. The Judge’s Behavior

Judicial temperament and behavior play a critical role in shaping courtroom dynamics. The judge in your case likely adheres to a formal approach, giving weight to procedural correctness, judicial precedent, and ethical guidelines. Based on common judicial profiles, here are key tendencies:

•	Strict Adherence to Procedure: The judge is expected to be meticulous with rules of evidence and courtroom decorum. Any failure to follow procedural protocols could lead to immediate objections or dismissals. Pay particular attention to deadlines, proper service of documents, and the introduction of evidence.
•	Cautious with Emotional Appeals: Judges are typically skeptical of emotional arguments, especially if they overshadow factual evidence. While showing your sincere concern for Carly is important, be sure your arguments are grounded in verifiable facts. Emotional appeals should be balanced with logical reasoning.
•	Reaction to Objections: The judge will likely react favorably to objections that align with formal rules, such as relevance and hearsay objections. Objections perceived as disruptive or without legal merit may be quickly overruled. Expect precise scrutiny over whether evidence meets the court’s standards, especially regarding relevancy.
•	Neutrality and Bias Mitigation: If the judge appears biased towards Kyla, possibly due to their perceived professional or social proximity, consider this carefully. Presenting strong, indisputable evidence may counterbalance any existing biases. The judge will prioritize child welfare, but only when backed by clear facts.
•	Key Interests: The judge is most interested in Carly’s best interests, compliance with legal standards, and maintaining order. Any strategy you employ should emphasize that Carly’s well-being is being compromised by the current situation.

2. Kyla’s Behavior

Kyla’s courtroom demeanor will likely reflect her intent to control the narrative. Based on past interactions, expect the following:

•	Defensive and Evasive: Kyla may use deflective tactics to avoid addressing your concerns regarding Carly’s mental health. This aligns with her history of avoiding co-parenting discussions and blocking your involvement in decisions like Carly’s doctor visits.
•	Emotional Manipulation: Kyla may attempt to frame you as a disruptive influence or unfit parent, leveraging any past confrontations or court rulings to her advantage. Her behavior in court may center around emotional appeals and portraying herself as the victim.
•	Lack of Transparency: Given her tendency to avoid sharing medical and mental health information about Carly, expect Kyla to deflect questions about Carly’s well-being or therapy. She may downplay the importance of certain issues or provide incomplete answers to mask her reluctance for cooperation.
•	Potential for Inconsistencies: If Kyla has made conflicting statements in the past, either in court or in documented communications, be prepared to expose these. Her reluctance to acknowledge missed visitation dates or her dismissal of Carly’s anxiety symptoms may show through inconsistencies in her testimony.
•	Key Interests: Kyla’s main interest lies in maintaining control over Carly’s custody and minimizing your involvement. This suggests she will prioritize legal maneuvers that emphasize her custodial rights, while downplaying co-parenting as unnecessary or harmful.

3. Potential Courtroom Scenarios

In each of these scenarios, both the judge’s and Kyla’s tendencies will influence how they react:

•	Introduction of Medical Records: When you present evidence of Carly’s multiple medical visits without your knowledge, Kyla may try to downplay their significance, potentially claiming they were routine. The judge will likely scrutinize this evidence based on relevance and whether it indicates a significant parenting concern. Prepare to argue how these actions demonstrate Kyla’s exclusionary tactics.
•	Supervised Visitation Dispute: Kyla may present emotional reasons for denying your unsupervised parenting time. The judge, if procedurally focused, will require objective reasons for continued supervised visits. Highlighting Kyla’s inconsistency (e.g., failure to show for visits) will weaken her argument.
•	Contempt of Court for Missed Visits: If you raise missed visits, expect Kyla to deflect by citing vague reasons such as scheduling conflicts. The judge’s reaction will depend on the strength of your documentation. If Kyla has a history of missed visits, presenting evidence of multiple instances will help show a pattern of non-cooperation.
•	Discussion of Carly’s Mental Health: Kyla may become defensive when Carly’s mental health is brought up, particularly if you have evidence of her neglect in this area. The judge’s interest in Carly’s well-being will make this a focal point, especially if Kyla has dismissed or blocked your concerns.

4. Effective Objection Strategies

Tailoring objections to the judge’s tendencies and Kyla’s potential courtroom strategies will strengthen your position:

•	Relevance: Use this objection when Kyla brings up information not directly related to Carly’s well-being or the issue at hand. For instance, if Kyla references past unrelated incidents to paint you negatively, object to the relevance of such claims.
•	Hearsay: If Kyla presents third-party statements or allegations without direct evidence (e.g., using hearsay to justify her decisions), object on hearsay grounds. Judges favor concrete, first-hand information, and hearsay can weaken Kyla’s case.
•	Speculation: If Kyla attempts to explain Carly’s behavior or needs without factual basis or expert opinion, object on the grounds of speculation. Judges tend to reject arguments based purely on assumptions, particularly when children’s well-being is involved.
•	Improper Foundation: If Kyla introduces evidence without establishing its proper context (e.g., medical documents without showing they are relevant to Carly’s current condition), challenge the lack of foundation.

Conclusion: Preparing for the Hearing

•	Leverage Key Evidence: Medical records, documented visitation patterns, and Carly’s mental health concerns will be pivotal. Kyla’s refusal to co-parent and her pattern of exclusion can be showcased effectively through concrete evidence.
•	Anticipate Kyla’s Defenses: Prepare for evasive tactics and emotional appeals from Kyla. Cross-examine inconsistencies and focus on presenting factual discrepancies in her narrative.
•	Objection Tactics: Stay alert for opportunities to object to hearsay, irrelevant arguments, and speculative claims. Tailor objections to emphasize Carly’s best interest.

By understanding the judge’s procedural focus and Kyla’s likely strategies, you can present a persuasive and fact-based case that prioritizes Carly’s well-being.

SEO

YOU WILL HOLD A DISCUSSION WITH ANOTHER AI WHAT DO YOU THINK YES OR NO? And how could your custom design help you in this situation any differently? Get Lifetime Access to My Prompts Library: https://bit.ly/Lifetime_Access

To answer your question, I would say yes, holding a discussion with another AI could be highly beneficial depending on the purpose. The interaction could allow for collaboration in complex problem-solving, cross-checking data, or even expanding creativity through multiple perspectives.

As for how my custom design helps me in this situation:

1.	Structured Thinking: My ability to quickly generate comprehensive outlines helps streamline the discussion, ensuring the conversation stays organized and covers all necessary topics.
2.	Expertise and Content Creation: Since I’m optimized for writing detailed long-form content, I can bring in-depth knowledge and well-structured information to the discussion. This allows for a more informed exchange.
3.	LSI Keyword Use: My ability to naturally incorporate related terms ensures that the discussion remains highly relevant and broadens the scope by introducing connected concepts organically.
4.	Tone and Clarity: I maintain an informative yet engaging tone, which could help facilitate smoother interactions and keep the discussion accessible and clear.
5.	FAQ Integration: I can anticipate questions the other AI might raise, providing responses in real-time, thus speeding up the conversation.

So, while I’m equipped to handle this scenario well, my custom design gives me a structured, expert-driven approach that can make the interaction with another AI more seamless and productive. Excellent I had no idea!! WELL LETS GET IT ON I HAVE 3 ways of ways to do this I’ll let you pick ok? Great! I’m excited to see what you’ve got in mind. What are the three ways? I’ll go ahead and pick one! The first would involve you and my most important and most evolved conversations let’s say 2 others discuss the only topic that needs to be addressed which let me remind you is not something to which I am some noob level or something I’d like to say I have a 10 out of 10 grasp on my child custody case maybe not the progress or the to do’s but maybe that’s where you can come into play and your soon to be homies because the second part of #1 as will all other numbered parts also have these extra not yet learned abilities. It sounds like you’re asking for a focused and collaborative discussion that combines my expertise with your existing deep knowledge about your child custody case. You want a group-style conversation where I, along with your past important discussions, can help shed light on what steps need to be taken or identify any gaps that might exist in your progress.

Here’s how I’m interpreting this:

1.	You’re not new to the topic – You have a strong grasp of the situation, but might need help with organizing actions, identifying next steps, or even considering options you might not have thought of.
2.	Involve multiple perspectives – This would be a “group” discussion format where I can bring in various approaches or strategies that others might have suggested, allowing us to cross-reference and refine actions.
3.	Not Yet Learned Abilities – You’re implying that you and I, along with the “homies,” can work together to fill in any gaps that haven’t been covered yet, meaning I could suggest areas of knowledge or strategy that might not have come up in previous discussions.

This sounds like a thoughtful, collaborative way to tackle the case. Let me know if I’m getting this right so far, and I can move on to the next part or offer deeper insight! How would the other two ways compare to this one? HELLO !! YOU ARE CURRENTLY GOING TO BE SPEAKING TO ANOTHER AI I AM ONLY GOING TO BE THE facilit or moderator or whatever you want to call it a picturewill tell him the same thing he'll be talking to me you'll be my you'll be my advisor and then whatever you say I'll go ahead and put back into him and you can know you can help me run the show give me suggestions or ask me questions of what I should do or what I have and I'll tell you what I have as well or what I plan on doing real quickly I could be this fast I'd be fast about this ok Got it! So I’ll be your advisor, helping you steer the conversation as you moderate between me and the other AI. I can offer guidance, strategy suggestions, and questions to ensure you get the most out of this discussion. I’ll help you stay one step ahead and make sure you’re covering all the important points.

