Can a judge's scolding deflate them at all?

[sanemom]

Our judge tends to yell at people... .  just his MO.  BPD mom (borderline waif usually) has set a hearing, it seems, just to get DH to get in front of the judge to look like a bad guy (he wrote an email to her friend asking her to look after their daughter; not good judgment, perhaps, but it certainly was not slanderous).  Of course, we have email after email where she is nasty, refusing to pay medical bills, telling DH that no amount of counseling will make him a decent human, etc., and we have not done anything with them yet.  This email from four months ago is all she has on DH and she is blowing it up like he is slandering her all over town.  (I am not sure if you remember, but she went all over town trying to smear my professional reputation with outright lies)

So I suggested to our attorney that maybe BPD mom will get off her high horse if our attorney can present some of the nastiness she is putting forward so the judge will yell at her.  Our attorney really liked that idea.  First, I am surprised HE didn't think of it (he can tell that BM is full of herself), and second, I am not even sure if it would work or not in terms of her thinking twice before she goes in front of the judge for a stupid reason again.  What do you think?

[marbleloser]

It's worth a shot,but IMHO,to her it won't matter.It might make you feel better,but if she's like my X,she'll just re-write history in her own mind and only hear the things she wants to hear.She won't hear him yelling at her.She might at that moment,but then she might twist it in her own mind,focus on what he says to your H,and discard what he says to her.That or he'll just be a meany judge out to get her.She won't accept the personal responsability.

[ForeverDad]

Odds are, if she does get a scolding, she'll eventually rewrite history shifting blame from herself to you know who.  (I cross-posted with marble, but didn't change a word so I guess we both had the same thought.)

This hit home to me.   Let me tell my story.  In 2008 my ex took our child on vacation with her without written notice.  The only warning I had was a comment or two a month or so in advance that she wanted to go during spring break.  Well, that week started off with her wanting to trade some days.  She wanted to trade her Mon for my Weds, then my Thurs for my Fri.  I figured her spring break plans never materialized.  Well, I went to get him Friday for my traded time, he was nowhere to be found.  I called her and she said they were already states away.  Apparently her idea of spring break week was a week off, son missed the next week of Kindergarten.

My lawyer filed Contempt of Court, said it was a slam dunk case, no compliance with required written notice.  However, magistrate surprised us all by ruling that despite failing to provide valid notice she was not 'technically' in contempt since she had an "inability to comply".  Why?  Divorce was final just weeks before and the order had changed.  (1) She failed to comply with the old replaced order which required notice by Feb 15.  (2) She failed to comply with the new order which required only 30 days notice.  So she skated disaster.  Next time I divorce I'll have to add in a Disclaimer CatchAll Clause that if anything doesn't apply due to time constraints then do hit_.

But ex did get lectured.  Unfortunately, magistrate chose wrong when trying to make the point.  For some reason the magistrate used child exchanges as an example of compliance.  (The county guideline provided for a 30 minute exchange window and if longer then the late parent had to call the other parent.)  Magistrate said the only reason for being late and failing to comply was if there was an accident and the parent was unconscious.  As we walked out stunned by the technical ruling in ex's favor, I recall telling my lawyer that the magistrate chose the wrong example because I worked some 30 miles away and sometimes traffic congestion during rush hour and inclement weather could easily delay my arrival.  I lamented that I was a good driver and didn't get into accidents.

So in recent weeks imagine my surprise when ex brought up that example, saying I had to arrive for exchange "on time" and not later.  Yes, she rewrote history and she looks back at the lecture from 5 years earlier and remembers me being the one being lectured.

[DreamGirl]

My husband's attorney scolded the hubs ex-wife. That's how his attorney was - logical and blunt. She was also kind of a bully really. The ex went pro se during their modification and his attorney was sick of taking all her phone calls that were 9 times out of 10 frivolous matters. So she just kinda lost it on the ex one day. (It was pretty understandable) She was short on patience and was being paid well and didn't think it fair that she keep charging her client over nonsense. She knew the law and had reached her limit in compromising with an emotionally driven Mama who really didn't have any business representing herself.

It actually helped. It created this good cop/bad cop dynamic (between the hubs and the attorney) and allowed the ex-wife to shift the blame to the attorney who she felt could no longer be her advocate in getting what she wanted.

