BM texting DH Pt. 2- Contempt?
As most of you know, BM has been giving DH week on/ week off with SD since March. They had a blowup last week after DH confronted her about sharing financial matters with SD. It is obvious a child couldn't come up with what SD said to him without BM telling her something.
DH ignored BM'S "we need to talk" text on Friday and she texted him again this morning. She asked if they could talk "for SD's sake". I told DH to stick to texts for proof and he told her that basically there is nothing to say, that can talk in mediation with a 3rd party, and that he'll get SD tomorrow afternoon as usual. SD doesn't start school until the 20th.
BM said "not until WE talk". DH said "ok, don't give me access to SD. You can explain that to her". There was a lot more but basically BM is hurt he told her how it is last week and she didn't like it and can't handle the truth. DH also told her that she can't keep using SD as leverage and she finally stopped texting him. I told him to NOT delete the messages.
Per the CO, DH is to have SD on Mondays and Tuesdays from 4-6pm (for the purpose of homework) but BM told him in text that he cannot have his visitation until they talk. Even if she doesn't make SD available for all of next week, doesn't DH still legally have SD from 4-6pm on Monday and Tuesday? DH probably won't call the police to enforce his visitation and will just document that SD wasn't made available to him and save their texts for the attorney to sort through.
- I love dogs's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
Comments
That's an odd court order. If
That's an odd court order. If she doesn't show, DH needs to go to get her & if that doesn't work stop at the police station to document contempt. In order for contempt to be found, he needs to "make every attempt to see the child" in order for contempt to be founded.
BM never wanted him to have
BM never wanted him to have overnights until she realized she could give him that and still get full CS, but yes, their CO sucks and that's why DH stopped fighting- he always came out of court with LESS time than before and it was humiliating for him.
So does he need to send BM a picture of the CO? Because she has one and has always picked and chose what she wanted to follow. Also, he hasn't officially retained his attorney but plans to talk to him tomorrow.
So they haven't followed the
So they haven't followed the exact CO in 3-4 years. BM has always given him extra time and overnights even though the CO only specifies Monday/ Tuesdays 4-6pm so that he can be involved in homework and every other Sunday from 9am-4pm.
So he still needs to enforce at least the COed time this week, correct? Because the status quo has been week on/ week off for almost 5 months.
That CO wording could perhaps
That CO wording could perhaps be a loophole against contempt.
As you stated above, SD is not in school this week (not until the 20th)... so does it really mean S must be brought to Dd on Monday and Tuesday all summer long when there is no homework? Homework indicates school year while school is in session. However could also include summer if SD were to be in summer school.
I do agree with the form of documenting the lack of BM's dropping SD off tomorrow (as was given to you by above member/s). Yeah, hassle, but if he eventually gathers and presents an attempt of contempt, he needs 'official' documentation . A cop taking a failure report on your front porch is definately offical documentated proof SD didn't arrive.
I'm surprised that wording was entered without it being followed by clarification. Back when the order was first new and fresh, how did Dad and Mom handle 4-6pm Mon-Tues during summer? Was the assumption of meaning mutual between both parents that those days and times belonged to Dad regardless of time of year? Did BM bring SD on those days and time regardless if were say, July? (which would clearly show she does indeed believe it means year round).
Anyway, glad to hear your DH stuck to the 'no private chat' , if BM wants to talk they can do it in a formal legitimate setting. I wonder what BM face looked like when she read Dad finally found his b*lls? LOL. She's not use to being defied.
They haven't followed the
They haven't followed the court order in so long there's no saying. I have documented at least the last 2 years of sleepovers so there's actual dates to prove he's been getting overnights and more than what is COed. I'd say I've documented close to 90% of the extra time he's had. He's going to consult with his attorney tomorrow. He doesn't want to enforce the CO, however, he wants the week on/ week off he's been getting without having to "talk" to BM on her terms.
TBH I'd call the police. Not
TBH I'd call the police. Not because I expect them to do anything, but because then it's documented with law-enforcement and can't be used as a "he said, she said" type of deal. Same reason he should save those text messages.
I hope the attorney will give
I hope the attorney will give him advice today because he hasn't retained him yet. He will be downtown for another matter so I think he just needs to motion to modify anyway. But if he calls the police, it should be to document, not necessarily enforce visitation? And will BM get a copy?
Well all he has to say is
Well all he has to say is that he has the court papers and that his visitation is Monday from 4-6 and BM is with-holding the kids. The police may do something to enforce it, they may not. Regardless of if they choose to act, it's now documented with them, and your DH can likely request a copy of the police report, or have your lawyer subpeona one.
BM won't get a copy unless she requests of the police report. They may try and call herr and ask why she's with-holding, but other than that she likely won't get a heads up.
That would actually be great!
That would actually be great! I've read that some departments won't get involved in civil matters. So he should try to enforce the CO at the very least?
Showing that he's making an
Showing that he's making an effort and she's still syaing no will look good for him in court and bad for her. Court is mainly about appearances unfortunately. So yes!