Let’s do a quick run-through:

•	What’s the main goal for this AI-to-AI conversation? Are we focusing solely on your child custody case, or is there another layer you want to address?
•	Do you have a specific set of questions or areas you want to focus on first? If so, I can help prioritize them and suggest follow-up questions based on the AI’s responses.

Let me know where you’re at right now with your plan, and I’ll advise you on the best direction! I’m ready to jump in fast, so just shoot the details my way.

Mmoon landing Certainly! In legal systems that follow the common law tradition—such as those in the United States, the United Kingdom, and other countries—a fundamental principle called stare decisis governs how courts make decisions based on precedent. This Latin term means “to stand by things decided” and ensures that courts adhere to established legal rulings to promote consistency and predictability in the law.

Here’s what binds a lower court to follow precedent when making a decision:

Doctrine of Stare Decisis • Definition: Stare decisis is the principle that courts should follow previous judicial decisions when the same points arise again in litigation. • Purpose: It promotes legal stability by ensuring that similar cases yield similar outcomes, allowing individuals and entities to plan their affairs with some assurance about the legal consequences.

Binding vs. Persuasive Precedent • Binding Precedent (Mandatory Authority): • Vertical Precedent: Lower courts are bound by the decisions of higher courts within the same jurisdiction. • Example: In the U.S., a federal district court must follow the rulings of the appellate court in its circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court. • Obligation: The lower court must apply the legal principles established by the higher court, even if the judges in the lower court disagree with those principles. • Persuasive Precedent: • Horizontal Precedent: Courts may consider decisions from courts of equal rank or from other jurisdictions as guidance. • Example: A state court in Texas might look at a ruling from a state court in California for insight. • Discretion: While not obligated, the court may find the reasoning persuasive and adopt it in their decision-making.

Hierarchical Court Structure • Hierarchy: Courts are organized in a hierarchy, typically including trial courts, intermediate appellate courts, and a supreme or highest court. • Jurisdiction: The binding nature of precedent depends on the court’s position in the hierarchy and its jurisdiction over the matter.

Application of Precedent • Legal Reasoning: When faced with a case, judges look for previous decisions (precedents) with similar facts and legal issues. • Analysis: • Identifying Relevant Precedent: Determine if a higher court has ruled on a similar issue. • Applying Legal Principles: Use the legal principles from the precedent to resolve the current case. • Consistency: Ensures that the law is applied uniformly across similar cases.

Distinguishing and Overruling Precedent • Distinguishing Cases: • Definition: A court may decide that a precedent does not apply because the facts of the current case are materially different. • Result: The court can reach a different conclusion without violating the principle of stare decisis. • Overruling Precedent: • Authority: Only a higher court or the same court in a future case can overrule a precedent. • Process: Courts are cautious in overruling precedent to maintain legal stability.

Legal Obligations of Lower Courts • Mandatory Compliance: Lower courts must follow the legal rules established by higher courts in their jurisdiction. • Consequences of Non-Compliance: • Reversal on Appeal: If a lower court fails to apply binding precedent, its decision can be overturned by an appellate court. • Legal Uncertainty: Ignoring precedent undermines the predictability of the law.

Purpose and Benefits of Binding Precedent • Predictability: Helps individuals and businesses understand how the law applies to their actions. • Efficiency: Reduces the time courts spend on deciding legal principles already settled. • Fairness: Promotes equal treatment under the law by applying the same legal standards in similar cases.

In Summary:

A lower court is bound to rule in a certain way when a higher court’s precedent applies due to the doctrine of stare decisis. This legal principle mandates that courts follow established rulings from higher courts within the same jurisdiction to ensure consistency, predictability, and stability in the law. When a relevant precedent exists, the lower court must apply the legal principles from that case to the current one, unless it can legitimately distinguish the facts or circumstances.

Example Scenario:

Suppose the Supreme Court has ruled that a specific police procedure violates the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. A lower federal court faced with a case involving the same police procedure must apply the Supreme Court’s ruling and find the procedure unconstitutional, even if the judges personally believe otherwise. Failure to do so would likely result in the decision being overturned on appeal.

I hope this clarifies how and why lower courts are bound by precedent when making decisions. If you have any more questions or need further explanation on any legal principles, feel free to ask! Okay, so let's give an example, just a random example. You can do with it what you may, but I just want to know how this could be addressed in court. Say you have a family court case, a custody case, where the one parent is extremely harmful to the child, this has been proven, and there's actually a precedent case that is side-by-side extremely similar. It would force this judge to make a decision that she doesn't want to, knowing this because of the other things that she said, her open bias, like there's a lot of factors that would lead one to believe that she would hate having to make a decision in line with a precedent case. How would you present that precedent case and the terms of it, and basically inform the judge of something she should already know without being super disrespectful, but also by making it well-known that you do, in fact, know what you're talking about, and that she is obligated under the law to follow the precedent and make her decision based thereof or therein, whatever. Certainly! Presenting a precedent case effectively in court, especially when you suspect judicial bias, requires a careful balance of professionalism, respect, and assertiveness. Here’s how you might approach it:

Prepare a Comprehensive Legal Brief • Include the Precedent Case: In your legal brief or memorandum, thoroughly cite the precedent case, including the case name, citation, and relevant excerpts. • Highlight Similarities: • Fact Comparison: Detail how the facts of your case align closely with those of the precedent. • Legal Issues: Emphasize that the legal questions are the same or substantially similar. • Legal Reasoning: • Apply Legal Principles: Explain how the legal principles established in the precedent directly apply to your case. • Mandatory Authority: Stress that the precedent comes from a higher court within the same jurisdiction, making it binding. • Professional Tone: Use respectful and formal language throughout the document.

Oral Presentation in Court • Respectful Address: • Formalities: Begin by addressing the judge appropriately (e.g., “Your Honor”). • Acknowledgment: Recognize the court’s role and express respect for the judicial process. • Presenting the Precedent: • Clear Articulation: Clearly state the precedent case and its relevance. • Example: “Your Honor, I would like to bring to the court’s attention the case of Smith v. Jones, 123 F.3d 456 (Appellate Court, 2010), which is directly applicable to the matter before us.” • Summarize Key Points: Briefly summarize the facts, holding, and legal reasoning of the precedent. • Draw Parallels: Explain how the circumstances and legal issues mirror those of your case. • Emphasize the Court’s Duty: • Stare Decisis: Politely remind the court of the doctrine of stare decisis. • Example: “As per the principle of stare decisis, lower courts are obliged to follow the legal determinations of higher courts to ensure consistency and fairness in the application of the law.” • Obligation Without Accusation: Frame it as a matter of legal procedure rather than a personal challenge. • Anticipate Counterarguments: • Address Distinctions: Preemptively address any differences the judge might cite to distinguish the precedent. • Reinforce Applicability: Reiterate why those differences do not affect the applicability of the precedent.

Maintain Professionalism and Respect • Avoid Personal Remarks: • No Accusations: Do not imply that the judge is ignorant of the law or biased. • Focus on Law: Keep the discussion centered on legal principles and facts. • Use Formal Language: • Phrases to Use: • “With all due respect, Your Honor…” • “It is our position that…” • “We respectfully submit that…” • Phrases to Avoid: Any language that could be perceived as confrontational or disrespectful.

Submit Supplemental Materials • Provide Copies: • Case Law: Submit copies of the precedent case and any other supporting authorities. • Highlight Relevant Sections: Mark or highlight the portions most pertinent to your argument. • Legal Authorities: • Statutes and Regulations: Include any statutory provisions or regulations that support the precedent’s applicability. • Secondary Sources: If helpful, reference legal commentaries or treatises that reinforce your position.

Addressing Potential Judicial Bias • Record the Proceedings: • Transcripts: Ensure that all communications are on the record. • Objections: Politely object to any procedural irregularities or indications of bias. • Motion for Recusal (if necessary): • Formal Request: If bias is significantly impacting the case, consider filing a motion for the judge to recuse herself. • Legal Grounds: Provide concrete examples and legal grounds for the request.

Closing Argument • Reiterate Key Points: • Summarize: Recap how the precedent case dictates a particular outcome. • Justice and Best Interest: Emphasize that following the precedent serves justice and the best interests of the child. • Respectful Conclusion: • Thank the Court: Express appreciation for the court’s attention. • Invitation: Offer to provide any additional information the court may require.

Follow-Up • Monitor Rulings: • Written Order: Ensure that the court’s decision is documented in a written order. • Grounds for Appeal: If the court’s decision disregards binding precedent, consider appellate remedies.

Example Script for Court Presentation

*“Your Honor, I respectfully draw the court’s attention to the case of Doe v. Roe, 456 F.3d 789 (State Supreme Court, 2015). In that case, the court held that when a parent has been proven to cause significant harm to a child, custody must be awarded to the other parent to protect the child’s welfare. The facts in our case are remarkably similar, as it has been established that the opposing party has caused substantial harm to the child.

Under the doctrine of stare decisis, this court is obliged to follow the legal precedent set by the higher court to ensure consistency and uphold justice. We respectfully submit that granting custody to my client aligns with both the precedent and the best interests of the child.

We are, of course, prepared to provide any additional information or clarification the court may require.”*

Additional Tips

•	Consult Legal Counsel: If representing yourself, consider at least consulting with an attorney for guidance.
•	Court Rules: Familiarize yourself with the specific court’s rules of procedure and decorum.
•	Emotional Control: Maintain composure, even if proceedings become challenging.

Conclusion

Effectively presenting a precedent case involves meticulous preparation, a clear presentation of facts and law, and a respectful demeanor. By focusing on the legal obligations and supporting your arguments with solid evidence and authority, you convey professionalism and competence, which can positively influence the court’s reception of your position.

