Contempt of Court :Revealing Sealed Docs

I'm wondering if the return of service by the sheriff or process server had Kaine's information on it. Or if the copy we saw had it redacted.

I'm wondering that too. And here is the divorce doc which shows his address as: undisclosed. I assumed from the get-go that undisclosed on all of these papers was so that Terri would not know the location of Kaine or baby K.

http://images.bimedia.net/documents/Horman+divorce+papers.pdf

Interesting theory you have on whether Terri inadvertently received a copy with his actual address on it. Surely that could not have been intentional! Wouldn't it defeat the purpose??
 
Walking this fine line here..........but we haven't heard what Terri says about how he got hold of those documents.

Uh, we haven't heard what Terri says about anything...because she won't say anything! I'd LOVE to hear her side of the story at this point, but I know she's not going to tell it. I'm sorry, but the woman keeps digging herself deeper and not saying a word.

I actually feel sorry for her defense attorney. I wonder what he's thinking right now? And what is he drinking? (Oh come on, you know he is).
 
I actually feel sorry for her defense attorney. I wonder what he's thinking right now? And what is he drinking? (Oh come on, you know he is).

Trust me...he's fine lol. And you're almost certainly right about the drinking!
 
Uh, we haven't heard what Terri says about anything...because she won't say anything! I'd LOVE to hear her side of the story at this point, but I know she's not going to tell it. I'm sorry, but the woman keeps digging herself deeper and not saying a word.

I actually feel sorry for her defense attorney. I wonder what he's thinking right now? And what is he drinking? (Oh come on, you know he is).

There is nothing she can say outside of a court of law anymore which will remove this juggernaut following her. Justice ticks slowly for all sorts of people. IF she is innocent, the only place that matters where she can prove that is in a courtroom.
 
What if, in Terri's zeal to get to MC's house, she brought the newly delivered documents with her. What if, while she's in the powder room, MC decides to take a peek, and because she's not gonna be in there long, takes pictures to review later?

I'm only posing this as an alternative to the immediate response that Terri had to have shown him the documents. Just to keep possibilities open, I guess.

That differs from what is reported in the documents that MC told LE (www.scribd.com/doc/34241334/Kyron-Horman-Affair).
 
There is nothing she can say outside of a court of law anymore which will remove this juggernaut following her. Justice ticks slowly for all sorts of people. IF she is innocent, the only place that matters where she can prove that is in a courtroom.

True debs at this point absolutely. But have we ever heard her voice from day 1 when she and Kaine were one united front? I can't recall her ever making a statement but I've been wrong before.
 
That doesn't make sense to me. I don't see how it could be mandatory to provide the address of person filing the RO to the one being restrained. There are confidential shelters for abused women and giving that address to a violent spouse or boyfriend would put many extra people at risk.

ITA Chili. Disclosing the address completely defeats the purpose of going into hiding.

I have a question for our legal eagles - is the address of the petitioner of an RO required in the state of Oregon?

ETA: Never mind - I see it's already been answered. Thanks!
 
LOL let's not forget the foundation for the RO is a murder for hire plot. I mean it doesn't look to good when the accused is passing sensitive information like where Kaine is located to the person you are sexting with.
What was Cook thinking?

Not to be crude, but I think my question is: what was he thinking with?
 
Walking this fine line here..........but we haven't heard what Terri says about how he got hold of those documents.

Given Terri's track record of things she has said, how much weight could one give to the statement you seek from her now, regarding Cook's access to the document?

Examples:

  • If Terri was innocent and left Kyron at school and went to run errands, why do her alibi statements not jibe with her cell and bank records (and possibly other evidence not yet revealed)? Would the argument here be that "sure, cell and bank records say one thing, but we haven't heard what Terri says about this".

  • Then there's those darn sticky polygraphs - we have no idea what all Terri was asked on those but we know she failed two or three of them and even walked out without completing at least one of those. Would the argument here be, "sure, she failed polygraphs and walked out too, but we haven't heard from Terri what she says about this". It should be noted here that the same polygraphs were given to 3 other parents, who all passed.

But even if one were to discount Terri's multiple failed polygraphs, discount Terri's bank records, discount Terri's cell phone records, discount statements from the landscaper, and now discount statements from her most recent love, I would LOVE to know what the devil's advocate approach would be for:

Why is Terri not contesting custody of her baby K? We know she wants her baby back - she went to Kaine's gym to try to get her. She asked the clerk to let her know when Kaine and baby K were at the gym again.

So why not attend the July 22nd hearing and fight to get her baby? Why not stand in front of a judge and tell her story of innocence and at least get a shot at 50/50 custody? If we stick to the 'we haven't heard from Terri on this' does that mean we also cannot put any weight in her attorney's statement that Terri will not be contesting custody? In your quest to hear from Terri, does attorney Houze speak for her?

If there really is no proof of any wrong doing, she should be able to get partial custody. Why would she not try?

If she is innocent and all of this is just statements from others and as you put it: "but we haven't heard what Terri says", then why not take the July 22nd opportunity to speak? Especially when it could mean getting custody or partial custody of her baby?

