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: Your loving home and parental teaching and guidance
From: Patrick <>
To: Desiree Capuano <>
Date: Tue, Jan 13 2015 10:56:23 am

I've already explained this to you (and the court) numerous times, but 
you either have a very short memory or very small comprehension, so I'll 
explain it again.  Before the passing of the PATRIOT act it was legally 
acceptable for a person to change their name by assuming a new name and 
becoming commonly, or generally, known by that name. Having utility 
bills, pay stubs, et cetera in that new name was sufficient, over time, 
for that name to become one's "legal name". So, prior to the passing of 
the PATRIOT act, Richard was my legal name as the term was defined 
at that time.  After the passing of the PATRIOT act the various levels 
of government no longer accepted that as a recognized method changing 
one's name and, as such, my legal name reverted to my birth name.

Therefore, there was no lie and you are, as always, incorrect.

You are also incorrect about me growing up in a trailer park.  I grew up 
in government housing - the projects, not a trailer park.


On 2015-01-13 10:33 AM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
> Raymond,
> Again, your capacity for transference and random accusations is truly 
> impressive.  Go ahead and take that as a compliment if you like.  (But 
> not something I'm attracted by, so let me be clear.)
> Citing evidence with you is pointless, but let's go with some low 
> hanging fruit.  It is pretty simple, but I'll go slow so that you can 
> follow.  Please try to pay attention.  If you truly are Patrick, 
> you lied about your identity to me, presented a false name on legal 
> documents.  Including G*****'s Birth Certificate. If Patrick is 
> your fake identity, then you are "being dishonest" right now.  That 
> was some pretty simple logic backed by examples.  Let me know if you 
> need me to diagram in Crayon for you.
> As you have repeatedly failed to provide evidence that you are not a 
> member of a subhuman species previously thought to be mythical such as 
> a Morlock, I do not feel that I am required to respond or read your 
> tantrum further.
> What is it like being so wrong and self-assured all the time?  Does it 
> feel blissful?  Does it remind you of home?  You know... The trailer 
> park that you grew up in?
> ~ Desiree
> On Monday, January 12, 2015, Patrick  > wrote:
>     Desiree:
>     You still have not provided any explanation or cited any
>     references to specific actions on my part, or provided any
>     supporting evidence for any of your claims that I am, or have
>     ever, been dishonest with you.  Until you are able to do so you
>     should stop making such claims because you sound like a child in a
>     school yard shouting "I know you are but what am I".
>     If you did not inform ICE of my birth name and that I was born in
>     Florida then that means they must have already had that
>     information in my file - which means they knew, officially, during
>     the time they were holding me in custody.  Prior to that point I
>     had never mentioned Florida or the name Patrick to them.  You
>     understand if I choose not to believe you, right?
>     To which rabbi do you refer?  I do not currently have a rabbi with
>     which I confer.  I shall presume you are not actually referring to
>     ANY rabbi and are just making stuff up again.
>     No, I don't cackle.  I don't believe I have ever cackled. Cackling
>     is unbecoming.  I use the terms "destroy" and "ruin" because they
>     are both vague and innocuous; they convey the intending meaning
>     without the possibility of being interpreted as being a threat of
>     physical harm.  If you know of a more appropriate term feel free
>     to let me know and I shall consider using it instead.
>     Now, let's shift the discussion to you.  The reason you have
>     responded to all of the messages I have sent over the past day or
>     so, and that you have done so expeditiously, is because you know,
>     though you will not openly admit, that the things I have said are
>     true.  In particular:
>     - you've failed to make G***** love and/or respect you;
>     - you know G***** still wants to return to living with me and
>     that the moment he does return, he will have no interest in
>     maintaining any further relationship with you;
>     - you know G***** has not acclimated to your environment and your
>     way of life and that he never will;
>     - you know G***** looks down on you and Sage as being white trash
>     that is below him;
>     - you know that these are all things I told you would happen, long
>     before you took G***** to Phoenix, and you insisted I was wrong.
>     The reason you feel compelled to respond to my statements is
>     because it angers you that I'm right and I've been right all along
>     and your pride is hurt because you know that I know that you're
>     wrong.  If you had any amount of confidence that G***** was happy
>     with you and that he had even the smallest amount of affection for
>     you then you would be indifferent to what I'm saying.
>     And now, let's talk about this fixation you have with
>     citizenship.  Why do you keep trying to make it an issue? Whether
>     I'm a US citizen as I say, or a Canadian citizen as you say - do
>     you think that makes any difference to me?  Or to where I am or
>     where I live?  Why do you think that I would have any personal
>     interest at all in having US citizenship?  If I'm really not a US
>     citizen I could have gotten US citizenship when we were together. 
