advice on second custody evaluation and/or relocation hearing issue

[Matt]

Let me just tell you what I offered - not the same situation but for discussion... .

I needed to move about 250 miles for work, in the same state.  I commuted weekly for about a year - drove to the new town Monday morning, worked all week, and drove back Thursday or Friday, and had the kids over each weekend.  When it was clear this was a permanent gig, I filed a motion, offering to pay Ex's moving costs, and to give her a pretty significant monthly amount, on top of what I was alreday paying in alimony and child support, for six months (or a year, I forget now), to help her while she found a job in the new town.

She wasn't working at all in the old town - living entirely off of what I paid her each month - and the cost of living in the new town is about the same.  So this extra amount was truly extra.  She initially said no - although the new town is closer to her family, and she had said she preferred it - she used to live here - she still said no.  We went to a court-appointed mediator several times, and finally I had to say, "Either we work this out, or I'll file for full custody" which she didn't want, so she agreed to it.

The mediator said he thought my offer was pretty good - I didn't have to offer that much.  And she found a good job quickly, so she's quite a bit better off now, in the new town, than before.

So... . different circumstances of course, but I think if you can figure out a plan like that, which seems to meet both parents' needs pretty well, at least on paper, that's a good approach.

It makes sense for you to move - be ready to explain why - and it makes sense for some visits, which will cost quite a bit.  Cheaper for Dad to visit you than to buy multiple airline tickets for you all to go to him, but if he's making $400,000 US he can afford quite a few visits either way.  Maybe offer some combination, or some options, to show you are open to different solutions.  Describe how the visits might work, like "Father can visit up to 12 times per year, each visit in New Town to be 24 hours with children;  Father will pick up children between 6:00 p.m. on Friday and noon on Saturday, and return them 24 hours after pickup;  Father will inform Mother of each visit at least 4 weeks in advance by e-mail;  Father and Mother will have no direct or phone contact before or during visit except brief phone contact to confirm pickup and drop-off times.  Father will pay entire cost of travel to visit children."

Or "Father will have time with children in Old Town at least 4 times per year, with Mother and children traveling by air between 6:00 p.m. Friday and noon Saturday, and dropping off children at Father's residence, and Mother picking up children 24 hours later;  air fare for Mother and children to be paid in advance by Father;  arrangements to be made by Father at least 4 weeks in advance and communicated to Mother by e-mail;  Father to pay for air fares and Mother to pay all other travel costs."

Or something like that.  Show you have thought about it and worked out something practical which won't push him out of the kids' lives.  I think if you take that initiative it will look good to the court.

My experience was that when I (with my lawyer's help) took the initiative and proposed solutions, we made progress, and when I didn't, we didn't.

[livednlearned]

pax,

Not sure what it's like where you live, but in my state, there are 10 criteria the courts look at for relocation. Things like: will family be nearby, do you have a job lined up, is the school district comparable to the one the kids are leaving, what is the distance from the other parent, what is the relationship with the other parent, etc.

Can you find out from your L what criteria might apply for relocation in your state? The nature of relationship with other parent, or ability of one parent to support relationship between kids and other parent may not be one of the criteria. In which case, no need to even offer supervised visitation and the huge effort involved in arranging flights, etc.

Also, if you want to appear reasonable, offer Skype conferencing at scheduled times or something that signals your reasonability without involving such drastic efforts. It's just as likely your ex will stop appearing for the Skype calls anyway. My ex had a similar thing added to one of our orders, and then he abandoned it altogether. It wasn't convenient for him. 

[paxfamilia]

Except he has beat them both on several occasions (closed fist, body slams, open hands, elbows) so I wouldn't nor would the kids ever consider anything but supervised with a cop in room.  So that limits things a lot.  But at least it's an offer.  

