Outcome of proven lies

[khunter]

Just curious as to what happens when you prove someone has lied knowingly in an affadvit, does the judge still take any of the information into account? What usually happens when it's obvious that it is lies? Does it change the proceedings? Is there a chance that supervised visits are changed based on the truth provided?

I received legal advice they told me that supervised visits would remain until all of us saw the child lawyer, the child lawyer decides not the judge, despite clear evidence being submitted to prove the other party lied. They also told me I would have to get hair follicle testing despite it being proven I'm not on drugs (with evidence urine testing when first allegation arose). Feeling at a loss that the justice system supports lying parent

 

[GlassHalfFull]

I guess my first question is, what jurisdiction are you talking about? A lot of the time, although it's not technical family law, domestic violence orders (DVOs) tend to be discussed here interchangeably with family law. But assuming you're talking about federal circuit court or family court, how exactly do you think you can or will prove the other party has lied? From my experience in family law, affidavits aren't tested in any real way until a trial. So you can claim you have proof that they lied, and you could even submit a document of some kind as an annexure to back up your claim, but until the case reaches a point where evidence is tested, it's very difficult to really prove anything.

And although the court processes tend to be quite structured in terms of how they progress, the registrar/judge from my experience at least, tends to have quite a lot of leeway to make interim decisions based on rules of thumb and gut instinct and there isn't much you can do about it.

I'm not sure what you're saying though... Your legal advice was that supervision would remain until "all of us" (who is all of us? you, your ex and the children?). Also, you don't usually see a child lawyer (ICL?), you see a family report writer in most cases. Is that who you meant? If so, that legal advice is probably sound. I had supervision remain in place for a good 9 months or so until the family report writer recommended it be removed. It sucked, but it is what it is.

And urine testing doesn't PROVE you're not on drugs in the broad sense of the word. It proves you haven't had drugs in the last couple of days or maybe a week or two in most cases. And if you know you've got a drug test coming up, it's definitely possible to abstain long enough that your test comes back negative, so a urine test doesn't prove you aren't taking drugs in the longer term... Hair follicle tests can 'see' further back, so they tend to be the gold standard for demonstrating you're clean.

Anyway, I'm not having a go at you. I know the justice system sucks at times, and rewards the false accuser more than the falsely accused a lot of the time. Especially in family law where it seems to be very rare for lies to be punished in any meaningful way. You just have to jump through hoops and hope that in the end, your relationship with your child(ren) is still strong. And hope that there's karma in this life or the next. 😂

 

[khunter]

I guess my first question is, what jurisdiction are you talking about? A lot of the time, although it's not technical family law, domestic violence orders (DVOs) tend to be discussed here interchangeably with family law. But assuming you're talking about federal circuit court or family court, how exactly do you think you can or will prove the other party has lied? From my experience in family law, affidavits aren't tested in any real way until a trial. So you can claim you have proof that they lied, and you could even submit a document of some kind as an annexure to back up your claim, but until the case reaches a point where evidence is tested, it's very difficult to really prove anything.

And although the court processes tend to be quite structured in terms of how they progress, the registrar/judge from my experience at least, tends to have quite a lot of leeway to make interim decisions based on rules of thumb and gut instinct and there isn't much you can do about it.

I'm not sure what you're saying though... Your legal advice was that supervision would remain until "all of us" (who is all of us? you, your ex and the children?). Also, you don't usually see a child lawyer (ICL?), you see a family report writer in most cases. Is that who you meant? If so, that legal advice is probably sound. I had supervision remain in place for a good 9 months or so until the family report writer recommended it be removed. It sucked, but it is what it is.

And urine testing doesn't PROVE you're not on drugs in the broad sense of the word. It proves you haven't had drugs in the last couple of days or maybe a week or two in most cases. And if you know you've got a drug test coming up, it's definitely possible to abstain long enough that your test comes back negative, so a urine test doesn't prove you aren't taking drugs in the longer term... Hair follicle tests can 'see' further back, so they tend to be the gold standard for demonstrating you're clean.

