25yearsMLC 10 Later I FILE D part 8

[25yearsmlc]

Why should l let go of the leverage?

THIS. I never understood why anyone would agree to bifurcation, because you do lose leverage to bring them to the table.

Well if you lack a legit objection you don't have leverage. You lose the motion in opposition, which costs more and potentially makes you look like you are hanging on.


Finally Since the pensions are in line with finally working, (i.e. supposedly being sent directly to me--so far only one has happened that way) and b/c I am getting health coverage, my L says I do not have leverage enough. Am I overwhelmed by her "adequate advocacy"? Nope.

Also this hearing is solely about spousal support, which is our biggest disagreement so it's later in yet another hearing, $$$$$ that I'll seek attorney's fees based on sanctions AND need, and the property division remains. That is somewhat clear, but I want the

Like our joint assets he took ***which is NOT A CRIME --can you believe it? Fraud, yes, shitty, yes.

(Ownit if you are out there, that is something I want to change. Legislatively I mean.

Judges ought to be able to punish the thieves - just like the IRS does for evaders.

I want women (or men) in my position, who were impaired or just had all the JOINT accounts blocked or stolen right before or during a sep/divorce,

NOT to just get their half back (after spending money to get what was theirs in the first place!)

I want it to yield the victim more than half now. In my situation, b/c h stole it and defrauded me when I was impaired. What a jerk.

The IRS does not tell a tax evader "oh, you underpaid. Sounds rough. So give us what you owe and only that, now." (If the IRS did that, then what's the downside or risk the tax evader takes when evading?)

In my idea, the person who steals the money from a joint account with the intent to defraud or retain community joint funds, ought to have to pay more than their spouse's half back. Even if only paying a fine to the court and even if it does not go back to the innocent spouse (which is my preference of course--at least refund the costs spent by the innocent spouse who had to go thru hoops to get their share)

= it would punish the wrong doer. Motivate people NOT to do it. I was always told that "judges frown upon taking more than half" but what does that mean?

I say mandate that the judges have the discretion to give more & maybe increases the judge's motivation. H did this to me days after I was released from a neurology ICU.

I don't think federal banks are easy to lobby and I doubt they can be counted on to say "yes we NOT require a notarized copy for why you want ALL of this money" b/c there are many legit reasons one spouse might want all of joint funds one day - getting that retirement RV, etc.

Or the defrauder could get 1/4 of the money, a few times to "invest/buy a car/special jewelry" etc and still get away with it.

I suspect banks would oppose any federal laws about this, I get it.

But here's the problem.

I've got 5 women in my Divorcecare who have h's who took ALL their life savings from joint accounts, leaving these women (all over 50, including a 64 y/o married for 40 years) and all 5 men have OW's on the side whom they now live with and seem to justify this or "want to live while they can". It's incredible b/c these are not serial killers yet have the same type of conscience I saw when practicing criminal law.

So where do these women go? One is to live in her son's attic and some will end up on welfare.

This is WRONG. It has to be stopped or at least decreased.


BACK TO EARTH...

In some ways I don't want to fight the bifurcation. Makes me look needy and I'm not sure it does affect me financially. Let him marry OW schmoopie and let me free too. Enjoy each other, OW/H. Marrying the rebound is just brilliant H.

Zero contact with our kids over the holidays, btw. Not a word from h, OR his parents OR his brother. I texted BIL on Christmas and that evening he texted me back, no one else with a "Merry Christmas to all".

I know they are not my family, I know they are not people who reach out and they may feel ANY contact with me is awkwardly and disloyal to h. But really, nothing for our kids from any of them? I cannot imagine erasing someone or a family that was created.

I stayed in touch or tried to, with each SIL of mine.

Only those who broke my siblings hearts were erased, but they attended my parent's funerals and were welcomed there...

All nieces/nephews are in our lives. No child was left behind the way my kids seem to be.

Our son 31, or should I say MY s31 and his gf, visited his grandfather/grandmother (she's been married to FIL for 25 years, but is not the bio grandma) at Thanksgiving.

It was with the understanding that H/ OW would not be there. I did not request this and did not bring it up.

But it bothers me deeply that some months ago, h texted our d's saying "I love you very much and will reach out after the divorce."

So a Merry Christmas or a Happy Birthday or a gift, would hurt his legal interests?

I think the opposite IF it ever gets in front of a judge.

Gotta let go of so much.


M and I get alone well and we COMMUNICATE a lot. I mean, it's hard not to want to plug him right into the slot of "Significant other" b/c we fit well.

And there's probably a lot of projection on both our parts, going on. But I do know for a fact that we are both self aware.

It helps.