[paxfamilia]

livednlearn, yes I had thought about Skype.  Right now it's been abolute no contact since Feb., and when he would text them or voice mail them from Dec. 25 until Feb. they totally ignored it all except to say "you're an abuser, go away, leave me alone, etc.".  So the current relationship, if considered, has been non-existant, and yes, my state states that current relationship is considered, but of course he'll say that up until I alienated them it was 42% he had and was 'meaningful'.  Kids will say it was torture, and the therapist stated in visitation that the kids were even mad at her over the last year because she wasn't 'getting' how bad the emotional abuse was becoming.  She stood on record to say that there has been emotional abuse documented by her back to 11/2006, and that she fully now believes that there was emotional abuse while we were still together/married, and that the abuse the kids have been complaining about all these years is just like what the children were reporting to the custody evaluator in 2006, only it has gotten worse as the kids have matured.  

So relocation requires all the things you mentioned.  So I'm okay on the job, the schools, the fact that entire extended family is there not here.  Ability of one parent to support the changed visitation with the other IS a criteria, but considering emotional abuse and physical bullying and stalking... .  I don't want to support the relationship anymore, but have no clue what the judge will want out of me.  I do know that he was 'pissed' to here that the ex wants sole custody just because the kids quit seeing him.  Judge stated "so you want to run the whole show?"  

I think the Skype thing is good.  Kids can get on, they will be quiet, and they will stop over time because he won't want to make the effort. And I cannot accuse him of child abuse over Skype or supervised visitation, could I?  Should be something he would like to protect himself from 'false allegations' he is stating I filed, right?

[paxfamilia]

The only other thing is that the therapist stated in depositions, that the children were so emotionally 'beat up' and scared of their dad that if anyone forced any visitation with their dad now, that it would further anger the children adn make any possibility of 'healing' the relationship at some point in the future. She stated something to the effect that this is a case in which that relationship may just have to be 'tabled' until the kids are adults and re-create the relationship on their own terms so they can ensure their own safety.

[livednlearned]

Judge stated "so you want to run the whole show?"

Is it possible that your judge knows he is a narcissist?

I think the Skype thing is good.  Kids can get on, they will be quiet, and they will stop over time because he won't want to make the effort. And I cannot accuse him of child abuse over Skype or supervised visitation, could I?  Should be something he would like to protect himself from 'false allegations' he is stating I filed, right?

I think NPDs don't think this way, but who knows. I think they are so focused on the power/control thing that false allegations are just noise to them. He won't show for the Skype visits because you have all the control.

And I think that people involved in supervised visitation can be called as witnessed if there is abuse. Others here might know. With Skype, you can actually record those calls, I believe. Using a third-party software. I remember reading others here had done the same thing.

[Suzn]

You can record Skype video calls here's a how to:  www.community.skype.com/t5/Windows-desktop-client/How-to-record-Skype-video-calls-on-windows-PC/td-p/250

[paxfamilia]

ooh, thanks didn't know you could record them

[Suzn]

Got a no contact order with some stiff teeth (jail for one year, within 24 hours, if he breaks it).  No RO, judge stated because of nature of allegations and other witness also a minor that he would postpone hearing for at least 6 months and make each of us pay for a GAL for each of the kids. So we went with the no contact order, and proceeding with relocation

So with the judges comment of him wanting to run the show and him giving you a NC order he seems to be seeing something is up. You have 6 months to regroup with NC from him if the relocation fails. Agreeing to the GAL for each child with some sort of stipulation of re-evaluating child support since this has financially devastated you. (That could be a conversation with you and your attorney alone) It seems reasonable to show that you are struggling financially with all these legal fees.

The person who did the supervising in the supervised visitation with my ex made out reports of how the visits went. This wasn't set up to be a permanent situation. The idea was to see how she interacted with the children over a period of time and to ensure she wouldn't run with them. If a parent doesn't show up for these visits or fights the system it would seem the point is mute. If he wouldn't agree to this at all, with everything that has been shown so far, and you are offering, that says something. I see your point it could look like a contradiction in what you've gained. Your attorney may have some insight on how to do something with this idea. He may say no way too.