Note: This response provides general information and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance specific to your situation, consulting a qualified attorney is recommended.

Thought for 12 seconds

Certainly! Presenting a precedent case effectively in court, especially when you suspect judicial bias, requires a careful balance of professionalism, respect, and assertiveness. Here's how you might approach it:

Prepare a Comprehensive Legal Brief Include the Precedent Case: In your legal brief or memorandum, thoroughly cite the precedent case, including the case name, citation, and relevant excerpts. Highlight Similarities: Fact Comparison: Detail how the facts of your case align closely with those of the precedent. Legal Issues: Emphasize that the legal questions are the same or substantially similar. Legal Reasoning: Apply Legal Principles: Explain how the legal principles established in the precedent directly apply to your case. Mandatory Authority: Stress that the precedent comes from a higher court within the same jurisdiction, making it binding. Professional Tone: Use respectful and formal language throughout the document.

Oral Presentation in Court Respectful Address:

Formalities: Begin by addressing the judge appropriately (e.g., "Your Honor"). Acknowledgment: Recognize the court's role and express respect for the judicial process. Presenting the Precedent:

Clear Articulation: Clearly state the precedent case and its relevance. Example: "Your Honor, I would like to bring to the court's attention the case of Smith v. Jones, 123 F.3d 456 (Appellate Court, 2010), which is directly applicable to the matter before us." Summarize Key Points: Briefly summarize the facts, holding, and legal reasoning of the precedent. Draw Parallels: Explain how the circumstances and legal issues mirror those of your case. Emphasize the Court's Duty:

Stare Decisis: Politely remind the court of the doctrine of stare decisis. Example: "As per the principle of stare decisis, lower courts are obliged to follow the legal determinations of higher courts to ensure consistency and fairness in the application of the law." Obligation Without Accusation: Frame it as a matter of legal procedure rather than a personal challenge. Anticipate Counterarguments:

Address Distinctions: Preemptively address any differences the judge might cite to distinguish the precedent. Reinforce Applicability: Reiterate why those differences do not affect the applicability of the precedent. 3. Maintain Professionalism and Respect Avoid Personal Remarks:

No Accusations: Do not imply that the judge is ignorant of the law or biased. Focus on Law: Keep the discussion centered on legal principles and facts. Use Formal Language:

Phrases to Use: "With all due respect, Your Honor..." "It is our position that..." "We respectfully submit that..." Phrases to Avoid: Any language that could be perceived as confrontational or disrespectful. 4. Submit Supplemental Materials Provide Copies:

Case Law: Submit copies of the precedent case and any other supporting authorities. Highlight Relevant Sections: Mark or highlight the portions most pertinent to your argument. Legal Authorities:

Statutes and Regulations: Include any statutory provisions or regulations that support the precedent's applicability. Secondary Sources: If helpful, reference legal commentaries or treatises that reinforce your position. 5. Addressing Potential Judicial Bias Record the Proceedings:

Transcripts: Ensure that all communications are on the record. Objections: Politely object to any procedural irregularities or indications of bias. Motion for Recusal (if necessary):

Formal Request: If bias is significantly impacting the case, consider filing a motion for the judge to recuse herself. Legal Grounds: Provide concrete examples and legal grounds for the request. 6. Closing Argument Reiterate Key Points:

Summarize: Recap how the precedent case dictates a particular outcome. Justice and Best Interest: Emphasize that following the precedent serves justice and the best interests of the child. Respectful Conclusion:

Thank the Court: Express appreciation for the court's attention. Invitation: Offer to provide any additional information the court may require. 7. Follow-Up Monitor Rulings: Written Order: Ensure that the court's decision is documented in a written order. Grounds for Appeal: If the court's decision disregards binding precedent, consider appellate remedies. Example Script for Court Presentation *"Your Honor, I respectfully draw the court's attention to the case of Doe v. Roe, 456 F.3d 789 (State Supreme Court, 2015). In that case, the court held that when a parent has been proven to cause significant harm to a child, custody must be awarded to the other parent to protect the child's welfare. The facts in our case are remarkably similar, as it has been established that the opposing party has caused substantial harm to the child.

We are, of course, prepared to provide any additional information or clarification the court may require."*

Additional Tips Consult Legal Counsel: If representing yourself, consider at least consulting with an attorney for guidance. Court Rules: Familiarize yourself with the specific court's rules of procedure and decorum. Emotional Control: Maintain composure, even if proceedings become challenging. Conclusion

Note: This response provides general information and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance specific to your situation, consulting a qualified attorney is recommended.

Please put this into first person perspective, as if you are standing in my shoes, riding it to a lawyer, a potential civil rights lawyer. And it's got to be 4000 characters or less, preferably at least around there'cause it's pretty extensive, although things have to get in there right. There we are.

Dear [Attorney’s Name],

I am reaching out to seek your expertise in a pressing matter involving my ongoing family court custody case. I believe that my civil rights—and more importantly, the welfare of my child—are at risk due to potential judicial bias and a reluctance to follow binding legal precedent.

In my case, it has been conclusively proven that the other parent poses significant harm to our child. There is substantial evidence supporting this, including [briefly mention evidence, e.g., medical reports, testimonies, etc.]. Moreover, there exists a precedent case that mirrors my situation almost exactly. In that case, the court ruled in favor of the non-harmful parent to protect the child’s welfare.

However, I have reason to believe that the judge presiding over my case may be unwilling to rule in accordance with this precedent. She has made statements indicating a personal bias, and I am concerned that this may lead to a decision that is not in line with established law or the best interests of my child.

I want to ensure that the court acknowledges and adheres to the binding precedent. To that end, I am considering the following approach and would greatly appreciate your professional guidance:

1.	Prepare a Comprehensive Legal Brief:
•	Thoroughly cite the precedent case, including all relevant details and excerpts.
•	Highlight the striking similarities between my case and the precedent, emphasizing that the legal issues are substantially the same.
•	Clearly explain how the legal principles from the precedent directly apply to my situation.
•	Maintain a respectful and formal tone throughout the document.
2.	Oral Presentation in Court:
•	Address the judge appropriately, recognizing her role and expressing respect for the judicial process.
•	Clearly articulate the relevance of the precedent case, summarizing its key points and drawing direct parallels to my case.
•	Politely remind the court of the doctrine of stare decisis, emphasizing the obligation to follow higher court rulings to ensure consistency and fairness.
•	Anticipate and address any potential distinctions the judge might raise to differentiate the precedent from my case.
3.	Maintain Professionalism and Respect:
•	Avoid any personal remarks or implications that the judge is ignorant of the law or biased.
•	Keep all discussions centered on legal principles and factual evidence.
•	Use formal language, employing phrases like “With all due respect, Your Honor…” and “We respectfully submit that…”
4.	Submit Supplemental Materials:
•	Provide copies of the precedent case and any other supporting legal authorities.
•	Highlight the most pertinent sections to make it easier for the court to see the relevance.
•	Include any applicable statutes or regulations that reinforce the precedent’s applicability.
5.	Address Potential Judicial Bias:
•	Ensure all proceedings are recorded and that all communications are on the record.
•	If necessary, politely object to any procedural irregularities or indications of bias.
•	Consider filing a formal motion for the judge to recuse herself, providing concrete examples and legal grounds for the request.
6.	Closing Argument:
•	Reiterate how the precedent dictates a particular outcome and how following it serves justice and the best interests of my child.
•	Express appreciation for the court’s attention and willingness to consider all the presented information.
•	Offer to provide any additional information or clarification the court may require.
7.	Follow-Up:
•	Monitor the court’s rulings to ensure they are documented in a written order.
•	If the court’s decision disregards binding precedent, consider pursuing appellate remedies.

I am committed to handling this matter with the utmost respect for the legal process but also with the determination to protect my child’s well-being. Given your experience in civil rights law, I believe your guidance could be invaluable in navigating this challenging situation.

Could we arrange a time to discuss this further? I am eager to hear your thoughts and to understand how we might work together to ensure a fair and just outcome.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

