PDA

View Full Version : Levi Page Show 11/15 9 PM ET / 8 CT


Levi
11-15-2011, 08:57 PM
Family Law Attorney Kim Picazio will be on the show to discuss the custody battle over Lisa's half brother. Here is the link to listen: http://tobtr.com/s/2555781

RANCH
11-15-2011, 09:06 PM
Family Law Attorney Kim Picazio will be on the show to discuss the custody battle over Lisa's half brother. Here is the link to listen: http://tobtr.com/s/2555781

Thanks for the reminder.

yllek
11-15-2011, 09:46 PM
Good show Levi and Kim.

It will be very interesting to see if Ms. Raim follows through on this custody order. If she does and Jeremy and Debbi don't want to answer questions about Debbi's actions on the night Lisa disappeared and/or a history of leaving the children unattended (or any other negative behavior) because it would incriminate them in a possible criminal case, taking the 5th could result in Jeremy losing custody. This is what I understood Kim to be saying. Sounds similar to the spot Terri Horman was backed into in regards to Kyron's disappearance. She chose to take the 5th and hasn't seen her baby girl in over a year. Luckily for the baby girl, a fit bio parent wanted and was awarded custody of Kyron's half sister.

In this case, Ms. Raim might not get custody since she hasn't seen her son in so long and may have issues of her own. A judge would want to know why and also would need Ms. Raim to prove fitness to take custody.

I could see this getting ugly with possibly Jeremy taking the 5th and the judge possibly deciding neither parent is fit (assuming Ms. Raim does indeed have issues of her own). At that point, I wonder if Debbi is determined to be the biggest concern, whether Jeremy would choose to answer questions and separate from Debbi in order to show his commitment to his son, or if the poor boy would be placed elsewhere (hopefully with a willing and able family member).

Lots of thoughts based on the information gleaned from tonight's show. Thanks.

P.s. I too wondered if someone whispered in Ms. Raim's ear to take this action as a way to get information regarding Lisa's case...

RANCH
11-15-2011, 10:01 PM
Good show Levi and Kim.

It will be very interesting to see if Ms. Raim follows through on this custody order. If she does and Jeremy and Debbi don't want to answer questions about Debbi's actions on the night Lisa disappeared and/or a history of leaving the children unattended (or any other negative behavior) because it would incriminate them in a possible criminal case, taking the 5th could result in Jeremy losing custody. This is what I understood Kim to be saying. Sounds similar to the spot Terri Horman was backed into in regards to Kyron's disappearance. She chose to take the 5th and hasn't seen her baby girl in over a year. Luckily for the baby girl, a fit bio parent wanted and was awarded custody of Kyron's half sister.

In this case, Ms. Raim might not get custody since she hasn't seen her son in so long and may have issues of her own. A judge would want to know why and also would need Ms. Raim to prove fitness to take custody.

I could see this getting ugly with possibly Jeremy taking the 5th and the judge possibly deciding neither parent is fit (assuming Ms. Raim does indeed have issues of her own). At that point, I wonder if Debbi is determined to be the biggest concern, whether Jeremy would choose to answer questions and separate from Debbi in order to show his commitment to his son, or if the poor boy would be placed elsewhere (hopefully with a willing and able family member).

Lots of thoughts based on the information gleaned from tonight's show. Thanks.

P.s. I too wondered if someone whispered in Ms. Raim's ear to take this action as a way to get information regarding Lisa's case...BBM
Looks like you caught the part were Kim Picazio said that a custody depo would be like free discovery for LE.

Abby Normal
11-15-2011, 10:05 PM
I personally don't think JI will have to plead the 5th, because he can be pretty easily accounted for. Working hard for his family, left children with a woman who even her ex in laws consider a good mom. Came home ot crisis, presumably no involvement or time chunks to answer to.

He may, though, have to separate from DB to keep him. I have a feeling he will do what he needs to do- even if that's what he needs to do.

yllek
11-15-2011, 10:33 PM
BBM
Looks like you caught the part were Kim Picazio said that a custody depo would be like free discovery for LE.

