Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Filed appellate brief

I just filed my brief appealing my child support payments. I am complaining about the family court deviating from state guidelines. I sent 5 copies to the appellate court, 4 copies to the state supreme court, and a copy to my ex-wife. She is still trying to augment the official record, so perhaps I could have just waited until she finishes with that. The appellate court is a real stickler for procedural rules and deadlines, so I figured that it would be safer to file the brief now.

I tried to make an appointment with a lawyer for a consultation, but she said that she was all booked up, and just gave me instructions on filing for an extension. She said that if I write a 3-page letter listing a bunch of excuses, then I could get an extra 15 days. My guess is that the typical lawyer devotes a lot of energy to such silliness.

Monday, May 29, 2006

Punishing fathers in prison

N. Carolina news:
The Corrections Department isn't making sure that inmates earning wages through its prison industries program are paying child support, according to a follow-up report from the state Legislative Audit Council.

The report, released Thursday, checked progress on 13 recommendations the council made in 2003. Two recommendations involved child-support collections from inmates.

The follow-up checked records for the 50 highest-paid inmates in 2005 and found nine owed money under court-ordered child support.
There is no mention of any children who actually need the money, and my guess is the money will just goto welfare agencies. It is just another way of punishing fathers and prisoners.

Saturday, May 27, 2006

Appellate record

I just got this from the appeals court:
Respondent's motion for extension of time to file designation of record is granted, provided said designation is filed in Santa Cruz County Superior Court within 15 days from the date of this order.

Dated MAY 25 2006 RUSHING, P.J.
I don't know what this is about. I guess my ex-wife thinks that the 500-page record is not enough. Perhaps she wants the appellate court to read printouts from this blog.

Thursday, May 25, 2006

Revised attorney fee order

I just got this in the mail from the family court. The judge amended his order after we left court:
HONORABLE Commissioner Irwin H. Joseph, presiding ...
Counsel/parties address(es) the issues now before the Court.
The parties are sworn and examined.

FINDINGS AND ORDERS: The Court finds that on 5/13/05 Judge Kelly assessed fees in the amount of $20,000 payable by Respondent to Petitioner re accumulated fees in the amount.of $40,452 as stated in the declaration of counsel at that time.

The Court find that the total of fees incurred to date, $54,892, less the previous total, $40,450, leaves a balance of $14,440 and that pursuant to sections 2030 FC and 2032 FC, orders Respondent to pay $10,000 to Petitioner for attorney fees. Additionally, Respondent shall pay to Petitioner $5,000 for attorney fees related to the appeal.

The total amount of attorney fees ordered payable by Respondent to Petitioner this date is $15,000 which shall be paid at the rate of $5,000 per month. The first payment shall be made on 7/l/06 and each month thereafter until paid in full.

SUMMER SHCEDULE: Pursuant to oral stipulation of the parties, the summer schedule proposed by Petitoner shall be the order of the Court. Petitioner shall prepare the order re summer schedule.

NEXT COURT DATE: This matter is set for Further Status Conference on 10/16/06 at 8:30 in 4.

Petitioner is directed to prepare the order pursuant to Rule 391.


There are no appearances.

The Court clarifies that the award of attorney fees for appellate services should not be misconstrued as an automatic award of said sum to Petitioner even if she never retains appellate counsel.

The $5,000 award of appellate attorney fees payable by Respondent shall only be payable if Petitioner retains an appellate attorney and incurs said amount of fees. If Petitioner does not retain counsel and incur fees, no appellate fees are due from Respondent to Petitioner. Petitioner shall promptly, and no later than September 1, 2006, forward to Respondent any attorney bills attributable as of said date to appellate work. Thereafter, Petitioner shall submit bills every thirty days which shall be payable by Respondent upon receipt until the total amount of $5,000 for appellate attorney services has been paid.

Since my ex-wife is a lawyer herself, I guess the judge was worried that she would pocket the $5k and write the brief herself. I don't know why he even cares. I'd rather that she kept the money than squander it on some sleazeball lawyer.

The entire system is rigged to benefit lawyers. I really don't think that this judge is getting kickbacks from lawyers, but he sure acts like he is much more concerned about the best interest of the lawyers than the best interests of the children.

