VIC Vexatious and litigious ex

Australia's #1 for Law
Join 150,000 Australians every month. Ask a question, respond to a question and better understand the law today!
FREE - Join Now

Dpj

Well-Known Member
1 July 2020
147
7
414
Totally agree with what you said. But what better incentive to get better than to see the kids. Ill attach my summary of gorman & gorman in an hour. It was an example where a woman appeared 'supranormal' (judges words) to all but the husband. Court appointed psych said she had borderline. She refused help and denied help and despite being primary care giver by a long way lost kids. And i mean zero contact, not even a phonecall. Thats the seriousness of BPD and a stubborn subject . No history of suicidal tendencies. No history of physicality towards the kids. No drug depencies. So not all traits of BPD by any means. There were circumstances to it, mainly her vaxatious ways meaning shared care would be tough. Well, i feel thats already starting to happen to me, albeit to a much lesser extent, but im 8 months in. They were 7 years in. Outcome weighed heavily on the psych assessment kids would grow up as more successful (emotionally) with the father. In the other BPD cases the person sought help, admitted problems, and werent punished as severely. Plus, most were more troubled couples in general with greater substance abuse and lower socioeconomic situations. Either one of those outcomes ill take but the key for me is to ensure a diagnosis. So really, i see that as my gamble, its a coin toss. I think/hope an experienced psych diagnosing her correctly may kick her into reality. Ill be pushing her mum and sister too to pull their finger out and work to that too. I know her mum knows but right now is treading cautiously which is fair enough. If she gets that assessment, the court has to determine what is best for the kids. And it could be heavily argued would mean kids live with me and see her. My thoughts here are 100% for my kids. Make them resiliant people. Not like their mum or aunty who pulled them from daycare coz a boy said poo poo bottom face to one of them.

At the end of the day, our family report, done by a psychistrist, will go ahead as my ex want it to find me crazy. So i guess that'll happen and will basically set the play for what i do next.
 
Last edited:

Dpj

Well-Known Member
1 July 2020
147
7
414
there will be no problem with first bit, the second bit is really out of your control . Has she ever accepted she has a problem? Ever sought professional help for it? .... So you spend a motza on a Psych report that shows she has a mental problem. What weight will the court place on it? who knows, orders to attend a program? maybe, who knows

If she has never accepted there is a problem on her best days, the chances of her being thankful for being compelled into a program she is sure she doesn't need is about the same chances of winning lotto without a ticket... Will that make her a better mum?.. highly unlikely... Of course if she does accept she has a problem & is happy to accept help then all good.

I learnt a hard lesson many years ago.. People who do not accept they have a problem, whether it be drugs or whatever, WILL NOT change until they decide for themselves they have a problem & need help.

She has seen a number of therapist but as she says 'my therapist thinks you're so abusive and its all you'. Like @sammy01 said, Cluster Bs don't seek help much as they think nothing is wrong with them. Also, a diagnosis often leads to a lost client which hurts a therapist bottom line. A court ordered psych doesn't have to grapple with that conflict. Anyway, lets see I suppose

See my below case notes.

------
Gorman & Huffman and Anor [2016] FamCAFC 174; (5 September 2016)

Summary: Case was for financial settlement and later custody of the children. The ICL and the ‘Husband’ both claimed the ‘Wife’ had traits of, primarily, Borderline Personality Disorders (BPD) and emotional dysfunction. Court appointed Psychiatrist diagnosed the Wife with traits associated with BPD. The wife, and her psychiatrist/councillor, both denied BPD with the Wife strongly opposed to her having any personality disorders. At the start of the trial (2011) the children were ~6, 2 and one on way (Wife pregnant). They had separated in 2009 and lived under the same roof until 2011. The Wife initially had the kids full time and the father then clawed back time over the 2011-2016 period to have the kids every second weekend (I recall). Both parties had remarried and the Wife was pregnant with her fourth (father lived in England) at the time of the case.


