The Psycho Ex Wife

Have your own psycho ex? Get a FREE Report on "Why Co-Parenting Doesn't Work", or learn how to win child custody with a custody coach.

I’ve previously covered how we were headed towards this first custody evaluation and how the custody evaluation is generally supposed to work as detailed by Custody Evaluations, Inc. in their literature.  Now we’ll discuss the actual experience before moving onto the conclusion.

I previously was a little off on the dates.  There were 6 sessions which took place over the course of August, September, and early October of 2004.  (So much for “speeding up” the process and saving money.)  PEW was seen individually first.  I was seen individually in session 2.  We were seen together in session 3.  Session 4 was a split session, with each of us being seen with the children.  Sessions 5 and 6 were both joint sessions.

So, in a mere 6 hours, only 50-minutes of which are you actually interacting with the evaluator (if you’re lucky) - this person passes a judgment on the both of you as parents and hands down a “recommendation” based upon their wealth of experience and alleged expertise.  You could even pare it down further.  3-hours each.   In 3-hours, you pay thousands of dollars for the privilege of having this “expert” ask you a few questions, watch you interact with your children for 10 fucking minutes, listen to your psycho ex spew completely unfounded and totally unsupported false allegations against you, you defend yourself and explain your position calmly and rationally, and then they pass their judgment.  You’re told by our attorney that the court “takes their recommendations very seriously and almost always goes with what they recommend.”

Since the rules “prohibit” either party, who pays for this evaluation, to have a copy of it - you’re only permitted to review it in your attorney’s office and take notes.  I believe that this rule is more self-protection for Custody Evaluations, Inc. and the entire one-hand-washing-the-other racket that is the automatic recommendation by the County Court to the County run CE program is completely unethical… but I digress.  I took notes.  I wrote the important and most pertinent parts of the report verbatim.  So, I followed the rules.

THE SMALL STUFF:

The report confirms that our schedule was, for the most part since the physical split, a 50/50 arrangement.  It confirms that the mother petitioned for full custody which was followed shortly thereafter by my counter-petition.

THE DETAILS: PEW petitioned for custody of the boys for the following reasons…

1. Parents were unable to decide where the boys would go to school.  PEW wants the children to attend [St. Catholic School] where S1 attended pre-school last year.  She indicates that she volunteered at the school to offset the cost of tuition, and that S1 is already familiar with the school.  LM wants the children to attend public school in the [Home School District].
2. PEW says that her work schedule changes occasionally and that LM was not flexible when her schedule changed.
3. PEW states that LM uses the children when he is angry at her.
4. PEW states she believes that LM’s petition is financially driven and if LM had the children he would be in a better position to keep the marital residence.
5. PEW indicates that LM has a “hair-trigger” temper and that he is “very controlling.”  She says that LM went for anger management counseling.
6. PEW states that she doesn’t have to work on Mondays and does not go into work until 5PM on Fridays.

The fact that these are essentially all lies or otherwise misrepresented will be a common theme during this effort and pretty much all of her court related petitions.  The CE will support her.

#1 shouldn’t even be in the report because not only did we both agree on where the boys would go to school, when PEW unagreed months later, a judge decided the matter and it was not relevant to these proceedings.  The CE completely disregarded that fact despite it being brought to her attention.

#2 is a flat-out lie.  All I ever did, married or split, was change my schedule to accommodate her whims.  Her chosen scheduling changes.  Her days where she didn’t feel like being a parent.  Almost anything and everything.  At the very time of this evaluation, I pointed this out to the CE that my current schedule had me home more than an hour earlier to accommodate PEW’s work schedule.  NEVER vice-versa.  Ignored.

#3 is a flat-out lie and pure, unbridled projection on the part of PEW.

#4 is a flat-out lie and a common theme (projection) for the money-centric psycho ex-wife.  You’ll notice that none of the child-centered reasons for not wanting to sell the house even crossed her mind.

#5 is a flat-out lie, projection and an absolutely perfect, vivid description of who the PEW was as a spouse.

#6 who gives a shit?  Funny how the CE mentions that but doesn’t mention the email I was prepared to show her which indicated that PEW was intending to switch to a full-time day schedule and only delayed that decision until after the evaluation was handed down.  It made her look better to be “home during the week to be with the children” (Even though they would BOTH be in school.  How transparent.)