[livednlearned]

I see your point it could look like a contradiction in what you've gained. Your attorney may have some insight on how to do something with this idea. He may say no way too.

That just happened in my case too. I offered N/BPDx the opportunity to spend S12's birthday with him from 10-2pm.

My L said don't do that anymore. Only if S12 asks, or if N/BPDx asks.

[paxfamilia]

As of right now the kids don't want me to offer anything. Their take is to go full throttle with their testimony, their friends', a teacher's, and the child abuse investigator's, the therapists', and try hard to convince the judge he is detrimental and rights should be stripped.  If we lose this relocation, then we have to stay here and the kids said leave it up to the custody evaluator to perhaps recomment relocation with some type of supervised visitation or Skype or something.  Any thoughts, anybody?

[Matt]

As of right now the kids don't want me to offer anything. Their take is to go full throttle with their testimony, their friends', a teacher's, and the child abuse investigator's, the therapists', and try hard to convince the judge he is detrimental and rights should be stripped.  If we lose this relocation, then we have to stay here and the kids said leave it up to the custody evaluator to perhaps recomment relocation with some type of supervised visitation or Skype or something.  Any thoughts, anybody?

Let me see if I understand what you're asking.

One approach is to put all the information on the table and ask for end his parenting rights completely, so there will be no further contact unless the kids some day decide they want it.  Then you could move anywhere you want.

Or... .

Another approach is to put all the information on the table, including the kids' preference for no contact, and ask for some process of healing, over time.  Maybe little or no contact at first, and then supervised contact with help from a professional to make the reunification more likely to be successful.  And maybe some checkpoints to see how things are going before there is unsupervised contact.

Two different strategies.  Are those the options you are looking at?

If you believe that he has been violent in the past, and that he has not received the help he needs to make sure he won't do that again, I think it's critical that you support that with clear thinking and as much information as possible.  Information about the violence that occurred, and psych evals if possible, so it will be clear that there are reasons he acted the way he did, and those reasons haven't been dealt with successfully.

I think it's important that you step back and look at the big picture, and decide for yourself what is in the kids' long-term best interest.  They can express their feelings and ideas and I think it's good you're hearing them.  I don't know if they can decide for themselves what is best for them in the long run;  in fact, it might be hard for you to do that too, because of all the stuff you're dealing with and your own very understandable feelings about their father.  But ultimately it's up to you to figure out which of these approaches - or another one - is in their best interests over the long haul, and then to explain it to your attorney and with his help to the court.

[paxfamilia]

I try and sit back and try to be objective, and I get tired from everyone insinuating (his attorney, even the kids' therapist at times) that somehow I cannot divorce my feelings and see what is best for the kids. All I know is this:  he is toxic, he is violent, and he stalks when you get the nerve to say enough and go no contact.  He did it with me, he did it with his kids.  I cannot ever see that he will ever change, only worsen, which has been his history with all 3 of us.  (If you are beat down, he's okay, and continues the emotional, but if you dare be yourself, which is normal, nothing bhity or anything, then he 'steps' it up, and begins the suffocating, choking, hitting, etc,., then the stalking when you remove yourself.)  I'd say he is a complete and utter detriment to anyone who dares become his immediate family  (his present wife included, although I am number one on the 'get list, but when I get the kids and I off the "get list, she will be number one).  I do think the kids are old enough and mature enough to make up their own minds.  They are girls, naturally more mature than boys at the same age, and have always been more mature than even their girls peers. They are the straight A, responsible, type of kiddos.  They have made statements where they look into the future (graduation, college, marriage, babies, etc.), and they say that their dad will only ruin the most precious moments for them, with the way he purposely seeks to humiliate them in front of the people who mean the most to them, etc.  And they have made several statements, that even as adults in the future, they dare not ever be alone with him as physical violence retribution is expected by them. They say they dare not even do something like go to a public dinner, based on his collective behaviors to me and to them over the years.  Even as little kids, they were not surprised in the least when he beat me up and knew immediately that I have not fallen or had an accident, that their dad did that damage to me.  I guess my only dilemma is that I know so many judges still want kids involved with supervised visitation with their batterer, which makes no sense to me and just teaches the kids that violence is just something on the wide spectrum of acceptable behaviors.  