Evidence that triggered outcome:
  • Wife had several events that worried the Husband including an AVO (rejected) against the new husband’s wife. The Father then filed to get more time in court.
  • During 2005-2007 the husband used a Dictaphone to record arguments. In these arguments, the Wife uses extreme language and threats such as ‘ill kill you’, ‘if you leave ill stab him’ (referring to their child). Of the ~20 full tapes, the conversations where the Wife threatened the Husband and the Children were strongly considered by the judge.
  • Both ‘Parties’ (wife and husband) filed affidavits regarding domestic violence. Both claimed emotional abuse against the other. Both had opposing opinions of events.
  • After the opposing opinions of the Parties and the serious claims being made via transcripts (initially) of the tapes, the court appointed psychiatrist (Dr.K) to conduct a thorough investigation. He was not (dd not) use the taped conversations in determining his outcome. His assessment included monitoring child/parent interactions, interviewing family/teachers/etc, multiple sessions with the children and the Parties.

Outcome
  • Full Custody to the father
  • No visitation rights for the mother in the first 12 months
  • No phone calls with the mother for 12 months (I recall it was for the full 12 months)
  • Visitation after 12 months to be based on treatment for BPD
  • Children and Father to seek counselling
  • Father to abstain from drinking for 12 months (wife claimed he had an alcohol problem)
  • Majority financial settlement to father (80%) despite significantly more initial and marital contributions from the Wife. Marriage lasted just a few years.

Judges Reasons
  • The judgement weighed most heavily on Dr.K’s diagnosis of BPD and the damaging affect it can have on children living with a BPD parent (including what he had already noticed in the children)
  • The inability for the Wife to accept she had an issue and her continued denial
  • Father was more believable in his evidence
  • The Judges determination that shared care would not work. It was then a choice between the Wife and Husband. The Wife’s history of non-compliance in keeping to a roster and the fact that this court result will be devastating for her (primarily due to her non acceptance of BPD) meant the judge believed that if majority care was given to the Wife, then these issues would remain. This is despite the Wife’s strong assurances it won’t happen again. He was accepting the father, as primary care giver, could work collaboratively with the Wife. But determined the for the kids to see their mother irregularly would be damaging for the kids in adapting faster and more effectively to their new life with their Father. The Judge thus determined it was either sole custody for the father or sole custody for the mother.
  • The determination the kids would be safer with their father, despite
  • Mother being primary care holder by a significant margin
  • No evidence of the mother inflicting or threatening to inflict violence on the children since the father had moved out (only evidence were on the tapes)
  • The children’s preference was to stay with their mother
  • Father displaying some signs, albeit hearsay levied by the wife, of an alcohol problem
  • Wife having better earning capacity (I recall)
My Thoughts on this case vs my situation case

I have used fake names in below (Jenny as my ex)

  • I believe shared care will work b/w Jenny and I but only effectively if I am primary caregiver.
  • Jenny and the wife both mad vexatious claims/orders. Jenny has now made multiple false accusations. Jenny is soon to be questioned in regards to DV and the police have said they have enough evidence to lay charges which I understand will happen after the baby is born. Jenny has also been served with DVO with the/a magistrate as the applicant. Police advised they’d support an undertaking for my FVO due to no sighted evidence.
  • The wife here was significantly more willing to threaten the life of the husband and the children as evidence via multiple phone calls/arguments. Jenny has threatened to kill me and I am scouring to see if I have evidence (was said to a councillor in an online session). She has never threatened to harm the kids as far as I am aware.
  • The father’s taped evidence was undeniable and powerful. The threat to kill is extreme. I do not have that evidence (still looking) but have a large amount of text, email and witness evidence of severe behaviour.
  • Jenny’s denial of any problems in on par with the Wife. Both projected abuse and blamed their Husbands entirely in defiance of the evidence.
  • The Wife, much like Jenny, appeared ‘supranormal’ (judge’s words) to all but their Husbands. Jenny however displayed glimpses of her BPD directly to others (I have statements) or to me (husband) in front of other people.
  • The Wife displayed no acts of self-harm. (I recall) which is in line with Jenny. Thus self-harm isn’t a mandatory factor in a BPD diagnosis acceptance by the court
  • Jenny (IMO) was mainly in the 1-3rd (of 4) BPD cycles. The 4th triggers Despair with anhedonic and suicidal thoughts. The movement into stage four can trigger hospitalisation, jail or the realisation by the subject they need help (most likely to seek help at this stage). Jenny often displayed anhedonia but only once expressed suicidal thoughts to me (Aug 2019 when staying at the spa for which I have correspondence)
  • The key for me is to get a Judge that takes BPD seriously and a Psychiatrist that is as diligent in his work as Dr.K
 

