Need advice for child custody

[m_t]

Nope. But I've spent a goodly amount of time learning this stuff. Are YOU a lawyer?

[Dallas]

I already said I wasn't. 

Given you are not a lawyer and you are making an assertion about law, the onus is upon you to support your position.  Otherwise, I will be forced to treat your assertion as mere hearsay.

Dallas

[Piedpiper]

Dallas...

Did mensa deny your application request?
Did you fail the bar exam again?
What is *UP* with some of your replies?  What help are you providing to anyone by dissecting and arguing others' help... including, but not limited to, Lee's?

[m_t]

Otherwise, I will be forced to treat your assertion as mere hearsay.

Dallas

Oh, that just cuts me to the quick.    You pretty much lost me when you started taking Lee to task.

[Dallas]

Oh, that just cuts me to the quick.    You pretty much lost me when you started taking Lee to task.

Sorry to hear you feel something I said was a personal attack against Lee.  It wasn't meant that way.

Dallas

[Dallas]

Dallas...

Did mensa deny your application request?

No.

Did you fail the bar exam again?

No.

What is *UP* with some of your replies?  What help are you providing to anyone by dissecting and arguing others' help... including, but not limited to, Lee's?

What is up is I think that what is written in the police report is relevant.  Getting a copy of any police report on a DV call to my home would be a priority for me in order to determine which way the issue of DV would blow if it came up in a divorce.  m_t seems be believe that hsiehd888 is screwed if his wife called the cops on him.  I would not make that conclusion until I read any police reports. 

I'll grant arguing over whether or not a police report is hearsay is pendantic.  Does having a bit of fun with that somehow take anything away from the substance of my position that the contents of any police report on a DV call matters?

As for Lee, I did not realize that he was "he who must not be questioned."  With regard to opinions on the law, I tend to defer to his opinion.  All other opinions do not--nor, in my opinion, should--receive such deference.  It's the difference between "is" and "ought."  Lee is an expert on what is the law.  He is a citizen when it comes to what ought to be the law.  I have opinions on what ought to be and see no reason not to express those opinions at times.  The natural time to express such opinions is when someone says something that implies another opinion.  If someone disagrees with me, then the ensuing discussion is by definition dissection and argument.

HTH,

Dallas

[m_t]

As for Lee, I did not realize that he was "he who must not be questioned."  With regard to opinions on the law, I tend to defer to his opinion.  All other opinions do not--nor, in my opinion, should--receive such deference.  It's the difference between "is" and "ought."  Lee is an expert on what is the law.  He is a citizen when it comes to what ought to be the law.  I have opinions on what ought to be and see no reason not to express those opinions at times.  The natural time to express such opinions is when someone says something that implies another opinion.  If someone disagrees with me, then the ensuing discussion is by definition dissection and argument.

HTH,

Dallas

It's more the tone you took with him.

[Dallas]

It's more the tone you took with him.

Sorry, I believe in being direct.  If you disagree with someone, you disagree.  I don't see any reason to pussyfoot around.  I hope I have limited my comments to the substance of what a person said and not at the person him or herself.  If I have failed, I apologize and welcome correction  anywhere I have attacked the person instead of his or her position.

Dallas