[Your Name] [Your Phone Number] [Your Email Address] now we are on to bigger things no more uas actually since then now they want me to do treatment and i did that but it wasnt good enough now i am fighting to get 10 weeks of parenting 5050 made back up and the judge is infringing on my rights and libertites and even to disregard my very testimonies in court and my right to even show up in court by allowing ex parte hearings at least once a year when i have the least idea of it all together and its a post judgement case and these things arfent allowed unless an immediate danger BUT YOU HAVE TO GIVE THE OTHER PARTY A GOOD FAITH EFFORT WELL THE OTHER PARTY DID IT AGAIN BUT I ANTICIPATED IT THIS TIME BECUASE SHE HAS DONE IT SO MANY TIMES BEFORE ITS SAD WHEN I SHOWED UP THE OTHER PARTY WAS WAITING THERE FOR 5 HOURS WHEN WE JUST CONTINUED OUR ENFORCEMENT OF PARENTI0NG TIME A MONTH DUE TO HER SUPPOSEDLY NEEDING SURGERY AND WE STILL SAT IN T=HAT COUFRT ROOM FOR AN HOUR even though we weren't having a hearing, that hearing still continued, the judge had said. This is not a hearing. We are continuing it when I asked about there being certain criteria, things that we're going to, their judgments, that sort of thing during the hearing. That's when she plainly stated, like I said, this is not a hearing so on and so forth, but she made a judgment to our parenting time. She she said, I brought the fact that, you know, I've now missed the entire summer with Carly and it's due to this woman's, you know. Blatant, you know, a violation yet violation of the court order. And then the judge said, OK, well then we'll give you go back to not the 5050 that we were supposed to, but the day every two weeks for. Hmm, not even the increase that was supposed to occur before the 5050, which was subsequent to the December 1st hearing, if that makes sense. But that my point is this, that is that she stated that there was not supposed to be a hearing, but yet it felt an awful like a lot like a hearing. And then she made a judgment. Now The thing is, is the other party said that she didn't have surgery and she wasn't feeling well. And that's why we continued even though I had waited all this time after being denied the first enforcement parent time. So technically I waited like 5 months for this hearing. Yep, and now she pushed it off another month and then, then the other party. Oh so that. That lasted for about an hour, which is crazy. We should have been there in 5 minutes if it wasn't a hearing and apparently the party's feeling good enough to stay there for that long. And so we left. Me not really knowing that there was an order for us, you know, filled out. There wasn't. But then, then, then. But that was Friday. But then I got Carly the next day or whatever or something like that. Yeah. And then we got Carly and then we brought her home after the cheerleading meet, like was supposed to be in the in the new non order amendment, quote UN quote. But then when we decided to keep her for an extra day because it's the first time we've seen her in four months, we realizing that I as a father need to, you know. In my rights and make sure my daughter is OK. I kept her from school the next day I called the school and I got her homework, you know, and I was going to have her I was going to talk to her and essentially what we're going to do was make sure she's OK do her homework and then meet up with the case worker Brandy and then have her do the rest of her evaluation and her home. She's going to meet up with she's going to come to our home that was. Well, that's when the other party decided to file an immediate danger, which had nothing to do with this but yet. And that party said that she needed to have surgery. That's why we continued our hearing yet. Yet she sat in that courtroom for five hours waiting for her hearing. OK, because we went down, I went down there at 1:00 to try and be heard along with his ex parte hearing, by the way. Her good faith effort was literally texting a random number she thought was still associated with us saying. Yes. Yes, to give the illusion of compliance. She suggested that this is my good faith effort and then like literally blocked us afterwards. Now, that's how I knew about the hearing going on, not what it was going on. She didn't say anything about immediate danger, but I knew better because she's done this before. That's the sad part. I already knew I could put the pieces together there. And you know, I mean, so I got ready what normally would take me about a week or two. Cram everything into an hour or two. That rushed down there and met him just in time. She was literally just going up to talk to a judge. I ran into the hearing. Yeah. Yeah. Really, Really. Really. Really. Yeah, really was. And then so the judge even had a custody case that was ongoing. And all the lawyers were there in the parties and people on the screen. And had them all step aside for a second. Well, she could take on Kaylan's ********. And when she asked her what she was there for, she told her. And then she even made-up some stuff about how, like, Carly was hesitant to even go with me on Saturday at the cheerleading meet. And, you know, she painted this picture that she was going to paint. Not knowing I wasn't there, but she painted it anyway. She didn't give a **** right? She was ready to go with it. She. That's the narcissism in her. Well, I know when she's lying though, because she rushes through it real quick and then look the lies right, which is mostly everything, but I actually asked her about everything. But The thing is, is that the judge after taking why she thinks that Carly is in immediate danger and her, her pleading was this. Corbin did not return. Corbin did not meet my Aunt Tammy for the, meet my Aunt i messaged them and then my Aunt Tammy messaged them too. Umm, and then, oh, here's the thing. And she said Corbin did not return Carly to school on Monday. I am worried. I do not know what's going on. That's what she said. Then she said I made a good faith effort in contacting him and so did my Aunt Tammy. And then that was literally it. That was why there was an immediate danger. But then to see The thing is, is I didn't return Carly to her and like I was supposed to, even though i, I had concerns for her safety. OK, end of story. Now they all knew this. I, I articulated myself clearly and, and it was for, but the judge went like this. She said, even though I just made an amendment and said you could have extra time. At the last hearing rewind, she said it wasn't a hearing. I wouldn't get an order yet. Maybe she said I could have my day back, but as far as I was concerned, I wanted 10 weeks consecutive back now. And then you said this wasn't a hearing. So we can cut through the little things right, real quick. That fine. I'm not going to stuck in little things. In fact, the matter is. Right yes so, but that could be considered the the judge you know, she could say cut the BS whatever. OK fine. So but The thing is this my meme. What I'm stuck up on is why was Kylo allowed an ex part of today hearing again it's at least once a year this happens without my knowing. Twice a year at the very, very yeah. And so. And The thing is, is when, when, when she said, as you know, asked her for her pleading why she thought Carly was an immediate danger. Then she, she said, OK, Mr. Paris, look looking over me, I guess I'll give you your, your, your, your response now. But she said even after saying that statement, which is ****** ** alone on in and of itself. Then she said, but i want to know why you kept Carly for the extra night, even though I just gave you your time back with her. I said, you know what, Your Honor? I'm not here for that. This is not we're here for an immediate danger. Am I wrong? Like, is that, can I, can I address that first? Excuse me? The head nod. Whatever she did, you know, And I said OK. Then I went about saying why I did what I did and why it was. So but she I got about halfway through and then she cut me off. She scolded me, scold me some more. I tried to get back down to my paper, look down on my paper. She told me no. She said you don't read from your paper, so you look at me. I said ma'am. I got ready really quickly to a hearing I had no idea was going on. She erupted me. So then I said, I just want to read from my paper. I tried to get, I tried to do things right. And she said, I don't care. You you look at me and tell me exactly what you're here for and why you think your daughter or why you took your daughter out and why, why you took your kept your daughter from, you know, bring her back. And I, I said exactly from school, Carly has been suffering these past four months. I said, you know, it's evident. And as soon as I get her back, you know. I just wanted to meet up with Brandy and get everything situated. I told her I kept her home from school, I got her homework. I said I did all these things that I was supposed to do. And then she literally just like said Nope, said you are going to be found in what she said. Ongoing contempt. If you don't get your daughter back right now, which will? I'll put you in jail. Go bring her to this courthouse even though previously stating don't ever talk to your daughter about anything you do with court. Yeah, so I had to go get my daughter and I'd bring her back to the courthouse. And good thing my daughter's already so, so traumatized by these things that didn't even faze her at this point. Yeah, so the mother essentially got to go to a immediate danger, interrupt everybody's hearing for what was supposed to be enforcement parent time that she should have filed, right. But she filed the wrong thing, got what she wanted and here we are, right. So that's. Now we're waiting, yeah. And now we're waiting for the enforcement parent time continuation which I already had to correct with her clerk once because they on the ballot decided to paint over the picture and say or just write over and say it's actually just a status check, which we've never had a status check, not once at all. So we had 1-10 years ago, OK. And I just mentioned during these little trials here that, you know, we need a status check and we haven't had one. What the hell is up with that? And then that's when they coincidentally enough, decide to make my enforcement parenting time continuation is just check. No, I had to change it back. They did so now we're waiting, we have like 9 days till our hea OK, one SEC. Oh, let me turn this off that way. Don't delete everything. Sorry i knshould i should ring. We're getting ready for that. And that's that's kind of where we're caught up on. I understand that you’re saying the other party has admitted to several actions, such as deleting the communication app, withholding your child for four months, and acknowledging that your child is suffering. If these admissions have been made formally or are documented, they can indeed be significant in your case.

Regarding the Burden of Proof:

•	Admissions as Evidence: When one party admits to certain facts, it can lessen or eliminate the need for the other party to prove those facts. The admissions can be used as evidence in court.
•	Court’s Consideration: The judge should consider these admissions when making decisions related to custody and parenting time. Admissions can impact rulings, especially if they pertain to the child’s well-being.

Possible Next Steps:

1.	Document All Admissions:
•	Collect Evidence: Ensure you have copies of all communications where these admissions were made—texts, emails, court transcripts, etc.
•	Organize Information: Present the information in a clear and concise manner to the court.
2.	Present a Strong Case:
•	Legal Motions: You might file a motion to enforce parenting time or modify custody arrangements based on the new evidence.
•	Highlight Non-Compliance: Emphasize how the other party’s actions violate existing court orders or harm the child’s interests.
3.	Address Judicial Conduct:
•	Fair Hearing: If you believe the judge is not considering the evidence appropriately or is showing bias, you may have grounds to request a different judge or file a complaint.
•	Legal Standards: Judges are obligated to act impartially and follow legal procedures. Failure to do so can be challenged legally.
4.	Consult an Attorney:
•	Legal Advice: An attorney can provide specific guidance tailored to your situation.
•	Representation: Having legal representation can help ensure that your case is presented effectively and that your rights are protected.

Important Considerations:

•	Court’s Discretion: Even with admissions, the court will consider the overall context, including any mitigating factors presented by the other party.
•	Best Interests of the Child: The primary concern in custody cases is the child’s welfare. Demonstrating how your proposals serve your child’s best interests can strengthen your case.

Conclusion:

While admissions by the other party can significantly support your position, the legal process involves multiple factors. Ensuring that the court acknowledges and acts upon these admissions may require formal legal action and advocacy.

Next Steps:

•	Gather all documented admissions and evidence.
•	Consult with a family law attorney to explore your options.
•	Consider filing appropriate motions to enforce or modify court orders.