sammy01

Well-Known Member
27 September 2015
5,152
720
2,894
Ok. So to give you something to think about..
$100 000. Well now, that is 100 000 things to think about. Nope I've changed my mind 200 000 yep $ 200 000. See at one point dad was ordered to pay mum's costs.
So I reckon dad might well have blown $200 000. Maybe more...

Next - She is a wopper, makes my ex seem like a human. Your ex too btw. Lets compare - SHE accused dad of abusing the kids, denied access several times, failed to follow court orders, solid - ROCK solid evidence of wife abusing dad, an established history of the kids refusing to go with dad because of mum's manipulations, she abused the kids by making them fear dad, mum sought orders that would minimise dad's time to a level that would not be meaningful (para 78). They previously had consent orders for dad to have alternate weekends. She accused dad of abusing the kids. Yeah I know, I snuck that one in twice. But it is important.

Now none of that is apparant in your case. Maybe a little bit, but not to the same extent. And not with the same body of evidence that Mr Gorman could produce... " the conversations where the Wife threatened the Husband and the Children were strongly considered by the judge. " You don't have that body of evidence. Did your nutter threaten to kill you OR you and the kids? More than once as appears the case here AND do you have the proof recorded? nope.

Next - Mr Gorman (I'm assuming) did not go into court to prove the ex is a nutter. He went to court because SHE wasn't following consent orders. The end result was mum was proven a nutter. You my friend DO appear to be going to court simply to prove the ex is a nutter. More on this one later.

This is the kicker - " for the first time made serious allegations of violence against the mother" para 34. Dad kept quiet on the allegations until mum started witholding the kids... He tried to avoid using allegations of dv against the mum because he knew it would make things worse for him... But when he started to have concerns that the kids were being manipulated / abused he used his evidence that he too was abused to substantiate the fact that mum is a nutter.

5 yrs... 5 yrs from separation to the time the final hearing. 5 farking years. 5 years those kids were subject to HER abuse. Now go make a cuppa and sit down and think this next one through... Nutters get worse when pressure is applied. Mate I don't want you to go through what Mr Gorman went through. You're best bet to minimise your kids copping the same abuse as Mr Gorman's kids is to cool things down. Back a nutter into a corner and they explode. Mate go for 5 a fortnight, 6 in 2 yrs. She is offering that anyways. You pull the borderline trigger and you can bet she'll change her orders to minimal time and start a long petracted battle that will go on for years. She is very very likely to get it at least in the interim, so all of a sudden you've got a year or two where you're only getting 3 or 4 nights a fortnight... Is it worth the gamble? I think not. Get your 5-6 nights and if mum fcuks up you take her back to court.

She accused dad of abusing the kids. Oops, mentioned that one once or twice. It is fcuking important and a huge difference between your case and MR Gorman.

