Battered spouse / VAWA

[RationalE]

Originally posted by max-one:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">In all simplicity:

If you want to reflect the reality, then you should be showing the both sides of the coin.
On the other hand, if you have certain objective, then you can show just one side of it (depending on what your agenda is).
Either way, it's your documentary and you are free to express yourself as you wish.

As to the interview, you may want to talk to an active duty DHS Directors as well,so your documentary would be more up to date.

There is one side on this issue that has had a free reign to present it's issue/cause in the way that is most advantageous to their side. To be a complete counter to that it would seem I would have to be their complete opposite. This cannot be the case. True abuse DOES occur and I-360s and self petitioning ARE needed. However to "balance" the issue in what I am doing would delute the message I am trying to portray. The public who this is meant for IMO cares little about the problems of USCs who marry and then get into trouble with their foreign spouses. To show 3 foreign women that have been horribly physically abused. Then show 3 American men having their lives psychologically shattered. Which one would the public wish to put their sympathy towards? Of course the women. Men are supposed to "**** it up" and take it.

A year or so ago I was in a camera equipment rental house. The kind of place the pros go to rent booms and tracking for dolleys for their films. Sitting on the counter was a brochure from the local women's shelter. They were asking documentarians to put together a film about abused women and children. Do you think an independent filmmaker would get their grant money if he proposed a "balanced" film? One that shows how false abuse charges are used to bolster custody cases? Or to secure greencards? I was told be several women connected with various women's shelters that more than half of all women at shelters for spousal abuse were there for either one of these two issues and NOT because they were abused. They weren't. Would the shelter promoting the film wish that these women with their views about the commonness of false abuse charges be interviewed to present balance? I rather doubt it. This is and has been an issue they own,

To me the way to present "balance" is to
1) admit that true abuse DOES happen and that immigrant women need the ability to self petition themselves
2) Spend the rest of the films, say 95% of it, presenting cases were this self petitioning process is being massively taken advantage of. This is a way to balance the above.

Actually this is what I am doing. I have had many interviews with a broad spectrum of people. Four trips so far and several more about to be scheduled.

Talking with an active duty DHS Director is a good idea. It would no doubt show the USCIS partyline which will look quite transparent when I am done. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good luck in your endeavor

[klinus]

A quick update on the battered spouse / VAWA situation, it turns out that her allegation was child abuse, not spousal abuse. This despite his pre-school saying no, the cops saying no and his pediatrician saying no (this despite another attempt wherein she traumatized the pediatrician to the extent that mom was thrown out by security). The short cause hearing was remarkable in the sense that the District Attorney's child abduction attorney showed up (and concurred that there was no child abuse by me) and the judge, rather than waiting for Family Court Services' recommendation (which CA Family Law requires) decided to give me 3 overnights/week pending their recommendation at the end of this month (guess the Judge wasn't overly worried about my son being harmed by me)

FCS will make a decision based on declarations from the neighbor, two police reports that had her recanting abuse twice and the pediatrician's notes that state that she tried to bully her (the pediatrician) into filing an abuse claim. In addition, sworn statements that "she has been a legal resident for many years, that I was erratic and that I have abused our son and that I was going to take said son to the slums of Calcutta and leave him there so that mom could never see the child again".

In the meantime, my son has had a scabies attack, which clearly was picked up from the sanitary conditions in the shelter:
http://www.bhchp.org/BHCHP%20manual/...DF/Scabies.pdf
I suspect that this will be considered in the final custody decision. It is also interesting to note that while mom did her Rambo act on the pediatrician my son's scabies had to have been obvious (his furious scratching when he got into my car seat was a leading clue; one look at the profusion of scars was enough to confirm the problem). Yet she either did not notice the scabies (to be real generous) or she was not counting on my being back in the picture and taking him to his pediatrician, who diagnosed the rashes as scabies. I'm not sure which is more heinous - ignorance of his condition or deliberately ignoring the problem so that it would not be held against her.



