking the kids too as well.

I expected him to deny things... but I also expected him to have excuses, I guess. Other than the stupid ones he posed.

Does it really work this way? If I can destroy his credibility on a couple of issues, doesn't the judge question his credibility on EVERYTHING? Not that the appeals court didn't already say that he lacks credibility.

They're also still asking that it all be dismissed.

And I swear to you, if I'm on hold w/T-mobile much longer, I shall scream.

 

[wileybunch]

Doesn't T-Mobile have online acct access with your call activity?

 

[fairisfair]

Doesn't T-Mobile have online acct access with your call activity?

probably not archival records. you usually have to request those.

 

[fairisfair]

What is the name of your state? MO

So, I picked up the answers that SH's attorney filed today.

It's a lot of blah blah blah... "Petitioner admits to the assertion in the first paragraph" which is the paragraph in which I quote the order. "Petitioner denies the assertion in the second paragraph" which is the one in which I made my allegation.

EXCEPT.

He admits that he left me off of medical forms "Not maliciously or wantonly" but in the best interests of the minor child and to prevent me from interfering with their right to seek medical care.

He also admits that he left me off the school forms because I had not informed him of my work phone number (he KNOWS I was unemployed and I can prove that) and that my cell phone was not in working order (a TOTAL LIE). If I can get my cell phone co to cooperate, I can prove he called me AFTER alleging to CPS that my phone didn't work... which was the end of July and just before school started. I just need to get copies of my cell phone bills.

In response to my allegation that he didn't inform me that Unruly had been referred to the children's hospital, he states that I knew he wanted to seek treatment for her and that I know the name of the hospital. But... I know the NAME of St. Jude's too. Does that mean he doesn't have to tell me if he takes her there? I know the names of LOTS of Dr's offices and hospitals. Is it just me, or is this the stupidest excuse ever? He used the same excuse for the pediatrician that he's been taking the kids too as well.

I expected him to deny things... but I also expected him to have excuses, I guess. Other than the stupid ones he posed.

Does it really work this way? If I can destroy his credibility on a couple of issues, doesn't the judge question his credibility on EVERYTHING? Not that the appeals court didn't already say that he lacks credibility.

They're also still asking that it all be dismissed.

And I swear to you, if I'm on hold w/T-mobile much longer, I shall scream.

I feel sorry for his attorney. Can you imagine actually have to argue those points on someone's behalf. Go get em C.

 

[CJane]

probably not archival records. you usually have to request those.

Yup. This is the downside of paperless billing and online bill pay. I don't keep records of ANYTHING financial (which I'm sure makes LDI want to cry ) anymore.

I can only access 08/14 to present online. I really need June and July (he called CPS in July). Thankfully, they're sending them to me. I just hope I have them in time.

 

[wileybunch]

probably not archival records. you usually have to request those.

With Cingular/AT&T, it goes back 6 mos --> oops, it goes back 1.5 yrs! Score. But, that made me think we should keep copies of the bills anyway. Cingular/AT&T has a PDF download option.

Anyway, hope she gets them.

Side note -- We had the ex swear she not only called, but left a VM on husband's cell and husband refused to let daughter call her back, but there was never a call recorded so he took screen shots of the online bill also to have if she ever decides to repeat that lie in court.

Yup. This is the downside of paperless billing and online bill pay. I don't keep records of ANYTHING financial (which I'm sure makes LDI want to cry ) anymore.

I can only access 08/14 to present online. I really need June and July (he called CPS in July). Thankfully, they're sending them to me. I just hope I have them in time.

Ahh, I hope you do, too! What a butt nugget for lying about that, but he doesn't have a good excuse so he has to pull something out of his @ss.

 

[JacobJoel]

Go back to paper CJ. In your case it is warranted.

evidently it IS normal. crazy = normal in this world.

 

[CJane]

Ahh, I hope you do, too! What a butt nugget for lying about that, but he doesn't have a good excuse so he has to pull something out of his @ss.

