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: Desiree Capuano <desiree.capuano@gmail.com>
To: Patrick <patrick@desireecapuano.com>
Date: Wed, May 06 2015 4:38:32 pm
Sure...as soon as you send me a travel itinerary.

On Wednesday, May 6, 2015, Patrick  wrote:

>  Desiree:
>
> Can you stop being a stupid fucking for even just a minute?
>
> Patrick
>
>
> On 05/06/2015 04:31 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>
> You're right, I didn't call every single airline to check their age
> limitations for you.  Did you need me to do all of the research for you?
> Do you need me to hold your hand through this whole process??
>
> On Wednesday, May 6, 2015, Patrick  > wrote:
>
>>  Desiree:
>>
>> Sure, and if he can be at PHX by 4:30am then there's a 6:37am flight on
>> Air Canada for $395, with a 2:15 layover in San Fran, for a total travel
>> time of 6:50; or there's a couple of 6:11am Air Canadas for $463 with 2
>> stops for a travel time of 10:17 and 11:47, respectively; or a 1:43 with
>> one layover in Denver for $559, travel time: 7:26.
>>
>> Do you do everything half-assed?  Can you just go away and shut up?  I
>> don't believe that there is ANY way that your involvement in something
>> would ever make it better so why don't you just go to your room and smoke
>> some weed or something?
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>>
>> On 05/06/2015 04:15 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>
>> Air Canada allows it at 12 - I already called them.
>>
>> On Wednesday, May 6, 2015, Patrick  wrote:
>>
>>>  Desiree:
>>>
>>> Do you realize that many airlines now do not let a person under 15
>>> travel alone?  Do you realize how that limits the number of flights
>>> available to choose from?  Do you ever look into things before you speak?
>>>
>>> I am calling airlines right now.  If I am able to secure a ticket I will
>>> let you know.
>>>
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>>
>>> On 05/06/2015 04:09 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>>
>>> I would assume with all that free time on your hands you would be able
>>> to secure G***** a plane ticket, yet I don't have a travel itinerary.
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, May 6, 2015, Patrick  wrote:
>>>
>>>>  Desiree:
>>>>
>>>> Last night I sent you an email requesting what you will permit with
>>>> respect to layover duration, et cetera.  Why, when I request clarification
>>>> of anything from you, do you always refuse to provide it?  You refuse to be
>>>> clear - even when the other party explicitly requests clarification - and
>>>> then later you try to accuse the other party of "misinterpreting" what you
>>>> meant.  Maybe if you used the English language correctly clarification
>>>> would not be necessary.
>>>>
>>>> Patrick
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 05/06/2015 02:23 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Once again - I don't see a travel itinerary.  Do you want to keep
>>>> talking or do you want to see your son?  Are you seriously suggesting you
>>>> would book G***** on a 15 hour flight?
>>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, May 6, 2015, Patrick 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>  Desiree:
>>>>>
>>>>> That's wonderful.  You have never indicated that you would allow a
>>>>> flight which has connectors and based on your demonstrated refusal to allow
>>>>> your children any independence, one must assume that you would not be
>>>>> amenable to such flights.  I have, repeatedly, asked you whether such
>>>>> travel arrangements would be permissible and you have refused to respond.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you saying that you're okay with a 15 hour flight, including a 10
>>>>> hour layover in a distant city?  You may notice, the lowest priced direct
>>>>> flight is $965US, which is about $1200CDN.  You realize I would be paying
>>>>> in Canadian dollars, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> Why do you insist on blaming your fuck-ups and shortcomings on me?
>>>>>
>>>>> Patrick
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 05/06/2015 02:10 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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 <
>>>>> desiree.capuano@gmail.com> 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 limited to".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  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 the cost.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   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
>>>>>> reference).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   I just did a search on Google and found the following;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  http://www.kayak.com/flights/PHX-YVR/2015-05-24
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Cheerio
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tuesday, May 5, 2015, Patrick 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Desiree:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Ricky,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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 12th, 2015.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>> dictionary.reference.com):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> itinerary
>>>>>>> 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 head.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Patrick
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  *Recap*:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ·         Travel between 05/24/2015-07/12/2015.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ·         Travel FROM Arizona on Weekends  within the above listed
>>>>>>> dates (05/24/2015-07/12/2015) only.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ·         Travel TO Arizona on Weekends within the above listed
>>>>>>> dates (05/24/2015-07/12/2015) only.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ·         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 <
>>>>>>> patrick@desireecapuano.com> 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":
>>>>>>>> http://www.adamsdrafting.com/including-without-limitation/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.weagree.com/book/96-The+issue+of+%E2%80%98include%E2%80%99+and+%E
2%80%98without+limitation%E2%80%99.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/including-vs-including-without-limit-48967/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.americancriminallawreview.com/aclr-online/overplaying-their-hand-
overly-broad-interpretive-canons-applied-including-not-limited-clauses/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Patrick
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 05/05/2015 12:59 PM, Desiree Capuano wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ricky,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  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.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Good Day
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Monday, May 4, 2015, Patrick 
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Desiree:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 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?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Patrick
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 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:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  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
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>