It is not clear, legally, if her taking him to the shelter based on a false child abuse pretext in itself was child abuse; certainly the number of penal codes that she has violated take most of a page-size spreadsheet – a lot of which are felonies or at minimum wobblers

For all of those who by virtue of having been abused and gone to a shelter who vehemently opposed my thesis that taking him to a shelter was abuse, may I suggest it is time to evolve from Canidae to Home Sapiens; if not watch out for the dog food from China; it can be deadly.

[klinus]

The saga continues...

Family Court Services recommended, and the Court approved, a 50/50 time sharing – joint physical and legal custody as an interim order. Three months of trauma for my son and ~$20K in legal fees later (which includes both mine and her $450/hr family lawyer), we are right where I offered to be, except that she her conditional permanent residency has expired.

Unfortunately, my son continues to reside half his time at the shelter, where the latest thing to bite him is spiders. She mysteriously procured a car, which she continues to drive him in despite the court order that specifically requires that all drivers who drive our son around be CA licensed and insured. On the one hand, her sworn court declaration states "that her green card is current; but will apply for a CA license when her green card is reauthorized".

When I proposed a 50/50 split, I did not envisage a situation where my son would be living in a shelter, with used clothing and diapers too small for him and being driven around illegally. Most shelters provide for short-term housing only, and since the reason for going to the shelter, viz. child abuse, has been eliminated by the Court, it is likely that she will be tossed out of the shelter soon.

My question is: given that it does not look like she is using WAVA, and that the final divorce decree looks like taking at least another 18 months, since she plans to appeal the custody decision, what are her options from an immigration POV, since sooner or later she will have to prove her residency status (BTW the Court has her passport) not the least when I go back to Court – soon - and ask that my son stays with me until she finds permanent housing where he is not endangered by all kinds of pestilences.

Again, I am fine with joint custody as long as he is not traumatized again by a repeat of the unnecessary saga that she put him through for what was clearly proven to be a bull$$it reason.

[simple24]

i just really do not know whay u.s embassy so rude to me, i been to interview last sept 21. and cunsoltant just ask me one question , who is bryan? i just answer him that he is my bf! but he answer me sorry u dinied! i do not know what i did wrong. verry rude! he not even read my all papers! and he give me color blue papers and say, sorry u family poor, not allow to go inside of united state, u cant afford to fly u.s... but the consultant not read my papers yet, and he say that words to me, he insult me

[Hudson]

Originally posted by davdah:
To some this may seem shocking. If you have been the father in a divorce case with children this rings all too familiar.

Sadly, it is all too common that both parents use the child as ammunition to get back at the other parent, namely the soon to be ex wife or ex husband for the audacity of divorcing them.

[Hudson]

Originally posted by klinus:
The saga continues...

Family Court Services recommended, and the Court approved, a 50/50 time sharing – joint physical and legal custody as an interim order. Three months of trauma for my son and ~$20K in legal fees later (which includes both mine and her $450/hr family lawyer), we are right where I offered to be, except that she her conditional permanent residency has expired.

Unfortunately, my son continues to reside half his time at the shelter, where the latest thing to bite him is spiders. She mysteriously procured a car, which she continues to drive him in despite the court order that specifically requires that all drivers who drive our son around be CA licensed and insured. On the one hand, her sworn court declaration states "that her green card is current; but will apply for a CA license when her green card is reauthorized".

When I proposed a 50/50 split, I did not envisage a situation where my son would be living in a shelter, with used clothing and diapers too small for him and being driven around illegally. Most shelters provide for short-term housing only, and since the reason for going to the shelter, viz. child abuse, has been eliminated by the Court, it is likely that she will be tossed out of the shelter soon.

My question is: given that it does not look like she is using WAVA, and that the final divorce decree looks like taking at least another 18 months, since she plans to appeal the custody decision, what are her options from an immigration POV, since sooner or later she will have to prove her residency status (BTW the Court has her passport) not the least when I go back to Court – soon - and ask that my son stays with me until she finds permanent housing where he is not endangered by all kinds of pestilences.

