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: Wed, Jan 14 2015 9:32:21 pm

I have a few minutes, so I'll point out another way you're wrong about 
the alleged lies you've attempted to cite:

In 2007, when I stated in the Immigration Court, that my name was 
Richard, it was, in fact, Richard under the California 
common law.  All of my ID, issued by the State of California and the 
State of Arizona had the name Richard on it and I had been using 
the name Richard exclusively for the prior 11 years.  It was not 
until I came to Canada and the Canadian government refused to allow me 
continue to use the name Richard unless I formally changed it from 
Patrick and the US government and the State of California also then 
began refusing to allow me to continue using Richard, that I 
decided it would be easier to just go back to using Patrick.  So, 
you see, I didn't lie about my name in the Immigration Court.

If the day ever arrives that you are right about something that we're 
disputing, it will be a special day, indeed.

Good day,

On 01/14/2015 08:14 AM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
> Gary,
> I am glad that you have learned how Google and copy paste work.  That 
> is precious, and I would pat your head like the good boy that you are 
> if you were here.  A for effort!  However, you have once again failed 
> to read.  F for comprehension.  The alias is tied to the root of the 
> issue, which is legal status.  Given that you were actually put in 
> prison by someone whose job it is to interpret and enforce laws, you 
> were in non-compliance.  Not only were you wrong as you are right now, 
> but you were punished for it.  Were you the catcher?
> Further, the request you made of me was to provide a specific example 
> and evidence that you have been dishonest with me. State and other 
> laws are non-applicable and irrelevant to the discussion at hand.  
> Have you openly lied?  The answer is plainly yes.
> Your delusions and failure to comprehend complex thoughts aside, there 
> is actually something relevant for us to discuss.  G***** would like 
> to attend a 2-day school camp.  The cost for this is $110 dollars.  If 
> he does not attend, he will be made to sit in a class and perform 
> whatever tasks are given to those who could not attend.  Would you 
> prefer the money go on his debit card or credit card?  In the absence 
> of a valid response, I will infer consent for the debit card.
> Please don't feel embarrassed for too long as there is good news!  You 
> are not American.  Phwhew!  That must be a huge relief to you.  I'll 
> forgoe the simple diagram for now, but if you are still as confused as 
> you seem to be, I'll go ahead and provide it.
> You have most definitely achieved your goal with this thread if it's 
> purpose was to amuse me and instill a sense of pitty for you and all 
> those I have shared this with. (The kind of pitty generally shown to 
> angry kittens.)
> All sniping aside, you really should get out in the world and do 
> something that makes you happy.  Make a friend, get laid... Whatever 
> you need to do to relieve that stress and right your head again.  That 
> may be the first step to you being a better person.  Or a person at 
> all as you have not provided me evidence that you are not some form of 
> subhuman.  Like a mole person.
> ~ Desiree
> On Tuesday, January 13, 2015, Patrick  > wrote:
>     Desiree:
>     Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1621, states as follows:
>     Whoever—
>         (1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer,
>         or person, in any case in which a law of the United States
>         authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify,
>         declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written
>         testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him
>         subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath
>         states or subscribes any *material matter* which he does not
>         believe to be true; or
>         (2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or
>         statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section
>         1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as
>         true any material matter which he does not believe to be true;
>         is guilty of perjury and shall, except as otherwise expressly
>         provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not
>         more than five years, or both. This section is applicable
>         whether the statement or subscription is made within or
>         without the United States.
>     Do you see the use of the term "material matter" there in
>     paragraph (1)?  Do you know what "material matter" means? It means
>     a matter which is relevant to the issue at hand. The issue at hand
>     was whether or not I was a US citizen. The name I provided to the
>     court was NOT material to the question of my citizenship and so,
>     did not rise to the level of being perjury.  With respect to my
>     statement to that immigration court that I was, at the time the
>     statement was made, a US citizen - that was clearly NOT perjurous
>     as is proven by the fact that the US government has since provided
>     me my US birth certificate and the 14th Amendment to the US
>     Constitution guarantees that any person born within the United
>     States shall be a citizen of the United States. SLAM, BITCH!
