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: The relevance of money in G*****'s desire to live with me
From: Patrick <>
To: Desiree Capuano <>
Date: Sat, Jun 20 2015 4:43:14 pm

I think you're right - the $20/month I'm spending on the violin rental 
for G***** to learn to play it is definitely spoiling him much more 
than it is helping him to try new things (i.e. broadening his exposure), 
and to discover the things he likes, enjoys, and wants to pursue.  In 
case it is not clear: that entire sentence was completely sarcastic.  I 
just taught him how to iron clothes (a practical skill that will 
actually be useful in life) and right now he is practicing the violin.

In 2 and a half years with you he has done nothing but hang out with his 
friends, and play video games.  Neither of which contributes to making 
him a better, more well rounded person.  Please, please, please help me 
to understand what you're claim that you're a good parent is based on.

This morning he made french toast using Challah bread that we picked up 
at the Jewish deli.  Why have you never bothered to teach him to cook?  
Do you not consider basic life skills relevant?


On 06/20/2015 10:37 AM, Patrick wrote:
> Hello, Desiree.
> When G***** arrived here I told him that, because of having been off 
> since March 6, I have used up my financial resources and am living on 
> my credit cards.  At the end of May I asked to borrow $1200 from him 
> to cover the rent for June.  Since he's been here we've not been doing 
> anything that would cost more than a few dollars.  I've not been 
> buying him anything.  We haven't gone to the shooting range, or out to 
> dinner, or the movies, et cetera. As far as he is concerned, we are 
> broke and living moment to moment, on credit.  Yet still, he would 
> rather live with, and be raised by, me.  Even if it means being broke, 
> in Canada.
> So, apparently your belief that he only wants to be with me because I 
> "spoil" him is entirely unfounded.
> It's also, recently, come to my attention, that you have convinced 
> yourself that the only reason G***** told the court he wants to live 
> with me is because I told him to say that.  Come on!  You know that's 
> completely ridiculous.  He said he wants to live with me before he 
> spoke with the court AND he still says it to this day.  He even said 
> it to your face in September 2011, while he was being held captive by 
> you the first time.  And, I have to believe he's sincere about it 
> because I always leave his visitation schedules up to him (though, 
> technically, up to you because you're a fascist dictator that wants to 
> impose your desires on others and keep them dependent on you).  He 
> knows I don't experience "emotions" and I'm not going to be "hurt" if 
> he doesn't want to visit or live with me - so he has no reason to be 
> insincere about it.  If, at any time he didn't want to visit or live 
> with me, he knows all he has to do is say so.
> Based on that, we would have to assume that if he was going to lie to 
> one of us about where he wants to live, it would have to be you. 
> Because you're the on that has forced him to do things against his 
> will and you're the one that get's angry, freaks out, takes your anger 
> and frustration out on him and Sage (even when it's completely 
> unrelated to them), and punishes them for saying things you don't want 
> to hear.  You have created an environment where he is afraid to say 
> anything that he thinks might upset you.  Good job.
> So, what are you going to try to convince yourself of now?  Or are you 
> finally going to accept that he just isn't one of you and as long as I 
> manipulate to keep him with you he's going to continue to cause subtle 
> friction in your "loving home"?  Anyway, he'll turn 16 in just 15 
> months then you'll have absolutely no legal authority over him (nor 
> will the California or Arizona, or any other US court).
> Cheers,
> Patrick