Again, I am fine with joint custody as long as he is not traumatized again by a repeat of the unnecessary saga that she put him through for what was clearly proven to be a bull$$it reason.

Unfortunately, a joint petition will not work with the two of you living in separate quarters. USCIS will probably see that as a ruse and I think you know that. Even if she temporarily lives with you, using a separate bedroom, will not suffice. Once the divorce is final, you will undoubtedly go to USCIS and give them the "evidence" that she lied, coerced you into signing the joint petition, and married you for the green card. You will deny this, of course, but in the end, think of it just the same. So, if I was her lawyer, and I am not, I would offer the following conditions: 1) after the divorce, you will not contact USCIS or any other immigraiton or law enforcement agency as to questioning the legal status of your ex wife, 2) this would include directly or indirectly through family, friends, acquaintances, or mutual colleagues, 3( if you violate the terms of this agreement, you will forfeit five years of joint custody of the child, not able to claim the child as a dependent on a tax return, and legal expenses of $20,000; and 4) you are signing this agreement with full knowledge and understanding of your rights and consequences by your appointed legal representation.

I seriously doubt you would sign such an agreement because it will go against your whole premise to begin with.

Once the divorce is final, she can still petition for removing conditional status based on divorce, but it would have no bearing on whether she has joint or sole custody of the child. I think the reason why she is appealing is because of her belief towards you and that you are paying for the expenses anyway. But I think you will now change your legal stance to drag out the divorce as long as possible.

She will only be tossed out of the domestic shelter if she violates the conditions of that shelter or if the shelter provides only short term stay. Violations of conditional living standards can include reasonable cleaning by her in the room she may have, but there are other conditions applying to all residences at the DV shelter depending on sponsor, location, organizational needs, etc. If the shelter has unsanitary conditions, then it is violating the building codes within that county jurisdiction. The director of the DV shelter could have something to answer for and it may not necessarily be on her.

[Darkforce]

False charges of domestic violence to obtain a VAWA waiver are extremely common. I believe USCIS has just begun to catch onto this fraud. My ex wife tried exactly that. The only thing it accomplished was to motivate me to sue her for fraud which I successfully did. I encourage anyone in such a situation to fight fire with fire. You can make their "stay" in America financially and emotionally devastating. Do not necessarrily count on USCIS to do anything, you must take action youself. If the spouse is conditional, chances are excellent that she will get deported. Just never lose your temper or let her manipulate you into a fight. That is exactly what she wants. Follow this advice; Protect, Divorce, Sue, Deport.

[klinus]

[quote]Originally posted by Hudson:

Originally posted by klinus:

Unfortunately, a joint petition will not work with the two of you living in separate quarters. USCIS will probably see that as a ruse and I think you know that. Even if she temporarily lives with you, using a separate bedroom, will not suffice. Once the divorce is final, you will undoubtedly go to USCIS and give them the "evidence" that she lied, coerced you into signing the joint petition, and married you for the green card. You will deny this, of course, but in the end, think of it just the same. So, if I was her lawyer, and I am not, I would offer the following conditions: 1) after the divorce, you will not contact USCIS or any other immigraiton or law enforcement agency as to questioning the legal status of your ex wife, 2) this would include directly or indirectly through family, friends, acquaintances, or mutual colleagues, 3( if you violate the terms of this agreement, you will forfeit five years of joint custody of the child, not able to claim the child as a dependent on a tax return, and legal expenses of $20,000; and 4) you are signing this agreement with full knowledge and understanding of your rights and consequences by your appointed legal representation.

I seriously doubt you would sign such an agreement because it will go against your whole premise to begin with.

Once the divorce is final, she can still petition for removing conditional status based on divorce, but it would have no bearing on whether she has joint or sole custody of the child. I think the reason why she is appealing is because of her belief towards you and that you are paying for the expenses anyway. But I think you will now change your legal stance to drag out the divorce as long as possible.

No way that I would sign the I-751, given that I filed the petition for divorce.
I have no interest in extending the divorce; I just want my son to not have to live half his time in a shelter and live a migrant life.
Given her track record of lies the court is not going to ask me to pay her attorney fees; opposing counsel has not asked for that.