THE DETAILS: LM initially believed that a 50/50 arrangement would be best.  However, during the sessions he indicated that he now believes it would be best for him to have primary custody of the boys for the following reasons…

1. LM is concerned about the long-term viability of parochial school due to declining enrollment.  He believes that [Home School District] will meet the children’s needs.
2. LM wants to have the decision-making for the children because he believes he is capable of making better decisions than the mother on behalf of the children.
3. LM believes he is better able than PEW to provide the children with a stable, secure home environment.  He indicates that the children have friends who will be going to school with them at [Public Elementary School] which is only a few blocks from their home.  He says he can drop the children off at school and pick them up when school is over.  In addition, he is close by for any emergencies which may arise.
4. LM says the children are comfortable in their home and the mother lives in an apartment without a yard for the children to play in.
5. LM indicates that the mother has difficulty setting limits for the children and that the children do not act out for him.
6. LM worries about PEW’s work schedule leaving her “burned out on Mondays” and unable to care adequately for the children.  In addition, he has concerns about the mother leaving the children with her sister for childcare because the mother’s sister “tried to commit suicide” a couple of years ago.
   

Oy-vey!  The following comments are made with a hint of hindsight in play.  Tell me if you can see how things have been worded to “meet” or otherwise support PEW’s accusations.

#1 While an accurate portrayal of a portion of my concerns, I again assert that this issue was irrelevant to the matter at hand and I still cannot begin to understand why the CE put so much focus on this.  The matter was decided.  The children were already going to public school for 3 full months by the time the report was submitted and for more than half of the actual CE sessions.  The matter was decided!

#2 While I know that these are really summaries of larger issues, this reeks of reading like I want to be the control-freak dad.  She makes no mention of all of the wild things PEW had done over the course of the summer, including breaking into the marital home. She ignored the restraining order which was accepted by PEW without a trial and in force at the time.  This occurred right smack in the middle of the custody evaluation and the CE flat-out dismissed the occurrence as irrelevant and my restraining-order as “nothing more than lawyer posturing to gain an upper-hand in these custody proceedings.” I knew I was dead at that very moment.  My confidence was nuked with that outright dismissal.  She also dismissed documents of a desire to commit suicide written by PEW herself.  If ever a man presented clear and convincing evidence of stability and child-focused decision-making ability in himself and the polar-opposite in his PEW - I did it.  It didn’t matter one bit.

#3 Again with the irrelevant school issue - a matter that was already decided.

#4 While accurate, an oversimplification and much colder version of what I explained.  PEW’s apartment was of nice size and accommodation.  I simply pointed out that keeping their close friends, their great neighbors, and having a yard in which to blow off some energy was a vital aspect of their growth.  These were a few of the things that an apartment complex didn’t afford the children at that time.  The most important part was that PEW and I were in close proximity to one another, a mere 10- to 15-minutes and an unnecessary and unjustifiable forced sale of the house was in no one’s best interests. Not even The PEW’s!

#5 Perfectly accurate.

#6 Partially accurate.  However, I made a specific note in my notes about the quotation marks around “tried to commit suicide.”  To me, it seemed to imply an unfounded accusation.  It was documented.  It also was documented that she was diagnosed bipolar, was a substance abuser, was not in therapy, and not following her course of treatment to properly manage her mental illness.  I guess none of that was relevant to the CE.

Summary of “Best Interest” Issues Revealed by the Parent’s Concerns:

(That sounds so meaningful.  It sounds really important.  The fact is, it’s a bunch of bullshit words strung together to screw a father.)

1 - Which parent’s work schedule makes them more available to the children during the school week. (Emphasis added by LM)

2 - What are the parents’ parenting skills?  (This based on our own 20-some minutes of interaction in a sterile, office environment with some strange lady watching us without saying anything.)

3 - Does one parent have a more stable, secure home environment for the children than the other parent?

4 - Are the children more bonded with one parent than the other?
…..

We’ll find out soon enough.  A separate post will be dedicated to addressing just how completely and utterly ludicrous these questions are in the context of this or any custody evaluation.

Next segment -  Impressions & Observations of the Kids…

After filing the petition for a restraining order on September 2nd, 2004, a hearing was scheduled for the following week on September 8th. PEW was appropriately served her notice and showed up with her legal representation. After lengthy discussion with my attorney, he was confident that I could handle this on my own and effectively told me to stick to the facts as I had presented them in the petition and do not deviate. Explain the story, provide your evidence (police reports and calls) and it should be granted.

Now, many attorneys do their “pro bono” work as may be required by their firms during restraining order issues. I was approached by one and decided to go ahead and take it. With a few hours to go until it was our turn, I filled him in on all of the details and he agreed that it was quite likely that I would get the restraining order.