I think at this point, we will just go with the kids wishes, which the child abuse investigator should back us up on.  Her report states that the children are old enough to refuse any visitation with their father.  It's not in her report, but she told me verbally that she would not file dependency court charges because of the kids' ages, and their statements to her that they would refuse supervised visitation or run away if someone tried to force any visitation of any kind.

Considering how desparately the oldest (16) would want to have a free trip back to Florida to see her friends and her boyfriend, and she is rejecting the possibility of free trips back (paid by dad), and would just have to tolerate some supervised (with armed deputies) visitation... . I think the kids are still suffering PTSD and dont' want someone to pull the pin out on the grenade again, so to speak.  Honestly, I can very much understand that, as I remember what it felt like the first few years after he beat me, and how I felt when I had to see him in court or mediation.  I don't feel that way anymore, annoyed, and angry yes, but I don't feel fear.  Probably because I am old enough to always carry a handgun and I would just 'stand my ground' if he was about to commit a forceable felony on me or my kids.    But the kids don't have that option and recall so many times when they were at his mercy, unfortunately.

[livednlearned]

I guess my only dilemma is that I know so many judges still want kids involved with supervised visitation with their batterer, which makes no sense to me and just teaches the kids that violence is just something on the wide spectrum of acceptable behaviors.  

Have you had the same judge? Will you have a familiar judge at this next hearing? If so, what does your L say about him/her?

[paxfamilia]

New judge.  He has heard only 2 issues/hearings, both recent.  One was ex's motion for another custody evaluation, which unfortunately he granted, because the kids therapist stated that "it would be a waste of time" rather than "it would be detrimental to the kids".  Ex claiming severe alienation by me, I'm claiming child abuse, judge said he wanted an expert to help him sort it out.  First hearing he heard, doesn't know us.

Next hearing was for permission to let their minor (17) friend testify.  Granted.  But also wound up being a discussion about the restraining orders I had petitioned for, how that would be handled and closed with a stiffer no contact order in which dad would have to go to jail for a year if he broke it, and the hearing would happen within 24 hours of him breaking it.  Judge heard me say several things in that hearing, including that husband had beat me, had broken my RO I had on him several times, no cop or attorney or judge would help me with those violations, etc.  He also heard me say that kids wanted lifetime restraining orders, he stated nobody ever got those, but that if we won our case that the kids would each get the same  no contact orders with 1 year jail violation, until each was 18.

So he's essentially new to our case.  He was a domestic violence judge for 8 years before this, and before that a pet court judge, and apparently has a very soft heart for the ones who cannot protect themselves (kids, pets).  He is firm and fires off a lot of questions quickly, and seems to want to admit more evidence and talk than most judges. 

I reflexively (didn't even know I was doing it) took off my reading glasses and threw them on the table at the last hearing, when opposing counsel was over there lying about how all this was false allegations to get back at the dad, that I've never co-parented, that I am always the problem, yada yada. Judge got pissed at me, said he could throw me out of his court for that, but didn't.  When everyone left that hearing (only me the bailiff and judge in room), he looked and me and said something like this:

"You present well, you speak well, you make sound arguments.  You need to keep your emotions in check. Bring yourself a memo pad with whatever word on it you need to write to keep you focused.  I need your to remember you are trying to reach your goal here."

That gave me a lot of hope, but I am still scared to death, because to date his very old and very seasoned aggressive pit bull attorney has managed to get away with so much, even just basically choking me out by delaying and motion churning and exasperating me emotionally and financially.

[Matt]

"You present well, you speak well, you make sound arguments.  You need to keep your emotions in check. Bring yourself a memo pad with whatever word on it you need to write to keep you focused.  I need your to remember you are trying to reach your goal here."

