PEW Continues to Harrass About New Year's Eve 2007

Continued from: Reinterpreting the Order Again

I decide to break no/low-contact in order to make sure she's clear my position on the order, though I did tell her on the phone before hanging up in her ear as she started to go off. Due to a number of emails and text messages since then, I send the following this morning:

(12/31/07, 11:28AM)

PEW,

In response to your latest barrage of emails, voice mails, and text messages threatening me with more litigation, I will offer you the following information regarding your latest misinterpretation of the court order.

New Year's Holiday is defined as December 31st through January 1st. Father has odd years. Mother has even years. As the "holiday" as defined begins in 2007, this is my year. The language of our orders haven't changed since the first one. Further, our history confirms my recollection of the order and not your latest revision. You had New Years Holiday in 2004 (three years ago) and 2006 (last year) under this same language. I had New Years Holiday in 2005 (two years ago). This is now 2007 and is my year. Historically, whoever had Christmas, the other had New Years. The only reason it's different this year is because prior to you being found in contempt of court, this would have been your next scheduled Christmas (followed by my next scheduled New Years).

I believe that this explanation is exceedingly clear and you will refute it. Just be assured that as I had informed you over the phone, the children will not be coming home today despite your orders for me to do so. Please stop with the incessant harassment. Stop with the unnecessary and unsupportable litigation.

~LW
-------------
After sending this, she calls to wish the boys Happy New Year. After chatting with the boys, I overhear S6 run into his bedroom and say to S9, "Mom said that dad is holding us here when it's supposed to be her time with us! She said we are supposed to be with her and not with dad!"

Engaging the children in such issues is another violation of the court order and another in a long line of efforts to alienate the children against me. I walk out of the bathroom and into their room and the following discussion takes place:

Remaining calm, I simply explained to them, with their assistance (they know the week-on week-off schedule) what the situation is.

Me: My week was the week before Christmas, correct?
Them: Yes.
Me: Normally, Christmas week would have been mom's this year, but trust me when I tell you that a special circumstance came up and I was supposed to have you for Christmas this year. Okay?
Them: Okay.
Me: That means, where are you supposed to be this week?
Them: With you.
Me: Please believe me when I tell you that I would not keep you from being with your mother. You are with me because that is our schedule and mom isn't supposed to be telling you any differently. It is not your business to deal with, okay?
Them: Okay. Sorry.
Me: There is no need to apologize, I just want to make sure you know the truth.

I really don't like having such conversations with the children. I'd really like for them to just be little kids and not be burdened with such bullshit, but alas, their mother - being the selfish, psycho that she is, will not hesitate to cross any boundary in order to create havoc. She doesn't care about these children or the impact her behavior has on them.

Soon thereafter, I get 2 calls from her on the house phone. Ignored, no voice mails. 2 calls on the cellphone. Ignored, 1 voice mail. So far, two emails.

(12/31/2007, 1:36PM Voice Mail from PEW)

LW, it's PEW. Those boys are supposed to be coming home. Today. I don't know why you haven't left yet. It's almost 2 o'clock. I don't know why you haven't left yet. They want to come home. They don't even want to be with you anymore. They want to come home and be with me. You had better bring them home today!

Followed by email at 2:05PM:

Listen LM,

You're wrong, it says this is my year and even if it wasn't what kind of father would keep the children when they don't want to be there for three weeks. They both just told me they want to COME HOME, but they said if they say that to you they'll get in trouble. What the hell is that?? I'm not going to litigate because I ENJOY it, quite the contrary....I hate it which is why I didn't dispute your latest shenanigans with "moving" back to the area....which is NOT what you did. You lied to JS. You don't live up here. This situation isn't working out and you know it....the kids are NOW suffering emotionally because they have a total psycho for a father and I am helpless to protect them. AND to top it all of, you're now holding them hostage at your [home state] when they want to be with me. They hate it there when D9 and S8 aren't there. Not to mention the fact that they each got like 3 gifts and DW's kids "got a whole bunch". You disgust me. I'm giving the 50/50 thing six months (the end of April) to work for the boys and then I'm filing for another hearing. So far I have [neighbor] telling me that the first day you had them, you left them at the bus alone and drove away......I have the teacher telling me that you refuse to give S9 a snack and a decent lunch....I have [another apparent spy at Cub Scouts] telling me that you single S9 out at cub scouts and do not allow him to participate in the snack there.....I have countless emails from the teachers about the children's behavior when they are with you.....I have S9 telling me about your "table topics" game where you ask the question "if something happened to your mother and she couldn't take care of you, who would you want to live with?" what kind of sick game is that??? I have your total inability to communicate on any level.....then there's the fact that you don't LIVE up here...you DON'T EVEN WORK UP HERE all the time.....YOU are the reason 50/50 isn't going to work. And I will prepare the judge for that on January 24th when I go in to discuss this bullshit with her. You're a sick person, even if I am wrong what kind of father would keep children when they clearly miss their mother. I'm going to litigate more because it's the ONLY THING I CAN DO. I hate spending my time this way, but when I hear my kids voices and they're wispering that they miss me and want to come home because their SICK father will get mad if he hears them.......it infuriates me. Some day JS is going to see what I see....and what the REST of the world sees in you.....you're a sick sick person.....EVERYONE knows that you don't care about what's best for those boys. I hope your holiday is ruined just like you ruined mine and the kids. Get help.