I requested the following:

• Restrain Defendant from abusing, threatening, harassing, or stalking Plaintiff and/or minor children in any place where Plaintiff may be found.
• Evict/exclude Defendant from Plaintiff’s residence and prohibit Defendant from attempting to enter any temporary or permanent residence of Plaintiff.
• Award Plaintiff temporary custody of the minor children and place the following restrictions on contact between the Defendant and the children: “Any agreed-upon visitation requires an exchange no closer than the driveway of the marital residence with no entry into the home.”
• Prohibit Defendant from having any contact with Plaintiff and/or minor children either in person, by telephone, or in writing, personally or through third persons, including but not limited to any contact at school, business, or place of employment, except as the court may find necessary with respect to partial custody and/or visitation with the minor children.
• Prohibit Defendant from having any contact with the Plaintiff’s relatives and Plaintiff’s children listed in this petition, except as the court may find necessary with respect to partial custody and/or visitation with the minor children.
• Order Defendant to temporarily turn over weapons to the sheriff of this county and prohibit Defendant from transferring, acquiring, or possessing any such weapons for the duration of the order.
• Order Defendant to pay temporary support for Plaintiff and/or minor children, including medical support and payment of the rent or mortgage on the residence.
• Direct Defendant to pay Plaintiff for the reasonable financial losses suffered as a result of the abuse, to be determined at hearing.
• Order Defendant to pay the costs of this action, including filing and service fees.
• Order Defendant to pay Plaintiff’s reasonable attorney’s fees.
• Grant such relief as the court deems appropriate.
• Order the police or other law enforcement agency to serve Defendant with a copy of this petition, any order issued and the order for hearing. The petitioner will inform the designated authority of any addresses, other than the Defendant’s residence, where Defendant can be served.

So, my pro bono attorney meets with the other side to try to get the lay of the land and see what he can make happen. When he returns after a lengthy discussion, he informs me that the other side is willing to accept the petition with one exception - that the children be excluded from the restraint.

When I explain to him that the greater portion of my fear is that the children could ultimately be harmed by her increasingly escalating behaviors, the attorney explains that I have a solid case on the firearms issue. She will be found guilty and the court would very likely impose all of that which I have asked for, except the temporary custody of the children. I allow myself to be talked into it. We avoid the hearing by allowing everything relevant to my own protection to proceed, most importantly, her immediate turning-over of the firearms to the Sheriff’s department. And again, I get another lesson in the mother-favoritism in family court.

Another hindsight lesson for anyone in a similar spot is here. While I will always suggest that you default to listening to the attorney’s advice, I will now suggest that you follow your gut… follow your instincts… do a risk/reward analysis. I believe I made a mistake in listening to this attorney’s advice as I had nothing to lose by going to a hearing. In that situation, where there is truly no downside to proceeding - PROCEED and see if you can get all of the relief you’ve asked for. I wasn’t going to jail. I wasn’t going to be sanctioned. I had the complete upper-hand. And I gave away a potentially strong opportunity to gain primary, if not sole, custody of the children because of PEW’s criminal behavior. I let the “expert” talk me into this because of the mantra “always listen to your attorney.” Well, folks… I’m hear to tell you that attorneys can be wrong. Attorneys make mistakes. Attorneys can give bad advice. Assess each situation on its own merits and if your instincts are telling you to follow through with the hearing and there is literally no downside to trying to push through and get what you asked for - JUST DO IT!

I thought that between winning the hearing over the schooling issue followed so closely by these events and subsequent restraining order being accepted by her without a fight/defense, I had a couple of major tools needed to protect myself and gain primary custody of the children. I would be able to protect them from her madness. My confidence level was quite high.

Still, following the advice of the pro bono attorney and not following through on the hearing, even though I still get the PFA, was probably another of several big blunders on my part. My high confidence level would soon be shattered as we go through the custody evaluation and panic begins to take hold.

The restraining order was entered for a duration of 18-months. I received exclusive possession of the marital home (though she wasn’t required to make any contributions to the mortgage or upkeep, which pretty much was the same as when we were married). She was required to turn over the stolen firearms to the Sheriff’s office.

In an early example of PEW’s penchant for willful disregard of court orders, I received a call from her 2-weeks after this hearing. She explained to me that her neighbors told her that a couple of Sheriff’s officers were looking for her at her place earlier in the day and if I had anything to do with it. I told her that I did not.

