This Blog is intended for educational and informational purposes only. Some posters are court ordered to have no contact of any kind with the person having a Restraining Order against them. Meaning no third party contact as well. If you by chance know a person one of our posters/authors is discussing to share their experiences with others, we ask you to respect our rights to free speech, under the United States Constitution. Restraining Order Blog is not meant to harass, directly or indirectly contact, harm, intimidate, bring any emotional distress, stalk or cyberstalk, nor intentionally slander or damage any individual in any way. Nor is it intended to initiate any third party contact on behalf of any poster or author, or violate a current restraining order in any way either. If you feel there is anything here that is slanderous, untrue, or illegal, please bring it to our attention. We will examine your request promptly, and any post you find offensive will be reviewed for removal in a timely manner. If you have a story to share, email me at ka7niq@yahoo.com, and I will add you as an author on Restraining Order Blog.












11/12/2009

FLORIDA MAN'S MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR DIRECT CRIMINAL CONTEMPT (PERJURY)

Restraining Order Blog suggests you don't let her get away with Lying Under Oath in Court.
Restraining Orders place incredible power over you in the hands of a woman.
Once she gets an Injunction against you, she can basically have you arrested anytime she likes by simply lying.The old saying "Hell has no fury like a woman scorned" is so very true.
Often times, her family members, or her new boyfriend will lie for her, and you will be arrested.
Once you are in jail, with an impossible bond to make, or get your witnesses together, you will be "easy meat" for a Prosecutor looking to enhance their conviction rate!
To the Police, you will be just another arrest they can brag about to their fellow Cops, atthe end of their shift.
Our advice is to fight like hell BEFORE the restraining order is made permanent.
This Florida Man did it, and his Motion was granted.
Don't let her get away with Perjury.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA




CASE NO.: FMCE 08 006280 (35)



Honorable Judge Arthur Birken

In re the Marriage of



JOSEPHINE SCOTT,



Wife/Petitioner,

and



DAVID MICHAEL SCOTT,



Husband/Respondent.

____________________________________/



RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE


FOR DIRECT CRIMINAL CONTEMPT (PERJURY)



COMES NOW the Respondent, DAVID MICHAEL SCOTT, pro se, and herewith moves this Honorable Court for its Order to Show Cause for Direct Criminal Contempt ordering Wife to show cause why she should not be held in direct criminal contempt of this Honorable Court for having made numerous materially false statements under oath, and in support thereof would show unto the Court as follows:

PRECIS

1. Husband respectfully submits that this motion does not require an evidentiary hearing because the claims made herein are self-proving and supported solely by Wife’s indisputable sworn written statements contained in notarized and verified written petitions filed and docketed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court, together with Wife’s sworn oral testimony in open court as recorded on audio compact disc by the Court’s judicial assistant and made an official part of these proceedings.

MEMORANDUM OF LAW

(Perjury - Florida Statutes 837.02, et. seq.)

2. Wife has made numerous sworn allegations in these proceedings and related domestic violence proceedings containing numerous material statements that are false, were known by Wife to be false at the time they were made, and since they were given under oath they are therefore perjury and according to the Supreme Court of Florida, constitute fraud upon this Honorable Court. Parker v. Parker, 950 So.2d 388 (Fla. 200_) (perjury in divorce proceeding is fraud upon the trial court). Where a petitioner makes false statements in a petition for a domestic violence restraining order, the petitioner is subject to perjury criminal prosecution under Fla. Stat. 837.02. Adams v. State, 727 So.2d 983 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). Moreover, it is proper for this Court to consider Wife’s perjury as a factor in evaluating the best interests of the child and primary residence and time sharing under Florida Statutes section 61.13 (3)(k). See, CIVIL DOMESTIC VIOLENCE/UNIFIED FAMILY COURT (UFC) BENCH CHECKLIST, p.7, section 14(b) (200_).

BACKGROUND

3. These divorce proceedings commenced June 2, 2008. Two weeks earlier, after Husband had for months declined Wife’s ongoing repeated demands that he vacate the marital home, Wife herself departed the marital home and moved to the City of Hialeah in Miami-Dade County taking with her the parties’ then five-year-old daughter.