Fascinating, because this is the technique I have found works well for me.  Not writing "Peace" over and over to stay calm - not a bad idea maybe!  But here's how I do it that helps me a lot... .

I have a hard-bound notebook - you can get one at an office supply place.  I date each page at the top, and write down what that page is about - "Custody hearing" or whatever - and who is present.

Then I write down anything I think is important, and especially (with a anything I need to do afterward, like if I realize I need to find some information, I write that and put a *.

And... . any time someone says something I know is false, I write it as carefully as I can - word-for-word if possible.  Then when it's the appropriate time, I can say, "A few minutes ago Mrs. Matt said 'Blah blah blah.'  That is not true, and she can't back it up with any evidence."  Maybe the issue never gets decided - sometimes a judge won't take the time to figure out what's true - but at least I'm on record stating that the other party made a false statement in court, and I'm not letting the judge assume that it's true.

This discipline - writing down important stuff - helps me stay focused and not interrupt.  It also allows me to refer back to my notes when I forget something important.

[livednlearned]

This is really useful for me too -- more than anything, I am worried about my anger coming through in court next week. I don't know what emotions are going to show up while I'm being cross-examined. The notebook is a good idea, although if I'm correct, you cannot come in with anything written down, right? Unless you agree that those notes can be entered as exhibits? Not that I would bring anything in, just want to make sure I understand how the process works.

It's crazy making to think about talking in a neutral voice about the abuse. My trial is for sole legal custody, which is not as extreme as your trial, pax. Still, how do you describe the behaviors of your ex in a neutral voice?

[Matt]

This is really useful for me too -- more than anything, I am worried about my anger coming through in court next week. I don't know what emotions are going to show up while I'm being cross-examined. The notebook is a good idea, although if I'm correct, you cannot come in with anything written down, right? Unless you agree that those notes can be entered as exhibits? Not that I would bring anything in, just want to make sure I understand how the process works.

It's crazy making to think about talking in a neutral voice about the abuse. My trial is for sole legal custody, which is not as extreme as your trial, pax. Still, how do you describe the behaviors of your ex in a neutral voice?

Ask your lawyer how things work there.  Where I live, nobody checked to see if I had anything already written in my notebook;  in fact I just used the one I normally use in my work every day, and it had lots of irrelevant stuff in it - nobody cared or even checked - but that could be different somewhere else.

Your lawyer should also help with this stuff - stress and staying calm and focused in court.  Talk openly about it - the lawyer should be prepared to deflect or stall a little if you need a minute to get your thoughts together.  And some simple coaching - what is OK to do, like if it's OK to ask that something be repeated, to give you time to think and compose yourself.

[paxfamilia]

livednlearn:  you will be fine this week!  I think it's great (although unnerving for you) that he is representing himself.  No lawyer in their straight mind would ever do that, especially given that it's for sole custody.  If it were for some small procedural thing, okay, but to represent yourself for sole I would think is going to speak volumes to the judge and it's going to say:  is this man nuts?  I also think that as long as you don't lose your cool (emotions, crying, showing frustration, etc., are okay in balance), that he will trip himself up somehow.

Now if he is like mine, he will be very sneaky at presenting only his side of things and force you to say yes and no only answers which may look incriminating, so make sure you and your attorney expect what he will bring up and that your attorney questions him and you on these specific issues, so that not just his side is presented.

[paxfamilia]

I can take anything in. I carried in 2 bags last time, full of ring binders with all kinds of things, nobody asked to see them.  Just had them there in case his attorney pulled a rabbit out of the hat (presented something that was one-sided and I had the whole truth, not just their truth).

[Matt]

I can take anything in. I carried in 2 bags last time, full of ring binders with all kinds of things, nobody asked to see them.  Just had them there in case his attorney pulled a rabbit out of the hat (presented something that was one-sided and I had the whole truth, not just their truth).

In that case, it may be helpful to have some stuff already written down - maybe key points you want to remember, or anything that might help you to stay calm and focused.

It sounds like the judge was giving you some helpful coaching - how to modify your behavior slightly so you can be successful in these situations... .