So, this is exactly what he claims:

"In further answering, Petitioner states that while he did omit the Respondent's name from the intake form, it was not done wantonly, wilfully and maliciously, but rather, was done to serve the best interests of the minor child, UNRULY, to ensure that the Respondent would not interfere with the minor child's ability to seek health care. Further, the Respondent has always been advised as to the name of this health care provider and has been able to communicate with them, as well as secure records from them, should she desire to do so."

He repeats this answer several times.

 

[CJane]

Go back to paper CJ. In your case it is warranted.

evidently it IS normal. crazy = normal in this world.

I think I will. I'll just highlight any phone calls from/to him on both mine and Wild's phones and attach a note of what was said/discussed in each call. It's a PITA, but he's also claiming that he informed me of ALL Dr's appts and discussed them all with me.

Also lies.

And here's what bugs me. I CANNOT LIE. Seriously just can't do it.

But, I'm cynical enough to know that most people will lie about anything if it serves their need - and most of the time they can almost justify it too.

The other part of me though? Thinks that if you're going to raise your hand and swear to tell the truth so help you God... you really ought to do it. And I'm a heathen!

 

[>Charlotte<]

to ensure that the Respondent would not interfere with the minor child's ability to seek health care.

This is the part I don't understand. Wanting to ensure you don't interfere with the child's healthcare is one thing, but doesn't he have to actually have some kind of reasonable cause on which to base that rationale?

I mean, by that logic, couldn't he also assert that he's not allowing you any visitation to ensure you don't dress her up as a clown and sell her to the circus??

If there's one thing this forum has taught me, it's to retroactively appreciate how easy I had it when I got divorced. The things that used to annoy me about him were nothing.

 

[CJane]

This is the part I don't understand. Wanting to ensure you don't interfere with the child's healthcare is one thing, but doesn't he have to actually have some kind of reasonable cause on which to base that rationale?

That's really what I can't wait for. I want him to justify, ON THE STAND, this idea that leaving me out of medical decisions - when the kids live with me the majority of the time - is somehow in the kids' best interests.

Maybe he can explain why his wife wrote "Mom" on the "Who brought the child in today" line too.

I mean, by that logic, couldn't he also assert that he's not allowing you any visitation to ensure you don't dress her up as a clown and sell her to the circus??

LOL After all, I threaten to sell them to the Gypsies on a fairly regular basis.

If there's one thing this forum has taught me, it's to retroactively appreciate how easy I had it when I got divorced. The things that used to annoy me about him were nothing.

LOL I'd have fewer issues w/all this if our relationship had ALWAYS been contentious. But until he got engaged, we got along GREAT.

 

[>Charlotte<]

I just realized I wrote "visitation" which wasn't really correct. I meant something along the lines of "give them back to you when he's supposed to".

 

[CJane]

I just realized I wrote "visitation" which wasn't really correct. I meant something along the lines of "give them back to you when he's supposed to".

It's all the same thing.

He DID threaten to keep them once. It did not go well for him.

 

[escape2paradise]

LOL I'd have fewer issues w/all this if our relationship had ALWAYS been contentious. But until he got engaged, we got along GREAT.

Funny how that happens, my X was the same way. We aren't talking a few months either, we were friendly for 10+ yrs after we split. I was married for most of this time. We, meaning my husband, my X and myself got along great. Now he hates us and we really don't have a clue why! The only new factor is the lady!

She is his sugar mama, so I guess it is in his best interest to keep her happy!

 

[LdiJ]

So, this is exactly what he claims:

"In further answering, Petitioner states that while he did omit the Respondent's name from the intake form, it was not done wantonly, wilfully and maliciously, but rather, was done to serve the best interests of the minor child, UNRULY, to ensure that the Respondent would not interfere with the minor child's ability to seek health care. Further, the Respondent has always been advised as to the name of this health care provider and has been able to communicate with them, as well as secure records from them, should she desire to do so."

He repeats this answer several times.

He is trying to imply that if you were included on the intake forms, that you would negligently interfere with her medical care. First, that's a really STUPID thing to imply without hard core evidence, and second you have JOINT LEGAL CUSTODY, so he is admitting that he is in contempt.

He would have been far better served to simply admit the mistake...or to blame it on his wife's lack of understanding of how things were supposed to work...but then, he would have been admitting that his wife was the one taking them to the doctor.

Object to the dismissal again.