It turns out, she hadn’t turned over the firearms to the Sheriff’s department and a bench warrant was issued for her arrest. In keeping with her ability to get out of certain trouble - she turned over the firearms shortly thereafter. Still, she had to go before the court and explain the delay in compliance. I wasn’t there for it, but I’m sure she turned on the crying faucet, made some lame excuse, and was not sanctioned for her willful disobedience of the court’s orders. She is contempt of court, she is already in violation of the PFA by continuing to hold the firearms - and NOTHING is done. No sanctions. No arrest. No penalty whatsoever. 4-years later, I’m no longer surprised when these things happen to me or anyone else.

Today I provide the details of the petition, the hearing, and the results of said hearing which precipitated The PEW breaking into the marital household and my subsequent filing of the petition for the filing of the restraining order.

On August 12th, 2004, PEW filed an emergency petition for the court to make the decision regarding where our children would attend school. Though we originally had an agreement, not unlike nearly every other agreement we’ve had, she decided to change her mind to feed her unquenchable thirst for chaos and combat via litigation.

She filed a petition which “further ordered and decreed that pending a hearing, LM is enjoined from removing the minor children from St. Local Catholic School.” As I start to detail the content of this petition and many others, you will notice a pattern of embellishment and flat-out lying that never seems to meet with her being punished for her unsworn falsifications to the court. This, despite the clear and convincing evidence of her having done so. Toss in a good measure of projection and you have the makings of a scary situation that would repeat itself dozens of times over the last few years.

The Petition:

You, LM, Respondent, have been sued in court to enjoin you from the removal of the minor child S1 from St. Local Catholic School and for attorneys fees for the necessity of same.

You are ordered to appear in court… [blah, blah, blah... details dates and times and courtroom.]

1 - Petitioner, PEW, natural mother… [inconsequential details].

2 - Respondent, LM, natural father… [inconsequential details].

3 - Petitioner and the parties’ children moved out of the marital residence located in County on May 5, 2004 due to Respondent’s continuing harassing behavior towards Petitioner.

Comment: Here is your first complete lie. PEW set the wheels of divorce in motion in January of 2004. She voluntarily remained at the marital residence until May 5th, 2004 of her own accord and I was agreeable to that in order that she would find a suitable place of residence for herself and the children when they were with her. I had several emails which spoke to how “nicely” I treated her during that period and how “if only” I had treated her that way throughout the marriage, we wouldn’t be divorcing. This is evidence she had failed to remember existed. I never harassed her and it defies logic that she would attempt to impress upon the court that her fears and this fictional harassment “forced her” to stay for nearly 5 months. The fact is, we barely spoke to one another during that period except as a courtesy and only if it was something pertaining to the children.

4 - There are two children… [inconsequential details].

5 - Petitioner filed for Custody and Support on June 1st, 2004. Respondent filed his own petition for custody on June 9, 2004. A conference was held on July 13, 2004 and the Conference Officer made no recommendation pending the results of the counseling process.

6 - The parties’ minor child, S1, attended St. Local Catholic School last year and is currently enrolled in St. Local’s for this upcoming year. The parties’ minor child, S2, is currently enrolled to attend pre-school at St. Local’s for the upcoming year.

Comment: S1 was enrolled in pre-K, and I quote, because PEW “needed a break” from caring for the children and to keep them from “being up her ass 24/7.”

7 - Respondent is now threatening to remove S1 from St. Local and enroll him in public school against Petitioner’s and child’s wishes.

Comment: I didn’t threaten any such thing. The reason for the short duration of the hearing was this all important fact - PEW had actually been the one to register S1 for our award-winning elementary school per our agreement during the 1st-week of February 2004! This was after she had initiated the divorce process! This was the lynch-pin of my defense and I believe the one which made the judge rule in my favor almost instantaneously after testimony was complete. Further, she often speaks on behalf of the children regardless of what they actually do or say. Fact is, S1 was excited to be attending the elementary school in question. It was within walking distance of the marital household. All of his neighborhood friends were going there. That’s not to say that he didn’t enjoy his time at St. Local. However, he was excited to be attending kindergarten at the “big boy school” that was 2 blocks from our home with all of his friends.

8 - The best interests of the children are served by maintaining the continuing loving, stable environment and therefore necessitates the emergency relief sought hereby, as school begins on 9/8/2004.

9 - Respondent’s threat to remove S1 from St. Local and enroll him in public school is solely for the purposes of posturing for his position in the parties’ upcoming custody hearing.