~PEW

My commentary: My, my, my - the rage is now out of control. Points worth addressing:

- My children just told me this morning, after being told we're heading back to [work state] tomorrow that they didn't want to go back and they were just having too much fun here. Of course, they also have to go back to school, which I'm sure is a bummer to all kids who've had off for 10-days. That's not to say that they don't miss their mom. A divorce arrangement sucks all the way around, but when you have a raging maniac for a mother, you will say what will appease her and they know if they tell her that they're having a blast with me, she'll get upset. That's because she does get upset.

- I did "move back up there." I have residences in both places. I work in mom's home state. It was an absolute miracle that I obtained this position and took it for two reasons: 1) I needed a job. 2) TO BE WITH MY CHILDREN!!! During my weeks where I don't have custody of the children, I can work from the home office and make a point of scheduling any travel I may have for those weeks where I don't have custody. Further, if business circumstances require it, I'm even up at our apartment in the work state because I have to be. Reality, PEW... catch it!

- Christmas presents: DW's children had more because their father brought over all of their stuff along with their grandmother. Of course, PEW has always been about everybody being "even" - even when circumstances just don't call for it or allow it.

- On the first day I had the boys during the 50/50 arrangement, I took them to the bus stop which is at the corner of her street and her neighborhood spies. While awaiting the bus, I notice I'm parked on the wrong side of the street and right under the sign which reads - "No parking, this side of street." As their buddies are assembling at the bus stop, they get antsy and want to get out. I let them, telling them, "I'm parked illegally, so I'm going to drive around the block and park on the proper side of the street." They bolt to the corner and I start to roll around the block when... the bus arrives! While at the stop sign, everyone boards and I roll to work. I wasn't at work 30-minutes when the raging phone voice mail comes. One of the neighborhood spies called her in work and reported that I just dumped them at the bus stop and abandoned them.

- When the boys aren't packed a nice lunch, they are given money for a school lunch. I got one email from S9's teacher saying that they get to lunch late and asked me if I could pack a morning snack for S9, which I have done every single day since. Boy, can PEW embellish and twist reality into abuse or what?

- One day, S9 was punished (loss of snack) for misbehavior in school. The day in question happened to be a Cub Scout meeting where all the kids get a snack at the end of the meeting. S9 was not allowed to have a snack because it was his punishment and I couldn't allow Cub Scouts snack time to undermine my disciplinary decision. It was one instance in dozens of meetings since September. Of course, PEW doesn't believe in discipline of any kind... so I could see where she might be upset.

- Table Topics is a fun game where we all ask questions of each other. Pretty much no topic is off-limits (within reason). They even sell "table topics cards" which was one of the gifts from Santa this year. The question she bastardizes is this: If you could live at anyone's home except your parents for one year - whose home would you choose? S9 chose his best friend's house. S6 chose his grandmother's house (my mother). D9 and S8 chose their grandmother's house. I'm not entirely sure how PEW twisted into what she described above. The question was "for a year" - I'm not sure any of us could die for only a year.

Welcome to my nightmare.

Followed by email at 2:07PM:

LM,

I like how you always portray yourself like such a "victim" too....I'm always threatening you right? or harassing you? grow up and be a man!!

~PEW

Followed by voice mail at 2:26PM:

LM,

I just responded to your email and I also wanted to let you know that now thanks to you your father and stepmom won't get to see the kids because I was supposed to take them down there on the 11th which is obviously not going to happen if they don't get their Christmas presents until the 6th. So, I hope you're happy. You ruined everything for everybody as usual because that's what makes you happy. See you on the 24th!