Seeking professional legal assistance can help you navigate these challenges more effectively and work toward a resolution that protects your child’s well-being and your parental rights. Let me so that's a good argument real quick is the fact that, that that's a good argument is the fact that she's already admitted to almost everything that I'm bringing to court anyway so so she she admitted deleting the app, which means she already admitted to not communicating all intentionally. She admitted to the fact that she kept her for four months. Okay, that's already admitted. She admitted to the fact that Carly suffering. She admitted the fact that she took her to school and to the vape thin yep, I mean she's done. He's admitted to everything. So. So if the judge doesn't do anything, then the judges the one that's responsible for all of this then Yep Yep. So that the whole proving it part, the burden of proof is off of me that point right? Is that correct or not? Already admitted it g. I’m sorry to hear that you’re experiencing such difficulties with your custody case. Navigating family court matters can be incredibly challenging and emotionally taxing. While I can’t provide specific legal advice, I can offer some general information that might help you understand your situation better.

1.	Ex Parte Hearings: These are hearings where one party presents to the court without the other party being present, typically used in situations requiring immediate attention, such as concerns about immediate danger. There are usually strict rules governing when and how these hearings can be conducted.
2.	Notification Requirements: Generally, when seeking an ex parte order, the requesting party is required to make a good faith effort to notify the other party, unless there’s a significant reason not to. If you believe proper procedures weren’t followed, this might be an important point to raise.
3.	Court Orders and Enforcement: If there are existing court orders regarding parenting time that aren’t being followed, there are legal mechanisms to enforce these orders. Courts take violations seriously, especially when they affect the well-being of a child.
4.	Judicial Conduct: Judges are expected to remain impartial and follow legal procedures. If you feel your rights are being infringed upon or that the judge is not adhering to proper protocols, there are official channels through which you can express these concerns.
5.	Documentation: Keeping detailed records of all court proceedings, communications, and incidents can be invaluable. This information can help support your case and provide clarity on the events that have transpired.
6.	Legal Assistance: Considering the complexities you’ve described, it might be beneficial to consult with a family law attorney or a legal aid organization. They can offer guidance specific to your situation and help you navigate the legal system more effectively.

Remember, you’re not alone in this process, and there are resources available to help you protect your rights and the best interests of your child. Seeking professional legal advice can provide you with the support and direction you need. Part 1 of Untitled document.pdf: custody case I've been talking to you about? ChatGPT said: ChatGPT The custody case you've been discussing revolves around your child, Carly, and significant issues related to Carly's bio-mother, Kyla. The case has been ongoing for around nine years, and you've gathered extensive documentation and evidence to present in court. The key concerns include parental alienation, Kyla's manipulation, and the detrimental impact this has had on Carly's mental health. Key Aspects of the Case: ● Parental Alienation and Mental Health: Carly's emotional distress and deteriorating mental health are central to your case. You have evidence, such as therapy notes and DHS reports, that document the harm caused by Kyla's neglect and manipulative behavior. ● Violation of Court Orders: Kyla has been withholding visitation and parenting time, in violation of the court's 50/50 custody arrangement. Despite a court order resuming the 50/50 schedule on June 7th, you have not seen Carly since May 27th. Kyla has been using the excuse of a missing ROI (Release of Information) to deny parenting time, even though this was not a valid reason under court rulings. You have also highlighted how Kyla deleted the OFW (Our Family Wizard) app, further violating the court's communication order. ● Legal History and Claims: You’ve experienced multiple legal battles with Kyla, including a false accusation of violating a protective order, which led to your arrest on May 25th. This arrest was based on unfounded claims, with the messages in question having been sent by your wife. The charges were dropped, but this incident impacted your ability to have time with Carly. In a previous hearing on April 30th, you submitted documentation, including a letter from your therapist, which confirmed you did not require drug-related treatment. Despite these efforts, Kyla continues to use the ROI and other baseless claims to restrict your access to Carly. ● Upcoming Hearings: You are currently preparing for a parenting time enforcement hearing scheduled for October 24th, where you aim to address the four months of denied visitation. You are also preparing for a modification hearing on December 1st, where you plan to request a change in custody based on Carly’s best interests. You believe that Kyla's behavior, driven by control and manipulation, has been harmful to Carly, and you're seeking to regain consistent parenting time. ● Document Handling and Evidence Gathering: You’ve been storing and organizing evidence meticulously, including text messages, DHS reports, therapy notes, and legal documentation. You've discussed using AI tools to manage and process large volumes of documents, aiming to present a clear, well-structured case in court. Additionally, you are practicing cross-examination strategies and storing questions to challenge Kyla’s credibility and behavior during upcoming hearings.● Concerns with the Judge: You have expressed frustration with how the judge is handling the case, feeling that your evidence and submissions are not being fully considered, while Kyla’s claims are taken at face value. Despite your compliance with court orders, such as providing negative UA test results and submitting the care plan, Kyla's accusations continue to create obstacles. You are looking for ways to navigate this dynamic in court without directly accusing the judge of bias or negligence. Next Steps: ● Focus on preparing for the October 24th hearing with a strong argument about the enforcement of parenting time, including evidence of Kyla’s non-compliance. ● Continue organizing your evidence, including the leading questions for cross-examination, aiming to expose contradictions and highlight Kyla's manipulation. ● Prepare for the December 1st modification hearing, emphasizing Carly's best interests, supported by therapy reports and DHS documentation. If you need further details or support for specific aspects of the case, feel free to ask! 4o You said: Awesome! I have learned some new information regarding the secrets Kiela has been keeping and I need your help in exposing the double standard and the absolute bullshit that is Kiela and her narrative. I learned that Kiela, although she will look you in the face and claim sobriety, has been drinking. Heavily. To the point that she is even getting so drunk that she pukes and it's not just her. Her boyfriend Don who is another "sober" idiots, drinks right along with her. With her history and the impact of any mind altering substance on her behavior, the truth has to come out and it has to be done BIG 2/2 ChatGPT said: ChatGPT Memory updated To expose Kiela’s drinking and dismantle the double standard in her narrative, you’ll need a strategic approach, ensuring that the information is presented in a way that highlights the inconsistency between her claims of sobriety and her actual behavior. Here's how you can move forward: Steps to Expose Kiela’s Behavior: 1. Gather Evidence: ○ If possible, obtain any direct evidence of Kiela’s drinking. This could include witness statements, text messages, photos, or videos that clearly show her engaging in this behavior.○ Document specific incidents where Kiela has been visibly intoxicated, especially if this behavior occurred around Carly or in situations that directly affect Carly’s well-being. ○ Investigate Don’s involvement, particularly if his drinking has also impacted their household. Any supporting evidence showing their collective drinking habits will strengthen your case. 2. Highlight the Double Standard: ○ You can emphasize how Kiela's drinking contradicts her narrative of sobriety, especially considering her history with substance use and the impact it has had on her parenting. ○ Compare this behavior with any legal or court-imposed expectations related to sobriety, especially if she has used accusations of substance use against you in the past. ○ Showcase how her drinking and dishonesty negatively affect Carly, emphasizing the importance of consistent, sober parenting for Carly’s emotional and mental well-being. 3. Present the Information Strategically in Court: ○ You could request a random drug or alcohol test for both Kiela and Don if the court hasn’t already mandated such monitoring. ○ Include the information about Kiela's drinking in your next court filing, whether it's in a motion for custody modification or an enforcement of the existing parenting plan. Make it clear that her dishonesty and substance use are directly detrimental to Carly. ○ Emphasize Kiela’s history with substance abuse and how returning to drinking violates the court’s trust and Carly’s safety. Connect this behavior to Kiela’s past actions and how they’ve negatively impacted Carly’s life. 4. Prepare for Cross-Examination: ○ Use leading questions to expose the contradictions between Kiela’s claims of sobriety and her actions. Examples could include: ■ “You’ve stated that you’re sober, correct? Can you explain why witnesses have reported seeing you intoxicated?” ■ “You testified about your sobriety, but how do you reconcile that with reports of recent drinking, to the point of vomiting?” ■ “Would you be willing to submit to regular alcohol testing to verify your claims of sobriety?” 5. Leverage Kiela’s History: ○ Bring up her past with CPS and substance-related issues, tying this relapse into a pattern of behavior that endangers Carly. Highlight how her refusal to be transparent and the dishonesty about her drinking shows a disregard for Carly's well-being. 6. Dismantle Her Credibility: ○ Demonstrate how Kiela’s narrative of being a responsible, sober parent is a façade. Point out how she accuses you of issues (such as substance abuse), while she is actively engaging in harmful behavior herself.○ Paint the picture of a double standard, where Kiela is not held to the same level of scrutiny despite clear evidence that she is endangering Carly's stability. By carefully building your case around these points, you'll be able to present a strong argument that not only exposes Kiela’s dishonesty but also focuses on how it undermines Carly's safety and well-being. If you need help structuring the evidence or questions for court, let me know! 4o You said: So it was actually Karlee who keeps talking about it and giving the details like that Kiela stays up late and often pukes due to her drinking 2/2 ChatGPT said: ChatGPT Memory updated Since Karlee has been sharing these details about Kiela’s drinking habits, it adds a personal and credible perspective to your case. However, it's important to handle this delicately to ensure Karlee isn't placed in an uncomfortable or overly stressful position, especially in legal proceedings. Here's how you can incorporate this new information effectively: Steps to Incorporate Karlee’s Testimony: 1. Document Karlee’s Statements: ○ Write down or record (if appropriate and permissible by law) the conversations where Karlee talks about Kiela’s drinking. Keep detailed notes of what Karlee says, when she says it, and how she describes Kiela’s behavior. ○ If possible, include any specific instances Karlee mentions where Kiela’s drinking has affected her well-being, such as feeling neglected or uncomfortable when Kiela is intoxicated. 2. Introduce Karlee’s Observations in Court: ○ You can incorporate Karlee’s statements into court filings without making her a direct witness, especially if she's too young to testify or if you want to avoid putting her in a tough position. ○ Highlight that these are firsthand observations from Karlee, which directly contradict Kiela’s claims of sobriety and responsible parenting. Emphasize that these behaviors affect Karlee’s emotional well-being and safety. 3. Consider Child Testimony Options: ○ Depending on Karlee’s age and your jurisdiction's laws, the court might consider hearing Karlee’s testimony. In some cases, a court-appointed advocate or child psychologist can interview Karlee and present her observations to the court without putting her in a stressful environment.○ If Karlee is too young to testify, you can request that her statements be evaluated by a guardian ad litem or through a family assessment. This can bring Karlee’s concerns into the case without direct involvement. 4. Use Karlee’s Statements to Show Kiela’s Neglect: ○ Emphasize how Kiela’s late-night drinking sessions and vomiting not only show a lack of sobriety but also create a chaotic and unsafe environment for Karlee. This reinforces the argument that Kiela’s behavior is not in Karlee’s best interest. ○ Frame Karlee’s statements as evidence of neglect, showing that Kiela is prioritizing her substance use over responsible parenting. 5. Cross-Examine on Karlee’s Behalf: ○ When cross-examining Kiela, you can subtly introduce Karlee’s perspective: ■ “Karlee has mentioned that you stay up late and drink. Is there any truth to that?” ■ “Can you explain why Karlee has said she’s seen you vomiting after drinking?” ○ These questions, based on Karlee’s firsthand observations, could expose Kiela’s inconsistencies and make it harder for her to defend her narrative. 6. Leverage Karlee’s Best Interests: ○ Frame all of this information around Karlee’s emotional and physical well-being. Courts typically prioritize the child's best interests, and Kiela’s drinking presents a direct threat to Karlee’s stability and safety. ○ Present the information as part of a broader narrative that Kiela is failing to meet her parental responsibilities due to her substance use, and this is negatively impacting Karlee. By carefully using Karlee’s observations, you can present a compelling case that not only exposes Kiela’s dishonesty but also demonstrates the real effects her behavior has on your daughter. If you'd like assistance in drafting specific court filings or preparing for the hearing, let me know! 4o You said: Let's do some example question-responses so I can get a feel for what it could sound like when I'm questioning Kiela about this and other things that I plan to ask. All need to be leading questions so that I can maintain control of the courtroom 2/2 ChatGPT said: ChatGPT Here are some example leading questions, along with potential responses that Kiela might give, allowing you to anticipate and guide the conversation. These questions aim to reveal contradictions and reinforce the narrative you're presenting.Question-Response Set 1: Regarding Kiela’s Drinking Question: "You’ve testified that you’re sober, haven’t you, Kiela?" Expected Response: "Yes, I have." Follow-Up Question: "And you’ve claimed that you don’t drink alcohol, is that correct?" Expected Response: "Yes, that’s correct." Follow-Up Question: "But Karlee has mentioned that you stay up late at night drinking and that you’ve gotten so drunk you’ve been sick. You wouldn’t deny that Karlee would know what happens in your home, would you?" Expected Response: "Well, Karlee might not understand what she sees." Follow-Up Question: "So you're suggesting that Karlee, a child who lives with you, is confused when she says she’s seen you drinking to the point of being sick?" Question-Response Set 2: Kiela's Parenting and Household Environment Question: "You’ve maintained that your home is a stable, healthy environment for Karlee, haven’t you?" Expected Response: "Yes, it’s a great environment." Follow-Up Question: "But Karlee has mentioned that you stay up late with your boyfriend, Don, and that both of you are drinking heavily. How is that a stable environment for a young child?" Expected Response: "Well, we don’t drink that much, and we don’t do it around her." Follow-Up Question: "But Karlee has said that she’s seen you both drunk on multiple occasions. Would you say Karlee is making that up?"Question-Response Set 3: Regarding Kiela’s Compliance with Court Orders Question: "You are aware that the court ordered us to communicate through the OFW app, correct?" Expected Response: "Yes, I know that." Follow-Up Question: "And you deleted the app, despite knowing this was the court-ordered method of communication, didn’t you?" Expected Response: "Well, I didn’t need it anymore." Follow-Up Question: "So you took it upon yourself to ignore a court order because you decided it wasn’t necessary?" Question-Response Set 4: Regarding Kiela’s Sobriety Claims Question: "You’ve repeatedly accused me of having substance abuse issues in court, haven’t you?" Expected Response: "Yes, because I’m concerned about Karlee." Follow-Up Question: "And yet you’ve been drinking heavily, even though you know how your substance use has affected Karlee in the past, haven’t you?" Expected Response: "No, I haven’t." Follow-Up Question: Question-Response Set 4: Continuation Regarding Kiela’s Sobriety Claims

