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 3:21:13 pm

I can tell that reading comprehension is not your strong suit based on your
previous response.  Please try to focus here, as it involves G*****.

Do you have identification (legal or otherwise) that you are able to
present, stating that you are Richard should you be challaged while
G***** is in your custody?  This is very important because if anything
should happen, G***** is not authorized to be in the care of custody of
anyone other than Richard, regardless of what you may call yourself.

There is a very real possibily of negative ramifications should this not be
the case.  I would prefer to spare both G***** and you from that.

I am trying to be proactive and look out for everyone's best interest
here.  Please try to be cooperative, I know it is difficult.

~ Desiree

On Monday, December 15, 2014, Patrick  wrote:

>  Desiree:
> Please have a dictionary on hand and double check the meanings of the
> words you are using before you respond.  There are no threats (a threat
> requires a statement of intention to cause harm in order to coerce the
> other party to do or not do something).  There is no libel (libel is the
> defamation of another through written words, knowingly using false
> statements...if something is true then it's not libel, no matter how
> defamatory it may be).
> Another DNA test will prove, without doubt that I am G*****'s biological
> father.  The court has already established I am his father (through the
> numerous appearances we have both made).  You have already conceded I am
> his father.  Therefore, there is no question I am his father, regardless of
> what name is on my ID or his birth certificate.  If you'd like we can have
> his birth certificate updated to reflect this.
> Nevertheless, I AM the person that you have known since January 2000, as
> Richard.  G***** knows me as Patrick, however.  Do you really
> suspect I am some other physical entity just pretending to G*****'s father
> so that you will send him here to a total stranger?  Are you really that
> obtuse?
> Patrick
> On 2014-12-15 12:25 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
> Patrick,
>  There is no need for dramatics, threats, or liable.  My request and
> requirement for visitation are and have always been quite simple.
>  There is no formal documented association between G***** and a
> Patrick with regard to paternity.
>  From your previous e-mail you state that I have only known you as
> Richard.  That seems to be a loose affirmation of my previous
> requirement.  May you please confirm that you are in fact the person
> G***** and I know as Richard?
>  Thank You
>  ~Desiree
> On Monday, December 15, 2014, Patrick  > wrote:
>>  I might also point out that you stated, not only Richard, but also
>> "his father".  There is no uncertainty that I am G*****'s biological
>> father.  Therefore, again, your argument about naming is not really
>> significant, is it?
>> Patrick
>> On 2014-12-15 6:37 AM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>> Patrick,
>>  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 impossible.
>>  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
>> here.
>>  May you please confirm that during his time in Canada, G***** will be
>> and remain in the sole custody of Richard?
>>  Thank You.
>>  ~Desiree
>> 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