Followed by email at 2:37PM:

LM,

By the way.....ALL of the stuff that was on their Christmas lists is here. The jerseys, the Webkins cow, the wrestlers, the lego people, Nintendo DS, .....because I can afford it??? no, I can't afford it....but I know their only little once and they only believe in Santa for a few years and you RUINED it. Get to a psychiatrist LM, you need help badly.....you need medication or something.

~PEW
-------------
My commentary: Hey, I was out of a job for 9-months and we have a lot of recovering to do from that. My kids had an excellent Christmas and got some of the things on their rather lengthy list, which, in it's entirety, would have cost close to $2,000 each. I know she can't afford it, but she's never been one to let that stand in her way. I think it's wonderful that she can (and always has) catered to the boys' every whim. It's why they appreciate things so little. It's why they expect a toy every time the wind blows. It's why everything that isn't perfectly balanced for them "is just not fair!" It is just another issue which we have to manage as a result of PEW buying the children's loyalty instead of teaching them how to grow up to be well-adjusted young boys who appreciate the things that they have, the people who love them, how to keep and maintain friendships, how to handle adverse situations appropriately, how to understand discipline and have self-discipline... and the list goes on. The very basic things that help to establish a well-rounded youth she is completely incapable of providing and/or teaching.

All I ever want is a peaceful, fun, joyous holiday with some semblance of normalcy. I seriously can't remember one in the last handful of years dating back to when we were still married. She sets out to destroy them - it's part of the illness. She makes everyone suffer for her issues. There is nothing anyone can do about it.

Despite all of this harassment - we are having a dynamite holiday season - it's just that for us, we have to plan for such antics and it sucks.

Happy New Year.

Subscribe In a Reader or by Email

Breaking News: PEW Re-Interpreting the Order Again

This has all just taken place in the last hour or so...

The main terms of the current custody order can be found in this post: Thanksgiving Comes Early ...take a look at the Holiday & Special Occasions breakdown.

If you've been following along, you already have seen how she alleges "confusion" about the schedule and understands better than the written order what the court's "intentions" are. No, she doesn't. As it has always been, it's her way or the highway.

I've continued with my no-contact as she's tried to engage me with her alleged confusion over the schedule. How confusing can one-week-on/on-week-off actually be? For the BPD who wants attention from her ex-husband, it can be as confounding as a Rubik's Cube. I had the week before Christmas, the week of Christmas to make up for last year's mess, and then back to our regular schedule - the week after Christmas as it is my next scheduled week. She will get the children back on January 6th as per the schedule. Except that she doesn't like that.

As I've not answered her half-dozen or so posts asking me ad nauseum when she is supposed to get the children next, because the schedule is clear - she has tried to engage S9 in finding out when they are coming back. This is a no-no, according to the court order, but she insists on pulling one or both boys into the fray when I don't pay her attention. When S9 asks me after a routine phone call this week, I simply tell him, "Son, it's not your job to worry about when the schedule is for your mother. She knows the schedule and it will be taken care of." Evasive, but if I answer him and then he goes back to her, it will only escalate from there and I have a spy on my hands again.

In any event, at some point in the last few days I told S9 that he would be going back to PEW "next weekend" and during tonight's phone call with her - he told her that. After he is done, he passes the phone to S6 for his chat. When he is done, S6 approaches me and says, "Mommy said she needs to speak to you."

LW: Yes?
PEW: I don't know what you're doing, but the court order says I'm supposed to have them for New Year's!
LW: PEW, read the order again, it's clear and it's not open for discussion. *CLICK*

Of course, it's not going to end there. Three consecutive phone calls in the next 2-minutes results in two angry voice mails.

Voice Mail 1:

PEW: LW, the schedule that you drew up says that I have the kids on even New Years. So that means that this New Years is mine. It says mother has them on even years, father has them on odd years. So, that said, we still have a court date for January 24th and I'm expecting my kids. So I think that you better rethink whatever it is that you're thinking and reread your proposal that you put together. The one that is now a court order, okay?

This is getting beyond ridiculous it really is... I can't even believe... I'm expecting them home and you're pulling this crap. I think you better rethink this... whatever it is you're doing! *CLICK*

Minutes later...

