~This Is My World~

Took Sarah to Anthony’s house so he could see her. Second time this month.

TOO much time passes in between though, which I don’t think is good since we only live 20-30 minutes from each other. OH well.

It was good for Sarah to see Anthony, he talked with her, showed her his fishing pool and he helped her pretend fish in the front room. It was cute.

What wasn’t cute was the lines of cocaine on his end table in the front room, so I took it upon myself and blew it off the table, it landed between the couch and the table, an area that Sarah can’t get to.

Of course, Anthony noticed it was gone, and was PISSED! Forget him, I was pissed, why is that stuff around when our daughter was visiting him and she is crawling around! She could have very well crawled to the table and lifted herself up, and gotten the blow on her hands. OMG, the thought of what COULD have happened scared the crap out of me,

I gathered up my daughter and we left.

Took Sarah to meet up with Anthony at the park down the street from me, today. It was good to see him, they played on the toys, laid on the grass, they had fun.

As we walked back to my sisters after the visitation, he said he can’t see her with me anymore because I am always talking about us breaking up. It has only been 3 months, and this was the first time he had seen Sarah since I left with her. Guess he was busy getting to know his girlfriend and her kids.

He thought he would get cute and start yelling at me, then he said, “I’ll just take Sarah and move to Mexico and you won’t ever see her again!”

Um, no you won’t.

No court orders, I have our daughter, not sure what steps I want to take, but for the month of March, Anthony paid a total of $215.00.

That was nice of him.

Moved my stuff out of Anthony’s house, to my sister’s house. I discovered Anthony was cheating on me, and the other woman even had some of her clothes in my closet, at the back, as if I wouldn’t see it. WOW.

As I was moving stuff out, Anthony had come home. I asked him who the woman was, and he was hesitant to tell me, but I coerced it out of him, telling him it doesn’t matter, the damage was done, our almost 7-month-old daughter and I were leaving. He told me it was a waitress at one of his stops, and her name is Coleen. He also told me what stop she worked at.

Happy Birthday to me, huh? It was actually a few days ago, but I’ve been busy, you could say.

This should all be interesting.

The first weekend of February, 1993, Keith went to go see his kids. His ex had drawn up some court papers. She wanted him to agree to an increase in support, from $400.00 a month for both kids to $500.00 for both kids.

She wanted him to agree to a visitation schedule of a week for Spring, 4 weeks during the summer, and 2 weeks during Winter.

She also wanted him to agree that her place of residence is WA State.

He did not sign the papers. He was agreeable to the visitation schedule, but not the increase in support and definitely NOT agreeable with taking the kids out of the state. He told her he wanted time to think and seek legal advice. That was on February 5th, 1993. She didn’t care.

On February 20, 1993, she packed up her stuff, and the kids and left with her then fiancé, stopping in Las Vegas to get married. She even sent him two of the same pictures from her happy day.

According to Keith, he saw his kids for 4 days in February. He was denied Spring because ex wife #2 couldn’t afford to send the kids plus they were still getting used to living in a new area. He saw the kids for 3 weeks in Summer, but was denied the two weeks during Winter because she was spending time with her family in San Diego.

According to online records, she and her fiance did get married on 2/20/1993, but according to a letter she wrote Keith’s employer, dated 2/12/1993, she wrote “effective 2-12-93” her new address was WA state and her name had changed as well, as she had gotten married.

Keith sent the kids their Christmas gifts to their new address.

Sent this to her on January 10, 2004-

“Dear Colleen,

I am “writting” this letter so that “we” can get a few things straight.

#1: there is no WE between you and I. My legal business is with Anthony (full legal name) Sr.

#2: Mr. R (Anthony) pays nothing out of pocket for the insurance premium that is offered through his employer. Maybe you should call the Fringe Benefits Dept to confirm this.

#3: What is “duel”?

#4: Mr. R (Anthony) has no business having other children when he couldn’t even support his first two children and complains about supporting his 3rd child.

#5: Don’t concern yourself with my “fat ass.”

#6: I will start the steps this week to get Mr. R to court. Remember, there is no “Us” as my legal business is with Mr. R only.

#7: I hope that the Judge tells me the same thing the last one did as well 🙂 Thanks for your concern.

#8: Go back to school and learn to spell, and learn the meaning of words and the differences between words like, “duel” and “dual”.

#9: Anything you write me, will be used against you and Mr. R.

Should you feel compelled to respond to me, please think long and hard about it. This is my formal notice to you, that while in the process of taking Mr. R back to court, I will also request a restraining order against you. I will no longer respond to YOU.

Have a great 2004,

Patricia (my last name)”

I did get a Petition for Injunction Prohibiting Harassment, started to fill it out, but never filed it.

SPRING BREAK- EX told Keith she couldn’t afford to send the kids and they were still getting used to living in a new area.

Summer- Keith got the kids for 3 weeks.

Winter- DENIED- Ex told Keith she was keeping the kids and spending this time with her family in San Diego.

More solidly anyway. Thank GOD Keith’s employer saved everything from his ex.

She wrote his employer a letter on 2/12/1993, asking them to please change her address on her child support checks. She told them that effective 2/12/1993, her new address in WA state. She told them her last name changed as well, as she had gotten married.

What I know to be factual is that as of February 5th, 1993, she was still in San Diego County, living at the home Keith left from in 1989. What I also know to be factual is that she did NOT get married until Feb. 20, 1993.