>     Why wouldn't I have?  Either I have no interest in being a US
>     citizen or I already am a US citizen.  Either way, it's clearly
>     not something that has importance to me, so I don't understand why
>     you keep trying to use that as a way to try to insult me. 
>     Moreover, you're talking about citizenship by virtue of location
>     of birth - that's such an incredibly arbitrary factor.  It would
>     take such a small minded person to think that the geographic
>     location of a person's birth would have any bearing on who they
>     are.  But then, YOU do think that way, don't you?  I can only
>     figure that you keep trying to make citizenship an issue because
>     you have nothing else that you can try to "hurt" me with.  That's
>     pretty sad for you.
>     Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that I decided I wanted
>     to move back to LA and that I was a Canadian citizen.  Do you
>     think that not being a US citizen would stop me?  Do you not think
>     that if I wanted to be living in the US right now I would be?  I
>     mean, even if all of your claims about me were true, do you think
>     DHS has the resources to constantly be looking for non-violent,
>     non-dangerous, white, english speaking illegals that may or may
>     not be in the country?  Come on, Desiree, you can't be that stupid.
>     Anyway, you can continue to make strange comments about
>     citizenship if it makes you feel better.  I'm just curious why you
>     keep trying to insult me by claiming something that is so plainly
>     irrelevant.  It would be like me trying to insult you by saying
>     you're not really blonde.
>     Patrick
>     P.S. You're attempts to insult me with this name thing fall into
>     the same category as the citizenship thing - I don't much care
>     whether you believe my legal name is Patrick or Richard.
>     It just doesn't really have any relevance to anything in
>     my life (what you believe, I mean).  Feel free to continue calling
>     me arbitrary names if that helps you sleep at night.
>     On 01/12/2015 07:30 AM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>     Perry(I assume that is a possible next Alias for you),
>>     Good morning, sunshine! (Again, not a term of endearment.)
>>     I would read the entire novel below, but when the first paragraph
>>     immediately begins with "fun facts" that diverge from reality, I
>>     know that it isn't worth my time.  I never mentioned your false
>>     Alias, let alone stated it as a factual name to ICE.  If you had
>>     a conversation about that during your interrogation for breaking
>>     the law and being here illegally, then that has nothing to do
>>     with me.
>>     I wonder (and so does your Rabbi, by the way) if all of your
>>     angsty hatred even really relates to me at all.  Facts and
>>     reality seem to be relative with you, and it is quite troublesome.
>>     I also wonder... Do you fold your hands and cackle malevolently
>>     when you talk about "destroying" me?It seems a bit over the top;
>>     much like all of these sad and pathetic emails you keep sending me.
>>     Also, hello to the folks reading at home via BCC. Hopefully you
>>     all find Ricky/Perry's tantrums as amusing and pathetic as I do. :)
>>     ~Desiree
>>     On Monday, January 12, 2015, Patrick
>>     >     > wrote:
>>         Desiree:
>>         See, there you go again, making unfounded claims against me. 
>>         Not only unfounded, but contrary to the actual physical
>>         evidence.  What basis do you have to claim that my ID is fake
>>         or that it was supported by falsified documents?  Obviously
>>         you've made no attempt to verify the authenticity of any of
>>         them.  You can verify the PAL with a quick call to the RCMP;
>>         you can verify the birth certificate with a call to Florida
>>         Vital Statistics.  Hell, you can even call ICE and inquire
>>         about the status of my case.  Why don't you call ICE and
>>         inform them that my name is actually Patrick?  Oh, you
>>         already told them that before January 2013 - they asked me
>>         about it during the interrogation.  Do you question the
>>         validity of the PAL?  Every time I buy a handgun or any ammo
>>         I have to provide the PAL and the store has to verify it with
>>         the RCMP.  If I have firearms in Canada, without a PAL,
>>         that's like 15 years in prison or some crazy shit.  If you
>>         really believe the crap that you say then why don't you
>>         report me to the RCMP?  If the PAL is fake then I'll go to
>>         prison.  If it was obtained with false information then it'll
>>         be taken away and I'll probably still go to prison.