Voice Mail 2:

PEW: Okay, your petition, section C under item 5, is New Years holiday to include December 31st through January 1st. Father shall have custody in odd year and mother shall have custody in even years. And, as defined... in that... ummm... the previous order... is... it defines even years are January 1st and then the... ummm... odd years are... you know... the even and odd is determined by the New Year. So it's already been defined. I don't know what it is you're doing or why you're doing it. But the kids need to be home on New Year's Eve. So, I'll see you then! Wherever! Ummm... whether it's at [new exchange point] or you want to drop them off at my house that's fine, but this is your petition that is now an order and we have a court date on January 24th. So, it's not... this isn't... this isn't... ummm... me just being wrong again, this is what you wrote! *CLICK*

Our commentary: This madness never ends. This madness is what I've dealt with since 1994. This madness is what we've dealt with since 2004. This madness is what we'll deal until who knows when. Some people crack "until the children are 18." Reality is... it goes well beyond that. There are graduations, college, possible marriages, grandchildren... and as long as we are both alive - this madness will continue.

Not only does she read the order, she recites it into the voice mail and still doesn't get it.

THE NEW YEAR'S HOLIDAY IS DEFINED AS DECEMBER 31ST THROUGH JANUARY 1ST.

The holiday begins in 2007. Father gets odd years. Normal people see this for what it is. Clearly defined. She has decided to interpret this as "New Year's Day is 2008 - therefore - the holiday is an even year." Except, Psycho, that the holiday duration is defined and it starts in the odd year.

Did I mention who had December 31st through January 1st last year? No? She did. The holiday as defined began in 2006. Did I mention who had it the year prior to that? No? I did. The holidays as defined began in 2005. Father has odd years, mother has even years. Does anyone who is not apeshit psychotic not understand this schedule?

Subscribe In a Reader or by Email

The Ex Sister-In-Law: "PP" Her Story

PP is the never-married, 40-something sicko sister of the Psycho Ex-Wife. PP has been diagnosed as Bipolar. She has had several stays in a mental health clinic in the late 1990s after a weak attempt at taking her own life. She is an alcoholic. She may even be Borderline herself.

She fancies herself a know-it-all about everything all-the-while having succeeded at nothing. Professionally, she came close - but managed to destroy that and it's been downhill ever since.

Some of her creepy background:

- She's been in and out of one disastrous relationship after another. Can't keep a man around to save her life, because she cuckoo. She's as much a psycho as her sister.

- Has thrice stolen identities and never been held legally accountable. Stole the identities of her namesakes: her mother and two aunts (who didn't press charges). She's also declared backruptcy no fewer than 2-times, wrecked the credit of aforementioned family members, and at our last investigation (2-years ago) had roughly 2-dozen financial judgements against her.

- In one sexual relationship, with a cousin (how close a cousin, I can't recall) - she became so obsessed with him that she began to stalk him. Dozens of phone calls per day. Sitting outside of his house and workplace. In one extremely bizarre situation - she claimed to have been pregnant with his child in an effort to "win him back," but chose instead to have an abortion. That abortion never actually happened. She just made it all up and really played it to the hilt, trying to drag who would become an ex-roommate into the ploy, insisting that this girl took her to have it. When people tried to check out the story, the roommate wanted nothing to do with anything and cut all ties with anyone associated PP.

- Once had a nice job that paid extremely well - a "Regional Director" of a well-known computer and electronics retailing company. That much is true. She really had the leadership position over a significant quadrant of the United States. After rising high in the company to this position, she was caught embezzling from the company and stealing from customers and was given a choice - be arrested or resign. She quit. The best she has been able to do since then (about 10-years ago) was waitress, but was fired from many of those jobs for being drunk on the job. She is now allegedly a paralegal - but I doubt that highly.

- Was allegedly the recipient of a sexual proposal by PEW's first husband, which ultimately led to the end of that marriage. Now, however, I don't believe it. I've actually tracked the first ex-husband down, but haven't had the guts to pick up the phone and call. He was also allegedly a raging alcoholic, but given the level of projection I've dealt with from PEW, I'd be willing to bet that there is a fantastically different version of events from his side. Should I call him? Tell me what you think with a comment. That could be fun or be a complete bust.

- Has vacillated between 120-pounds and somewhere at the high-end of 200s before having her first of two gastric bypasses in the late 90s or early 2000s. Still in the marriage at that point, I remember imploring her that she was going to die because she chose to put away cheesesteaks at a rate that a professional eater would envy. She figured, with the bypass, she could continue to eat like she was eating (a binge eater) and expect the weight to stay off. Instead, she fucked up the surgical results which saw her return to the hospital to have it corrected.

- She's a drunk, in case I didn't already cover that.