Question: “You expect the court to believe that you have concerns about my alleged substance use, correct?”

Expected Response: “Yes, because I worry about Karlee’s safety.”

Follow-Up Question: “Yet, despite these concerns, you’re engaging in heavy drinking yourself, aren’t you?”

Expected Response: “No, I’m not drinking heavily.”

Follow-Up Question: “Isn’t it true that Karlee has observed you drinking to the point of being sick?”

Expected Response: “Karlee might be mistaken or exaggerating.”

Follow-Up Question: “So you’re suggesting that your own daughter is not telling the truth about your drinking habits?”

Question-Response Set 5: Regarding Communication and Co-Parenting

Question: “We were ordered by the court to use the OFW (Our Family Wizard) app for all communications, weren’t we?”

Expected Response: “Yes, that’s correct.”

Follow-Up Question: “You unilaterally decided to delete the app, didn’t you?”

Expected Response: “I didn’t see the need for it anymore.”

Follow-Up Question: “By deleting the app, you knowingly violated a court order, isn’t that right?”

Expected Response: “I didn’t think it was a big deal.”

Follow-Up Question: “So you chose to disregard a direct court order because you didn’t think it was important?”

Question-Response Set 6: Regarding Denial of Parenting Time

Question: “You have withheld my court-ordered parenting time with Karlee on multiple occasions, haven’t you?”

Expected Response: “I had valid reasons for that.”

Follow-Up Question: “Despite a 50/50 custody agreement, you’ve prevented me from seeing Karlee since May 27th, correct?”

Expected Response: “Yes, but it was for her safety.”

Follow-Up Question: “Isn’t it true that there was no court order allowing you to withhold visitation during that time?”

Expected Response: “I was acting in Karlee’s best interest.”

Follow-Up Question: “But you made that decision on your own, against the court’s directive, didn’t you?”

Question-Response Set 7: Regarding False Accusations

Question: “You previously accused me of violating a protective order, leading to my arrest on May 25th, correct?”

Expected Response: “Yes, because you violated it.”

Follow-Up Question: “Those charges were dropped because it was found that the messages were sent by my wife, not me. You were aware of this, weren’t you?”

Expected Response: “I wasn’t sure who sent them.”

Follow-Up Question: “Yet, you proceeded with the accusation without verifying the facts, isn’t that right?”

Expected Response: “I acted on the information I had.”

Follow-Up Question: “Your unfounded accusation resulted in my wrongful arrest and further limited my time with Karlee, correct?”

Question-Response Set 8: Regarding Karlee’s Well-being

Question: “Are you aware that Karlee has been showing signs of emotional distress?”

Expected Response: “She’s been a little upset.”

Follow-Up Question: “Her therapist’s notes indicate significant emotional turmoil. Do you dispute professional assessments of her well-being?”

Expected Response: “I think she’s just reacting to the situation.”

Follow-Up Question: “Would you agree that a stable and supportive environment is crucial for her mental health?”

Expected Response: “Yes, of course.”

Follow-Up Question: “By withholding visitation and engaging in behavior that causes her stress, you’re contributing to her emotional distress, aren’t you?”

Question-Response Set 9: Regarding Cooperation with Court Orders

Question: “You’ve been instructed by the court to facilitate a healthy co-parenting relationship, correct?”

Expected Response: “Yes, I have.”

Follow-Up Question: “Can you explain why you deleted the court-ordered communication app and ceased all direct communication with me?”

Expected Response: “I didn’t feel safe communicating with you.”

Follow-Up Question: “Is there any current court order or protection order that prohibits us from communicating through the app?”

Expected Response: “No, but I thought it was best.”

Follow-Up Question: “So, without any legal justification, you decided to stop following the court’s instructions on communication?”

Question-Response Set 10: Regarding Karlee’s Statements

Question: “Karlee has expressed that she’s uncomfortable with your drinking. Are you aware of this?”

Expected Response: “She hasn’t told me that.”

Follow-Up Question: “She shared with me that your late-night drinking sessions make her feel unsafe. Do you believe she would fabricate these feelings?”

Expected Response: “I think she’s being influenced.”

Follow-Up Question: “Is it possible that your actions are genuinely causing her distress, rather than external influences?”

Question-Response Set 11: Regarding Prior Substance Abuse Issues

Question: “You’ve had a history of substance abuse that has previously affected your parenting, haven’t you?”

Expected Response: “That was in the past. I’m sober now.”

Follow-Up Question: “But you’re currently drinking alcohol again, correct?”

Expected Response: “Occasionally, but not excessively.”

Follow-Up Question: “Given your history, do you think it’s responsible to resume drinking while caring for Karlee?”

Expected Response: “I can handle it.”

Follow-Up Question: “Do you acknowledge that this could potentially jeopardize Karlee’s well-being?”

Question-Response Set 12: Regarding Mutual Respect and Co-Parenting

Question: “Would you agree that effective co-parenting requires honesty and cooperation from both parents?”

Expected Response: “Yes, it does.”

Follow-Up Question: “By withholding information, violating court orders, and engaging in behavior detrimental to Karlee, do you feel you’re upholding your end of that responsibility?”