Comm. Joseph made our kids suffer for six months while he ordered inkblots tests and other idiotic wastes of time. He never showed the slightest bit of regret. He has extended this divorce case so that it will last for at least three years, and there is no end in sight.

There seems to be just one thing that this judge cares about, and that is making sure that lawyers get paid. Three times he has gone out of his way to order me to pay Miss Jennifer Gray, my ex-wife's ex-lawyer, $6,500 even though another judge ruled that I didn't have to pay. He sheltered Miss Gray from testifying, even though I caught her lying under oath and trying to defraud me out of some money. The above order says that I have to pay her $10k anyway. And now he goes out of his way to amend his order to make sure that my ex-wife actually hires an appellate lawyer.

You might think that Comm. Joseph is just making sure that attorney fees actually goto attorneys, but he is also protecting his own orders from appeal. He knows that he has made some questionable orders that I am appealing, and he is insuring that a outside lawyer will be writing a legal brief that defends his orders. I think that a family court judge should just let the appellate court decide whether his orders are correct or not.

Monday, May 22, 2006

She explains the late brief

My ex-wife just called me to assure me that her brief was mailed on time, and she didn't just sit on it for a week. She blamed the problem on the post office.

She said that her law firm has this problem all the time. They put mail in an outgoing mail basket, and someone else is supposed to mail it. When the opposing law firm doesn't get a brief on time, it just calls and asks for another copy. Her firm just emails or faxes the document, and it is no big deal. I should have called and asked, she said.

She said that she hand-delivered the brief to the court on the day after she was to have mailed it to me. I guess that she didn't trust the post office to get the brief to the court on time.

I actually believe her when she says that she didn't hold up the brief. If she were going to use such tactics, then there were other situations where she would have had more to gain. But I am also skeptical that the post office is really that slow. Maybe her law firm employs a goof-off mail clerk, I don't know.

The real problem is that the court uses such an outmoded system for handling paper documents. The court should just use a system of electronic filings. The court and the opposing party would necessarily get the same document at the same time.

Sunday, May 21, 2006

Late postmark

Here is the postmark on the envelope that I got from my ex-wife yesterday. It looks fishy to me.

Saturday, May 20, 2006

Late brief arrived today

I just got a PETITIONERS RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT'S OPPOSITION BRIEF TO MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES in my mailbox today. The hearing was on Thursday, two days ago!

This is a new low. There is a "proof of service" where someone named Darrell Moon swore that it was mailed in Monterey on May 11. It was postmarked in San Jose on May 19. Our hearing was on the morning of May 18.

My guess is that the court got its copy on time. I would have liked to rebut what said at our hearing. I am finding it really hard to believe that it took the US Postal Service nine days to send a letter from one side of the bay to the other.

The brief says:
Mr. AngryDad understands the rules of court better than many attorneys; he also knows that since he isn't an attorney, he is not bound by ethics or even held to comply with the Rules of Civil Procedure. He understands that the negative consequences for misbehavior as an in propria persona litigant are minimal. Mr. AngryDad has also learned how to negotiate the system so as to force his opponents and the judges to do his legal work.
It would be nice if that were really true.

Friday, May 19, 2006

Britney Spears and her kid

AP story:
NEW YORK - Britney Spears stumbled outside a Manhattan hotel, nearly dropping her 8-month-old son and further fueling the ever-growing media scrutiny of her parenting skills. ...

The baby bobble was the latest public incident involving the safety of Spears' child. Earlier this week, she was photographed driving with Sean Preston in a car seat facing forward rather than facing backward, which some safety regulations say is best.

Spears, who recently announced that she's pregnant with her second child, was visited by a sheriff's deputy at her home in Malibu, Calif., last month after Sean Preston slipped from his nanny's arms as she was lifting him from a high chair and something in the chair snapped.

In February, authorities visited Spears' home after photos showed the singer in a car with her son in her lap, instead of being strapped to a car seat in the back seat. She first blamed pursuits by the paparazzi, but later said it was a "mistake."
No, I do not think that Britney should lose her kid. But she is lucky that she is not a father in family court, because her parenting slip-ups are much worse than the trivial accusations that I faced in court.

Billionaire's Divorce

Las Vegas Sun reports:
LOS ANGELES (AP) - An appeals court ordered documents from billionaire Ron Burkle's divorce proceedings unsealed after the state's highest court struck down a law that allowed people to shield financial records in divorce cases from public view.