Go figure….

Ex had drawn up so court papers because she was leaving the state. These papers were signed by the ex and her Notary Public friend on 2/5/1993. These papers stated that Keith and her will share JLC, while she has SPC. She wanted Child support upped to $500/mo. There’s a few more stipulations, but it’s visitation we’re concentrating on.

As far as visitation goes, the ex was agreeable to the following:

“a. Winter vacation defined as the period starting in December from the children’s last day of school immediately preceding Christmas through and returned the first Saturday immediately preceding the first day school commences in January the following year.

b. Spring vacation as defined as that period referred to as “spring break” or “Spring” by the children’s respective schools. Visitation beginning after the last day of school before “Spring Break” and must be returned the first Saturday immediately preceding the next school attendance day.

c. Summer vacation as defined as any four week period between academic years. Children are able to visit at any agreed upon four week period after the last day of any academic year and must be returned prior to the Saturday of the next academic year.

The previous three vacations are the only agreed upon visitation periods. All air travel, bus travel and care travel are to be divided 50/50. Furthermore, it is agreed that the preferred mode of transportation is airline.

Both parties agree that Respondent is to give Petitioner a five week notice as to when children are to deport on winter and spring vacations. Petitioner is to notify Respondent as to the exact reservations made for the children’s departure and return, and at that time to inform Respondent as to his expense for travel. Respondent is then to dispurse immediately funds for his half of the expenses to Petitioner.

Both parties agree that Petitioner and children’s place or residence is the State of Washington and that Respondent’s place of residence is the State of California. The children are not to vacation outside of the state of California without expressed written consent from the Petitioner. The children are not to reside outside of the state of Washington without the expressed written consent of the respondent.”

There is a “FINALITY OF AGREEMENT” clause that states that “this agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and otherwise supersedes any previous agreement or agreements between the parties. No other agreement, statement, or promise made by or to the other party or the agent or representative of either of the parties, shall be binding on the parties unless it is in writing and signed by both of them subsequent to the day of the execution of this agreement. “

Under “GENERAL PROVISIONS” it’s written that “THIS AGREEMENT BECOMES EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY AS OF THE DAY AND YEAR FIRST WRITTEN ABOVE, FEBRUARY 4, 1993.”

Well, Keith DID NOT agree with the children being moved out of state so he did not sign this drawn up Stipulation Amending Custody, Visitation and Support of Minor Children.

The ex packed bag, baggage and their two kids up and moved anyway, within a week.

When Keith and ex divorced in 1990, he had defaulted. He just wanted to be done with her.

November 29, she was awarded sole physical custody of their two kids and he was awarded Joint Legal Custody with rights of reasonable visitation as mutually agreed upon with the Petitioner. It was also ordered that he “shall not remove the minor child from the County of San Diego without the express written permission of Petitioner or further order from this Court.”

He had moved to the LA area, so visitation was mutually agreed upon, he would drive to the County of San Diego or she would drive the kids up.

Keith told me that whenever it was an advantage for her, she would let him see the kids. For example, when she wanted to go out.

In the Spring of 1990, had written him and told him that she guesses he doesn’t miss her, but it was nice to see him. She also told him that “just because they get divorced legally it doesn’t mean have to mean the end of” them, that she would “like to” see him again, she “just didn’t want to be married anymore.”

Child support was $200 per child, ceasing when the child dies, reaches age of 18, enters Marriage, becomes emancipated, or ceases to be in the physical custody of the petitioner. IF the child reaches age 18, unmarried, resides with Petitioner, still a full time high school student, support shall continue pursuant to CA Civil Code section 4704.5, until the child marries, no longer resides with Petitioner, no longer a full time high school student, completes 12th grade, or attains age 19, “WHICHEVER SHALL FIRST OCCUR.”

She was also awarded as her sole and separate property the family residence, all items of furnishings, appliances and personal affects currently in her possession ad the 1986 Nissan 200 SX.

There was also an order that “Neither party shall annoy, harass, telephone or otherwise disturb the peace of the other in at any time or at any place. “

Sole Physical Custody:  A parent with sole physical custody is referred to as the custodial parent.  They have the legal authority to decide where a child will live, although some restrictions might apply depending on the state or if a relocation clause has been signed. http://www.custodyzen.com/divorce-terms/sole-legal-custody.html#2

Joint Legal Custody: Under California law, “joint legal custody” means that both parents share the right and responsibility to make decisions relating to the health, education, and welfare of a child. (Cal. Fam. Code § 3003.) https://www.divorcenet.com/states/california/ca_legal_physical_custody#:~:text=Under%20California%20law%2C%20%22joint%20legal%20custody%22%20means%20that,Joint%20legal%20custody%20is%20very%20common%20in%20California.

4704.5.  For purposes of Sections 4710.9, 4711, 4711.5, 4711.7,
4712, and 4712.5, the director of the responsible state agency
includes a designee thereof, which may, but need not, be a public or
private agency that contracts with the State Department of
Developmental Services for the provision of hearing officers or
mediators.

https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2005/wic/4700-4704.5.html#:~:text=%22Service%20agency%22%20means%20any%20developmental%20center%20or%20regional,provide%20services%20to%20persons%20with%20developmental%20disabilities.%204704.5.