She'd be drunk at work. Binge drink. Drink and drive. One time, the one side of her car was so fucked up that both right side rims were bent beyond repair. I confronted her about what the hell happened. She couldn't remember. Really, she couldn't. The night before, apparently, she went to a bar. Sometime between the time she was in the bar and that damage occurred - she blacked out. For all I know, she may have killed someone. At least once cited for public drunkenness.

- Her and PEW would have EPIC fights. I only wish I had recorded some of the voicemails left at my home for PEW, which sounded as if they were left by Satan himself... at least - that's what I imagine Satan sounds like. These two fucking idiots would argue over who had a worse life and who wanted to commit suicide more times.

- Her current living arrangements are bouncing from relative's house to house - including PEWs (which drives me bonkers but there is nothing I can do about that right now), her parents, and an aunt or two - the alcoholic ones.

- Ah yes... and an expert on everything and has now taken up her sister's cause. As an alleged paralegal for a family law firm, her advice to PEW has been treated as expert and sound. PEW has lost pretty darn near every case brought before the court in the last 18-months as a result. I hope she keeps advising her.

Which brings me to one of her emails sent to me from PEW's account prior to the contempt hearing. Everyone ready? She joined the fray during the Christmas 2006 debacle and here is her contribution to the issue:

12/23/2006, 1:46AM, written by PP (a.k.a. The Psycho Ex-SIL)

LM,

It's PP. I showed the court order to the family law attorneys at the firm I work at and they said that the judge was not clear in regards to exchanges for holidays. You and PEW can both have any interpretation that you want but I can assure you that if you go back to court for "clarification"-since YOU were the one to move out of state and continually lied to the judge, over and over again, it will go against you.

PEW will NOT be at the [exchange point] on Sunday and you can show up at her door with the police if you want but there is nothing in the court order saying the police can do anything to her in any way. If you want to be mad at anyone, be mad at your lawyer for not having the sense to ask the judge to spell it out PEW's not keeping you from the boys, she just isn't driving on a "holiday"-she is perfectly fine with driving her next scheduled turn. You can try to jam your OPINION down her throat like it's law, as usual, but it still doesn't make it TRUE. If I recall, several weeks ago she went out of her way to drive to be nice, when it wasn't her turn, and this is how you repay her, as usual.

If these matters go back to court, we will bring up how you were non-compliant several weeks ago and made the boys drive HOURS longer than they had to just to spite PEW when you were in [paternal grandmother's state]. THAT IS crystal clear in the court order. Also, your insistence in moving S6 from a loving, caregiver-again, just to mess with PEW, when it's CLEARLY in S6's best interests to stay with [neighbor], will go against you badly-and just wind up costing you more money. We'll also bring up how S9 works himself into a state of such anxiety when he's going to your home for the weekend that we don't know what to do for him. 48hrs of being weighed, measured and harassed continually about his weight sure sounds like a good time for an 8year old. Maybe if you'd just shut up about it, it would work itself out.

I know you feel like you had some kind of victory in court but the judge gave you the absolute MINIMUM she had to in every way. If your lawyer is telling you that you have any grounds on any of the above situations, I suggest that she doesn't know what she's talking about and she just wants to continue to bleed you financially even though you have a losing case. Stop harassing my sister because we are not going to deal with your crap for the next 13yrs until S6 reaches 18. If you thought [PEW's attorney] made a fool of you and DW in court the last time, trust me, we will get somebody even tougher for the next round if you INSIST on continuing the nit-picking and harassment of my sister in this manner. This is the reason you two divorced, remember?

You are a disgrace as a father or you never would have moved to [home state] in the first place. All of your bull**** is your attempts to salve your own conscience about that decision. Let the boys get on with their lives, would you? In the least traumatic way possible at this point? You NEVER put the boys interests/feelings/concerns first-just what YOU think is best for them. Truly, I'm starting to think you are severely unbalanced based on the continual hounding of PEW via phone calls, emails, name-calling etc. I mean, I always thought you were unbalanced but I think you are so bitter over the divorce you have pushed yourself over the edge trying to make PEW PAY for leaving you and taking your SONS. Pull yourself together, DW. There is nothing more pathetic than a desperate man grasping at straws. It's really very, very sad. I better not hear that DW is harassing my sister ever again or she'll be in court for defamation of character, harassment etc.

You're right, we're done communicating about this. If you really want to see your sons for this visit, you better let PEW know when you'll be HERE to pick them up.

