In case you have trouble navigating the link, I took the liberty of taking
screenshots for you (there are 11 pages of flights to choose from);
[image: Inline image 1]
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
I would appreciate it if you would keep your emotions in check as we
attempt to discuss and resolve this.
Did I ever once say I needed to know where G***** was going to be every
single minute of every single day? No, I haven't. I told you specifically
what information I needed, which was regarding the plane/flight information
ONLY but you wanted to argue about the meaning of "including but not
You never once asked me to work with you on the date of his departure, you
demanded it and only AFTER I said 'No' did you bring up that it was about
With all your threats to "destroy me", the emails you've sent to my
work, and that horrendous website still up and being hosted from your home
computer - what makes you think that I should do ANYTHING to help you out?
Tell me exactly why I am responsible for taking time off of work to
accommodate you? Where exactly does it say that I am required to in the
court decree? Please show me.
See - you still don't get it. If you had come to me and said "hey,
flights are cheaper on Wednesday and I would really appreciate it if you
would work with me on G*****'s travel" I would have done it. Even after
everything you have done (especially beginning in March). The fight here
is one sided, always has been.
Now to wrap this up, I do NOT need (from you or Liz);
*1. a detailed plan for a journey, especially a list of places to visit;
plan of travel. *
*2. a line of travel; route.*
*3. an account of a journey; record of travel.*
*4. a book describing a route or routes of travel with information helpful
to travelers; guidebook for travelers.*
What I need is the same thing you have sent me for every other visitation
G***** has had to see you - the confirmation from the airline that
includes the flight information (generally referred to as a "travel
itinerary" - I can copy and paste a picture of one of you still need it for
I just did a search on Google and found the following;
I gave you the travel dates on April 20th. You could have purchase a
ticket at any point in the last 2 weeks. Instead you want to quibble over
dictionary definitions and cite case law and now there are no reasonable
flights left that are non-stop. So I guess I have no choice but to allow a
layover, unless you want to explain to Liz that you were incorrect in your
interpretation of what I said. Regardless of where he's traveling to,
send me the flight confirmation. Or don't and we can most certainly take
this back to court and you can plead your case.
On Tuesday, May 5, 2015, Patrick wrote:
How am I the one making it complicated when you're the one changing your
demands? Please see my further comments below.
On 05/05/2015 08:55 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
This is just unnecessarily complicated. Even for you. Let me make this
VERY simple so that you can follow.
1. As stated on the email 05/04/2015 which you cited, Gariel's
permissible time period for visitation with you is between May 24th, 2015
and July 12th, 2015. This means that the EARLIEST he may leave Arizona is
May 24th, and the LATEST that G***** may be returned to my custody is July
2. As stated previously as well, G***** is to depart Arizona on a
weekend, and be returned on a weekend within the above stated time period
of visitation. NOT a week day. G***** and I have both looked up the
prices for tickets, and there is not a significant price difference between
equivalent weekend and week day flights as you (falsely) stated
previously. This is not a significant financial hardship.
In your email dated 2015-05-04 you stated, and I'm quoting, "G*****
*may travel* for the purposes of visitation *between the dates of* May
24th and July 12th, 2015" (emphasis added). You stated, in your own words,
in writing, that G***** may travel between the two stated dates and you
did not further qualify it.
You still have not provided a reason as to WHY you will not permit
G***** to travel on a weekday. Contrary to your grossly misinformed
belief, you ARE required to provide a reason under these circumstances.
You need to find yourself a better legal advisor.
You are full of shit about the cost of the flights. A flight on May 27,
28 is $150 - $180; on May 24 it's $1300, on May 30, 31 it $550 and up. How
is that not a significant difference? If you're going to make such claims
then provide proof. Where did you find such ticket prices?
3. You and I have already discussed a situation where by you have
an option for G***** to fly to LA to visit with Liz on a weekend, then fly
to visit you in Canada during a week day.
You have imposed unreasonable requirements on allowing G***** to fly to
LA. You insist that you require a complete itinerary but then you refuse
to clarify exactly what information you are demanding. That is the same
stupid single mother bullshit my mother did when I was a kid and I'm not
going to waste my time on it.
4. The above visitation as previously stated ALSO is contingent
upon a full travel itinerary including all flight and travel plans. You've
done this before, so it shouldn't be difficult or a surprise.
