2010.06.28 - Kyron's Dad files for divorce and restraining order

[SacreBleu]

bbm
The fallacy of comparing Terri, or any other parent in Terri's position, to someone in the military is that the parent in the military chose to be in the military, knew that service away from his/her family would most likely be part of their commitment, and made that decision for themselves. Terri is a stay-at-home mom. Her priority was being at home with her children, and someone else has removed that choice for her. (moo--I will not credit the MFH plot until proof/evidence surfaces). mho

BBM

Terri made the decision not to fight the RO.

 

[stmarysmead]

(clip)
I am "fired up" on this topic....even more so... than on the topic of Terri's friend Dee laughing on her blog about abusing an animal in her care. My husband and I travel frequently for a variety of reasons. I am as scrupulous at checking out who cares for our dogs as I was once for our kids. They (OUR PETS) can't tell me, can they, if they are being neglected or hurt? I dread just such a person as Terri's friend Dede...who not only abuses the dog but sees humor in its pain. I was stunned by reading that blog post here.

(clip)

bbm

Huh? I'd like the chance to read that material, especially as I have two rescue dogs and abhor animal cruelty. Can you point me to that blog? Is it DeDe's? Wasn't her blog pulled from the web, like that of MC's wife? Or am I confusing what's on the web and quotable? That's a distinctive possibility! TIA

We discussed the blog and it is linked on this thread right here on WS.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...-to-go-sideways.html&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us


http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=114841&highlight=dede+blog&page=6

"A Specific Tool" thread.

 

[debs]

BBM

Terri made the decision not to fight the RO.

And according to her attorney, her child needs to see her, given that Terri was K's primary caregiver and having her removed from K's life was detrimental to the best interests of K.

 

[desquire]

I was being silly.

Anyway, it stands to reason that Kaine had some kind of documentation to provide to the judge with the petition for the RO. This is a high-profile case and the judge's reputation is on the line. That, and I'm about 99.9% sure Ms. Racker wasn't going to petition on Kaine's behalf w/o it.

Believe it or not, you're wrong. the way the process works, the judge grants a temporary restraining order based solely on the allegations of the person requesting it. No proof has to be provided unless/until the other party challenges. Since Terri never challenged - because she'd then be in the same pickle she's worked to avoid through abatement - Kaine never had to provide any evidence to support his allegations.

 

[SacreBleu]

ibm
It will be interesting to see how the visitation is modified...

Indeed.

You did not address the question in my post, however. If you were in Kaine's position, given what information you have been given by LE, would you want to hand your child over to Terri?

All I'm saying is, right, wrong or indifferent, I cannot fault Kaine for the actions he has taken.

 

[stmarysmead]

And according to her attorney, her child needs to see her, given that Terri was K's primary caregiver and having her removed from K's life was detrimental to the best interests of K.

What else can Terri's attorney say? That Baby K is happier than ever, well adjusted and doing fine in the care of her loving Dad?

 

[debs]

Believe it or not, you're wrong. the way the process works, the judge grants a temporary restraining order based solely on the allegations of the person requesting it. No proof has to be provided unless/until the other party challenges. Since Terri never challenged - because she'd then be in the same pickle she's worked to avoid through abatement - Kaine never had to provide any evidence to support his allegations.

And since the RO was granted before Terri ever knew she was going to be slapped by one, and once served spent time getting a divorce attorney and a criminal attorney, it could be reasoned that she did not challenge the RO was on the advice of her attorneys, for reasons yet to be reasonably explained, outside of constitutional rights violations this act seems to have perpetrated on Terri and her daughter.

 

[tlcya]

allegation = enough to be granted TRO
respondent can then refute said allegation
Judge would then determine whether there were suffiecient evidence to grant a more permanent RO.

In this instance, due to ongoing criminal matters and on advice of counsel, respondent did not refute the allegations used in order to obtain RO.

 

[Kat010]

(clip)
I am "fired up" on this topic....even more so... than on the topic of Terri's friend Dee laughing on her blog about abusing an animal in her care. My husband and I travel frequently for a variety of reasons. I am as scrupulous at checking out who cares for our dogs as I was once for our kids. They (OUR PETS) can't tell me, can they, if they are being neglected or hurt? I dread just such a person as Terri's friend Dede...who not only abuses the dog but sees humor in its pain. I was stunned by reading that blog post here.

(clip)



We discussed the blog and it is linked on this thread right here on WS.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...-to-go-sideways.html&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Huh? When I clicked your link led me right back to this page. But when I quoted you and could see the whole URL, then there's a link to cached material. Doesn't the use of cached material mean that the original has been removed from public use on the web? If so, wasn't there a mod ruling that we can't use a) non-MSM blog-style links and/or b) material that no longer is available to the public? I seem to recall that coming up in the discussions about Michael Cook's past, as alleged by his wife on her blog.

Mod! Advice please! And if you have any chocolate, share that too, please. TIA.

 

[tlcya]

Indeed.

You did not address the question in my post, however. If you were in Kaine's position, given what information you have been given by LE, would you want to hand your child over to Terri?

All I'm saying is, right, wrong or indifferent, I cannot fault Kaine for the actions he has taken.

I don't think anyone here can bleu.