Merry Christmas. PP

Our commentary:

I cannot begin to convey the level of projection in this email. Obviously, you think you only have my side of the story. You have hers, too. Just keep reading. The email above accuses me of doing/being everything that PEW is and does. It's not just a "reasonably close" description - it's dead on. Dead. On. Dead on. Two of the biggest points of projection are:

- The Custody Hearings of October 2006 were a rousing success for me. When I tell you that I got everything for which I had petitioned except primary custody - I'm not lying. She fought every point on my petition. Granted, primary custody was a big one, but a whole bunch of important issues were addressed - all of them in my favor.

- Her attorney made a fool out of no one. I kept calling him by his first name instead of "Mr. Attorney" and he lost his temper asking the judge to yell at me. (Believe it or not, it was not intentional.) And DW, who has extensive litigation experience, was rock solid on the stand. Uncrackable. And DW frustrated her attorney at every turn. That's not an exaggeration.

This is what her family does - bully, belittle, project, threaten, blowhard, blowhard, blowharder.

The beauty of this email is that it was one of my exhibits and the judge has another one of her sarcastic moments towards PEW with it...

More Highlights from the Contempt Hearing of March 2007:

JUDGE: PP writes in this email packet an email to your ex, and it's really -- it says, "LM, it's PP. I showed the court order to the family law attorneys at the firm I work at." --What does PP do for the law firm?

PEW: She's a paralegal.

JUDGE: Right. And this is an email that PP sent on your address, your email address, to LM on Saturday, December 23rd in the afternoon. Oh, I'm sorry, 1:46AM, so it was like Friday night, late Friday night. So she had talked about this case with the family law attorneys in her firm, is what that email says. PP then talked to you about what the family lawyers said, didn't she?

PEW: You know what? PP lies a lot. I don't know if she actually spoke to -- I think she was trying to call LM's bluff or something. I don't know why she does the things that she does. But, I don't really want to speculate on that. I didn't ask her about --

JUDGE: You're saying that PP didn't talk to you about what to do if you're not taking children that you're supposed to take for a custody exchange, how to not be in contempt? She didn't tell you anything about that?

PEW: I -- yeah, I know what it means to be in contempt. I think it means that if I willfully, maliciously violated the court order, then I should be held in contempt. But that's not what happened!

Our commentary: How about JC mocking PP's advice (and lack thereof) to PEW, right there in the record? Again, I know the text doesn't convey JC's "'tude" - but it was out there in all of it's glory. A 60-something, 30+ year veteran of family court affairs, stopping only just short calling her a flat-out liar. She's wearing her disdain for PEW right out there on her sleeve

Judge Contempt has PEW, and pretty much the rest of the dysfunctional fucktards that are her family, pegged. That's good for me.

Buy enough t-shirts and I'll spring for the transcript of the hearing in August of 2007 where PEW, again pro-se - takes Judge Contempt on mano-y-mano after filing a petition to have her recuse herself from the case! I'll just make that complete clusterfuck a post in and of itself - no commentary from us. Frankly, as I sit here recalling that hearing, I know that there is nothing I can say that will do it any more justice than JC's own words will.

Subscribe In a Reader or by Email

Psycho Ex-Wife, Esquire - Contempt Hearing Highlights

PEW has taken on the role of attorney because she knows better than those in the legal profession how to handle stuff like our debacle. She knows better than the two seasoned veterans of Family Litigation she hired and subsequently fired. They "weren't doing a good enough job" for her and that's why she has been slowly losing her perceived grip on the situation(s). Yeah, that's it. The more she acts on her own behalf, the more she fucks up, the more the people now "in charge" of our lives become aware of just the kind of terrorist we're dealing with.

I never get to cross-examine PEW. The JC questions me, PEW questions me, and then JC questions PEW. By the time she is finished hearing all of the bullshit, she won't even allow me to cross-examine PEW on her testimony. That's just how convinced the Judge was that I was correct and PEW was found guilty of contempt on the issues I brought before her. She went straight to her ruling. It was a sight to behold, watching PEW break out the always popular last-ditch-effort the tears! If I didn't think I'd be admonished by JC, I would have laughed out loud as she does it every single time she loses something, which has been a lot lately.

PEW: With regard to Christmas, did I not tell you that I was ill at any point?
LM: I believe probably Christmas Eve you told me you were ill.
JUDGE: Okay! Wait a minute. Wait a minute. The emails I have starting, let's see, December 22nd through the 24th -- on the 22nd it starts, "I'm not taking them to the exchange point." And there's nothing about sick then, is there?
PEW: Your Honor, I don't recall exactly when I told him I was ill, but I have brought a doctor's note, and I bought a letter from my employer.
JUDGE: I'm not sure I buy that. But we'll see. Because the tone of these letters isn't "I'm sick, I can't come." The tone of these letters is "Forget it guy. I'm not coming!" So, you sit down you ask your question. That one so far is not flying, but go ahead.