4. Wife resided continuously and without interruption at her new residence in Hialeah for next two months. At no time did she return to the marital home.

5. During this two month period while Wife lived in Hialeah, Husband continued to reside in the marital home without interruption, earnestly seeking reconciliation of the marriage, and had no personal contact whatever with Wife. With the exception of two short 20 minute visitations at her school, Wife also refused Husband any contact with the minor child.

6. Also during this two month period, Wife continued her repeated demands that Husband leave the marital home so that she could return. Husband declined these demands on the basis that 1) Wife was and had been for two years engaged in an extra marital affair, and 2) Wife had left the marital home voluntarily and without incident.

7. At the end of this two month period, having no lawful means to compel Husband to leave the home, Wife on July 3, 2008 filed her third petition for domestic violence restraining order in five years. In her petition, Wife made sworn allegations that, inter alia, Husband had threatened to kill Wife, kill his daughter and commit suicide.

8. Wife made no such allegations in her divorce petition filed thirty-one (31) days earlier. She had, however, made the exact same allegations four years earlier in her second petition for restraining order.

9. Two weeks later on July 14, 2009, and while under oath in open court, Wife directly contradicted her previous sworn statements in response to direct questioning by her own attorney and in response to sua sponte follow-up questioning by this Honorable Court by admitting that Husband had never threatened her in any manner whatever.

WIFE’S SWORN FALSE STATEMENTS

(Threats of Violence)

10. The following are excerpts from Wife’s three petitions for domestic violence restraining orders and two petitions for dissolution of marriage, all which were made under oath and understood by Wife to be subject to penalty of perjury if found to be knowingly false at the time they were made.

First Restraining Order

October 3, 2003

11. After five years of marriage, but less than two months after purchasing the marital home, Wife on October 8, 2003 filed her first of three petitions a for a restraining order accusing Husband of domestic violence and child abuse arising from a single instance of marital discord (

“[H]e has threatened to take [Rebecca], and threaten to kill himself. I fear he may do so since he is depressed because he was fired.”



Husband vehemently denied these allegations, and when Wife failed to appear in court to testify the Court dissolved the restraining order and dismissed the case.

Second Restraining Order

May 17, 2004

12. Seven months later, on May 17, 2004 Wife filed her second of three petitions for domestic violence restraining order:

"[David] threatened to take his own life and the life of his daughter. . . . [He] threatened to take his life and our daughter with him. . . .”



“I fear that he may feel that he is at the end of his rope and take his life and his daughters life. I fear for her safety on a daily basis. . . .”



“He is extremely unstable and unpredictable . . . extremely violent . . . I fear that my life and my daughter's life are in danger. . . . He is a bomb waiting to explode. . . .”



13. Again, as before Husband vehemently denied these allegations. After Wife requested a perfunctory continuance of the hearing to avoid appearing in court Wife filed a notarized voluntary dismissal of the petition and discharged her attorney handling the matter.

14. Incredibly, just twenty-nine days after Wife’s sworn allegations that Husband threatened murder and suicide, threatened to harm her and the minor child, and that she feared for her life and the life of the minor child, Wife filed a divorce petition and made another sworn statement that “[b]oth parties are good parents.” She also made a sworn request that the Court “[a]ward shared parental responsibility.” The following is a direct quote from that petition:

"Both parties are good parents, but the Wife is the proper person to have the primary care and custody of the parties’ minor child, with supervised visitation awarded to the Husband.”



“[Wife] respectfully requests that this Honorable Court ... [a]ward shared parental responsibility. . . .”





15. In this 2004 divorce petition Wife made no mention of any of the alleged threats of violence she had put forth just twenty-nine days earlier. Wife eventually voluntarily dismissed this petition as well and the parties’ lived together for the next four years without incident or altercation.