She signed the agreement pretty soon after - and made sure to tell the hubs how mean his lawyer was. I think the point was finally gotten across. It wasn't some grand plan on anyone's part, I think it was all about timing and a constant moving forward in the firmness of the issue at hand - the hubs wanted 50/50 and wasn't really willing to compromise for anything less.  

Your question was "can a judge's scolding deflate them at all?"

I don't think this can be a blanket question attached to all individuals suffering from BPD. Nor should you really try to use it as a tactic in advancing your case. I know I've pointed this out to you before, but you often are trying to "guess" her reaction and trying to manipulate the circumstances to get a positive outcome.  A blanket statement that is true about those suffering from BPD is that they are emotionally, fear driven individuals who struggle in regulating their emotions. So, depending on the day and the state of turmoil she is in, the outcome will tend to yield a different kind of result. Like in my case, she was going thru a breakup and was very stressed out with the court case - I think that helped just as much in her conceding the fight and signing the agreement. She had reached her limit and was losing ground rapidly.

I think that's what is important in these legal battles. You have to focus on the prize and not get caught up in the smoke and mirrors game. Judges hate mud-slinging contests. So if the ex presents an email that says "Ex said x, y, z" and your attorney says "well, she said t, u, v first" - it makes you both look bad.

If you had a problem with her nastiness and unwillingness to communicate, it should be presented in it's own right not in some attempt to shine the light on her behavior rather then your own. If he was in the wrong, he was in the wrong. Her being in the wrong too doesn't make him anymore "right".

~DreamGirl

[Waddams]

My ex-wife just got more pissed at me after being scolded by the judge.  Like it was my fault that he didn't like her way of distorting truth, her selfishness, etc.

Oh wait, if I hadn't stood up for myself and had just acquiesced to her all demands and let her get away with all her misconduct, then she wouldn't have been in front of a judge, so it was really all my fault anyway.  How dare I! 

She also had some really nasty things to say about the judge on her FB page, which I still conveniently have a copy of, just in case I need it in the future.

[Her Mama]

Years ago, when CPS was still involved in our case and we had visitation (DOT had refused to allow J contact with LB from the time she was born so we had to est. a relationship for custody), DOT and her mother kept interfering with our visitation.  After filing for contempt a few times, each case going before a different magistrate, they just kept slapping her wrist.  Finally we appeared before one of the magistrates a second time.  He REALLY lit into her.  In no way was she to interfere.  She was not to drive LB to the visitation, she was not to call her mother during visitation (her mother wouldn't leave during our visits or put LB down off her lap).  She was not to show up during our visitation, or pick her (and g'ma) up afterwards.  

Didn't phase her at all.  In fact, right from the hearing in one building, she marched herself over to the CPS building next door where we were to have our visitation that day, and told the caseworkers that J had dropped his case and that we were all going on visitation together.  They even tried to attack the caseworkers and the deputy there when the caseworkers, who attended the same hearing, when they told her that wasn't the ruling and she had to hand over LB for visitation.

The only good it actually does to expose the crazy, is for the judge to see her true colors.  In our case, any ruling was really not going to phase her, not for the long term.  But once a case is in the hands of the court, it's up to the court to make the decisions, not them.  You might have to keep reinforcing the decisions by filing contempt over and over... .  not fun I know.  But if you are appearing in the same courtroom, with the same legal authority sitting at the bench each time, you'll have a decent shot at getting a sustainable ruling.

[sanemom]

Perhaps the better question is:  "Is the best defense a good offense?" in these situations.  I do not expect a judge's scolding to change her behavior in general; I would just hope it would make it less likely for her to want to go to court for stupid stuff.

Was dh in the wrong?  Slightly, but as our attorney pointed out, there was nothing inherently wrong with what he did, and most lawyers would never bring something this silly in front of a judge because it could backfire (the judge getting irritated by the waste of time).  Our attorney believes that her main reason for the hearing is just to try to make dh look bad.  If she succeeds in getting the judge mad at dh, then she may want to go again for more.

We will be asking for counseling with a therapist from our insurance (she is still insisting on using the one who is biased against us and who is a full fee therapist), and that would be when the lack of cooperation, including her nasty emails about it, could come to light.  That may also be when we would show her emails indicating her refusal to pay medical expenses as the GAL says that if we use the full-fee therapist, she would have to pay half (and we all know we would never see a dime of that--she has only paid for half of one copay in the last ten years).