Comment: Projection, plain and simple. The reality was that the rather significant expense of the Catholic school was being used by PEW to force me to sell the house. It was an expense that neither of us could afford and I was already paying significant school taxes for the children to attend the public elementary school. She petitioned often knowing that anything awarded in her favor would be primarily my expense due to our disparity in incomes and I was already struggling to keep up the house payments with child support, temporary alimony, and day-to-day living expenses. She was simply trying to burden me with more expenses which would force the sale of the home.

10 - Respondent has threatened Petitioner that he will “drag out” the divorce proceedings and will continue to maintain sole possession of the marital assets because he believes it will advantage him in the custody proceedings if he remains at the marital residence while Petitioner has been reduced to residing in an apartment.

Comment: I threatened no such thing. I wanted this ended quickly and as painlessly as possible. The only person that “reduced” PEW to living anywhere was PEW. She initiated the divorce without grounds (not that she needs any in our state). She moved out of her own accord and into a rather nice apartment that she took months to discover and obtain. Remember now, our original “agreement” before I was ambushed by her filing for custody of the children was a shared arrangement that was dictated by our respective work schedules.

11 - Respondent maintains sole possession of the marital residence because he is the only party with the financial ability to maintain the mortgage, however, he refuses to negotiate with the Petitioner regarding the distribution of marital assets so that she can obtain her own residence.

Comment: The earliest indicator that she was “entitled” to her own single-family home and that I was responsible for providing the finances necessary for her to accomplish that. Further, as the readers may already know - I negotiated my ASS OFF with this psycho. The only one failing to negotiate in good-faith was the PEW and I had an enormous amount of evidence already to show same.

12 - This latest threat to remove S1 from St. Local’s is simply another example of Respondent’s harassment of Petitioner since it is clearly not in the best interests of the child.

Comment: Again, I threatened nothing. The children were enrolled because we agreed to it and The PEW herself did the registration, the orientation, and the back-to-school stuff necessary. It was only after June or July, when she discovered she wasn’t going to easily get her way that the schooling became an issue. All I did was follow-through on the initial registration by contacting the school, getting to know the principal and the teacher, and making the arrangements for after-school care if necessary. Turns out, it wasn’t. Not only wasn’t PEW working during the school week (a fact I’m guessing she didn’t think would matter to the court), S1 qualified for full-day kindergarten, something I worked solely with the school to obtain for him. Apparently, it was in S1’s best interests to the both of us until PEW decided for no particular reason except to litigate - that it wasn’t.

13 - S1 enjoys and flourishes at St. Local’s. He is familiar with all the teachers and has many friends. Further, after school care is available at St. Local’s. If S1 was forced to go to public school, he would then have to be bussed to a separate after-school care facility.

Comment: Lie. Aftercare wasn’t needed. Even if it was, it was local and associated with the school.

14 - Petitioner believes, therefore avers, that it would be to S1’s detriment to be uprooted from a school he knows and enjoys and to be separated from his brother. Further, the minor children are having emotional issues with the separation of the parties. To cause more transition and instability would be detrimental to both children.

Comment: Says the person who is responsible for more transitions, upsets, moves, and school changes than anyone else in this entire saga. 3 moves to residences (a 4th apparently forthcoming depending upon how her foreclosure notice is processed), 3 schools. It’s interesting that my efforts are to settle things down for the children and ensure some level of stability in their lives and yet, she pontificates about “transition and instability.” The insanity of it all is boundless.

15 - The Petitioner believes and therefore avers that she would prevail on the merits of the hearing to enjoin respondent from removing the children from St. Local’s.

Comment: Of course she does. Of course, the little matter of her explaining why she enrolled them in the public school to begin with would loom large at the hearing.

16 - To permit the minor children to be removed from their present school activities and counseling environment at this time would be damaging to the children’s education and welfare and not in their best interests.

Comment: Drama much?

The bulk of my testimony centered around the following facts:

- The lynch-pin: SHE REGISTERED S1 FOR THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL!!!

- That we had agreed to send the children to public school - our award-winning elementary school, and we did so after the divorce proceedings were initiated by PEW.

- I had spoken with many parents with students at the Catholic school and checked their facts. They had significantly declining enrollment. They were boosting tuition as a result. There was talk of the school CLOSING. These are things that the PEW had apparently no knowledge about.