I actually wondered if this custody motion was all Ms. Raim's idea, or did she have some prompting, when the news first broke. I remember the free discovery strategy when Kaine Horman's team reportedly hoped Terri would answer questions in civil custody court that could be used in a possible criminal case.

yllek
11-15-2011, 10:43 PM
I personally don't think JI will have to plead the 5th, because he can be pretty easily accounted for. Working hard for his family, left children with a woman who even her ex in laws consider a good mom. Came home ot crisis, presumably no involvement or time chunks to answer to.

He may, though, have to separate from DB to keep him. I have a feeling he will do what he needs to do- even if that's what he needs to do.

BBM.
I understand what you're saying Abby. On the show tonight, Kim pointed out that Jeremy will be asked if had knowledge of patterns or history of behaviors on Debbi's part that resulted in risk or negligence to the children (not just the night Lisa disappeared). So, it's not just whether he can prove that he is fit to care for the children, but did he knowingly put them at risk by leaving them with Debbi?

(yllek) If he answers "no" about knowing any patterns of negligent behavior and there are witnesses to say otherwise, that's a strike against him. If he answers "yes" and he allowed her to care for the children alone, that's a point against him.

Kim made a good point about Jeremy being able to possibly use the fact that this was his first night shift in his favor. Debbi told the world she drinks a couple of times a week - it's out there - along with the possible black out for Oct. 3rd. But, Jeremy can cop to knowing that Debbi likes to party, only it was never a problem before because he was always home to watch the children when she had her adult time. He could claim that he logically assumed Debbi would not party when she was in sole care of the children.

(yllek) No matter how you slice it, if Debbi won't answer questions and/or there is evidence of a pattern of negligence or risk based on her behavior, Jeremy may have to separate from her to retain custody, imo...

Boodles
11-15-2011, 10:55 PM
This is a very interesting turn. I wonder how Tacopina and Picerno are going to get around this problem. For Jeremy and DB, it's plead the fifth or almost certainly lose JI's son. I could imagine Jeremy dumping DB over this. So interesting....they may get caught between a rock and a hard place over this.

Then again, this case is so quirky, there could be many more twists and turns before this plays out.

Sparklin
11-15-2011, 11:01 PM
BBM
Looks like you caught the part were Kim Picazio said that a custody depo would be like free discovery for LE.

That was my first thought when I read about it. I posted somewhere 'This might bring out a whole lot of info LE doesn't want out yet' It it's EMERGENCY custody papers does that mean it will be immediate or can the judge deem it non emergency with minimum info?

RANCH
11-15-2011, 11:13 PM
That was my first thought when I read about it. I posted somewhere 'This might bring out a whole lot of info LE doesn't want out yet' It it's EMERGENCY custody papers does that mean it will be immediate or can the judge deem it non emergency with minimum info?
I'm not sure what your asking, but I don't see anything immediate happening with this custody issue. According to family law attorney Kim , CPS would be involved if their was any immediate concern or danger.

yllek
11-15-2011, 11:31 PM
I'm not sure what your asking, but I don't see anything immediate happening with this custody issue. According to family law attorney Kim , CPS would be involved if their was any immediate concern or danger.

She did say that. She also said that CPS may be investigating, but we just don't know. I kinda think we would have heard something, but there have been a couple of recent cases where we heard nothing until siblings were removed.

I pray not only for the best possible outcome for Lisa, but her brothers too. If Jeremy's son is removed, his mom may not be fit herself. We know nothing except she didn't see him for years. A judge will want to know why. She will be scrutinized just as hard, or harder, than Jeremy and Debbi who have some very heavy hitters in the legal field acting as their "advocates" and "consultants". I do think Jeremy seems to have a close family who would be willing and able to care for his son if it came down to it. I don't know so much about Debbi's family's fitness or willingness if her son was removed per CPS (not saying they wouldn't/couldn't, just haven't seen them like we did the Irwins early on). I hope someone in her family would be deemed fit and willing. But, I'm jumping ahead here. This may not even get too far.