She will only be tossed out of the domestic shelter if she violates the conditions of that shelter or if the shelter provides only short term stay. Violations of conditional living standards can include reasonable cleaning by her in the room she may have, but there are other conditions applying to all residences at the DV shelter depending on sponsor, location, organizational needs, etc. If the shelter has unsanitary conditions, then it is violating the building codes within that county jurisdiction. The director of the DV shelter could have something to answer for and it may not necessarily be on her.

She used a false claim of child abuse to get into the shelter; her sponsor is now aware of that and has backed away from her. She is occupying a bed that should be used by someone who has a genuine need.

[Darkforce]

Irony: Laws to prevent violence to women actually increase violence against women. If a man will be falsley accused and convicted of this crime, there is only an incentive to commit it. Think about that.

[Hudson]

Originally posted by klinus:
She used a false claim of child abuse to get into the shelter; her sponsor is now aware of that and has backed away from her. She is occupying a bed that should be used by someone who has a genuine need.

She made the claim of what she believed and thought as true just as you do the same.

You made the claim that scabbies is caused by unsanitary conditions at the DV shelter. You should read the article you posted a little more carefully. It states, "Scabies is generally transmitted by intimate contact, but transmission also occurs by fomites (often in clothing or bedding)." Or this site state:
* crowded housing, shared beds, and crowded schools and day care centres;
* a high paediatric population;
* failure to recognize an infestation;
* reduced access to medical or nursing care;
* faulty application of treatment regimens;
* failure to treat close contacts;
* failure to eradicate scabies from clothing and bed linen; and
* a lack of running water, which may predispose people to secondary skin infection.


You could make the argument that it is not sanitary, bur poor a house keeper, if you want to state that she does not wash the bedsheets or clothes in hot water. But that is a nafarious argument. if you claim unsanitary conditions, it goes not against her, but to the DV shelter which she is staying at. And if she moves to a better DV shelter, what would your argument be then I wonder?

[klinus]

The key issue is the false claim of child abuse; secondary to that is the collateral damage of scabies and insect bites.

Without the claim of child abuse she would never have been able to make it into the shelter and my son would not have been afflicted with the above infestations; even if she had gone to a Rolls Royce shelter that would still not have justified the false claim of child abuse, which is what I believe led to the highly unusual situation of dad getting half custody of a 3 year old.

[klinus]

To be clear, I don't think that it is financial - she just wants to get even with me by taking my son away from me and hurting him since it is the only weapon left to hurt me with (and, frankly, its hell of a weapon).

Joint 50/50 custody of a three year old when the Mom is not a drug user or confirmed alcholic is really rare and requires serious work on the part of the mom to convince the court that she does not have the best interests of the child but by God she did an outstanding job.
The dust has not settled yet; there are plenty of opportunities for her to commit harakiri long before the ICE catches up with her when she is forced out of the shelter.

[TylerJohn]

My immigrant wife filed a false domestic violence charge against me in last year in order to get the green card by fraud. I was found not guilty of the charge however she was allowed to keep the restraining order on me for a two year period. We have since divorced. I have 4 witnesses to testify that she lied and told them that I was never mean to her or ever tried to hurt her. I also discovered alot of other evidence on her that her marriage to me was really based on fraud plus she may still be married to her husband in Asia. I have filed complaints with ICE and not a word from them. Any info on this would be appreciated.

[4now]

Hide Post
which is what I believe led to the highly unusual situation of dad getting half custody of a 3 year old.

Hello Klinus


Unusual situation of 50/50 custody. Sorry to tell you this but it would be UNSUAL if it were not joint custody. It would take some extreme circustances for this to go any other way. This is almost standard procedure I am sorry to tell you. Even when the courts place PHYSICAL custody with one parent, the joint custody status remains. So dont get too excited about yourself, otherwise the court would have placed 100% physical custody with you.

Next.. you are grasping at straws thinking that she is not going to get greencard, even on regular waiver.