>>         But you're not going to do that because you know you're full
>>         of it.  You know my ID was obtained legitimately.  And you
>>         know my true legal, and birth name is indeed Patrick.  If
>>         you really believed it was not then you would have tried to
>>         have me arrested for whatever nonsense you're claiming.  And
>>         don't say you "wouldn't do that to G*****" - of course you
>>         would - you already have.  Moreover, if my ID and my PAL was
>>         fraudulently obtained then that means that I am perpetually
>>         in the commission of numerous felonies...and you knowingly
>>         allowed G***** to be in my care not only while committing
>>         those felonies, but while illegally transporting, handling
>>         and operating firearms (illegal if what you say is true).
>>         Don't you see how incredibly stupid you keep making yourself
>>         look?  I wish I could include all the recipients of these
>>         messages as CC rather than BCC so you can see how many people
>>         regularly get a good laugh at the obtuse things you claim
>>         (but they've asked not to be disclosed).
>>         As for calling me Sally: if that makes you happy then go for
>>         it.  I suppose the intention is to suggest I am a woman or
>>         womanly.  Is that supposed to hurt my feelings?  How 'bout if
>>         you call me Vickie, instead? I kind of like Vickie better
>>         than Sally.
>>         Again, you accuse me of "regularly" spouting lies.  I recall
>>         challenging you on that numerous times and you failing to be
>>         able to actually present any cases of me lying.  Has that
>>         changed?  Can you actually recall a specific instance of me
>>         lying?  Are you going to say I lied in court when I said my
>>         name is Patrick?  So, I provide physical proof that that
>>         IS my legal name and you say that the documents are forged? 
>>         Get real!
>>         As for "subjective opinions": all opinions are subjective -
>>         that's kind of what makes them opinions. Otherwise, they'd be
>>         facts.  And you were actually able to graduate with a
>>         bachelors degree?  Oh, right, from the University of
>>         Phoenix...not from a REAL university.  I'm sorry.
>>         So, government issued photo ID is not acceptable as proof of
>>         identity to you?  Well, it's good enough for the RCMP, and
>>         it's good enough for US Border Patrol, ICE, and the TSA.  So,
>>         I guess you're shit outta luck there.
>>         I don't get lonely.  I don't use drugs or get high.
>>         Why do you tell me to grow up?  In what way am I acting
>>         immaturely?  It seems, on my end, I'm just having a calm,
>>         rational discussion.  It seems to me that you're the one
>>         getting worked up and flinging irrelevant, unfounded
>>         allegations like a child.
>>         Why do you end your email with a declaration that there is no
>>         affection intended?  Do you think I might not be aware of
>>         that?  Do you think I have anything but disgust for you and
>>         people like you (trashy, ghetto recipients)?  It almost seems
>>         more like you're trying to convince yourself of the things
>>         you say, than anybody else.
>>         Let me tell you a story about something that happened on
>>         G*****'s latest visit.  I noticed, since he's been with you
>>         he's picked up some trashy habits.  Lately, when he's eating,
>>         he's been picking his teeth with his fingernail - a truly
>>         revolting white trash mannerism. Normally, I try to break him
>>         of trashy habits right away, but I didn't want to seem
>>         nagging so I kept silent.  Then, a few days later, we were
>>         watch Family Guy and Lois was doing that during dinner, and
>>         Stewie said to Brian how disgusting she was, picking her
>>         teeth with her finger right there are the table. Talking down
>>         to her for being all trashy.  G***** immediately broke that
>>         habit.  A couple days later I asked him if it was because of
>>         what Stewie said - you smiled and said yeah.  You see, it's
>>         not just me manipulating G***** against you - it's also Seth
>>         Macfarlane and Stewie and everyone else that hates white
>>         trash people.  You're just so gross.
>>         Let me point out something obvious to you: you are in what is
>>         called, in legal terms, the "superior position" because
>>         G***** is in your custody and you have complete authority
>>         over all matters pertaining to him.  The fact that you still
>>         get so worked up over what I say or what's going on in my
>>         life, and that you still feel the need to make claims like my
>>         ID is all fake, and calling me girl's names, is a pretty darn
>>         strong indication that either A) you've got serious mental
>>         problems, or B) you're the one that won't let go.  Remember
>>         when we last spoke on the phone?  Who was the one that was
>>         yelling and throwing accusations?  Who's the one that hang
>>         up?  Not me.  I was calm and indifferent.  Because I don't
>>         really care about you.  I enjoy this email correspondence
>>         because it creates a written record for me to publish.  One
>>         day Sage will be able to go on the Internet and read them. 
>>         Every time you apply for a job or meet a guy that you like,
>>         I'll be there to make sure they're fully informed of who you
>>         really are.  That is why I engage you in these delightful
>>         conversations.