For those who think LE is being singularly focused on Terri and perhaps thinking LE has nothing on her, then why couldn't she walk into that judge's chambers and make that case so she could get her baby?

I am sincerely interested in any devil's advocate reply.

...
 
Again, I was told I had to put my address on the RO when I filed it in Oregon. I was told this by the court. This was also in 1999 so I am unsure if things have changed since then.

Just reiterating personal experience....
 
True debs at this point absolutely. But have we ever heard her voice from day 1 when she and Kaine were one united front? I can't recall her ever making a statement but I've been wrong before.

Absolutely. I have no idea what she sounds like. Frankly, though, from the jump she's been Grand Central Station of speculation. But the presumption of innocence isn't being given anywhere but in that judicial system. Certainly that presumption isn't out among the inter tubez, and therefore the wisest and most consternating thing she can do is 'hold her piece' until the Court tells her to speak. Whether at that time what she says will be perceived as the truth by the court, I can't answer.

So having MC say she pointed out parts of the RO that she herself showed him ....... that's just what he says until it can be proven in a court that there is no possible way he saw those documents without her permission.

So for that, I keep it open as a possibility that he got into the documents without her knowledge and then he shared them with the two others, also without her knowledge. If that's not the case, I surely hope they have a detailed trail to follow, because, as I said once before today, the burden of proof is on the State.
 
It seems to me that the police are feeding KH's lawyers information to try to get TH thrown into jail for contempt of court--once she's in jail the police may feel like they would have alot more leverage to get what happened to poor Kyron out of her??
 
There is nothing she can say outside of a court of law anymore which will remove this juggernaut following her. Justice ticks slowly for all sorts of people. IF she is innocent, the only place that matters where she can prove that is in a courtroom.

Precisely; so why give up the July 22nd hearing and all chance to get all or some custody of her baby right now?

I just posted a much longer reply to you on the subject of 'hearing what Terri has to say'. Then saw this post from you which feeds precisely into my point - she is actually turning down the chance to speak in a courtroom - even on a topic that one could say has nothing to do with Kyron's fateful disappearance.

Terri is turning down the chance to get her own child back right now. It wasn't a motion to move the date out further, it was a clear statement from her attorney that Terri is not contesting the restraining order in regards to current custody of her baby.

...
 
Precisely; so why give up the July 22nd hearing and all chance to get all or some custody of her baby right now?

I just posted a much longer reply to you on the subject of 'hearing what Terri has to say'. Then saw this post from you which feeds precisely into my point - she is actually turning down the chance to speak in a courtroom - even on a topic that one could say has nothing to do with Kyron's fateful disappearance.

Terri is turning down the chance to get her own child back right now. It wasn't a motion to move the date out further, it was a clear statement from her attorney that Terri is not contesting the restraining order in regards to current custody of her baby.

...

This issue should probably get straightened up sooner rather than later. As I understand it, the hearing on the 22nd has only to do with the ouster and another tangential issue. Afaik, TH hasn't challenged, and no hearing has been scheduled, on issues relating to her contact with baby girl. The reason she would not challenge that aspect of the RO has been typed out a number of times. Suffice it to say, that if the RO judge rules against her, it would be based on findings of fact and law that could totally bite her in the butt in the criminal trial. No criminal defense lawyer would advise her to take that risk. So she isn't.
 
Precisely; so why give up the July 22nd hearing and all chance to get all or some custody of her baby right now?

I just posted a much longer reply to you on the subject of 'hearing what Terri has to say'. Then saw this post from you which feeds precisely into my point - she is actually turning down the chance to speak in a courtroom - even on a topic that one could say has nothing to do with Kyron's fateful disappearance.

Terri is turning down the chance to get her own child back right now. It wasn't a motion to move the date out further, it was a clear statement from her attorney that Terri is not contesting the restraining order in regards to current custody of her baby.

...


I thought the hearing Terri is not contesting is the one to vacate the home, ie her attorney said she will leave the home and that she is getting other counsel for the domestic matters, the divorce and the custody?
 
I thought the hearing Terri is not contesting is the one to vacate the home, ie her attorney said she will leave the home and that she is getting other counsel for the domestic matters, the divorce and the custody?

Right, the scope of the 7/22 hearing is here:

http://www.koinlocal6.com/mostpopular/story/Terri-Horman-called-911-during-police-sting/Dz4uMChK60KCWjy3W5FG4Q.cspx

I don't know about her getting another attorney for the family law issues, but it's very clear that the only thing she's not disputing at this time is moving out of the house.

eta: I think she only has a certain amount of time (maybe 30 days) to request a hearing on other aspects of the RO, but that time hasn't run yet. Hold onto your hats 30 days from the day the RO was filed.
 
On the restraining order we've seen, Kaine listed the address of his attorney.

Here is the RO:

http://www.statesmanjournal.com/assets/pdf/J016056678.PDF

You can see Kaine's listed address is that of his attorney, Laura Rackner. The address of where he has been living is not listed. My guess is that the court either made a mistake and sent Terri his address (you'll see that their last name is listed as "Horton" on the first page of the paperwork so they do make mistakes) or that MC either lied to LE about how he got the address (maybe he followed Kaine or something). Or somehow the information of how he got the address got garbled between LE and Kaine (or his attorney).