- The climate surrounding the Catholic church at the time regarding the sexual abuse of children was something I mentioned. Was I concerned or had any proof that there was anyone at the church who couldn’t be trusted? Certainly not, but it had more to do with the negative perception of the church and all of the controversy surrounding that topic. It was probably partly responsible for the declining enrollment.

- Finally, we were “non-practicing” Catholics and I couldn’t remember the last time we had attended church that wasn’t for a wedding or major Catholic event (Christmas, New Year’s, Easter, Thanksgiving). So, I questioned the veracity of her extolling the virtues of the Catholic Church and the education that they provide when she couldn’t herself remember when the last time it was that she had attended church on a regular basis (let alone the last time she was there for any reason in recent memory).

My attorney (#1) buried her story on the stand. Her position and justifications were indefensible and it was clear. I was absolutely perfect on the stand under the questioning by her attorney.

THE RULING: After testimony was completed, the judge immediately gave his ruling. S1 would go to the public elementary school. S2 could attend Catholic school’s pre-K for the upcoming year but would also attend public school when kindergarten started. Further, I was under no obligation to pay for any attendance at the Catholic school because mom was “stay-at-home” during the week and it was a “luxury” expense.

The lies and embellishments would be a consistent pattern for her and despite my protestations, she was never punished or otherwise sanctioned for filing false petitions. It was a waste of my time and money, the court’s time and money, and even her time and money. However, as long as attorneys, judges, and court staff need paying - they will continue to entertain such frivolous lawsuits.

It’s really hard to describe the feelings that overcome one in the midst of a situation like this break-in. I call it a “break-in” because that’s exactly what it was. I had the locks changed since her move-out and made the mistake of leaving downstairs windows “cracked” when I left for work. So, she ripped-out the screen, opened the window and let herself and the children into the house.

Yes - the children.

This was the first shocker for me and I remained extraordinarily calm given the situation. I couldn’t believe she had done this in front of the children, then ages 5 and 3. I had great neighbors on a wonderful block and the most heartbreaking part of this whole ordeal was the big, bright smiles on the faces of both boys and the excitement in their voices when, during that evening when they were out front playing, they were telling our next-door neighbors, excitedly, “Yeah! Mom and Dad are getting back together and we’re so excited! This is really great!” To keep a solid face I had to work very hard to choke back tears and sadness and do the parental side-stepping that was something akin to telling them, “…oh, we’ll see, there are a lot of things that need to be discussed” …and avoid ripping their hearts out of their chest again. The PEW would take care of that the next day. I still get butterflies and sadness when I think about those couple of days when I remember how the kids were.

The details of the events are best described in my petition for protection from abuse for the dates in question (9/1 & 9/2, 2004):

My wife and I had a hearing on the morning of 9/1/2004. The judge ruled in my favor, which my PEW rather upset.

Upon returning home, I changed my clothes and went to a meeting at work. At approximately 1:45PM, my phone activated and caller ID indicated that the call was coming from my home. I removed myself from the meeting and answered the phone.

The PEW identified herself to me and said, “I just wanted to let you know that I’ve broken into the house and I already check with the police. There isn’t a fucking thing you can do about it, either. I’m moving back in and I am going to make your life a living hell until you have no choice but to sell this house!”

I tried to convince The PEW to leave the home with the children. I told her that I understand that she was entitled to be there, but it didn’t have to happen today. She refused to leave and we ended the conversation.

At that time I called police radio and asked [town's] police to send a patrol car to the home to see what was going on.

Soon thereafter, I arrived home to discover that no police had been dispatched. As PEW had stolen my firearms that I won from the home approximately 6-months ago and their return was again discussed in the morning, I asked if she had them with her and if I could have them back, at which time she replied menacingly, “Your guns? Yeah, you’ll get them back all right - you better be careful what you ask for!”

I understood that to be a threat. I again called the police and urged them to send someone over right away as I was on the premises, as was my wife and my children and that things were escalating. I believe I said that I “strongly advised” them to come to the home.

Within minutes the police arrived and spoke to us separately. They advised me that PEW was adamant about staying and that neither they nor I could force her to leave.

Later in that evening, around 10:00 PM, PEW and I had a relatively civil discussion about what transpired and of our general circumstances. PEW expressed her frustration with the situation, her living arrangements, her mounting legal bills. Of particularly serious concern to me, PEW stated specifically that she is having trouble dealing with all of this and she, “felt like ending it all” which I took as a clear reference to suicide. Furthermore, during our portion of the discussion regarding our custody issues, she said to me, “If I lose my children, I don’t know what I’d do, probably kill myself.”