Our commentary: This is the very first question PEW, Esquire asks - and JC jumps all over her ass. Keep in mind, by the time PEW, Esquire is permitted to cross-examine me, JC has already asked me my version of events and I've submitted a well-organized, highlighted packet of email exchanges that supports the entire timeline of events leading up to Christmas. The text above probably doesn't do it justice because you can't "feel" the tone of JC - but she is direct, firm, and sarcastic when she wants to be. She pulls no punches in calling you out when you fuck up. Here's a tip, PEW - it's best to remember exactly when you said you were ill when you are using that as your excuse for failing to show up. Dumbass.

For the next excerpt, I wish that there was a video camera permitted in the courtroom and I could offer you a youtube link to JC reading the contents of one of the damning emails from PEW, Esquire:

PEW: With regard to Christmas, did I not beg you to come pick them up, saying that I was ill?
LM: I don't recall you begging me to come pick them up. I recall you telling me that you were sick and couldn't drive out there. It was at the last minute. I had plans for the evening. I believe I told you that I didn't believe you were sick. And, in fact, if it pleases the court, I still have the voice mail from Christmas Eve and you don't sound sick. You don't say you're sick. You say, "If your not coming to pick them up here, I'm going to my mother's for Christmas," and I believe you did go to your mother's for Christmas.
JUDGE: Wait! Let me read this.
PEW: Oh, okay.
JUDGE: December 22nd at 14:59:59, from PEW:

"Go ahead. You're going to look like an asshole. I'll meet you next time per the court order. I'm not meeting you on Christmas Eve. That would be so like you to ruin the children's Christmas. It's a holiday. I have plans. I'm not meeting you at the exchange point because that's not what the order says. I will be at my home till 7PM on Christmas Eve. If you're not there by then, I'll assume you're not coming and I'll take the boys with me. I'm not interfering with your custody. I offered to let you pick them up a day or two early, since you want such meaningful time. You're so pathetic."
JUDGE: Okay. Go ahead.

Our commentary: Any person with a shred of intelligence and dignity would have looked at the judge and conceded right there. Cuff me. Jail me. I am in contempt. I am so busted and I have no way out of this. Not PEW, Esquire, though - she is in court, playing attorney and she bulls on through the cross-examination seemingly unfazed.

It's hard to describe just how flat-out sarcastic and condemning JC was being by reading that and the tone in which it was read. The Judge slapped her across the face and then in the same motion backhanded her - and it totally went right over PEW, Esquire's head. After all, she had her question list to get through!

Another tip: PEW, when I start going off on a tangent and giving testimony that is incredibly damning to you, try objecting to stop me. Don't just stand there dumbfounded as I go off on a soliloquy which strongly shows JC what's at work here.

More to come. Check the categories in the sidebar for more updates. "Transcript Highlights."

Subscribe In a Reader or by Email

Christmas 2007 - Part III: Final Fallout

After being granted my continuance on December 14th, the crazy email barrage again started with renewed vigor.

December 16th, 2007, 10:17PM:

LM,

I am upset about this situation with Christmas. I wasn't trying to ruin your Christmas last year, I even offered for you to have the boys the day before Christmas. Regardless of saying that I didn't think it was fair for me to have to drive them out to [Exchange Point] on Christmas eve I wound up getting very sick. I've never kept them from you....you did get them on the 27th last year and I even offered to bring them out on the 26th. I didn't fight this 50/50 arrangement because I know they need their Dad. This is so wrong, not just for me but for them. The summer was the same thing....I've never done anything like that to you, what you pulled after I came and spent the weekend down there was terrible. You are totally breaking my heart. I am so distraught, I can't bear the thought of not seeing them for three weeks straight and not a day during the Christmas season. I do believe the order said that the "Christmas holiday" was your this year but not the whole week....she never uttered those words. She didn't say "Christmas Break" or "Christmas Week", she said the holiday, which is Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. I've been praying everyday that you somehow move past the hatred you have for me and do the right thing. Why are you doing this? I AM their mother remember......I know you wish you could change that but you can't and they love me very much. Please please do the right thing. I am just sick about this. You have been so cruel and I don't understand it at all.

~PEW

Our commentary:
This is followed by a series of short, nonsensical emails telling me that she has proof of how "wrong" I am about the holiday custody arrangement and that she has proof. Dumbass doesn't (or won't) realize that my position is lock-solid supported by all of the documentation. However, since that doesn't meet with her warped reality - it might as well not exist.