16. Then, on May 14, 2008 Wife left the marital home and two weeks later filed her second divorce petition, this time again making no mention of any alleged threats of violence. 17. Thirty (30) days later, however, when Husband refused to leave the marital home, Wife filed her third petition for restraining order suddenly alleging, as she had four years earlier, that Husband threatened to hurt Wife, hurt his daughter and commit suicide.

18. The following are direct quotes from Wife’s sworn statements contained in her July 3, 2008 petition for domestic violence restraining order:

Third Restraining Order

July 3, 2008



“He has been threatening to hurt me and has hurt me in the past so I will not reconcile. I fear his mental state will worsen and he will hurt me again and worse harm our daughter.”



“He continues to threaten me. . . . I fear he will shoot me and take my daughter and hurt her too.”



19. One month later, however, Wife directly contradicted the above sworn statements and admitted under oath to the contrary:

2nd Court Hearing on Third Restraining Order

September 4, 2008



20. The following is Wife’s sworn testimony excerpted from the second hearing on Wife’s third petition for domestic violation restraining order:

Q: “Has Mr. Scott ever threatened you by words?”



A: “He’s never directly stated that he’s gonna kill me or anything like that.”



Q: “Has he ever threatened you by action?”



A: “Um, I believe he has because the way he leaves his guns throughout the house, and I’m afraid to bring it up and say, you know, ‘why are you doing this’ and ‘why can’t you put it away’ and I think it will trigger basically a fight among us which will escalate and I’m always afraid since my daughter’s in the house that I can’t really bring anything up just because there’s guns in the house and I don’t want a problem with him.”



THE COURT: “Well, maam, has he ever waved a gun at you?”



A: “No, he’s never--”



The COURT: “Has he ever pointed a gun at you?”



A: “He’s never pointed a gun at me.”



THE COURT: “Has he ever picked up a gun and without pointing it at you said ‘I’m gonna use it on you?’”



A: “No, he’s never pointed it and said ‘I’m gonna use it on you,’ but he’s knowledgeable about gun safety and he leaves them around to implicitly threaten me.”



Q: “Were you intimidated in any way by the presence of the gun?”



A: “Yes, it intimidates me and I’m scared that in my sleep he’ll wake up and sometimes even harm me.”



THECOURT: “Based on what? You’ve said he never threatened you verbally, he’s never threatened you with a weapon, uh, what is it - - why is it that you have- -



21. Here, Wife indisputably contradicts her previous sworn statements in her third petition for domestic violation restraining order and shows that said statements were false and were known by Wife to be false at the time they were made. Since they were made under oath they are therefore perjury within the meaning of Florida Statutes section 837.02, constitute direct criminal contempt of this Honorable Court and are subject to criminal prosecution.

22. To summarize, in her June 2, 2008 divorce petition and emergency motion filed just two weeks after she had moved away from the marital home, Wife made NO allegations of threats of murder and suicide, NO allegations of threats of harm to her or the minor child, and NOR did Wife allege that she feared for her and the child’s life and safety.

23. Five weeks later, however, with Husband still to refusing to leave his home, Wife suddenly became afraid for her life and resurrected the exact same allegations from four years prior, to wit, that she feared for her life on a daily basis because Husband allegedly had he “threatened to kill his family and commit suicide.”

24. In other words, every time Wife wanted to remove Husband from the marital home she filed for a domestic violence restraining order, making unsubstantiated allegations that she feared for her life and the life of the minor child.

25. To be sure, Wife’s vague allegations that Husband is “unstable,” “erratic,” “unpredictable,” that he is “extremely violent,” that he suffers from “mental illness,” and, of course, that he “threatened to kill his family and commit suicide,” were wholly unsupported by any evidence except Wife’s own self-serving testimony despite ample opportunity to gather, prepare and on two separate occasions present such evidence to the Court

26. In the case at hand, however, the Honorable Judge Birken found Wife’s allegations devoid of evidentiary support and on September 4, 2008 dissolved Wife’s third restraining order and dismissed her petition. Yet, this took two months to accomplish, during which time Husband was forced to live elsewhere having been removed from his home by police the same day Wife filed her petition.

No comments:

Post a Comment