Stop wasting your vengerul efforts. If you filed for divorce, what is taking so long .. are you purposely delaying it... if so this is going to backfire on you when she files that waiver under emotional abuse and under bonafide marriage. she has easy emotional abuse case becuase look at you..... You stand by and idly watch as u allow her to live in a shelter with the child that you claim to care about. You should be ashamed and your family should be ashamed of you!! Surely you have enough money to place her in a rental/ or nice home room rental than to continue to watch the woman you married who bore you a child to live like that. Where is your responsibility man.

All this legal money/court fees you are wasting could have been put to better use.
Are you paying child support and spousal support? She should have take you into family court and applied based on the I-864 alone for financial support. Hmmm.. or maybe she did and this is what all this is about to get out of it.

Your story about family court bla bla is bunk.. Sprint girl had you pegged.No family agency will alledge kidnapping or child abuse to go into a shelter. Btw these agencies will provide these women with an automobile thru different programs to help them on their feet. this is what you were supposed to be doing for this alien that you married. Those cars that we donate to charity.. this is one of the uses from that program.

So my best advice to you is to get over and genuinely be concerned for your son.by helping your wife get a place so that both of u can enjoy your son. THAT sir would be the responsible and genuine thing to do.

[Quote}there are plenty of opportunities for her to commit harakiri long before the ICE catches up with her when she is forced out of the shelter.[quote]


Hellooooooooooo.. Wake up from this dream. why is ICE going to be looking for her? SNAP OUT OF IT! The lady status has only been terminated b/c of joint 751.. and I doubt very much if USCIS has even gotten around to doing that yet. even if so... it would probably take at least 2-4 years before they would generate a NTA for her. Soon as that divorce comes thru, she's filing that waiver on bonafide marriage and if she is smart she will include the mental abuse that you yourself have just described here.

Best wishes for your pawn.. er I meant son. He is going to need all the help he can get in this Chess Game.

[klinus]

Aaah the ignorant canidae from NOW howls:

Just the facts, ma'am:

1) Joint custody is the norm; however, joint 50/50 physical custody for a child 3 years has a probability of less than 5% in California. As an active, and feral member of NOW surely you must be aware of that. Also the rare cases where that happens is when clearly the mother does not have the best interests of the child (using him as a pawn?)
2) She decided to take him to a shelter, claiming false child abuse in the hope of gaining custody. The Court saw through this. The shelter has now figured out that her claim of child abuse is false and is likely counseling her out to make room for people with genuine abuse.
3) The Court order specifically states that our son has to be driven by California licensed and insured drivers. She chose not to get one, relying on her Canadian license despite our DMV requirement of being locally licensed within 10 days of taking up residence in the state (which is the reason why she does not have one of my cars – the impound fee for being caught is $200 + $1800 tow fee)
4) This violation of the court order and her false claim to legal residency, and the fact that there is no real reason to him be in a shelter where he has had multiple infestations will be addressed in the long cause motion, due before the end of the year, where the Court will have (unlike the short cause motions that have led to the interim orders) time to examine the issues and make a determination about which parent the child is better off with.
5) Contested custody divorces range in California from 18 months to 4 years, in part because our Court calendar takes at least 3 months to find a spot.

The interesting part of this is that rather than agreeing to an amicable solution, she took off to a shelter, hired an expensive immigration attorney ($400/hr) and now has an interim 50% timeshare with our son (which will go down since I represent stability, continuity, and, frankly, the likelihood of continuing Court jurisdiction over the minor child vs. the inherent flight risk and instability that she stands for).

My only interest in this is the welfare of my son; she has chosen a path that will require her to be out of status until the final divorce decree which could take a long time. Also, because of the anonymity inherent in the shelter, communication between us can only happen through the lawyers at $575/pop (her $400/hr and my $175/hr). Under the circumstances, time for her to get off her high horse.

When you cannot make custody decisions, the Court makes the decisions.

Dem's de facts, ma'am. "tis occasionally possible for the female of the species to be the bad guy