This erratic behavior has me concerned for my children’s welfare, my own welfare, and even her welfare.

On Thursday, 9/2/2004, I had to run some errands in the morning. One of my stops included the police station, where I filed a report with Officer So-And-So. I informed him of my discussion and PEW’s suicide references. I further expressed to him my fear that PEW may try to hurt herself and then try to accuse me of doing it or attempt to provoke a physical confrontation. After he took my report, I headed home.

I arrived home at approximately 11:00 AM. once there, I sat down with PEW to discuss the drop-off and pick-up of S1 for school. I made a call to the after-care program to adjust my registration from full-week to drop-in.

PEW informed me that she was taking the boys to her apartment to pick-up their hermit-crabs and some other things. She returned approximately 90-minutes later without anything from the apartment. It was approximately 2:00 PM. I awakened from a nap and informed PEW of my intentions to go into work.

PEW asked me to wait, let the boys out into the yard, and she went into the bathroom. Upon exiting the bathroom, she informed me that she was moving back out. I was shocked because the boys were already very confused by the previous days’ events. They were telling our neighbors that, “…mommy and daddy were getting back together.” Now, she was telling them that they were not moving back in.

I expressed extreme displeasure at this revelation and thought this behavior could have extreme negative effects on the children. It was then that PEW charged at me and started yelling at me and she raised her hands as if she was going to strike me. Given my suspicions that she would try to engage me in a physical confrontation, I backed away from her, telling her, “Be careful! This could cost you your kids!”

She continued to yell at me, approaching me again with a raised hand. I moved towards the steps that lead to the front door. I demanded the house key and PEW refused. I told her I was going to take the van keys. I didn’t threaten PEW at any time. However, she called the police.

By this time, I had exited the marital residence and went to my vehicle which was parked across the street. The boys were in the house now, upstairs and looking out the open front window at me. PEW came storming out front and went berzerk in the driveway. In an effort to get the attention of the neighbors, PEW began shouting at the top of her lungs, all within view and hearing of the children, “DO YOU PEOPLE KNOW WHAT KIND OF NEIGHBOR YOU HAVE?!?! HE’S AN ABUSER, A FUCKING-ASSHOLE (repeatedly), A HOMOSEXUAL, AND REAL MAN WOULD HAVE LEFT THE HOUSE AND ALLOWED THE WOMAN TO STAY!!!” The language was filthy, vile, full of expletives - and S1 was clearly unnerved by what he was witnessing. When she had completed her tirade, she threw the house key in the grass. The police then arrived, including Officer So-And-So with whom I filed the report earlier in the day. Soon after a talking to by the police, PEW left with the boys.

In my estimation, this erratic behavior pattern is becoming increasingly more aggressive and is demonstrating that PEW has little regard for the welfare of the children. I am concerned for the safety of the children, my own safety, and even PEW’s safety from herself.

It is also important to note that after telling me the prior evening that she fired her attorney - during the confrontation on 9/2/2004, PEW told me that she did not fire her attorney and that the attorney had advised PEW to re-enter the home, causing all of this upset and strife for the children and me, but for what end I don’t know. I find PEW’s behavior threatening and detrimental to the children most especially.

The entire situation was surreal, there is no other way to explain it. At least I had the sense enough to file a report with the police and accurately predicted what her intentions were.

Worthy of note:

- Despite explaining to the police that she made a gun threat, they didn’t arrest her, because she apparently didn’t have the guns on her actual person. I’m absolutely certain that if the roles were reversed, I would have been arrested.

- Despite explaining that she had attempted to attack me and even despite the police witnessing some of her screaming and foul mouth, she was not arrested. I’m absolutely certain that if the roles were reversed, I would have been arrested.

Frankly, I think I was lucky that I wasn’t arrested.

At least I took the necessary steps, short of moving out, to maximizing self-protection and it appeared to have worked.

To this day, I’m astounded that his major incident was never considered by any custody evaluator as relevant to determining her stability or her ability to parent the children effectively… but this would be one of many harsh lessons I would learn over the course of the coming months and years.

Separately, learn about the abuse of restraining orders: Without Restraint - The Use and Abuse of Restraining Orders. You can also do a simple google search for “restraining order abuse” and find alarming information.

I count myself lucky that I was actually able to get one, for what little good it did me, given the circumstances. What is quite ironic was that reality is, women use them overwhelmingly as a weapon in a divorce and custody situation. Custody Evaluator 1 will dismiss my offering of same as “lawyer posturing to get an upper-hand in the custody situation” despite PEW’s acceptance of guilt to avoid a hearing. Have I mentioned that if the roles were reversed what my expectations would be?