>     As for me telling you, that my name was Richard:
>     Section 1279.5 of the California Code of Civil Procedure states:
>         (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), (c), (d), or (e),
>         nothing in this title shall be construed to abrogate the
>         common law right of any person to change his or her name.
>     Which means that in California any person may change their name
>     legally under "common law" - in other words, by adopting a new
>     name.  Which is what I did in 1993 - 1996. At that time there was
>     no requirement that government issued ID bear only the name stated
>     on the person's birth certificate.  Therefore, when we were
>     together, and prior to the Patriot Act, my legal name (under
>     California law) was Richard.  And therefore I did not lie to
>     you at that time.  Again, I saw: Fucking SLAM!
>     Section 326 of the Patriot Act improses, amongst many other
>     things, regulations on financial institutions with respect to
>     identity documentation required by their customers.  The
>     regulations require that only the "legal name" as defined by
>     federal law (not state law) may be used and that only specific
>     forms of identification may be used to establish the identity of
>     the account holder.  From the Patriot Act came the REAL ID act of
>     2005, which imposed even stricter requirements on the issuance of
>     identification documents by the states.  Upon accepting the REAL
>     ID act California could no longer issue ID with any name other
>     than that which is on the person's birth certificate.  This
>     effectively makes California's section 1279.5 irrelevant if a
>     person wants to have any kind of government issued photo ID.  So,
>     again, you are completely fucking wrong.
>     As for me now saying my legal name is Patrick: Since neither
>     the US government nor the Canadian government accepts common law
>     name changes any more then they will only allow me to use the name
>     as it is stated on my birth certificate - unless I go through the
>     formal, court based legal name change - which I have no interest
>     in bothering with.  And so, yet again, I did not lie and your a
>     fucking idiot!
>     And your stupid comments about crayons and diagrams just make you
>     look that much more moronic.  It's people like you that make me
>     embarrassed to be American.  When people go on about "stupid
>     Americans" they must be referring to you.
>     I'm not going to bother with the rest of your message because you
>     just insist on proving what a misinformed and ignorant imbecile
>     you are.  Why don't you do a little research before you provide
>     such stupid, misguided responses.
>     Anyway, I have flight to catch in the morning so you're on your
>     own for the rest of the week.  I've accomplished what I've set out
>     to with this thread so I don't think there's anything further to say.
>     Patrick
>     On 01/13/2015 03:50 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>     José,
>>     I know this is difficult for you, but please try to focus and pay
>>     attention here.  Think really hard... Make that squinty face you
>>     make when that hamster is doing his best to move the wheel inside
>>     your head.  You asked for an example of when you had been
>>     dishonest with me. The patriot act has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do
>>     with the conversation.  Further, is not true and does not apply.
>>     I suppose that sort of logic is why you were thrown in prison by
>>     a federal judge for perjury.  Perjury happens to be a noun. 
>>     Perjury is defined as, "the offense of willfully telling an
>>     untruth in a court after having taken an oath of affirmation."
>>      Translation: lying. That is another example.  I've now provided
>>     you with two examples that you requested.  You are welcome.
>>     Please don't make me break out the crayon diagram as it only
>>     serves to further degrade you.
>>     You know what people from the projects and people in trailer
>>     parks have in common?  They are both... How did you put it?  From
>>     the lower echelon of society.  Though the ones who grow up there
>>     just never seem to get out of the shadow.
>>     As a disclaimer to keep you from being confused now and in the
>>     future:  When I do not respond to you in part or in whole it
>>     means that you are so wrong and delusional that it isn't even
>>     worth my time to respond.  You'll just pull something delusional
>>     (likely something you yourself are guilty of or feeling guilty
>>     about) from some orifice and present it as if it were a truth.
>>     Allow me to apply some Richard logic to this conversation.  Do
>>     you know why you are spending this inordinate amount of time
>>     responding to me?  Because Cuthulu is masterminding a conspiracy
>>     against you to force you to initiate pointless conversations with
>>     someone you obviously hold a high level of contempt (and
>>     unrequited love) for. aliens.  See?  I even tied in
>>     your persecution complex.  Again.  You are welcome.
>>     ~Desiree
>>     On Tuesday, January 13, 2015, Patrick
>>     >     > wrote:
>>         Desiree:
>>         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.
>>         Patrick
>>         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