She sends me copies of the Contempt Order from March and the copy of the Custody Order from November. Both obviously support my position. The order from November refers to the terms of my petition which are entered as "the order." It is quite clear. When she goes home on the 20th of December, she digs out her copy of the petition and makes the astounding discovery that she is completely wrong! LET THE CRAZY-MAKING BEGIN! (We respond to none of what follows.)

12/20/07, 7:55PM:

Well LM, I got home, I reviewed the petition/proposal that you filed in September. It appears, as usual that I overlooked the fine details...I'm sure you've looked at the transcript from the Nov 2nd hearing by now and realize that she asked me if I agreed with everything else but the two items I brought up and I said "yes" Of course when I originally reviewed everything, I was focused the driving issue and overlooked Christmas that you put in there that you would have the kids the entire week of Christmas. You always "beat me" on the technicalities but that won't happen in the future, I assure you. I'm sure your "Legal Eagle" DW, has been telling you that you have me beat......but that's because she's not truly "A Mother".....if she was she would never think this was a "great" idea. I'm going to withdraw my petition because I'm the "better" person.....and EVERYONE knows that. My family knows, your family knows, our old friends know, my friends know, my company knows, the school knows.....but most importantly YOU know that I'm a WAY nicer person than your girlfriend and you're upset that I divorce YOU. I can't compete with someone who is as manipulative and intelligent as you (and your girlfriend) who is apparently the gonads behind this whole thing because I happen to know that you are not this MEAN......and that's exactly what this is...manipulation.....deceit....payback....whatever it is...it's wrong and it sucks for me that I'm not as SMART as you and your girlfriend. Worst of ALL..it sucks for S9 and S6....they love being here..they love the fun we have together, just like you used to LOVE spending time with me....because when I'm with them I AM the person you fell in love with......because they LOVE me back. Let me give you some advice though....this Judge...is starting to see your true colors...read between the lines. Read what she is saying to you on November 2nd and in that contempt hearing.....she's not just sick of me....she's kinda sick of you too. Do what you feel you must with Christmas.....I will live through this just like ALL of the other atrocities that you've inflicted on me over the past 4 years....will it EVER stop?

~PEW

Our commentary: She is withdrawing this petition because she knows that if she sets foot in that court in front of Judge Contempt again - with this complete and utter bullshit - the consequences could be quite severe. When things turn in my favor - it's because I'm "manipulative and evil and DW is my gonad-set and running the whole show." Nothing could be further from the truth. Reality is - PEW gives me pretty much everything I need on a silver platter to use against her while avoiding, at all costs, anything that could put me at odds with the court. Oh, make no mistake, DW is one smart cookie and has assisted every step of the way - but DW doesn't give me the evidence. DW doesn't file all of the petitions which, during testimony, I turn around on her. She's her own worst enemy and for that - I am thankful.

DW is the same person she tried desperately to get all "buddy-buddy" with, attempting to convince her that I was the spawn of satan and that she would soon see my "true colors." When that doesn't work - demonize!

Followed at 8:39PM by:

LM,

against my better judgement...I'm also going to say that I think that DW calls the shots..I have a really really really hard time believing that you are THIS mean. We spent some really good good times.....especially during the holidays. You and I had some good times at this time of year and I won't ever forget that....remember the time I made you and MCB sing the SOUND of MUSIC?? that was right before I found out we were pregnant with S9. And we made love many times by the light of the Christmas tree.....particularly one time I remember when you asked me to marry you...by tie fire up the mountains..........LM.....remember the good not the bad.....our boys want to see their mommy during Christmas....

~PEW

Our commentary: Oh holy shit. Now, you will see some e-mails later on, but PEW has been trying to get LM back for 4 years now, only he could never see it. This psycho would actually ask him to move back in with him several times per year, and he couldn't see it, thinking it was just about money, HA. As he read this, he looked over his shoulder and said, "sign into my e-mail account, and ah, yea, you are right." LMFAO. I died when I read this, I mean seriously, I could not stop laughing for 2 fucking hours. This whore has tried to convince everyone she meets that LM is a sociopath that abused her for ten years, and yet here she is reminding him of how they made love? She is one fucked-up cookie.

Followed at 9:11PM by:

LM - in summary............I know who calls the shots..and it's NOT YOU. sad...~PEW

Followed at 9:23PM by:

LM - I got it.....worry more about squaring youself with not letting the mother of your childr