>>         Patrick
>>         P.S. When making your ridiculous claims about me you should
>>         remember that what other people are thinking is "Yeah, but
>>         you married the guy and had a kid with him.  What does that
>>         say about you?"  You're really not too bright, are you?
>>         On 01/11/2015 10:08 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>>         I'm still not sure what your current fake ID supported by
>>>         falsified documents happens to be, so I will address you as
>>>         Sally.
>>>         Sally,
>>>         I would genuinely address your response if it had any merit,
>>>         or purpose other than to allow you to lash out like the
>>>         impotent child that you constantly prove yourself to be.
>>>         However, considering you regularly spout outright lies and
>>>         subjective opinions as fact with no true supporting evidence
>>>         or basis in reality, (likely when you are drunk and/or high
>>>         and lonely) I will simply show your thoughts the amount of
>>>         consideration they deserve.
>>>         Grow up, and have a nice night Sally.
>>>         Regards (of some sort) (but again, not affection... Don't
>>>         misunderstand),
>>>         Desiree
>>>         On Sunday, January 11, 2015, Patrick
>>>          wrote:
>>>             As always, I shall address each of your statements and
>>>             point out, as plainly as possible, why/how it is wrong.
>>>             On 01/11/2015 12:54 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>>>             Ricky / Richard / Morgan / Parick / Patricia / Susan /
>>>>             whatever your chosen alias is today,
>>>             I don't get your intended implication here. How is my
>>>             first name, whether assumed or legal, relevant to
>>>             anything in my previous message and, in particular,
>>>             whether I am on schedule with my plan against you?  An
>>>             insult is much more effective when the intended
>>>             recipient is able to infer the reference.  Please clarify.
>>>>             Are you bored or something?
>>>             Bored: no.  Or something: vague and ambiguous.  Please
>>>             be more specific.
>>>>             Your stalker-like obsession with me is truly
>>>>             impressive.  The amount of time and energy spent
>>>>             thinking of me is flattering, but honestly a little
>>>>             pathetic.
>>>             If there is any sincerity in your statements then you
>>>             have grossly misinterpreted my intentions.  I was pretty
>>>             direct when I told Detective Tuchfarber that my
>>>             intention was to do everything in my power and
>>>             capabilities to make your life as miserable as possible,
>>>             and, if possible, to the point that you ultimately
>>>             commit suicide.  That would be my ultimate desire.  But
>>>             before you reach that point it is imperative that you
>>>             experience as much misery, disappointment, and suffering
>>>             as possible first.  At this point in your life you have
>>>             very little to lose so there is not much incentive for
>>>             me to actively publish your information.  I shall wait,
>>>             patiently, until you rise up a bit, THEN proceed with
>>>             the billboard campaign around Phoenix; I'll wait until
>>>             you actually have some financial significance, THEN
>>>             publish your complete credit and financial history -
>>>             including your social security number and birth
>>>             certificate (not illegal as long as it's done outside
>>>             the US).
>>>             I don't see how you could interpret such intentions as
>>>             being misguided affection.
>>>>             For someone who so strongly espouses logic and
>>>>             intelligence, I would think that you could have grasped
>>>>             that I am not interested in you. Especially since I
>>>>             have directly told you that I am not interested in you.
>>>             Whether or not you are interested in me is not relevant
>>>             to my objectives.
>>>>             I realize that I am really amazing, but please expend
>>>>             some of that energy towards finding a man / woman /
>>>>             inanimate object that is capable of coping with your
>>>>             delusional nature, and providing some small measure of
>>>>             happiness.
>>>             I see no evidence to suggest there is any merit to your
>>>             implication that I am delusional.  If you know of any
>>>             then please cite them.  Otherwise you're just talking
>>>             gibberish again.
>>>>             Everyone has a right to the pursuit of happiness. 
>>>>             Though that is a founding principal of America, so I
>>>>             understand it being foreign to a Canadian citizen like
>>>>             yourself.
>>>             Almost every country in the world includes in their
>>>             respective constitutions and/or bill of rights the right
>>>             to the pursuit of happiness.  I wish I could say it is
>>>             because you are an ignorant American that you do not
>>>             realize that, but that fact that you were born on US
>>>             soil has nothing to do with the fact that you are
>>>             clearly ignorant.
>>>             You again bring up the question of citizenship.  Why? 
>>>             You are the only one pretending to still cling to that
>>>             claim. When I show up at border crossings with my US
>>>             birth certificate and BC photo ID US customs and ICE
>>>             don't even give me a second thought.
