Rand’s Divorce

bullshit

Rands Divorce: Visitation Violation to be heard tomorrow!!!


(Frank G. Roux??)

Look at what this piece of excrement (imo) wrote:

“From: Frank Roux
Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 3:32 PM
To: Rebecca Whitcombe

Subject: Marriage of Ricci

Dear Rebecca:

Thank you for your exceptionally fine work on the Ricci Custody Judgment and Parenting Agreement. My client, Patriece, has one major concern. She feels that Randy will take undo advantage of the right of first refusal at subparagraph (g) on page 6. She feels that Randy may very well use the 2-hour provision. For example, if youngest child Gianna has a sleep over with a friend or if Patriece away from the children due to work for more than 2 hours, Randy will accuse her of not spending time with the children. Please bear in mind that the two teenage Ricci children are with Patriece for 90% of the time and Gianna is there for approximately 75% of the time. There are certain occasions when Patriece is not with the children (especially the teenage daughters) for more than 2 hours and Randy could use that as “she’s not spending parenting time with them.” Is it possible to substitute the following language for the current subparagraph (g) language?? “If the other parent cannot care for the children due to illness and/or injury, said parent may ask the other parent to care for the children.” Please advise.

Thank you very much.

Frank”

Now, here is Mrs. Whitcombes reply:

Your Trip, Your Way at Expedia.ca

“Frank:

Thank you for getting back to me.

Actually, that is exactly the reason for the provision, in part.

If Patriece needs to work during her parenting time (other than her normal work hours, when the children are presumably in school anyway), then Randy should be given the option to care for the children rather than them staying home unsupervised or being sent to someone else’s home to be looked after. Its purpose is not only to be used during a period of illness or injury.

Randy has expressed a concern that the children are spending an undue amount of time at other people’s homes in the evenings during Patriece’s parenting time. This provision is an attempt to remedy that concern. If the kids are with friends because they want to be there, this isn’t an issue. However, if Patriece has to work, or attend a meeting, or something else, the children should be with Randy. There is simply no reason for them to be elsewhere when their own father is (or may be) available to care for them.

If you have other concerns, please let me know. I have not yet had any feedback from Randy, other than a blanket rejection of the entire agreement because of the children’s residence being with Patriece under the terms of the agreement.

Rebecca”

Mrs. Whitcombe is my childrens attorney. Here she admits that there is a problem right? Why then has this “issue” been up in the air for 6 months now??

You see yes she appears to be doing her job but, when?? These are my kids and this waiting game is unacceptable!! I have screamed this from the roof tops for a year now.

And this f’n PUNK Frank G. Roux is more lost in this case then I am! God I hope tomorrow goes well!

Travelocity SAVES You 20% or MORE on Air Fares

As I wrote last week, I some how mustered up the “nuts” to go and file two motions regarding my divorce. Tomorrow am at 9 am in family court of Lake Co. the second motion I filed is;

VIOLATION OF VISITATION

“Judge Ortiz ordered on 7/15/10, that visitation set forth on 6/4/10 regarding THE RICCIS youngest daughter (8 yrs) would also now include the other two RICCI CHILDREN (14 and 17 yrs).

After repeated attempts, via text message and by phone, Mrs. Ricci nor the other two children have responded.

As a result of this,

Mr. Ricci has had no time with his other two daughters.

Respondent (me) feels that Mrs. Ricci as primary custodian, is responsible to help aid this and pleads for this motion to be heard prior to the 9/1/10 divorce trial.”

My “lovely” wife is responsible for this. Its not that my daughters don’t want to be with me. They are now used to being out of Mrs. Ricci’s house up to 6 days and nights per week.

What My “lovely” wife does is makes them watch their younger sister with the “trade off”being “no questions asked sleep overs and no supervision nor accountability.

If I were 14 or 17 I would do the same but, doesn’t this “prove” the lack of supervision that my older girls have?

The other item is, I would take my youngest anytime and would prefer her to be with her father over her older sisters who should NOT be responsible for her!!

I gotta stop putting all the blame on Frank G Roux. This “lovely” woman can’t think for herself? And has no regard for her 3 children and seems to only be out for herself? That would be fine IF her and her stupid network I like to call the “gaggle of hags” knew that she could achieve this WITHOUT RUINING ME OR MY KIDS IN THE PROCESS!!!!