Good catch, Chili Fries:dance:

Your post reminded me of when I first saw the RO and did notice that Kaine used his attorney's address -- and breathed a sigh of relief!:yow:

I didn't catch the misspelling of the last name though -- and, you're right, they do make mistakes.

Because the use of his attorney's address as his contact address, that certainly would seem to be following the letter of the law as Originally Posted by Kat re the Oregon State Bar info on RO's.

http://www.osbar.org/public/legalinf...ningOrders.htm

***
With the alleged murder for hire plot, Kyron missing, and the vulnerability of Baby K, I'm just shocked that it seems his address of residence got revealed.
(Well, maybe shocked is too strong a word. Everything else in this case has already been so shocking I ought to be getting used to it.):slap:
 
Perhaps someone smarter than me can explain the "main point" of the contempt thing... But here's my take on it's importance and why the "abduct" thing was brought up today too. I think that what is important about the contempt (+ previous notes of inquiry about when Kaine is at gym with the baby) and the timing of the RO is this... (although someone can correct me here)

Document today:
http://images.bimedia.net/documents/horman-affair.pdf

That RO was sealed... It was NOT unsealed until July 8th. It was not to be shown to ANYONE except:

(page 8)
1. Oregon courts and court staff
2. any governmental agency
3. the parties (Kaine and Terri)
4. respondent's attorney
5. petitioner's attorney

AFTER Terri received it, on the day she received it mind you -- she permitted MC to see it (received: June 28th; page 9 beginning at line 21 onward in the above linked document.) According to the document, MC photographed it and then, later, provided information about that document to 2 other individuals! I don't know "when" he showed it to others, but we "might" assume that it was in a time frame that was out of order with the seal. EITHER way, this was an RO, was Terri trying to let others (3rd parties) try to contact or interfere with Kaine's life? TERRI broke the seal... Apparently she broke the RO.

Could we presume that Terri knew that MC let the other 2 individuals know -- or asked him to show it to others for some purpose? Not necessarily, but they wouldn't have known anything about the RO if she had adhered to the sealing of the document (during its sealing). Additionally, regardless of the timing, if she was to be restrained from Kaine, why is she letting others know where he is? She is to LEAVE HIM ALONE!

page 10 beginning at line 3 onward.
"Further, Respondent allowed Mr. Cook to take cell phone camera photographs of the sealed restraining order. Of particular concern to the petitioner was the fact that a cell phone camera photograph was taken of the Petitioner's listed address. In fact, the search of Mr. Cook's cell phone also revealed that a Google Maps search of the address was later performed by Mr. Cook." (it goes on to say that Cook told LE that he didn't go to the Petitioner's address.)

Later he searched? For whom did he search? To whom did he provide search information? Did he provide Terri with that Google map or a detailed description of how to get to Kaine's residence?

SCAAAAAAAAAAAAARY! Particularly in light of a few things...

Also in the court document (starting at line 21, page 10):
"While Respondent, at times, references that she misses both children, K[] and K[], the significant majority of the material deals with social and personal matters between Mr. Cook and Respondent and belies that assertion. Respondent asked Mr. Cook to lie to her attorney and others about the fact that she had gone to Mr. Cook's home."

Lie? Did Mr. Cook print out a photo of that Google map? Why would Terri want Mr. Cook to lie about Terri being at his home?

Page 11, line 8 discusses the gym thing... Terri asked the gym clerk to let her know if Kaine came to the gym with the baby.

"... on or about June 28th, 2010, and prior to the service of the legal documents, Respondent came to that location looking to 'abduct' her daughter, K[], from the gym daycare center while Petitioner worked out at the gym."

The word "abduct" -- to carry off by force. I wonder if there is a thing at the gym that "if you sign your child in, it is you who must sign your child out." I think there is a reason that the word "abduct" was used in that document.

Additionally...is it possible that on June 26th, after the 9-1-1 calls that a) Terri knew that it was a sting, and why the sting AND b) that she was told that Kaine had taken custody of the child and now she would have to go to court to get custody back?

BOTTOMLINE:
a. Terri was thought to be trying to "abduct" the baby on the 28th (for whatever reason), I suppose that could be argued in the court, but that was the word used in the document. EVEN IF the RO papers hadn't been served yet, there was probably certain legal precedent set at that time. Perhaps the police had told Terri something to keep her at a distance from Kaine and the baby AND that was known by the person who wrote the word "abduct."

b. Terri broke a "sealed" RO. Further, I think it is likely she "used" someone to Google a map for her.

c. Terri didn't want anyone to know that she had been at the home of the person with the Google map, why?
 
LOL let's not forget the foundation for the RO is a murder for hire plot. I mean it doesn't look to good when the accused is passing sensitive information like where Kaine is located to the person you are sexting with.
What was Cook thinking?

You mean, what was he thinking with, correct?
:angel:
 
Oops, my joke is so old. A few others beat me to it.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
185
Guests online
4,153
Total visitors
4,338

Forum statistics

Threads
593,354
Messages
17,985,244
Members
229,104
Latest member
Justice is coming
Back
Top