JMO...

RANCH
11-15-2011, 11:44 PM
She did say that. She also said that CPS may be investigating, but we just don't know. I kinda think we would have heard something, but there have been a couple of recent cases where we heard nothing until siblings were removed.

I pray not only for the best possible outcome for Lisa, but her brothers too. If Jeremy's son is removed, his mom may not be fit herself. We know nothing except she didn't see him for years. A judge will want to know why. She will be scrutinized just as hard, or harder, than Jeremy and Debbi who have some very heavy hitters in the legal field acting as their "advocates" and "consultants". I do think Jeremy seems to have a close family who would be willing and able to care for his son if it came down to it. I don't know so much about Debbi's family's fitness or willingness if her son was removed per CPS (not saying they wouldn't/couldn't, just haven't seen them like we did the Irwins early on). I hope someone in her family would be deemed fit and willing. But, I'm jumping ahead here. This may not even get too far.

JMO...

Excellent post yllek. I agree with all you say. I will only add that I would hope that CPS would act immediately on any immediate concerns or danger to a child. Investigations should be for long term issues like custody.

al66pine
11-16-2011, 12:26 AM
Slightly O/T, I did not hear show, but above discussion about JI or DB taking the 5th led me to wonder....

With Jeremy and Debbie not being married, do you think the court would allow “marital privilege” to apply in any criminal charges (if/when eventually) brought against one or the other re Baby Lisa‘s disappearance?

As a matter of public policy, have/do courts (esp. Missouri) extended this privilege to unmarried couples w. bio-babies/children, to promote intimate-partner harmony?

If so, anybody ready to put money on whether a court would allow the privilege to attach, where one member of the couple is still married to someone else?

Thanks in advance to those offering the benefit of their legal expertise on these questions.
 
(Anyone curious about or not familiar w. this principal, which is based on the “policy of encouraging spousal harmony, and preventing people from having to condemn, or being condemned by, their spouses,” google “wiki spousal privilege“ for a quickie explanation.)

Nixie
11-16-2011, 12:37 AM
Slightly O/T, I did not hear show, but above discussion about JI or DB taking the 5th led me to wonder....

With Jeremy and Debbie not being married, do you think the court would allow “marital privilege” to apply in any criminal charges (if/when eventually) brought against one or the other re Baby Lisa‘s disappearance?

As a matter of public policy, have/do courts (esp. Missouri) extended this privilege to unmarried couples w. bio-babies/children, to promote intimate-partner harmony?

If so, anybody ready to put money on whether a court would allow the privilege to attach, where one member of the couple is still married to someone else?

Thanks in advance to those offering the benefit of their legal expertise on these questions.
 
(Anyone curious about or not familiar w. this principal, which is based on the “policy of encouraging spousal harmony, and preventing people from having to condemn, or being condemned by, their spouses,” google “wiki spousal privilege“ for a quickie explanation.)


No expertise here but the lawyer on the show did say they couldn't use privilege because they aren't married.
Also like to add I loved Kim on the show she was very straight forward about a lot of possible things that could happen!

RANCH
11-16-2011, 12:37 AM
Slightly O/T, I did not hear show, but above discussion about JI or DB taking the 5th led me to wonder....

With Jeremy and Debbie not being married, do you think the court would allow “marital privilege” to apply in any criminal charges (if/when eventually) brought against one or the other re Baby Lisa‘s disappearance?

As a matter of public policy, have/do courts (esp. Missouri) extended this privilege to unmarried couples w. bio-babies/children, to promote intimate-partner harmony?

If so, anybody ready to put money on whether a court would allow the privilege to attach, where one member of the couple is still married to someone else?

Thanks in advance to those offering the benefit of their legal expertise on these questions.
 
(Anyone curious about or not familiar w. this principal, which is based on the “policy of encouraging spousal harmony, and preventing people from having to condemn, or being condemned by, their spouses,” google “wiki spousal privilege“ for a quickie explanation.)