>>>             But, I'll play along, for the sake of argument: Let's
>>>             assume your claim that I am a Canadian citizen is true. 
>>>             So?  What's your point?  Are you trying to suggest that
>>>             a person born on US soil is inherently superior to
>>>             someone who wasn't?  By that logic then Lauchner and
>>>             Michael Capuano are automatically superior to me. 
>>>             Charles Manson, Ted Bundy and Richard Ramirez are
>>>             superior to every single person ever born in Canada? 
>>>             That's some pretty sketchy reasoning.  And let's pretend
>>>             for a moment that I AM a Canadian citizen: that hasn't,
>>>             and still doesn't prevent me from living in the US.  I
>>>             own a business in the US.  So, again, what are you
>>>             trying to imply?
>>>>             Your obsessive pursuit of my attention seems to only
>>>>             pale in comparison to your capacity for delusional
>>>>             transference, and cruelty towards G*****.
>>>             Again, you're making claims about my psychological state
>>>             without citing a single case of me ever exhibiting
>>>             delusional behavior.  At least when I call you
>>>             delusional I refer your to a specific thing you did
>>>             which supports my claim.
>>>>             It is unfortunate that you chose to rob G***** of his
>>>>             right and opportunity to choose for himself which
>>>>             parent to live with.
>>>             Come again?  I was the one initially requested G*****
>>>             be interviewed by the court so he can tell the court
>>>             where he wants to live.  You then attempted to
>>>             circumvent that by having me deported.  I then ordered
>>>             my attorney to request the court put the interview back
>>>             on calendar. Then, when G***** was given the chance, he
>>>             clearly, explicitly, and very unequivocally told the
>>>             court he wants to return to live with me.
>>>             See that?  That is a case of you exhibiting delusional
>>>             behavior.  You're accusing ME of doing exactly what you
>>>             have, and continue to do.  THAT's delusional.
>>>>             You relinquished all rights a mere 2 months from his
>>>>             14th birthday where he would have been able to declare
>>>>             his choice in front of everyone in open court.
>>>             I relinquished my rights so that I can remove the court
>>>             from the equation.  So that I can proceed with my plans
>>>             respecting you. It's hard to do that when I have to
>>>             maintain appearances for the court.
>>>             You are unsurprisingly misinformed about the
>>>             significance of G***** turning 14.  There is no
>>>             statutory age, in either California or Arizona, at which
>>>             the court is required to grant the child the living
>>>             arrangement the child desires.  It is completely at the
>>>             discretion of the court.  "Generally" after the age of
>>>             14 the court will "listen" to what the child wants - but
>>>             that's the extent of the law on the matter.
>>>             I also point out, waiving one's rights does not mean
>>>             refusing one's responsibilities. Though you seem to
>>>             think they are one and the same.  I did not refuse to
>>>             allow G***** to return to live with me - I created a
>>>             situation where he can see, firsthand, what you would be
>>>             like in the absense of the court compelling you to act. 
>>>             And so far you've played right into it.
>>>>             It doesn't surprise me given your repeated
>>>>             underestimation of his intelligence and potential;
>>>>             simply seeing him as a pawn and tool to use in your
>>>>             obsessive quest to win me back. ("destroy me" ...
>>>>             Whatever you want to call it.)
>>>             As I have explained to him: sometimes, to get the
>>>             desired outcome, we have to go through a period of
>>>             challenges.  That is what he is going through right
>>>             now.  I believe the exact idiom I used was "Sometimes,
>>>             to make an omlette you have to break a few eggs".
>>>             I explained what that meant and how it applied to the
>>>             current situation.  He acknowledged understanding.
>>>>             I love G***** regardless of what decision he should
>>>>             ultimately make.
>>>             If that is the case then why do you insist on not
>>>             allowing him to make that decision? He already has: he
>>>             said he wants to come and live with me.  He has
>>>             expressed that if he never heard from you again he's
>>>             fine with that.
>>>             It's already been more than 2 years...what do you
>>>             believe is going to happen?  Do you think one day he's
>>>             going to wake up and realize that he was wrong all this
>>>             time and suddenly love you unconditionally?  Again, I
>>>             say, THAT is delusional!  Dude, the fact that since the
>>>             July hearing, since you've gotten full custody and
>>>             authority over him he has steadily withdrawn from you
>>>             and that other kid of yours should tell you something. 
>>>             Before that he could hold on to the hope that at the
>>>             next hearing the court would order you to return him. 