The filings released Thursday detail a 1997 marital agreement in which Burkle and his wife, Janet, decided that she would accept a fraction of their assets - $30 million plus interest and a house - if the couple ever divorced.
The $30M was not enough for her and her greedy lawyers.

In a separate matter, the New York Post gossip page kept running nasty and false stories about Burkle, and then try to extort huge payments to stop the stories. Burkle got audio-video recordings of the demands. The gossip editor complains that he was set up, and faces criminal charges.

I am usually in favor of court proceedings being open to the public, but I would think that Burkle would have had a strong case for sealing the details of his personal finances.

Thursday, May 18, 2006

Ordered to pay more fees

I just got out of court. The bottom line is that my ex-wife asked for $114,147.78 in past and future attorney fees. (She is a lawyer herself, and is not currently represented by another attorney.) Commissioner Irwin Joseph ordered me to pay $15,000 in 3 installments, starting July 1.

The good part was that he refused to order fees that had been denied before by another judge. He also called the $50,000 request for appellate fees ridiculous.

He swore us both in. I testified that my ex-wife's lawyer, Miss Jennifer J. Gray, lied in declaration on the most pertinent points, and I demanded an opportunity to cross-examine her under oath. Miss Gray was in the courtroom, but Comm. Joseph denied my request without any explanation.

Comm. Joseph said that Miss Gray had only $14,000 in bills since the last attorney fee order, and he was ordering me to pay $10,000 of it. He gave no other explanation except to say that I had deeper pockets. In particular, he didn't say anything about my ex-wife's alleged justifications, such as me maintaining this blog. He ordered me to pay $5,000 for her appeal.

Comm. Joseph scheduled our next status hearing for Oct. 16. I am not sure what is left to argue about, but the AngryMom may think of something.

Then my ex-wife complained about her seeing the kids last Sunday for Mothers Day may not have been covered by a custody order. The judge spent a couple of minutes fumbled thru the court file. I said that it is not clear what she wants the court to do, since Mothers day is past, she got what she wanted, and there is no pending dispute. Then she complained that there might possibly be a dispute about the summer schedule. I agreed to stipulate to the summer schedule that we already agreed to out of court. I guess that she'll send it to the judge for his signature.

I really don't see any legal justification for Comm. Joseph's refusal to let me cross-examine Miss Jennifer Gray. Her declaration is just hearsay without her testimony. He was apparently just protecting her from embarrassment or perjury accusations. Or he just wanted her to get paid, regardless of the merits. At any rate, it stinks.

Wednesday, May 17, 2006

Court motion tomorrow

My ex-wife has a motion for attorney fees to be heard tomorrow morning. The system is heavily biased in favor of lawyers, so I'll probably have to pay some more fees. I will report tomorrow.

My ex-wife is also complaining about this blog. She has complained about it before, but this is the first time that she actually printed out some pages from the blog and gave them to the judge. She is asking the judge to punish me for maintaining the blog. Maybe I should not have mentioned how the judge is known to some court watchers on this local activist page.

Tuesday, May 16, 2006

Mens News Daily

Mike Lasalle writes:
When I first encountered the divorce "system" in 1995, I observed that while women were well represented and supported as a special class within the system, men were rarely acknowledged except in their capacity as income earners.

I also discovered a network of judges, lawyers, social workers, non-governmental organizations, and court-appointed evaluators. All were called to serve the needs of Judges and their protocols, and all were dependent on the State (and each other) for referrals and new business. Virtually all of these players operated under the pre-conceived notion that the State had already assumed the role of "father" under Parens Patriae. My role - the role I was given but did not want - was to be that of a quiet surf, too proud or too shamed to raise a voice in protest.

In my experience, family court was really Trial by Ordeal - and, instead of helping my family through a difficult circumstance, the system instead seemed bent on making it much worse. Not surprisingly, I also found that support for fathers within the system was virtually absent. Using the web, I learned of many other men and fathers around the globe whose experience with family court - and other branches of the legal system - was as Kafka-esque as my own.
His website, Mens News Daily, is excellent.

Sunday, May 14, 2006

Mothers Day

The kids are with my ex-wife for Mothers Day. They would normally be with me this weekend, but she wanted them for Mothers Day. The kids were also working very hard on making a special present for her. They did most of the work at my house so that it would be a surprise. I am sure that she knows that they were working on something.