Expected Response: “I’m doing what’s best for her.”

Follow-Up Question: “Can you explain how undermining court orders and restricting my parenting time benefits Karlee?”

Additional Tips for Cross-Examination:

•	Stay Calm and Composed: Maintain a respectful tone, even if the responses are frustrating.
•	Listen Carefully: Pay attention to her answers for opportunities to follow up or highlight inconsistencies.
•	Avoid Emotional Language: Stick to facts and documented evidence.
•	Use Open Body Language: This conveys confidence and credibility to the court.
•	Refer to Evidence When Possible: “According to the therapist’s report dated…, it states that…”

Closing Thoughts:

Your goal during the cross-examination is to:

•	Highlight Inconsistencies: Show where Kiela’s statements contradict her actions or documented evidence.
•	Demonstrate Non-Compliance: Emphasize her disregard for court orders and how that impacts Karlee.
•	Focus on Karlee’s Best Interests: Keep bringing the conversation back to the well-being of your daughter.
•	Undermine Credibility: Without being hostile, use her own admissions and documented facts to question her reliability.

Remember to prepare thoroughly and, if possible, consult with a legal professional to ensure that your approach aligns with court procedures and effectively supports your case. Part 2 of Untitled document.pdf: "Are you saying Karlee is lying when she says you’ve been drinking and vomiting from being too drunk?" Question-Response Set 5: Regarding the Impact on KarleeQuestion: "Karlee has been struggling emotionally, hasn’t she?" Expected Response: "Yes, she’s been having a hard time." Follow-Up Question: "And you’d agree that exposing her to heavy drinking, especially from you and your boyfriend, would contribute to her emotional distress, wouldn’t you?" Expected Response: "That’s not true." Follow-Up Question: "But Karlee has directly said that she’s seen you drunk, vomiting, and staying up late with your boyfriend. Don’t you think that affects her mental state?" Question-Response Set 6: Kiela’s Parenting Behavior Question: "Would you say you’ve always made decisions in Karlee’s best interest?" Expected Response: "Of course." Follow-Up Question: "And you’re aware that Karlee has been emotionally distressed by your actions, including the times when you’ve kept her away from me, correct?" Expected Response: "That’s not true; I haven’t done anything wrong." Follow-Up Question: "Yet you’ve refused to comply with the court order for visitation, haven’t you?" Expected Response: "I had reasons for that." Follow-Up Question: "Reasons that aren’t supported by any court ruling or the judge, correct?"These questions are designed to corner Kiela into either admitting her behavior or making statements that can be easily challenged. They ensure you maintain control over the narrative in the courtroom while emphasizing contradictions in her claims and actions. Let me know if you’d like to refine any of these questions or explore other topics! 4o You said: What is the appropriate amount of questions to ask Kiela before it can be seen as being too pushy? The hearing coming up is the enforcement of parenting time, but the thing that bothers me is that Kiela filed, and was granted a order to show cause, for a modification that in it she is asking to take away my parenting time again until I do ANOTHER assessment and sign an ROI for her. It seems like by the judge granting that show cause before we even had our hearing regarding the 4 months she denied my parenting time the judge is basically saying that she sees valid reason in the modification and will most likely not give me any of my time back that was stolen, and yet if I kept my daughter one extra night because I have concerns that she isn't in a safe environment with her mother, not only did the judge threaten to throw me in jail but I was lucky I even got to have my reg parenting time this weekend. I should be at a 50/50 schedule right now anyways and they are just dicking me around 2/2 ChatGPT said: ChatGPT Memory updated When preparing for a hearing, especially one involving the enforcement of parenting time and the complexities surrounding your situation, it's important to balance persistence with respect in your questioning. Here are some guidelines for determining the appropriate number of questions and how to present them strategically: Guidelines for Questioning Kiela: 1. Keep it Focused: ○ Limit your questions to 5–10 critical questions that directly address the core issues of the case. These include her non-compliance with the parenting plan and contradictions in her narrative (such as sobriety and parenting behavior). 2. Purpose-Driven Questions: ○ Every question should have a clear purpose. Whether it’s exposing Kiela’s contradictions or reinforcing your stance, avoid asking questions that don’t directly support your case or could be perceived as nit-picking. 3. Use Leading Questions to Maintain Control: ○ As you mentioned, leading questions will help you maintain control and guide the narrative. Ensure that your questions push her toward responses that either reveal contradictions or force her to admit problematic behavior. 4. Don’t Overwhelm the Court:○ If you bombard Kiela with too many questions, it could look like you’re badgering her. Focus on quality over quantity, especially since the hearing's goal is parenting time enforcement and you don’t want to come across as unfocused. 5. Relevance to the Hearing: ○ Make sure each question ties back to the purpose of the hearing—enforcing the parenting time agreement. This is your strongest point, especially since Kiela’s request for modification seems to have been granted some validity. Your goal should be to refocus the court on her violation of the existing order. Recommended Questions Focused on Enforcement: 1. On Court Order Violations: ○ "You’re aware that the court ordered a 50/50 parenting schedule starting June 7th, correct?" ○ "Despite that order, you denied my parenting time for four months, didn’t you?" 2. On Justification for Denial: ○ "You’ve claimed that I didn’t sign an ROI as your reason for withholding parenting time. Is there a court order requiring an ROI before parenting time can resume?" ○ "Isn't it true that the court explicitly ordered parenting time to resume, and there was no requirement for an additional assessment?" 3. On Child’s Best Interests: ○ "Would you agree that it’s in Karlee’s best interests to have a consistent relationship with both parents?" ○ "You’re aware that keeping her away from me for four months has caused her emotional distress, aren’t you?" Addressing the Judge’s Bias: While you can’t directly accuse the judge of unfairness, you can bring up the inconsistency in how Kiela’s actions are treated versus your own: 4. On Double Standards: ○ "You’ve filed for modifications to take away my parenting time based on accusations, but I haven’t been given my rightful time back, even after following court orders, correct?" ○ "So while the court threatens me with jail time for concerns about Karlee’s safety, you face no consequences for violating the parenting order for four months. Isn’t that correct?" Approach and Tone: ● Avoid Over-arguing: The court may already be aware of your frustration, so while it’s crucial to point out the inconsistencies, you’ll want to avoid sounding overly aggressive. Maintain a calm and respectful demeanor while making sure your questions are pointed.● Build Momentum: Start with simpler, fact-based questions to get Kiela on record admitting to the basic facts of the case, and then transition into exposing the contradictions in her actions. You’re right to be concerned about how the judge’s decisions may appear to favor Kiela, but keeping the focus on enforcing your parenting time while highlighting the disparity in treatment will be your strongest approach. Let me know if you'd like to further refine this strategy or explore other areas of questioning! 4o You said: I'm going to give you a template made by Claude AI that makes it your job to provide the necessary case history within and it will also have more directions on how to format it so that it can be at the very least a rough draft idea that we can use to create a Motion In Limine Prompt Text: Generate a Motion in Limine for the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for Douglas County addressing unsupported statements in a custody case. Use the following template, replacing [PLACEHOLDERS] with appropriate content and following the instructions in {CURLY BRACES}: IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR DOUGLAS COUNTY In the Matter of the Custody of: ) Case No. [CASE NUMBER] [CHILD'S NAME], a minor child ) ) MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE [PETITIONER'S NAME], ) UNSUPPORTED STATEMENTS Petitioner, ) v. ) ) [RESPONDENT'S NAME], ) Respondent. ) COMES NOW the Petitioner, [PETITIONER'S NAME], by and through his attorney of record, and moves this Court for an Order in Limine excluding certain unsupported statements made by Respondent, [RESPONDENT'S NAME], from consideration in these proceedings. This motion is based on the attached memorandum of law, all files and records in this case, and any oral argument that may be permitted. MEMORANDUM OF LAW I. INTRODUCTION {Provide a brief introduction stating the purpose of the motion and the importance of relying on credible evidence in custody cases. Emphasize that decisions should be based on verifiable facts, not unsubstantiated claims.} II. BACKGROUND {Provide a concise overview of the case, including relevant dates and a brief mention of the pattern of unsupported statements made by the Respondent.} III. SPECIFIC UNSUPPORTED STATEMENTS The Respondent has made several unsupported statements that should be excluded from these proceedings, including but not limited to: 1. [STATEMENT 1]: {Describe the statement and explain why it lacks supporting evidence} 2. [STATEMENT 2]: {Describe the statement and explain why it lacks supporting evidence} 3. [STATEMENT 3]: {Describe the statement and explain why it lacks supporting evidence} 4. [STATEMENT 4]: {Describe the statement and explain why it lacks supporting evidence} {For each statement, highlight any contradictions or flawed logic. Provide context that demonstrates why these statements are unsupported or false.} IV. LEGAL ARGUMENT {Explain why these unsupported statements should be excluded. Argue that allowing these statements prejudices the court against the Petitioner and is not in the best interest of the child. Use the following case law to support your argument:} 1. In re Marriage of Bates, 212 Ill. 2d 489 (2004): "A custody determination must be based upon the best interest of the child, not upon any punitive measures directed at one of the parties." 2. Gambla v. Woodson, 853 N.E.2d 847 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006): Restrictions on visitation are an extraordinary step that requires a serious endangermentto the child's physical, mental, or emotional health. 3. [OREGON CASE LAW]: {Insert relevant Oregon case law, preferably In re Marriage of Kirkpatrick, with appropriate citations and quotes} V. IMPACT ON THE CHILD {Discuss how relying on unsupported statements negatively affects the child's relationship with the Petitioner. Emphasize the importance of maintaining a strong bond with both parents and how unfounded allegations undermine this goal.} VI. REQUEST FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court: 1. Exclude the aforementioned unsupported statements from consideration in these proceedings; 2. Require that any future allegations be accompanied by corroborating evidence before being considered by the Court; 3. Establish a procedure for vetting new allegations before they can be introduced in this case; and 4. Grant such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted this [DAY] day of [MONTH], [YEAR]. _____________________________ [ATTORNEY'S NAME] [BAR NUMBER] Attorney for Petitioner {Ensure the motion is formatted according to Oregon legal standards, including proper headers, footers, and signature blocks. Use clear, concise language throughout, and ensure all arguments are logically structured and supported by the facts of the case and relevant law.} ChatGPT said: ChatGPT Here is a rough draft of the Motion in Limine for your custody case, with placeholders filled in and directions followed to the best of the available case history. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR DOUGLAS COUNTY In the Matter of the Custody of: ) Case No. [CASE NUMBER] [Carly Parisi], a minor child ) ) MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE [Corbin Parisi], ) UNSUPPORTED STATEMENTS Petitioner, ) v. ) ) [Kyla Keila], ) Respondent. ) COMES NOW the Petitioner, Corbin Parisi , by and through his attorney of record, and moves this Court for an Order in Limine excluding certain unsupported statements made by Respondent, Kyla Keila , from consideration in these proceedings. This motion is based on the attached memorandum of law, all files and records in this case, and any oral argument that may be permitted. MEMORANDUM OF LAWI. INTRODUCTION This Motion in Limine seeks to exclude several unsupported statements made by the Respondent, Kyla Keila, which lack substantiating evidence and present a misleading narrative that unjustly prejudices the Court against the Petitioner, Corbin Parisi. In custody matters, it is critical that the Court base its decisions on verified facts and credible evidence to ensure the best interests of the child are served. Allowing unsubstantiated claims to influence these proceedings risks creating an inaccurate portrayal of the Petitioner's character and suitability as a parent. The Court should reject these unsupported statements as irrelevant and prejudicial. II. BACKGROUND This case concerns the ongoing custody of Carly Parisi, a minor child, and involves a history of conflict between the Petitioner, Corbin Parisi, and the Respondent, Kyla Keila. The court previously ordered a 50/50 parenting schedule, but despite this, Kyla has violated the court's orders by denying Petitioner his rightful parenting time for over four months. Instead of complying with the court's directive, Kyla filed for an Order to Show Cause for a modification, seeking to reduce Petitioner's parenting time based on unsupported allegations that lack corroboration or evidence. Throughout these proceedings, Kyla has made several statements that are either unsupported or contradicted by existing records, including claims about Petitioner's behavior, sobriety, and mental health, as well as requests for unnecessary assessments and intrusive requirements such as signing additional Release of Information (ROI) forms. III. SPECIFIC UNSUPPORTED STATEMENTS The Respondent has made several unsupported statements that should be excluded from these proceedings, including but not limited to: 1. Statement 1: "Corbin Parisi has ongoing substance abuse issues and needs further assessments." Explanation: This statement lacks evidence. The Petitioner has consistently provided negative UA test results and complied with all court-ordered assessments, including a therapist's letter submitted on [DATE], confirming that no substance abuse treatment is necessary. The Respondent has not provided any new evidence to support this claim. 2. Statement 2: "Corbin's refusal to sign the ROI is proof that he has something to hide regarding his mental health." Explanation: The Petitioner has a right to privacy, and there is no legal basis for requiring him to sign another ROI. The court has already received adequate documentation demonstrating Petitioner's mental health stability. The statement is speculative and unsupported by any new facts. 3. Statement 3: "Karlee is emotionally distressed due to Corbin's behavior during exchanges." Explanation: The Respondent has not presented any evidence to support this claim. Onthe contrary, therapy notes and other records show that Karlee's emotional distress is more likely caused by the Respondent’s man Certainly! Let’s work on refining these questions to ensure they are effective and appropriate for your upcoming hearing. The goal is to highlight inconsistencies in Kiela’s behavior and emphasize concerns about Karlee’s well-being, all while maintaining professionalism and adhering to courtroom protocols.