>>>             That hope is gone.  I really don't know what you are
>>>             hoping for, but your relationship with G***** has
>>>             reached it's peak and the only place it's going from
>>>             here is down.  There's less than two years until he can
>>>             legally move out and I'm willing to bet that within 24
>>>             hours of turning 16 you'll never hear from him again.
>>>             As for "love": unless you can provide a clear definition
>>>             of what the word means then you should refrain from
>>>             using it.
>>>>             I know he is capable of so much, and will support him
>>>>             down whatever path he should ultimately choose in
>>>>             whatever capacity I am able. I may be hard on G*****
>>>>             sometimes, but being a real parent means looking out
>>>>             for the physical, mental, and emotional well being of
>>>>             your child even when it isn't easy or popular.
>>>             You are completely oblivious to anything going on with
>>>             G*****.  I just spoke to him on the phone - you still
>>>             haven't even noticed the anomoly in his eye.  You live
>>>             in the same house with him and he's been back for 8 days
>>>             and you haven't noticed.  You also didn't notice it
>>>             before he came up here.  How can you not notice a bright
>>>             discoloration in his eye?  Do you not speak with him? 
>>>             Do you not look him in the eye when you do (assuming you
>>>             do speak with him)?
>>>             You add him to your insurance but you don't bother
>>>             taking him to the doctor or the dentist (you only do it
>>>             when you think I'm going to bring it up in court). 
>>>             Dental cleaning and checkups are supposed to be every 6
>>>             months, not every 12.  He wasn't in the habit of using
>>>             deodarant - I had to point out to him one day that he
>>>             smelled of BO.  He still often "forgets" to brush his
>>>             teeth.  He doesn't know how to get from your place to
>>>             the Target, which is only a few blocks away.  When given
>>>             the choice of doing the research to figure out how to
>>>             get to the outdoor shooting range, or not go, he chose
>>>             not to do the research.  Is that the result of your
>>>             "real parenting"?
>>>>             I can only hope that one day you decide to strive to be
>>>>             a better person, and better parent.
>>>             I strive, on a daily basis, to improve myself.  I strive
>>>             to be objective and fair, and to be reasonable and
>>>             rational.  I consider myself to be fair and decent.  The
>>>             people I come in contact with, exclusive of you, of
>>>             course, also consider me such.
>>>             You're still making the same unfounded arguments that
>>>             you've been making since 2011.  You're the one that has
>>>             to use underhanded tactics and false claims to get what
>>>             you want.  I'm referring to you resorting to calling ICE
>>>             in order to gain custody by default.  See, when
>>>             G*****'s with me he's with me because he *wants* to
>>>             be.  I've never once had to force him or tell him he has
>>>             to visit because the court ordered it.  You, on the
>>>             other hand, have done exactly that.  You claim to want
>>>             what's best for G*****, yet you teach him nothing.  You
>>>             think hugs and kisses will make everything okay (again,
>>>             that's delusional).
>>>             It is my opinion that if anyone needs to work on being a
>>>             better person it is you.
>>>>             If not for yourself, for G*****'s sake.
>>>             Both I, and G*****, are happy with who I am, with how I
>>>             behave, with my values and beliefs.  If I identify a
>>>             character or personality flaw in myself then I will
>>>             commit to improving it.
>>>             You act the same now as you did in 2000. You still try
>>>             to use people's guilt and pitty to manipulate them.  You
>>>             tell people half truths and versions of events which are
>>>             heavily skewed in your favor, to gain their support. 
>>>             That's deceptive.  That's completely contrary to how I
>>>             try to live and how I try to guide G*****.  You can
>>>             deny that you do that until you're blue in the face but
>>>             I've got over 400 emails from you and/or about you where
>>>             you've done that countless times.
>>>             You rush into relationships with losers like Lauchner
>>>             and Capuano, you move in with them, you hastily have
>>>             children with them.  You expose your children to people
>>>             like Lauchner and tell them he's a good, wonderful
>>>             person.  You allow him to take on a paternal role in
>>>             their lives.  You defend his behavior and get angry when
>>>             people state facts about him.  Yet you want to pretend
>>>             you're a good, honorable person?  And that you give a
>>>             shit about your children?
>>>>             He is the one being hurt by your actions, scheming, and
>>>>             manipulation.