Last year I helped them make a Mothers Day present for her, and put a picture of it on this blog. My ex-wife complained to the court about that.

I don't mind letting her have the kids for Mothers Day, if that is what she wants, but she tried to claim that it was court-ordered. Well, maybe there is no explicit court order, she said, but she is sure that the judge would have ordered it if we asked him. I got the impression that she intends to ask the judge when we see him on Thursday.

I think that the judge should deny such a silly request. Mothers Day will be over by then. Yes, there will be another Mothers Day next year. I just don't think that the judge should be micro-managing our lives, even if my ex-wife asks for it.

Thursday, May 11, 2006

Court expert credentials

This feminist blogger complains that a family court expert might just have a masters degree and some minor other credentials.

I wouldn't mind so much if these so-called experts really had the equivalent of a masters degree in subject matter that would really qualify them to give the opinions that they do. I've never seen any of these family court experts cite any academic knowledge or show that they have any legitimate expertise appropriate for court testimony.

Wednesday, May 10, 2006

SubGenius mom

I commented before about the SubGenius mom who lost custody of her son because of some goofy pictures, and then got hit with a gag order.

Here is more info:
After reportedly receiving scads of unflattering emails, Punch admonished Bevilacqua in court for posting information about the case on her blog and issued a gag order, precluding her from publishing again. In imposing this restriction, however, Punch -- ever obsessed -- inadvertently revealed he’d violated the rules of evidence against viewing material related to a case that has not been entered into the official record -- which includes a litigant’s blog. Her lawyers asked Punch to recuse himself, which he did -- citing only, in Rachel’s words, "a number of factors" -- and has been replaced by the Honorable Eric R. Adams in Genesee County.
The picture of her wearing a papier mache goat’s head does look ridiculous, but not any business of the family court. Judge Punch probably thinks that the SubGenius folks are disrespectful of religion, and might be offended by the picture, but the son wasn't even involved.

I am a little surprised that the judge recused himself after reading the blog on his spare time. I always assumed that my judge could read my blog if he wanted to. I am not trying to get him to recuse himself because we only have one family judge in town. If he recused himself, I'd probably get some judge who is temporarily pulled off some felony criminal case.

Tuesday, May 09, 2006

California feminist bill killed

Glenn Sacks reports:
Anti-Father CA Bill Pulled in Face of Huge Opposition

In the face of over 4,000 opposition calls, letters and faxes, California Senator Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles) has decided to withdraw a bill which would have granted custodial parents an almost unlimited right to move children far way from their noncustodial parents. Romero pulled SB 1482 just before today's scheduled hearing on the bill.

Friday, May 05, 2006

Appellate record

I just got the official record for appeal in my family court case. It is about 500 pages! And that does not include the pages for our custody dispute, which would be much greater.

I am appealing the way my child support order was calculated. The judge did something that has never been done before in California, as far as I can tell.

I am told that the appellate court rarely reverses the family court,
but I think that it is worth a try. Now I have to write a brief.

Wednesday, May 03, 2006

Irresponsible and destructive actions

A reader writes:
Your attack on Jennifer Gray in your latest brief is great. However, Gray was only representing your ex-wife. Can't it be argued that your ex-wife, not Gray, was responsible for most of "irresponsible and destructive actions" that you attack Gray for? Gray probably had no way of determining whether "unfounded allegations" were true or not.
Yes, my ex-wife is responsible for her court filings. It may well be that Ms. Gray was just carrying out the irresponsible and destructive wishes of her client. But that still leaves the question about why I should have to pay for it.

I don't think that it really matters whether my ex-wife or Ms. Gray was the main instigator of the irresponsible and destructive actions. Ms. Gray either knew what she was doing, or should have known, and should not be paid for it.

I am also not sure that it matters whether Ms. Gray knew all the facts related to those unfounded allegations. Ms. Gray charges $250 per hour for her time. (It went up from $225 per hour during the case.) She ran up a $54k bill trying to intervene in my divorce. She bases her claim on her skill and expertise. She had all the evidence when she got into the case, and none of it ever convinced the court that I was ever at fault about anything. Now she wants to get paid.