On September 2, 2004 and the following days - a series of major events took place. These events gave me a tremendously high and false sense of positivity that would never come to fruition. Worse than that, the lack of consideration that these events, and many others, would garner would accelerate my education in the divorce and family court system. It was still the same-old, same-old. It actually may even be worse than it was 20- or 30-years ago for men and fathers in this country. It’s exacerbated by the proliferation or better understanding of personality disorders and how they drive family court litigation. I’m certain that this is the perfect storm that is my situation.

This is going to take a while to explain, so I offer you what I called then the “Cliff’s Notes” version (or not) that I sent a friend who was concerned about not hearing from me for a few days. This is effectively as-written back in September 2004. More details will be forthcoming…

Cliff’s notes version: (Note: she stole my guns 6 months ago and hasn’t returned them - cops: “There is nothing we can do.”)

- The first of several court cases went down on Wednesday morning. We were at an impasse over where the kids were going to school. She sued me to have them go to Catholic School. The judge ruled in my favor. She was none too happy.

- Hours later, I’m in an important meeting regarding a new start-up we’re doing in [another country]. My cellphone buzzes and I look at the display… it’s a phone call… from my HOUSE. I remove myself to a private conference room and answer. It’s my wife. She announces she broke into the house and that she is moving back in. Claims to have fired her attorney, broke her apartment lease and that’s that. Unable to talk her out of leaving: Discussion, cops, discussion… nothing the cops nor I can do to get her out since she’s on the deed (no settlement yet). I’m stuck.

So, I resign myself to the fact that, for at least the short term, we’ll have to go back to living together and try to do it amicably. I start the wheels in motion to take action against her. The sorriest thing is that my kids think that we’re “getting back together.”

- Thursday… after making arrangements with my attorney. I go to the police station and describe a conversation that my wife and I had the night before where twice she made references to “wanting to end it all” and “if I lose these kids, I dunno what I’ll do, probably kill myself.” I tell them that I fear for her, my boys, and myself and that I suspect that she COULD even injure herself and try to make it look like I assaulted her. They take the report, I go home.

- We discuss the logistics of S1 getting off to school next week. I make some calls to adjust planned arrangements for after-school care… which should no longer be necessary. She runs errands with the boys telling me that she is going back to her apartment to get the hermit crabs for the boys and some other things. I take a nap, as you can imagine, it’s been a long night.

- Upon her return, I tell her that I am going into the office and she tells me to wait… she wants to talk about something. She sends the kids in the yard… and she announces she is moving back OUT. I get really upset. I tell her that this charade is going to wreck these boys. She feigns an attack at me, in my estimation, to try to get me to put my hands on her… I retreat to my car across the street and she comes out in the driveway and at the top of her lungs (in an effort to try to get the attention of neighbors) goes into this disgraceful, expletive-laced tirade screaming to them, “DO YOU KNOW WHAT KIND OF NEIGHBOR YOU HAVE?!?!? >>>” and she’s off to the races. In the meantime, the children are in the front window witnessing all of this. I just lean against my car waiting for the cops again… (there is still nothing that they can do). During our exchange… she informed me that she didn’t break her lease and she did all of this on the advice of her attorney.

She ultimately leaves with my kids again and right now… all is quiet on the home front. I get the boys back tonight thru Tuesday morning. I got a lot of undoing of damage to try to do. I missed pretty important days at work, but by the grace of God, my boss, the CEO has been extremely understanding and flexible. I only just got back from the courthouse… I decided I can’t be “nice” anymore. I filed for a protection from abuse order this morning. If the judge accepts it, hearing Wednesday (S1’s first day of school)… and given the nature of her work, if it sticks… it will very likely cost her her job.

Against the advice of my attorney, I DIDN’T file one yesterday for fear it would “push her over the edge.” Unfortunately, after the events of yesterday afternoon… I truly am left with no choice. I can only hope that there is are some guardian angels out there watching over my boys. Part of the PFA includes the children and requests full custody of the children on a temporary basis until the custody evaluation that we’re going through plays itself out.

I think she may have scuttled any shot she had at winning that case now, too.

That’s the Cliff’s Notes version… if I filled in all the details, I think even your head would explode.

That gives you all an idea of what happened and what was going to happen relative to the break-in. DW previously posted my email to her regarding my fears and some information about the break-in.

The Restraining Order Petition