almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
|
|
Wow. Was just going through my PMs and deleting old messages so I don't get a "full" box. I ran across an old conversation between Relayer and I. He was doing some kind of response to something. Here's one part of what I said:
_____________
I would avoid finger pointing and blaming. You said she went on a smear campaign, or something to that effect, yet this sounds like you're trying to smear her back. I'd stick solely to facts and keep them short and sweet.
I would not say your allegations were "limited to two police reports". I'd say your allegations were upheld in the police reports attached in exhibit __.
I would not state you weren't a threat and she outweighed you, but that you could NOT have been violent against her as at the time you were hospitalized for a serious illness, had lost a massive amount of weight, was hooked up to the PICC, etc. I wouldn't even say her OP was granted, just that she petitioned for an OP without merit due to those circumstances. If she fails to tell the court it was granted and the judge doesn't think to ask, it may slip through. Being granted though, the judge may feel there was more to it or that it would never have been granted.
Sentences like: In addition, Respondent failed to follow through on mediation and was diverting resources away from the children to satisfy her desire for to continue her clear pattern of abuse and control over me and the Respondent succeeded in that goal.
Finger pointing. I'd stop at: In addition, Respondent failed to follow through on mediation and was diverting resources away from the children.
_____________
Ok, so just had a pre-hearing meet with my lawyer yesterday and took in my responses to a list of my STBX's demands. Lawyer called in his secretary and asked her to remove any editorializing and just leave only the basic response. LOL I didn't realize I'd editorialized it, but sometimes you just get too close to the subject.
--------------------
Char Fox
|
preemiemom
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 01/17/07
Posts: 19391
|
|
[quote] I didn't realize I'd editorialized it, but sometimes you just get too close to the subject. [/quote]
----------->> I had to draft something recently as well (may or may not be using it). Anyway, I have a 6 page.. heavily editorialed version. Then..sat on it, for about a week or so. Took the heavily editorialized version, and chopped it. Down to just about 2 1/2 pages.
I kept the 6 page version for my lawyer's eyes only. So she has ALL the nitty gritty detail, she can read it in 10 minutes versus spending an hour with me talking about it. And the 3 page version is suitable for court (with maybe still a few minor revisions.. it might still be a little editorialized but if so, not much).
The first version? Helps me get past all "the stuff" and get to what ultimately became the 2 1/2 page version.
Try that for the future.. a draft version that you have that is yours.. it's not worthless or anything.. helps you remember what you want to say/what you want to get across, even if ONLY to your counsel. The other, is good for actual usage.
|
|
0 registered and 12 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: dsAdmin
Print Topic
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is disabled
|
Rating:
Topic views: 1699
|
|
|
|
|
|
UBB.threads™ 6.5.1.1
|
Easily Connect With a Lawyer or Mediator
Have Divorce Professionals from Your Area Contact You!
|
|
|
|
|
The information contained on this page is not to be considered legal advice.
A local counsel or professional should always be consulted in regards to any legal matters.
"a passion for a better divorce℠" - established in 1996
© 1996 - 2013 Divorce Source, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