[paxfamilia]

And I'm hoping the coaching the judge gave was an indication that he believes my side of the story.  Maybe reading too much into it, but he did not have to treat me so nicely or made the effort that he did, especially if he thought I was blowing smoke up his you know what.

[livednlearned]

Now if he is like mine, he will be very sneaky at presenting only his side of things and force you to say yes and no only answers which may look incriminating, so make sure you and your attorney expect what he will bring up and that your attorney questions him and you on these specific issues, so that not just his side is presented.

Yes, he is like that! He sent an interrogatory and the witness/document list, and both of those have a lot of revealing information about what he is going to ask and say. I'm studying for it this weekend like it's an exam.

Thanks for the positive perspective. I know it's true in my gut, but it still feels nerve wracking. Just thinking about being up on the witness stand is intimidating. It really helps having everyone's support 

[Suzn]

Maybe reading too much into it, but he did not have to treat me so nicely or made the effort that he did, especially if he thought I was blowing smoke up his you know what.

I would try to take this at face value. You are absolutely right, he didn't have to tell you this.

[Matt]

And I'm hoping the coaching the judge gave was an indication that he believes my side of the story.  Maybe reading too much into it, but he did not have to treat me so nicely or made the effort that he did, especially if he thought I was blowing smoke up his you know what.

He probably won't go all the way toward believing either party - it's probably not appropriate for him to decide that all at once.  But I think you can be sure that if you take his advice, he will see that and respect it, and if you don't, he'll notice that too.

[paxfamilia]

Whoa, what?  He has to believe one side or the other.  Somebody's lying.  Both cannot be right about allegations of alieanation, child abuse, stalking, etc. 

[Matt]

Whoa, what?  He has to believe one side or the other.  Somebody's lying.  Both cannot be right about allegations of alieanation, child abuse, stalking, etc.  

Well... . in my somewhat limited experience, unfortunately, it may not work that way.

I agree with you, it would be best if those allegations would be researched and understood, and a clear decision made about what really happened.  That's the way it works (or at least the way it's supposed to work) in criminal cases - evidence and advocates for both sides, and a verdict.

In my case, that's not how it worked - my wife had been violent a few times, and had broken a number of other laws, including making serious (criminal) false accusations which cost me a lot in $ and stress;  when she was deposed, she made more than 40 false statements under oath.  The family law court never made a "finding of fact" regarding those events, and put almost no effort into finding out what was true and what wasn't.

Your case is somewhat different, and the court may show more interest in who is telling the truth, but don't assume that the judge will ever clearly decide who is telling the truth and who isn't.  If you go to trial, there may be a clear "winner" and "loser".  Most cases never go to trial - there's a settlement at some point, maybe with some strong guidance from the court.

I think you have to be ready for either approach, and see which makes most sense for you.  One approach is to move things forward until you are in such a strong position that you can get a settlement - without trial - which you believe is good for you and the kids.  The other approach is to proceed to trial, which will cost more, but may be needed if the other side won't settle along lines you feel OK with.  I guess what I'm saying is that it isn't wise to decide up front, "We'll settle and not go to trial" or "We won't settle no matter what - we'll go to trial."  Better to decide - as I think you have more or less done here in this thread - what you believe is best for the kids, and then read the situation as things proceed, and decide as the case develops whether a settlement is best or whether the cost of a trial is worth it.

[paxfamilia]

He'll never settle out of court, unless he feels that his job/reputation would be in jeopardy, and I won't place it in jeopardy by reporting him as then I feel that he would literally kill me or the kids in retaliation.  I will take your advice, but in a sense, our 7/25 hearing is a type of trial, although it will not solve all issues, but if granted (relocation out of state), then it sort of will define visitation/custody a lot.

He is so sick in his head, he truly wants to the kids to have some type of 'reprogramming' therapy to erase their little sick twisted minds that they have been the victims of his emotional and physical abuse.  Now, his attorney may at some point tell him that the deposition we had with the kids' therapist establishes emotional abuse going back to before the divorce/custody decree, but I doubt that, as he sees my ex as a cash cow.