Anyway, I'm not having a go at you. I know the justice system sucks at times, and rewards the false accuser more than the falsely accused a lot of the time. Especially in family law where it seems to be very rare for lies to be punished in any meaningful way. You just have to jump through hoops and hope that in the end, your relationship with your child(ren) is still strong. And hope that there's karma in this life or the next. 😂

Thanks that helps, no offense taken, it is federal circuit court, and family based. And I provided proof of evidence against the allegations it wasn't in regards to DVO there is no DVO in this case,it was that I owned guns, it was a lie, the proof was submitted that there was a gel blaster it was blown out of proportion the ex put guns were being left all over the house..... They also claimed I leave child home alone despite her calling the police the police report stated I had a baby sitter. Other was that I do drugs, the lawyer we saw told me to get a urine test done as soon as I saw the allegation that's why I did it. Just curious how the court system deals with this or what outcomes occur

 

[GlassHalfFull]

Ah fair enough. Look a urine test immediately following the allegation is certainly a feather in your cap (shows you were proactively trying to clear your name I guess?) and it can't hurt your case, but as I said, it's just hard to have allegations dismissed entirely at the interim stage. It will be up to the judge to make decisions on what to take seriously and what to push aside in order to progress the matter.

I guess sometimes it can just be about perception. If you (with the help of your lawyer) present your case as being that you're just a good dad trying to spend time with your kids and all the allegations are hot air, hopefully that's how the judge will see it. They see false allegations thrown in court all the time. It's their job to have a good BS detector. But they have to balance that with their primary role which is to protect the kids from harm... Can't be an easy job sometimes. I just wish it could be quicker, cheaper and easier to get to the point where it all gets investigated properly.

As I said though, don't expect justice. The courts don't usually punish lies... Even if it's established that there's no evidence of anything the ex has accused you of, in all likelihood they will just move on from it and try to figure out arrangements that work for the kids going forward. All the lies end up just water under the bridge. The lack of punishment for lying in court only makes it more likely that it will happen to the next poor sucker. I suspect certain lawyers even recommend to their clients to lie and cheat, or at least don't discourage it or give their clients some home truths about the best interests of the kids. I wish more could be done but this is the system we have to work with.

 

[khunter]

Ah fair enough. Look a urine test immediately following the allegation is certainly a feather in your cap (shows you were proactively trying to clear your name I guess?) and it can't hurt your case, but as I said, it's just hard to have allegations dismissed entirely at the interim stage. It will be up to the judge to make decisions on what to take seriously and what to push aside in order to progress the matter.

I guess sometimes it can just be about perception. If you (with the help of your lawyer) present your case as being that you're just a good dad trying to spend time with your kids and all the allegations are hot air, hopefully that's how the judge will see it. They see false allegations thrown in court all the time. It's their job to have a good BS detector. But they have to balance that with their primary role which is to protect the kids from harm... Can't be an easy job sometimes. I just wish it could be quicker, cheaper and easier to get to the point where it all gets investigated properly.

As I said though, don't expect justice. The courts don't usually punish lies... Even if it's established that there's no evidence of anything the ex has accused you of, in all likelihood they will just move on from it and try to figure out arrangements that work for the kids going forward. All the lies end up just water under the bridge. The lack of punishment for lying in court only makes it more likely that it will happen to the next poor sucker. I suspect certain lawyers even recommend to their clients to lie and cheat, or at least don't discourage it or give their clients some home truths about the best interests of the kids. I wish more could be done but this is the system we have to work with.

Thanks so much that helps a lot, I'm new to everything it's like going in blind sometimes have no idea what the result will be. I'm hoping supervised visits will be removed I have other kids half siblings to new partner, they're so upset not spending time with my oldest, I'm hoping he can come to the home to see them they cry after every video call don't understand why he can't come over . That's what I'm pushing for, trying to show the judge I'm not a threat to my son.

 

[GlassHalfFull]

For what it's worth, my ex kept pushing for supervision to be in place "indefinitely" and the registrar in my case kind of scolded her via her lawyer (in polite terms) saying that supervision is only ever intended to be a short term arrangement while risk was addressed. In my case, my ex made some really horrific allegations against me, like that I had sexually abused my 2 year old daughter among other things. So understandably (from the court's point of view that is, not mine!!) I had supervision until I was able to get a forensic psychologist to analyse both myself and the nature of the allegations and then publish his findings on my 'level of risk' and then after that, we had a family consultant to analyse the psych report and interview all parties and then make a recommendation about how to move forward. Anyway, the whole process took a while (9 months) but thankfully the allegations were as dismissed - at least as much as they can be when it's just her word against mine and my daughter was barely verbal at that age.

Anyway, good luck with your case. It's gut-wrenching for everyone involved. My lawyer called what my ex accused me of "a hamburger with the lot" because it seemed like she just threw everything she could in my direction to see what would stick. Sounds like yours was similar.