>>>             G***** is not being hurt at all by what I am doing.  He
>>>             knew before I started executing the plan exactly what
>>>             the plan was/is.  I always confer with him beforehand so
>>>             that he's not taken by surprise.  If he told me he was
>>>             uneasy with anything I would not proceed with that
>>>             course.  I told him in May I would be waiving all of my
>>>             parental rights in July.  I told him why.  If he had
>>>             concerns about me wouldn't he bring them to you?  You're
>>>             his primary custodial parent, aren't you?  When he's
>>>             with me we talk about you.  Are you saying that he has
>>>             such a lack of respect for you that he can't even speak
>>>             openly with you about me?  If that's that case then it
>>>             really sucks to be you.
>>>             He once asked me if I would shoot you.  I told him that
>>>             murder is illegal and immoral and can result in spending
>>>             the rest of one's life in prison.  And that the rest of
>>>             my life in prison is not a risk I'm willing to take. 
>>>             But otherwise, no, I would have no qualms about it; that
>>>             that is how much I despise you for the things you've
>>>             done and continue to do.  He did not flinch; he didn't
>>>             look anything other than indifferent; as best I could
>>>             tell, he didn't care.  The topic never came up again. 
>>>             That was during his visit last summer.  To be clear, I
>>>             told Tuchfarber the same thing.  There is nothing
>>>             illegal or threatening about /wanting/ to harm someone -
>>>             as long as you don't act on it.  I am reasonable and
>>>             rational enough to know the difference, and to refrain
>>>             from engaging in such activity.
>>>             And let me be absolutely clear on this point: I would
>>>             never deliberately cause you physical harm, other than
>>>             in self defense or defense of another.  Though that is
>>>             nothing special toward you - I have that rule for *ALL*
>>>             people.  Also, I emphasize that G***** brought up the
>>>             question and I only responded to it truthfully.
>>>>             ~ Desiree (Not meant as a term of endearment, please do
>>>>             not mistakenly take it that way.)
>>>             I don't understand your meaning.
>>>>             On Sunday, January 11, 2015, Patrick
>>>>              wrote:
>>>>                 Desiree:
>>>>                 Allow me to also point out: Having previously
>>>>                 waived, in court, *all* of my parental rights, you
>>>>                 now have the full legal right and authority to:
>>>>                 - refuse to allow G***** to visit me;
>>>>                 - take away the phone and every other thing I have
>>>>                 provided him, including the debit and credit cards
>>>>                 (although you do not have the legal right to
>>>>                 withhold them - you must return them to me);
>>>>                 - cut off all contact and communication between
>>>>                 G***** and me.
>>>>                 Doing so would definitely prevent me from being
>>>>                 able to have any influence on his perceptions,
>>>>                 values, beliefs, et cetera and, thereby prevent me
>>>>                 from being able to have any influence on your home
>>>>                 environment and the relationship between you and
>>>>                 him. However, doing so would also make him hate you
>>>>                 that much more and ensure that he leaves your home
>>>>                 at the first opportunity and never has anything to
>>>>                 do with you for the rest of your life.
>>>>                 So, you see, again, we've created a situation where
>>>>                 you have two mutually exclusive options but neither
>>>>                 of them do ends favorably for you.  That is
>>>>                 strategy, and the benefit of long term planning,
>>>>                 and the benefit of foresight.  Remember also, that
>>>>                 all of this was initiated by, and is the result of
>>>>                 your own actions.  I am where I am because of your
>>>>                 direct and explicit actions; G***** now has
>>>>                 Canadian citizenship and cannot be deported from
>>>>                 Canada and receives all of the benefits and
>>>>                 protections of being a Canadian citizen the moment
>>>>                 his foot touches Canadian soil - all because of
>>>>                 your actions calling ICE. And you can say that I've
>>>>                 been manipulating G***** but that's exactly what
>>>>                 you have done countless times with almost everybody
>>>>                 you've ever met (that's why people always take your
>>>>                 side when they hear your side of the story but then
>>>>                 abandon you when they discover the full story).
>>>>                 I'd also like to point out that, as always, I've
>>>>                 been very careful to make sure everything I do is
>>>>                 within the law.
>>>>                 I've discussed all of this with G***** and I've
>>>>                 explained to him what my plan is with respect to
>>>>                 you.  I've told him if he's uncomfortable with any
>>>>                 of it then I won't proceed.  He is fully aware that
>>>>                 he is being used as a pawn in my plan to ruin your
>>>>                 life and he seems to be okay with it.
>>>>                 All the best,
>>>>                 Patrick
>>>>                 On 2015-01-11 9:04 AM, Patrick wrote:
>>>>>                 Good morning, Desiree.
