Mail

Recent Posts

Popular Posts

Desiree Capuano & James Pendleton
250 E. Placita Lago Del Mago
Sahuarita, AZ     85629
Tel: 520-288-8200
desiree.capuano@gmail.com
japendletonjr@gmail.com
Back to Mailbox Back to mailbox
Newer Message Newer message
Older Message Older message
Re: G***** summer visitation 2015
From: Patrick <patrick@desireecapuano.com>
To: Desiree Capuano <desiree.capuano@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, May 04 2015 6:59:37 pm
Desiree:

Please provide a definitive response clearly stating whether or not you 
are going to allow G***** to visit between the dates of May 24, 2015 
and July 12, 2015.  You're silence requires the other party (me) to make 
assumptions, and assumptions are not admissible in court.

Patrick


On 04/26/2015 04:24 PM, Patrick wrote:
> Desiree:
>
> What the fuck is wrong with your head?  Do you do this silly shit just 
> to be annoying is your whole life experience based on trailer parks 
> and TV?  Come back to reality for a second, will ya?
>
> What the fuck do you mean by "itinerary"?!?!? That is such a fucking 
> vague term.  Be specific, you fucking idiot!  You're wasting my time 
> with all this stupid back and forth.  You pretend like you give a shit 
> about G*****'s safety, demanding I provide an "itinerary" and that I 
> keep on me documents to establish I'm someone I'm not - and the other 
> 364 days out of the year you don't put an ounce of interest into 
> what's going on with him.  Stop being such a fucking tool!
>
> Just shut the fuck up and be a normal person or just fucking go away.  
> I don't need your stupid shit and I have better things to do than try 
> to jump through your hoops for your amusement.  You're just a fucking 
> twit.  There is no documentation identifying me as Richard and 
> you know it.  That deportation document is meaningless since the 
> government has admitted that I'm not that person.  What the FUCK is 
> wrong with you?
>
> And don't go telling G***** that the reason he can't come to visit is 
> because I didn't meet your "reasonable requirements". Your 
> requirements are moronic and impossible to meet because they keep 
> changing.
>
> I'm done with you.  Let him visit or don't, it's your problem.  He and 
> I both know that you have 100% of the authority to allow him to visit 
> and that it is entirely on you - not me.  He turns 16 in less than a 
> year and a half and I'm pretty sure when that day arrives he's going 
> to say "Fuck you!" and that will be the last you hear of him.
>
> Good day,
> Patrick
>
>
>
> On 04/26/2015 04:02 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>> Ricky,
>>
>> That sounds like an acceptable start to me.  However, as already 
>> discussed, I will require a full itinerary for G*****'s summer 
>> trip.  Upon my receipt of said itinerary, I will review it in full 
>> and provide approval at such time.
>>
>> Also, please remember to keep a copy of your deportation paperwork 
>> handy as you claim that is the only legal document in your possession 
>> identifying you as Richard (G*****'s father).
>>
>> ~Desiree
>>
>> On Sunday, April 26, 2015, Patrick > > wrote:
>>
>>     I have confirmed, with Liz, that she would pick up G***** from
>>     LAX on May 24, 2015 and she would bring him to LAX on May 27,
>>     2015 or May 28, 2015 to travel to Vancouver, BC.  During the time
>>     G***** would be in Los Angeles, he would be staying at Liz's
>>     residence.
>>
>>     Is that acceptable to you?  And, if so, do you agree to permit
>>     G***** to travel from Phoenix, AZ to Los Angeles, CA on May 24,
>>     2015, then from Los Angeles, CA to Vancouver, BC on May 28, 2015?
>>
>>     Patrick
>>
>>
>>
>>     On 04/26/2015 11:35 AM, Patrick wrote:
>>>     Desiree:
>>>
>>>     I'm unclear - your "previous correspondence" stated that G*****
>>>     traveling to California was contingent on your express notice
>>>     and consent.  But you now seem to be saying that it is
>>>     pre-authorized by you and that you just require "full itinerary
>>>     including flight and contact information".  May you please try
>>>     to be a little more clear and consistent in your communication?
>>>
>>>     I will speak with the relevant parties in Los Angeles and get
>>>     back to you with confirmations.
>>>
>>>
>>>     Responses to your statements:
>>>     1. You are correct that you are not required, not legally
>>>     anyway, to justify your decisions to me. However, your refusal
>>>     to provide a rationale for your decisions is evidence that such
>>>     decisions are arbitrary and NOT based on rationale or on what is
>>>     in G*****'s best interests.  And child rearing (or leading, in
>>>     general) arbitrarily, as opposed to by rational consideration
>>>     and democratic processes is fascist and dictatorial.  I have
>>>     been, and I believe I have now, proven that that is your
>>>     approach to raising children (if not your approach to life, in
>>>     general).
>>>
>>>     In the past, when I have attempted to implement a rule, I have
>>>     always allowed G***** the opportunity to question it's
>>>     rationale and, on more than one occasion he has pointed out that
>>>     there was no logical basis for it.  In such cases I have
>>>     conceded that he was correct and the rule was either abandoned
>>>     or modified appropriately.  THAT is my approach to raising
>>>     children - and to life in general.  That is why I am a better
>>>     person than you and why G***** will always respect me, while he
>>>     fears you.  Personally, I'd rather have someone's earned respect
>>>     than to have their fear.  But that's just me.
>>>
>>>     2. I am not "failing to comply", as you put it.  I am proposing
>>>     alternatives to what you have mandated, in order to make more
>>>     cost effective travel arrangements. Alternatives which would not
>>>     affect you in any way whatsoever because you are not the one
>>>     traveling.  You are proving that you are completely unwilling to
>>>     have ANY flexibility in this matter - even though it does not