[livednlearned]

He'll never settle out of court, unless he feels that his job/reputation would be in jeopardy, and I won't place it in jeopardy by reporting him as then I feel that he would literally kill me or the kids in retaliation.  I will take your advice, but in a sense, our 7/25 hearing is a type of trial, although it will not solve all issues, but if granted (relocation out of state), then it sort of will define visitation/custody a lot.

He is so sick in his head, he truly wants to the kids to have some type of 'reprogramming' therapy to erase their little sick twisted minds that they have been the victims of his emotional and physical abuse.  Now, his attorney may at some point tell him that the deposition we had with the kids' therapist establishes emotional abuse going back to before the divorce/custody decree, but I doubt that, as he sees my ex as a cash cow.

He will never settle out of court because he has money. It's the same with my ex. Making him pay for my legal expenses is second after getting sole legal custody. I make sure my L does not take her eye off that goal, and that takes effort on my part.

Before divorcing N/BPDx, I never talked about money. Now I talk about it like it's the weather. I've noticed that my L thinks about money differently than I do, and I make sure she never forgets what it means to me. I have to advocate for that goal almost more than I have to advocate for custody.

Even if you are awarded legal fees, and even if your ex doesn't pay, it becomes a sticking point in court. It becomes one more thing that the court holds against him. When pwBPD don't listen to the authority of court, that's what seems to bother them most. That's when they start to dole out just punishments.

[Matt]

He'll never settle out of court, unless he feels that his job/reputation would be in jeopardy, and I won't place it in jeopardy by reporting him as then I feel that he would literally kill me or the kids in retaliation.  I will take your advice, but in a sense, our 7/25 hearing is a type of trial, although it will not solve all issues, but if granted (relocation out of state), then it sort of will define visitation/custody a lot.

I'm going to brainstorm about this a little, and please take it as such - throwing ideas around - with some reflection on a similar situation, and how I handled it - one approach that didn't work and then another one that did.

(And I'm hoping DreamGirl is still reading and will chime in, as we have discussed this before, and she has some different ways of looking at this stuff that aren't my views but are surely good to consider.)

A few years ago, a few years after our divorce was settled, I needed to move about 250 miles for work.  I offered - as I think I noted below - a settlement which I thought was more than fair, and my wife refused.  I had the option to go to court, but I proposed we talk about it with our court-appointed mediator, who was wise and skilled;  several months later nothing had been accomplished.  Time was running out because of getting the kids into school in the new place, so I needed to either get an agreement from her or file something with the court.

At our next session with the mediator, I was prepared, and asked to speak for a few minutes.  I detailed several facts - crimes which my wife had committed but for which she had not been prosecuted, including making false accusations - and stated (correctly) that if we went to court, and I sought full custody, I would be required to disclose all that information, and it would become a public record, and she could be prosecuted for any or all of those crimes.

I said I would honor my initial offer for the rest of that session, but that if no agreement was reached I would file the next morning for full custody, and I would be prepared to disclose all that information and let the chips fall where they may.

Her reaction was memorable:  "You can't prove all that!".  (She was right - everything I said was true, but not all of it would be easy to prove.)  She didn't deny any of it - in front of the mediator.  She talked awhile, processing what I had said, with some coaching from the mediator, and then she asked for 24 hours to respond, and I said that was fair.  The next day she accepted my proposal, with one small and reasonable change:  that I commit not to disclose that information.  (Later I found out that part of the agreement is not enforceable, but it's probably moot now anyway.)

Summary:  I didn't want to disclose her crimes, but I needed to use that approach to get an agreement.  It was a hardball approach but it worked after every effort to resolve the issue had failed.

It's possbible that something similar might work for you - not reporting him, but making it clear, through your attorney, that if there is no settlement and you go to trial, this stuff will become part of the public record and there is no guarantee it won't be found out by the authorities in his field.