Recent Posts

Popular Posts

Desiree Capuano & James Pendleton
250 E. Placita Lago Del Mago
Sahuarita, AZ     85629
Tel: 520-288-8200
Back to Mailbox Back to mailbox
Newer Message Newer message
Older Message Older message
Re: G*****'s travel plans
From: Desiree Capuano <>
To: Patrick <>
Date: Mon, Dec 15 2014 7:37:02 am

You will recall that In my consent, I expressly stated that G***** is to
be in the sole custody of his father Richard and that any other
personage would be considered kidnapping and not allowed.  Those were the
terms.  You acknowledged receipt as well, but please read below to refresh
your memory:

"During this period of time he is to remain in the sole care of his father
Richard, an no one else."

Richard's untimely demise would seem to make adherence to this clause this

Having G***** convey the message was wishful thinking on my behalf that it
would be received and met with understanding rather than the venom and
immediate rejection that I am frequently faced with.  It was not meant as a
form of manipulation, coercion, or whatever "message passing" that you may
infer/interpret the intent to have been.

All that being said, can we please just be adults here and have some normal
issues?  You are correct in stating that the only one hurt by this behavior
is G*****.

You can be whoever you want to be the rest of the time... James Dean, Marry
Poppins, or even the Queen of England.  I really don't care.  It doesn't
matter.  Further, It doesn't matter if I believe whatever you are taking to
be your present identity is factual.

Where G***** is involved you need to suck it up and be Richard.
Wether that be a made up or previously assumed identity.  Richard is
who is on all pertinent information pertaining to G*****.  Work with me

May you please confirm that during his time in Canada, G***** will be and
remain in the sole custody of Richard?

Thank You.


On Sunday, December 14, 2014, Patrick  wrote:

> Desiree:
> G***** mentioned earlier that you had told him to tell me that unless I
> can provide proof that I legally changed my name from Richard to
> Patrick then you would not allow him to visit me during his winter
> break.
> I remind you that the court expressly forbids using the child (G*****, in
> this case) to pass messages between the parents (us, in this case).  I have
> informed G***** of such and will not accept any messages from him on your
> behalf.
> I further remind you you did clearly agree to the travel arrangements
> previously committed to by me with respect to G*****'s winter break;
> moreover, you may recall me insisting on receiving a clearly written
> authorization for G*****'s visitation plans for exactly this type of
> reason.
> With respect to your request for proof that I legally changed my name from
> Richard to Patrick, I cannot provide such proof because such name
> change never occurred.  The name on my birth certificate is Patrick and
> the US and Canadian governments will only issue ID in the name that is on
> one's birth certificate.  I'm sorry that you are only now accepting the
> reality that you married and had a child with someone who you clearly knew
> so little about (kinda tells you something about yourself, though, huh)?  I
> guess I'm just that good...and you're not.
> You may also remember, in December 2011, I declared under oath, in open
> court, before you and the Judge, that my birth name was Patrick.  That
> was 3 years ago.  But all of a sudden now it's become an issue for you?
> So, is it an issue because you finally realize that I've been telling the
> truth the past 3 years and you look like an idiot and you're trying to save
> face?  Has there been anything that you accused me of that actually turned
> out to be right?
> As for G*****'s visit: the only person who will be adversely affected by
> you not allowing him to visit according to the terms you already agreed to
> in writing, would be him (I am devoid of emotion so I would only be
> affected financially but I'm not going to lose any sleep over the few
> hundred dollars for the plane ticket).
> Patrick