>>>>>                 I'd like to inquire how things have been going
>>>>>                 with all the wonderful stuff that you are able to
>>>>>                 teach and expose G***** to which I, according to
>>>>>                 you, could not do.  In particular, how has that
>>>>>                 emphasis on "family" been working out?  Have you
>>>>>                 been able to instill in him the importance of
>>>>>                 "family" and how good it is to have "family"? 
>>>>>                 Would you say he's "bonded" with your family? And
>>>>>                 knowing your family - is it your belief that that
>>>>>                 has improved him in some way?  These are loaded
>>>>>                 and/or sarcastic questions.  I already know the
>>>>>                 answers to them (otherwise I woudln't be asking),
>>>>>                 and I wouldn't expect you to answer them, not
>>>>>                 honestly anyway - given your aversion to reality
>>>>>                 and honesty.
>>>>>                 From what's been reported to me and from my own
>>>>>                 observations, so far all you've taught G***** is
>>>>>                 poor table manners and how to mimic the people
>>>>>                 around you rather than having your own opinion. 
>>>>>                 An important skill, I suppose, if you live in an
>>>>>                 environment where people get angry with you for
>>>>>                 being different.  Say, for example, your home.
>>>>>                 Are you still trying to convince yourself that you
>>>>>                 have the perfect little family?  Are you beginning
>>>>>                 to realize, yet, that G*****'s presence there is
>>>>>                 slowly eroding the happy, fair tale home that
>>>>>                 you're trying to hold on to?
>>>>>                 I know that by saying this you will react to spite
>>>>>                 me - it's what you people do.  Am I saying it
>>>>>                 deliberately, for that purpose?  Is it that I know
>>>>>                 that you're getting fed up with how he's ruining
>>>>>                 your fair tale and you've been having thoughts of
>>>>>                 sending him away before he starts to taint Sage as
>>>>>                 well - and by stating these truths to you I will
>>>>>                 provoke you to hang in there a little longer, so
>>>>>                 you can show me how wrong I am?  Probably.  The
>>>>>                 longer G***** is there, with his "bad attitude",
>>>>>                 his indifference toward you and Sage and your
>>>>>                 family, and his subtle demeanor of disgust and
>>>>>                 condescencion toward you and Sage and your mother,
>>>>>                 and your trashy ways, the more it will instill
>>>>>                 into Sage's subconscious that he is inferior and
>>>>>                 inadequate. The more it will slowly eat away at
>>>>>                 your perfect family.
>>>>>                 Sucks!  Now, on the one hand, you are pulled by
>>>>>                 your upbringing and years of conditioning, to
>>>>>                 react in the only way you know: with anger and
>>>>>                 spite, to want to keep G***** there because you
>>>>>                 believe that will adversely affect me; while on
>>>>>                 the other hand, you know I'm right and that I've
>>>>>                 been manipulating the situation for two years, and
>>>>>                 that as long as G***** is in your home you will
>>>>>                 never be happy because you will never have your
>>>>>                 fairy tale.
>>>>>                 So, you'll show this email to your mother and ask
>>>>>                 her what you should do.  She's going to say I'm
>>>>>                 just trying to get under your skin and the best
>>>>>                 thing is to not respond at all.  She'll say that
>>>>>                 if you don't respond then I'll think you're
>>>>>                 unaffected and that will piss me off.  She'll say
>>>>>                 this because she's just like you - after all,
>>>>>                 where did you learn your behavior from, right? 
>>>>>                 And just like you she has the same emotional,
>>>>>                 irrational beliefs that a child inherently and
>>>>>                 unconditionally loves his mother.
>>>>>                 But!!!  I am relying on your mother providing you
>>>>>                 such advice.  And on you pretending you don't care
>>>>>                 and that you're unaffected.  I require you to
>>>>>                 insist on keeping G***** with you longer - the
>>>>>                 longer he's with you the more of an effect he'll
>>>>>                 have on Sage and the more subconscious hostility
>>>>>                 will seep into your home.
>>>>>                 In the end you'll take your mother's advice and
>>>>>                 not respond to this, you'll convince yourself
>>>>>                 (with your mother's help) that everything is fine
>>>>>                 in your home and that I'm the one trying to cause
>>>>>                 problems for you.  Or am I saying that because I
>>>>>                 believe you'll do the opposite of what I state
>>>>>                 you'll do - just to spite me?
>>>>>                 Let me ask you this in closing: Has the amount of
>>>>>                 "love" in your home increased or decreased over
>>>>>                 the past year?  It's rhetorical - I know the answer.
>>>>>                 Patrick