>>>     affect you in any way at all.  Is there ANY reason you can
>>>     provide why G***** should not be permitted to travel on May 28,
>>>     2015 rather than on May 24, 2015? You're adamant refusal to
>>>     provide such indicates there is not.
>>>
>>>     As for me being the one hurting G*****, I don't see how you
>>>     come to that conclusion.  You're the one being completely
>>>     inflexible on his travel dates and only allowing him to travel
>>>     on the dates that the flights cost over $500.  How exactly am I
>>>     the one hurting him?
>>>
>>>     I include G***** in correspondence because I believe in being
>>>     transparent and honest with him.  You're approach is to say one
>>>     thing to me (or to the court), then to provide G***** your
>>>     fairy tale perception of the situation - wherein you usually
>>>     portray yourself as the noble, honorable, victim.  But the way
>>>     you portray things to G***** only works if I'm never able to
>>>     rebut your stories - if I never hear about what you've told
>>>     him.  Do you honestly believe that G***** and I keep secrets
>>>     from each other?
>>>
>>>     Either list, specifically, what "inflammatory and defamatory
>>>     lies" you're referring to, or stop making such vague
>>>     generalizations.  You see how I am specific when make claims
>>>     about you?  That's why everyone believes me, and ignores you.
>>>
>>>     3. What childish tantrums?  How am I being childish? And what
>>>     behavior qualifies as a tantrum?
>>>
>>>     4. The purpose of this communication was directly and
>>>     exclusively related to G*****'s visitation.  You are the one
>>>     that started being belligerent.  Why do you keep doing that? 
>>>     What is wrong with you?
>>>
>>>     5.
>>>
>>>
>>>     On 04/26/2015 11:02 AM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>>>     Ricky Steve (so you aren't confused),
>>>>
>>>>     That is acceptable per my previous correspondence.  As a side
>>>>     note, I am not required to justify my decisions to you for any
>>>>     reason at any point.  I have told you the terms.  You may
>>>>     comply or not.  That is your decision.  Your failure to comply
>>>>     in this instance only hurts G*****.  As does your continuing
>>>>     to include G***** on correspondence where you make
>>>>     unfounded inflammatory, and defamatory lies despite both he and
>>>>     I requesting that you do not do so.
>>>>
>>>>     Again, cease and desist in your childish tantrums and obsessive
>>>>     stalking behavior.  There is no reason(or desire) for us to
>>>>     interact  directly other than where it concerns G*****'s
>>>>     travel.  On that note, I await G*****'s full itinerary per
>>>>     previous stipulation. That means his travel to California as
>>>>     well as Vancouver.
>>>>
>>>>     - Desiree
>>>>
>>>>     On Sunday, April 26, 2015, Patrick
>>>>     >>>     > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>         Desiree:
>>>>
>>>>         May G***** be permitted to fly from Phoenix, AZ to Los
>>>>         Angeles, CA on May 24, 2015, then to Vancouver, BC on May
>>>>         28, 2015?  If not, then please provide your reasoning as to
>>>>         why not.
>>>>
>>>>         Patrick
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         On 04/26/2015 09:17 AM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>>>>         Richard,
>>>>>
>>>>>         May 27th, 2015 will not work.  G***** may travel on
>>>>>         05/23/15 or 05/24/15.  If not either of those days, the
>>>>>         next permissible time is the following weekend.  Those
>>>>>         dates being 05/30/15 or 05/31/15.  You will need to find a
>>>>>         weekend that works for G***** to travel out. Keep in mind
>>>>>         that his return date to Arizona is still to be July 12th,
>>>>>         2015 regardless of the date he leaves to visit.  That
>>>>>         means the further you push out the date, the less time you
>>>>>         two get together.
>>>>>
>>>>>         On Saturday, April 25, 2015, Patrick
>>>>>          wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>             Desiree:
>>>>>
>>>>>             May you confirm whether May 24, 2015 is the only date
>>>>>             you will permit G***** to travel from Phoenix, AZ to
>>>>>             Vancouver, BC?  I would like him to travel on May 27,
>>>>>             2015.  Will he be permitted to do so?
>>>>>
>>>>>             Patrick
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>             On 04/20/2015 10:32 AM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             Richard,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>               G***** has stated that for his summer vacation, he
>>>>>>             would like to visit with you in Canada from May 24th
>>>>>>             to July 12th.  May you please confirm that you will
>>>>>>             pick G***** up from the airport on May 24th, and
>>>>>>             return him to the airport on July 12th?  During this
>>>>>>             time he is to remain in the care of his father
>>>>>>             Richard Steve Riess in Canada, and is not permitted
>>>>>>             to be flown to other sites such as California without
>>>>>>             my notification and express written consent.  To that
>>>>>>             end, G***** has also expressed a desire to travel to
>>>>>>             California during this time, for which I will need a
>>>>>>             full itinerary including flight and contact
>>>>>>             information.  Please provide this information as soon
>>>>>>             as possible so that there is no delay in his summer
>>>>>>             visitation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             Any deviation from the above stated shall be deemed
>>>>>>             kidnapping and a violation of the terms of reasonable
>>>>>>             visitation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             Desiree
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>