Levi did ask about this on his show. Family law attorney Kim Pieazio stopped him in his tracks and said no. Simple reason being their not married. Not sure how to answer your other questions.

yllek
11-16-2011, 12:43 AM
Slightly O/T, I did not hear show, but above discussion about JI or DB taking the 5th led me to wonder....

With Jeremy and Debbie not being married, do you think the court would allow “marital privilege” to apply in any criminal charges (if/when eventually) brought against one or the other re Baby Lisa‘s disappearance?

As a matter of public policy, have/do courts (esp. Missouri) extended this privilege to unmarried couples w. bio-babies/children, to promote intimate-partner harmony?

If so, anybody ready to put money on whether a court would allow the privilege to attach, where one member of the couple is still married to someone else?

Thanks in advance to those offering the benefit of their legal expertise on these questions.
 
(Anyone curious about or not familiar w. this principal, which is based on the “policy of encouraging spousal harmony, and preventing people from having to condemn, or being condemned by, their spouses,” google “wiki spousal privilege“ for a quickie explanation.)


Levi asked Kim about marital privilege on the show tonight. She replied, "they're not married" and Levi kinda moved on. Looks like from one of the statements you posted above that MO might extend the privilege to unmarried couples with bio children. IDK. But, I don't think privilege applies in civil/family court anyway; just in a criminal case. I hope someone with better legal experience can weigh in.

If there ever is a criminal case against Lisa's parents, I'm still not sure privilege would apply. I think the only exception to privilege is when a minor child is the victim of a crime.

Gitana1 is always really knowlegeable on the legal questions, including those related to family matters, imo. Maybe she'll pop into this thread. Though, I wonder if we should be posting in the Emergency Custody thread instead?

Rosemarie
11-16-2011, 12:45 AM
Levi did ask about this on his show. Family law attorney Kim Pieazio stopped him in his tracks and said no. Simple reason being their not married. Not sure how to answer your other questions.

RANCH, My head was kind of doing this :crazy: until I read your post. That's it in a nut shell, I think. :) thanks

Deborah and Jeremy are not married.

RANCH
11-16-2011, 01:03 AM
Slightly O/T, I did not hear show, but above discussion about JI or DB taking the 5th led me to wonder....

With Jeremy and Debbie not being married, do you think the court would allow “marital privilege” to apply in any criminal charges (if/when eventually) brought against one or the other re Baby Lisa‘s disappearance?

As a matter of public policy, have/do courts (esp. Missouri) extended this privilege to unmarried couples w. bio-babies/children, to promote intimate-partner harmony?

If so, anybody ready to put money on whether a court would allow the privilege to attach, where one member of the couple is still married to someone else?

Thanks in advance to those offering the benefit of their legal expertise on these questions.
 
(Anyone curious about or not familiar w. this principal, which is based on the “policy of encouraging spousal harmony, and preventing people from having to condemn, or being condemned by, their spouses,” google “wiki spousal privilege“ for a quickie explanation.)

I bumped the legal question/lawyer thread if you have any legal questions. Link is below.

Legal Questions for our VERIFIED Lawyers - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

AlmostGone
11-16-2011, 01:41 AM
I personally don't think JI will have to plead the 5th, because he can be pretty easily accounted for. Working hard for his family, left children with a woman who even her ex in laws consider a good mom. Came home ot crisis, presumably no involvement or time chunks to answer to.

He may, though, have to separate from DB to keep him. I have a feeling he will do what he needs to do- even if that's what he needs to do.

I really like your post... I think your on to something and it's very possible this could happen... I think it would be in the best interest of the child for now IMO

katshep
11-16-2011, 01:56 PM
I bumped the legal question/lawyer thread if you have any legal questions. Link is below.

Legal Questions for our VERIFIED Lawyers - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=153148)

They're not married end of story. No privilege. Criminals take heed: always marry your partner in crime and do not separate during your life of crime.