How is that cuppa tea going... You're gonna need a refill. You're going to court to prove the ex is a nutter (I told you I'd get back to it)
You risk coming across as the vexatious ex. The cases I hate reading the most are the ones where mum is a nutter. Dad gets infected with nuttiness and runs his case badly as a result. Mum accusses dad. Dad gets mad (rightly so) and starts making accusations back. So hypothetical to prove the point. Every drop off mum and dad argue infront of kids. Mum thows soiled underwear at dad (u'm did i mention thta happened to me) Mum stops access. Dad picks up kid from school, keeps the kid home from school for make up time for the weekend dad missed. Mum and dad argue some more via text messages. Both say dumb stuff. Mum accuses dad of DV. Gets an avo. Dad writes some dumb stuff on facebook. They're in and out of family court constantly.blah blah blah. Magistrate has decided that the toxic relationship, that both parents seem intent on using the courts as a tool for their personal vendetta against each other and the kid's childhood is being destroyed as a result. In some cases I've read, the truly heart breaking ones are when the magistrate concedes that mum has created in an image in the mind of the child that dad is the devil. The kid is that scared that it would be cruel to make the kid spend time with dad... The end result? an order saying mum has sole parental responsibility and dad is given no access. YOU are risking that end result...

You risk coming across as the vexatious ex (cpt 2). 3 psychologists. 3. three. So me and the ex had 3 goes at marriage counselling. The second one was recommended by my friend, a school counsellor who was the first to tell me about this thing called borderline personality and he said his mate would be a good counselor to pick up on that one... NOTHING. ZIP. zero. I'm the problem. ME ME ME. Alcohol was the dominant theme with one counsellor. Of course i was drinking too much, I was living in an abusive relationship, I was self medicating... The next counsellor decided I was hypersensitive to criticism and I just needed to grow a set... NO, I was the victim of emotional and sometimes physical abuse. I was traumatized and got no help from a professional who should have been able to see it. The third counsellor was a doozy, my ex and her having a group hug whilst they cried on each other's shoulders. Do you think I was gonna get a fair hearing with the sisterhood? nope. I was the problem because I had failed to understand the 'new dynamic' of marriage and I was living in an old mysoginistic paradigm. WTF? You mentioned the judge said the NUTTER appeared normal 'Supranormal'. You're risking your nutter pulling it off. You don't have the recordings like Mr Gorman had. Just like the three counsellors were unable to see that my ex is a nutter, you could be in the same situation. But you're gambling your kids on it.

" The Judge thus determined it was either sole custody for the father or sole custody for the mother." You're risking making this a toss of the coin. Heads or tails. No other possibility. High stakes. So you lose. Kids grow up in a world where mum is the sole parental influence on what sort of adults they become. You are relegated to the ancient history book of the kids lives. The winners write the history books.... But with 4-5 a fortnight you're guaranteed to be there and have close to 50/50 care

I'd like to know what happened in Mr Gorman's case. Where are they now.... See I reckon OR I fear, that Mrs Gorman did the counselling, sung like a little song bird, said the right things manipulated the whole fcuking thing and was back in the kids lives AND started working so that the seeds she'd already planted in the minds of those poor kids were ready and before you know it the kids were back refusing to go to dad and by the age of 12-14 dad is back in court with a few uncomfortable realities ahead of him.
 

sammy01

Well-Known Member
27 September 2015
5,152
720
2,894
oh and I forgot... I'm gonna break my rule about diagnosing people. BUT let me tell ya a bit about borderliner personality.

There is no cure.
stuff all by the way of effective treatments
No medications
Even if progress is made, it is only in some elements of the disorder - Self harm for example, which isn't an issue here.
Even if progress is made, often relapses happen shortly after treatment ends.
They are nutters from a far of distant planet. Human remidies don't work
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dpj

Atticus

Well-Known Member
6 February 2019
2,011
294
2,394
@Dpj .... Just a couple of points, & these are just to give another opinion, not to tell you you're approach is wrong or not going to work, but I would be very wary of relying too heavily on Gorman & Huffman .... Sure you can see some similarities, but doesn't mean the judge you see will accept that it has....

There are people with BPD, & then there are just plain evil bastards, & then there are plain evil bastards who happen to have BPD, having read the recorded transcripts of Ms Gorman, she would fall into the later I suggest.... She is a next level evil nutter. Not really sure how much of that case you can infer would have direct relevance to you...