Go look up the word "itinerary", you fucking moron! What fucking
language do you speak? Is it some made up version of English? Is it
because your American that you're such an idiot? Let me help you (from
noun, plural itineraries.
1. a detailed plan for a journey, especially a list of places to visit;
plan of travel.
2. a line of travel; route.
3. an account of a journey; record of travel.
4. a book describing a route or routes of travel with information helpful
to travelers; guidebook for travelers.
So what the fuck are you asking for? Just the flight information? Do
you want to know exactly where he is going to be each day? Be more fucking
specific you fucking idiot!
Fuck you, and fuck your stupid, white trash, single mother bullshit
games. I'm going to get him a ticket for the 27th or 28th and if you don't
allow him to leave then I get to show the court that not once, but twice
now you've refused to allow him to visit during his extended school breaks.
Good day, I'm not reading any further because your stupidity hurts my
· Travel between 05/24/2015-07/12/2015.
· Travel FROM Arizona on Weekends within the above listed dates
· Travel TO Arizona on Weekends within the above listed dates
· Visitation with Liz is permissible, and up front visitation
which has also been discussed is also permissible as long as I am apprised
of G*****'s location and the plans.
· The above plans as previously stated are contingent upon you
providing me a full travel itinerary including all flight details and
arrangements for G***** while on travel.
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Patrick wrote:
You're the one going "round and round". I HAVE reviewed the previous
emails, which is why I require clarification - first you stated one set of
requirements, then you stated a different set of requirements.
You are grossly mistaken about the meaning and legal definition of
"including but not limited to". You might want to review, for example,
some current case law on the matter. Specifically, the "but not limited
to" means the previously stated list of requirements is NOT exhaustive and
MAY include additional, not explicitly stated, requirements. Stop
pretending to be smarter than you are!
If what you wish to express is that you require specific information
then you should have phrased it as, for example:
"I will require x, y, z. Additional information may be provided, at
your discretion, but is not required by me."
Based on your most recent email THAT is what you meant to say. But that
is 100% contrary to what you ACTUALLY said.
Since, literally, what you have said in your email dated 2015-05-04 is
that G***** is permitted to travel "between" the dates of "May 24th and
July 12th", with no additional exclusions or qualifications, I am going to
obtain G***** a flight from Phoenix to Vancouver for a date which will be
reasonable and cost effective. I don't care if that is conducive with your
work schedule because there is no requirement that you MUST personally
transport him to the airport or be present at the time of his departure.
In the event you are actually interested in better educating yourself
(since, clearly UoP hasn't done much for you in that respect), here are a
couple links regarding "including but not limited to":
On 05/05/2015 12:59 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
I really don't have the time or patience for this. You seem to want
to go round and round on questions that have already been answered. You
asked for a confirmation of dates and I gave it to you. If you require
additional calrification, read the previous emails in the thread.
"Including but not limited to" means that I will accept any additional
information you have to provide, but I require the stated pieces of
information at a minimum. Understanding the use of this term is covered
under basic reading comprehension. The only other email correspondence
that needs to be provided is the travel itinerary. There is no need for
any further discussion of the matter and as such I will not be responding
to anything else.
On Monday, May 4, 2015, Patrick wrote:
What additional information will you "need"? Your response states
"...including [sic] but not limited to...", which means that you are
reserving the right to add to the stated list.
Also, your most recent message (below) conflicts with the previous
message, in that you are now stating G***** may travel "between" the dates
of May 24th and July 12th, whereas you previously stated he may depart
Phoenix only on May 23, 24, 30 or 31. So that I am clear: are you now
saying he may depart Phoenix on other dates, as well?
On 05/04/2015 09:07 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
Yes, G***** may travel for the purposes of visitation between the
dates of May 24th and July 12th, 2015. I will need the travel plans
(itinerary) all flights G***** will be occupying, including but not
limited to; the airline, day, time, flight number, confirmation number, and
destination. This includes his flight from California to Vancouver.
On Monday, May 4, 2015, Patrick wrote:
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.
On 04/26/2015 04:24 PM, Patrick wrote:
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.
On 04/26/2015 04:02 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
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).
On Sunday, April 26, 2015, Patrick
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?
On 04/26/2015 11:35 AM, Patrick wrote:
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
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
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?
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.
On Sunday, April 26, 2015, Patrick
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.
On 04/26/2015 09:17 AM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
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
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?
On 04/20/2015 10:32 AM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
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.