 

[Donjeta]

http://www.katu.com/news/local/104507829.html

Terri Horman has been a primary focus in the search for her stepson, Kyron Horman, who went missing June 4th. Terri Horman was the last person to see Kyron when she dropped him off at Skyline Elementary School for classes. Minutes later, he was marked absent for his first class. He has not been seen since.

He was marked absent minutes after Terri last saw him? So he wasn't there for the chaperoned tours? Or does this mean, like, 75 minutes later at 10 am?

 

[SurfieTX]

Believe it or not, you're wrong. the way the process works, the judge grants a temporary restraining order based solely on the allegations of the person requesting it. No proof has to be provided unless/until the other party challenges. Since Terri never challenged - because she'd then be in the same pickle she's worked to avoid through abatement - Kaine never had to provide any evidence to support his allegations.

I had considered that possibility, but at that time, how did anyone know she wouldn't challenge? Was the RO being used as a litmus test and/or a lawyer's game of chicken?

 

[gardeness]

BBM

Terri made the decision not to fight the RO.

I disagree--I think her attorneys were not going to fight it until they received equal information and were able to depose the LS, in which LE refused to assist. I base this on Bunch's words from yesterday: Peter Bunch said he's asked for Terri Horman calls to 9-1-1, back to Dec 26th [Note: the Decemeber request my have been mispoken]. But was denied by Sheriff's office saying it's part of "ongoing Investigation." He's tried to serve the landscaper, Rudy Sanchez with subpoena for deposition, but prosecutors wouldn't give him contact information because of the "ongoing investigation."

I cannot imagine an attorney going into an RO hearing unprepared.

source link: http://www.katu.com/news/local/104507829.html

 

[Kat010]

Huh? When I clicked your link led me right back to this page. But when I quoted you and could see the whole URL, then there's a link to cached material. Doesn't the use of cached material mean that the original has been removed from public use on the web? If so, wasn't there a mod ruling that we can't use a) non-MSM blog-style links and/or b) material that no longer is available to the public? I seem to recall that coming up in the discussions about Michael Cook's past, as alleged by his wife on her blog.

Mod! Advice please! And if you have any chocolate, share that too, please. TIA.

p.s. When I used the cached reference to see what Google calls "the current page"--that reference was from June--I received this message: "The blog you were looking for was not found. If you are the owner of this blog, please sign in."

So I'd guess that material isn't available.

 

[desquire]

Terri made the decision not to fight the RO.

And it was a smart decision IMO. If she were my client I would have advised her to do the same thing. The restraining order is a temporary situation that will be erased when custody is ultimately decided in the divorce proceeding. By fighting it she exponentially increases the chances that she'll be tried and convicted in Kyron's case, guilty or not. She has to weigh a temporary separation against increasing the risk of a lifetime's separation. Emotionally a tough decision, rationally a no-brainer.

 

[SacreBleu]

perhaps! I was only addressing a minimizing of the memorandum as having been written by a legal aide. It seemed as though that was supposed to make the document less effective, when in fact it proved extremely effective indeed!

I simply said that it was my opinion that it was written by a legal aide. I made no indication, either positive or negative, of my opinion of the memo. Any minimizing was done at the reader's level.

 

[liz b.]

And according to her attorney, her child needs to see her, given that Terri was K's primary caregiver and having her removed from K's life was detrimental to the best interests of K.

I've always thought that KH should offer some strictly supervised visits... Have a veteran SW from DSHS monitor such visits.... Or LE. MOO

 

[stmarysmead]

Huh? When I clicked your link led me right back to this page. But when I quoted you and could see the whole URL, then there's a link to cached material. Doesn't the use of cached material mean that the original has been removed from public use on the web? If so, wasn't there a mod ruling that we can't use a) non-MSM blog-style links and/or b) material that no longer is available to the public? I seem to recall that coming up in the discussions about Michael Cook's past, as alleged by his wife on her blog.

Mod! Advice please! And if you have any chocolate, share that too, please. TIA.

LOL! I caught that too. I do have chocolate but it's low carb...but you should have it for catching my erroneous link.

Here's the right stuff:

"We discussed the blog and it is linked on this thread right here on WS.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=us


http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...de+blog&page=6

"A Specific Tool" thread.

 

[SacreBleu]

And it was a smart decision IMO. If she were my client I would have advised her to do the same thing. The restraining order is a temporary situation that will be erased when custody is ultimately decided in the divorce proceeding. By fighting it she exponentially increases the chances that she'll be tried and convicted in Kyron's case, guilty or not. She has to weigh a temporary separation against increasing the risk of a lifetime's separation. Emotionally a tough decision, rationally a no-brainer.

My interest is piqued. Please explain further.

 

[Kat010]

Indeed.

You did not address the question in my post, however. If you were in Kaine's position, given what information you have been given by LE, would you want to hand your child over to Terri?

All I'm saying is, right, wrong or indifferent, I cannot fault Kaine for the actions he has taken.

bbm

I've only read one court document from yesterday, and maybe another one has been posted. I got up late this morning!

But so far, I haven't seen a request to "hand your child over" from TH or her attorney.

So, they've filed a court document re: the RO and access to baby K? Are they asking for shared custody or what? Inquiring minds want to know!