That said, if it was your ex's suggestion to have the family report done, (albeit to show you are the nutter) then see what it turns up I guess, if you can afford a lazy $10K
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dpj

Dpj

Well-Known Member
1 July 2020
147
7
414
I think the main point here is i tried to get her to drop the upcoming $10k report. So far she hasnt and she wants it done to prove im crazy. So it will probably go ahead anyway. As i said, ill take 5 days. So lets get it into perspective. If it has to go ahead then obviously im going to see what is says.

Of course i have rock solid evidence of abuse, why do you think she is up for multiple DV charges? She accused the the husband's new wife of the abuse as i recall. She isnt offering 6 days at 2 years. She pulled it all. Ive got 5 now and thats in an interim court order so im not going backwards from that.

Of course im trying to cool things. Firstly, i didnt ask for DV charges or a DVO, in fact i asked them not to lay any of this. I dont bite back on texts or email. Sammy01, i appreciate your comments big time but youre not reading it properly. How am i coming across as vexatious? Ive never attacked only blocked. How am i risking losing them totally? Im goimg to disagree
 

Dpj

Well-Known Member
1 July 2020
147
7
414
That said, if it was your ex's suggestion to have the family report done, (albeit to show you are the nutter) then see what it turns up I guess, if you can afford a lazy $10K

I think thats exactly it. I got 5 now and that sets a strong precident never to go backwards. Ive already said ill take 5. Im certainly not pinnjng my hopes on a Gorman style outcome, j can see the differences. The psych report is required as per the court order. If she wants it, she gets it. So of course im going to see what that says.
 

Atticus

Well-Known Member
6 February 2019
2,011
294
2,394
Ive got 5 now and thats in an interim court order so im not going backwards from that.
Only point I would make here is that IF it goes all the way to a contested hearing, it will be up to the judge. There is nothing compelling a judge to accept interim arrangements as a minimum, & (if I recall correctly?) your kids are all pre school age, so if you want 5 days (or greater) to continue after school age, the whole question of practicality of proposed orders (in context of KIDS best interests) must be considered by the judge.... Things like how far apart do the parents live, are they both within reasonable distance of the kids school, how well are the kids likley to cope with the arrangement & how may it affect schooling etc etc
The psych report is required as per the court order. If she wants it, she gets it. So of course im going to see what that says.
I don't recall reading anywhere it was a court ordered report, sorry if I missed it, some of your posts are very long.... Obviously if I had known that I wouldn't have argued it's potential to not amount to much at your expense.....

As an exercise, maybe it would be worth while finding BPD cases in which a judge has referenced Gorman & Huffman .... That may be a better indicator of how much weight a judge may give it in confirmed cases of BPD or similar
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dpj

sammy01

Well-Known Member
27 September 2015
5,152
720
2,894
Dpj - a word of advice, go into the family report and every other bloody thing to do with this BS with an attitude of proving that you're a good dad and the kids will do well to have lots of time with you. That is all. Nothing else.

DO NOT... Repeat DO NOT go into the family report writer's office with the intentnion of proving the ex is a nutter. Your line of argument is that big picture you have a fair bit of common ground as far as attitudes to parenting. But there is some conflict around some issues. So for example - you're not a big fan of gaming devices, but hey, we've been playing them since commodore 64 and donkey kong.... But you think moderating screen time is a better approach than banning them which is what the ex wants in the orders.

Mate I'd like you to avoid court at this point in time. I want you in court ONLY if she wont agree to consent orders for 5 now and 6 in a year or two. I have concerns for you that you might wind up with 5 and no more. Why do I have these concers? the baby. They don't like splitting kids and the risk of this being labelled high conflict and you seeing your time reduced to 4...

That said, if the ex is gonna insist on stupid things in the orders about game consoles and re-partnering, you might need court to get final orders. I think I mentioned to you that my ex managed to cause us to blow and additional couple of grand because just before signing on the dotted line she decided she wanted this paragraph changed or an extra order included and every bloody time it meant letters between solicitors which = $$.