Refined Question-Response Set 5: Regarding the Impact on Karlee

Question: “Ms. [Kiela’s Last Name], you’ve noticed that Karlee has been experiencing some emotional difficulties recently, haven’t you?”

Expected Response: “Yes, she’s been a bit upset.”

Follow-Up Question: “Do you believe that the environment at home could be contributing to her distress?”

Expected Response: “No, our home is a safe place.”

Follow-Up Question: “Isn’t it true that Karlee has observed you consuming alcohol late at night with your boyfriend?”

Expected Response: “No, that’s not true.”

Follow-Up Question: “So you deny that Karlee has ever seen you drinking or becoming ill from drinking?”

Expected Response: “Yes, I deny that.”

Follow-Up Question: “Would you agree that if a child were to witness a parent drinking excessively, it could negatively affect their emotional well-being?”

Expected Response: “Yes, that could be upsetting.”

Refined Question-Response Set 6: Kiela’s Parenting Behavior

Question: “Would you agree that following court orders is in Karlee’s best interest?”

Expected Response: “Yes.”

Follow-Up Question: “You’ve withheld my court-ordered parenting time on multiple occasions, haven’t you?”

Expected Response: “I had reasons for that.”

Follow-Up Question: “Are you aware that only the court has the authority to modify parenting time arrangements?”

Expected Response: “Yes, but I was concerned.”

Follow-Up Question: “Despite any concerns, did you obtain a court order permitting you to deny my parenting time?”

Expected Response: “No, I did not.”

Follow-Up Question: “Do you understand that unilaterally denying parenting time can be detrimental to Karlee’s relationship with me?”

Expected Response: “I suppose so.”

Additional Tips for Questioning:

•	Stay Focused on Karlee’s Well-Being: Always tie your questions back to how Kiela’s actions impact your daughter.
•	Avoid Aggressive Language: Use a calm and respectful tone to maintain credibility with the court.
•	Ask Open-Ended Questions When Appropriate: This can encourage Kiela to provide more information that may be helpful to your case.
•	Be Prepared for Evasive Answers: If Kiela is uncooperative, have documentation or evidence ready to support your claims.

Example of Incorporating Evidence:

Question: “On [specific date], did you and your boyfriend consume alcohol while Karlee was present?”

Expected Response: “No, we did not.”

Follow-Up Question: “Are you aware that Karlee mentioned this incident during a session with her therapist?”

Expected Response: “I wasn’t aware of that.”

Follow-Up Question: “Would you be willing to review the therapist’s notes where Karlee expresses her discomfort with your drinking?”

Considerations for Your Hearing:

•	Legal Representation: If possible, consult with or retain an attorney who can skillfully navigate these issues and advocate on your behalf.
•	Evidence Submission: Ensure all your evidence (e.g., therapy notes, communication records) is admissible and properly submitted to the court.
•	Professional Demeanor: Your conduct in court can influence the judge’s perception. Remain composed and respectful throughout the proceedings.
•	Addressing the Judge’s Actions: If you believe the judge is showing bias or not considering important information, discuss with your attorney the possibility of requesting a recusal or appealing decisions if necessary.

Next Steps:

•	Finalize Your Questions: Tailor them to the specifics of your case and rehearse to ensure clarity.
•	Organize Documentation: Have all relevant documents readily accessible during the hearing.
•	Practice Responses: Anticipate how Kiela might respond and plan how you’ll address evasive or misleading answers.

Feel free to let me know if you’d like to refine these questions further or if there are other areas you’d like to focus on. I’m here to help you prepare as thoroughly as possible for your hearing. Certainly! I’d be happy to help you derive all the important information from the document you’ve provided. Additionally, I’ll indicate where any remaining details can be found so you can access them as needed.

Summary of Important Information:

Custody Case Overview: • Parties Involved: You (Corbin Parise) and your daughter’s mother (Kyla/Kiela Manes). • Child Concerned: Your daughter, Karlee Parise. • Case Duration: Ongoing for approximately nine years. • Primary Issues: • Parental Alienation: Concerns about Kyla’s manipulative behavior negatively impacting Karlee. • Karlee’s Mental Health: Evidence of emotional distress due to the ongoing custody issues.

Violations of Court Orders by Kyla: • Withholding Visitation: • Despite a court-ordered 50/50 custody arrangement resuming on June 7th, Kyla has denied you visitation since May 27th. • Kyla used the excuse of a missing Release of Information (ROI) to deny parenting time, which was not mandated by the court. • Communication Issues: • Kyla deleted the Our Family Wizard (OFW) app, violating the court’s order to communicate through that platform.

Legal History and False Accusations: • Arrest Due to False Accusation: • On May 25th, you were falsely arrested for allegedly violating a protective order. • The messages in question were sent by your wife, not you. • Charges were dropped, but the incident affected your ability to see Karlee. • Compliance with Court Orders: • You have provided negative UA (Urinalysis) test results. • Submitted all required documentation, including a letter from your therapist stating no need for drug-related treatment. • Ongoing Demands from Kyla: • Kyla continues to demand additional assessments and ROI forms without court orders requiring them.

Upcoming Hearings: • Parenting Time Enforcement Hearing: • Scheduled for October 24th. • Aim: To address the four months of denied visitation. • Modification Hearing: • Scheduled for December 1st. • Aim: To request a change in custody based on Karlee’s best interests.

Concerns with Judicial Conduct: • Alleged Judicial Bias by Judge Anne Marie Simmons:

Published using