Usually, lawyers only have a chance of collecting attorney fees from the other side when they win the case. In family court, the judge has broad discretion, and can award attorney fees to a losing lawyer. But the lawyer who wants to get paid has to prove, at a minimum, that she did something worthwhile for the money. Merely making unfounded allegations that cannot be proved in court is not doing something worthwhile. It is destructive.

Monday, May 01, 2006

Brief opposing attorney fees

I just filed this, for our May 18 hearing.
Opposition brief to attorney fee motion

I strongly oppose paying any more attorney fees, and ask for a refund.

Ms. AngryMom is a lawyer. Ms. AngryMom filed for divorce in Oct. 2003. On Nov. 23, 2003, we signed a Marital Settlement Agreement (MSA) in which we agreed to 50-50 custody, a parenting plan, spousal support, and a division of assets. I had paid $80,000 for her law school education.

In June 2004, Ms. AngryMom hired Ms. Jennifer J. Gray and launched an ill-considered character assassination against me in order to seize sole legal custody of our kids, and to demand more money. Ms. Gray reports to have done $54,892.54 worth of billable work in the effort. After 22 months of motions, hearings, evaluations, discovery, and other legal wrangling, none of her allegations have been found to have any merit, and we are right back where we started – 50-50 custody of the kids and no reason to deviate from the MSA.

In contrast, I have spent approximately $1,000 in legal fees. I also spent approximately $15,000 in psychotherapist evaluations and opinions that were necessitated by the Court. These numbers would be zero if Ms. Gray had not entered the case. (Of course this case has also taken a huge toll in lost time and income opportunities.)

Ms. Gray misrepresents the facts
Ms. Gray’s April 2, 2006 declaration is very misleading, as all of her work in this case has been. In particular:

"Attention Given to Case: I worked on this case with Ms. AngryMom for over two years." [para. 7] I figure that she was only on the case 16 months, from June 2004 to Oct. 2005.

"Time Consumed: This case consumed a majority of time over a two year period." [para. 14] Again she falsely says two years, and this time she says that she spent more time on this case than all her other cases put together. I believe that she had a dozen other clients, and her statement is very unlikely.

"... resulting in excessively time consuming mediation attempts and litigation efforts." [para. 3] Ms. Gray didn’t spend any time on mediation. She spent all her time trying to litigate what had already been resolved in the MSA. She falsely blames me for the litigation.

"Success of My Efforts: Every court action concluded in Ms. AngryMom's favor." [para. 8] No, Ms. Gray failed to improve Ms. AngryMom’s situation in any significant respect. Ms. Gray devoted most of her effort to gaining sole legal custody of our kids, and she never came close to that. She did get a temporary custody order in her favor, but we eventually reverted back to the 50-50 custody we had at the time Ms. Gray intervened. Not even her motion to compel discovery gained anything.

"Mr. AngryDad chose to contest every issue presented to the court, regardless of whether or not his position was supported by law." [para. 11] The only position that I ever took was that we should stick to our MSA. After 22 months of litigation, this Court has not found a single flaw in my position.

"In addition to Mr. AngryDad's decision to represent himself, his demands required an unusual amount of time on seemingly routine issues." [para. 14] I defy Ms. Gray to name even one unreasonable demand that I made. All I wanted was to able to see my kids, pay guideline child support, and uphold the MSA. She spent an unusual amount of time on routine issues because she was creating make-work for herself and pursuing untenable legal theories.

Ms. Gray’s work has been wholly irresponsible and destructive
No good has come from anything that Ms. Gray has done, and it is really wrong to reward her for her irresponsible and destructive actions. She obviously took this case because she was gambling on getting a piece of my bank account. She has already gotten $20,000 out of me (and maybe another $6,500 under dispute), and she got nearly $10,000 out of Ms. AngryMom. This is already far more than she deserves as she has only brought frivolous motions and accomplished nothing worthwhile. She should be sanctioned, not me.

Ms. Gray’s motions for custody were based on unfounded allegations that ultimately were rejected by the Court. Her motions for support were unnecessary as our MSA already provided for guideline support. Actually, those motions just made a mess for Ms. AngryMom and myself because she used disputed figures and left us with retroactively modifiable support orders for a year and a half. I am still not sure whether those orders are subject to additional modification. Had she done her job properly, we would not have had retroactively modifiable orders. Ms. Gray’s discovery motions were also unnecessary as I had already provided the requested documents and her motions did not result in anything additional.

It is doubtful that Ms. AngryMom even owes any money to Ms. Gray. The alleged debt is not collectible because Ms. Gray could never successfully sue for the money. Her withdrawal from the case was a tacit acknowledgement that the case could not possibly justify her exorbitant fees.

At a minimum, Ms. AngryMom should have to be able to show some tangible and worthwhile benefit from Ms. Gray's work, in order to justify the extravagant attorney fees. She has not and she cannot.

I deny any fault in this case
Ms. AngryMom continues to accuse me of an assortment of sins, including neglecting the kids, violating court orders, impeding discovery, intimidating witnesses, etc. None of these allegations have any merit. This Court has not found me to be at fault about anything.

I never put our children in any danger, and there is no court finding that I did. No one even expressed the opinion that Ms. AngryMom was any better parent than I was. While there are hundreds of pages of allegations against me, there is not one single example of any incident where any judge or court expert said what I did wrong or expressed the opinion that it was even possible for me to be a better parent than I have been. (There were a couple of negative opinions about co-parenting, but neither said that I was individually responsible for any problems.)

The Court did order a temporary change in time-share in Nov. 2004, but that was not based on any evidence, testimony, or expert recommendation for immediate intervention because there was none at that time. Judge Kelsay justified it by giving us a lecture on how he believes that time-share does not matter. He also said that he had presided over many custody trials, that he thought that they all went badly, and that there must be something wrong with me if I objected to an incompetent custody evaluation. His order was ultimately reversed after a custody trial.

Ms. AngryMom tries to buttress her case by claiming that I violated court orders and other required procedures. These claims are based on events that occurred while she was represented by Ms. Gray and Ms. Gray was billing for $54,892.54 in legal work. I am sure that Ms. Gray would have known what to do about it if Ms. AngryMom’s claims had any merit. They do not.

Ms. AngryMom objects to my web site, but there is nothing illegal or improper about describing events in open court from my point of view and expressing my opinions in an online journal. If there is, I hope someone tells me, because I am continuing to write about my experiences. However much she may disagree with me keeping a journal, it is not a justification for attorney fees.

She accuses my web site of being "akin to stalking", and yet she admits to hiring a private investigator to pose as a potential roommate for the purpose of deceiving me into divulging some of my personal plans. I do not spy on her. She spies on me.

Attorney fees prior to May 13, 2005 have already been adjudicated
On May 13, 2005, Ms. AngryMom asked for $40,452.01 in attorney fees. Judge Kelly heard arguments for and against, and awarded $20,000. Ms. AngryMom is not entitled to a new hearing on attorney fees that have already been denied.

Part of the attorney fee request has been denied multiple times. In Aug. 2004 she asked for $7500 in attorney fees. I had to pay $5000 of that, and the other $2500 was denied. She asked for that same $7500 as part of her May 13, 2005 request, and she is asking for that same $7500 again now. At most, she should only be asking for fees since May 13, 2005.

Awarding appellate fees would be inappropriate
Ms. AngryMom asks for $50,000 in appellate attorney fees.

I object to this Court making any such award for appellate fees. The primary effect of such an order would be to protect this Court’s own orders by making an appeal uneconomical. This Court would have a conflict of interest if it tried to interfere with the appealability of its own orders. Ms. AngryMom can ask the appellate court for fees, if she wishes.

She has no need for an appellate attorney anyway. She is a lawyer herself, and the appellate issues are simple and straightforward. If this Court believes that it acted correctly, then the appellate court will reject the appeal anyway.

Ms. AngryMom is a lawyer; I am not. She has no need for a lawyer. There is no precedent for any attorney fees in a case like this. My paying for her law school education should have been enough. Spousal support has been terminated. She has spent a lot of time and money fishing for evidence of abuse and money-hiding. She has come up with nothing. Ms. AngryMom’s attorney fee request must be denied. I request that my previously-ordered fees be refunded.
I have no idea what the court will do. My ex-wife cited some cases where family courts have awarded exorbitant attorney fees. The judges seem to be partial to paying lawyers lots of money.

I am amazed that her lawyer, Ms. Jennifer Gray, can get away with such bald lies. Seeing how she lies in our case, I am sure that she lies in her other cases as well. The lawyers and judges in town must know what she is. I don't know why they tolerate it.