Is The Truth Believable?

[Aussie0zborn]

Kormilda made an interesting comment in another thread :

pwPD are excellent liars and storytellers and the truth is often much harder to believe.

Is it worth going all the way and telling the truth or am I going to sound like I am making up stories and be totally unbelievable?

She has made wild and hysterical accusations about me that are all irrelevant to the case but everything she accuses me of she actually did herself. All this is just character assassination but if I respond to it and tell the truth then it will sound like I am lying.

How far do you go when telling the truth? Do you tell the court that unbelievable stuff that nobody will believe and risk making yourself look like a liar?

[rogerroger]

For the most part, bear in mind that while for you all this is highly personal, for the courts (including your own attorney), it is all mostly paperwork. They care less about personal testimony than they do about how to fill out the forms and what to write in paragraph 12.

They are also VERY well aware that in domestic cases there is a massive amount of finger-pointing and false accusation.

So, forget about claiming anything for which you cannot provide supporting evidence, and ignore anything for which your stbx cannot provide supporting evidence (if called upon to respond, calmly and patiently deny it, or if your attorney advises, testify that what she claims you did was actually done by here -- that way in the eyes of the court your claims will probably at least cancel each other out).

The best advice I got on these forums was "document as much as you can". Personal testimony is not completely worthless, but nearly so except to the extent supporting evidence can be provided.

[ForeverDad]

My lawyer told me that courts expect and allow for a certain amount of heightened tension, edgy emotions and even lying.  It's not their lives hanging in the balance, for them it's just another day at work and they leave the files there when they go home.  However, courts do expect the tensions to subside post-decree.  That's why courts view Contempt of Court motions more seriously after the final decree.

testify that what she claims you did was actually done by her -- that way in the eyes of the court your claims will probably at least cancel each other out.

Much of what is claimed is listened to and then largely disregarded, apparently much is seen as hearsay, especially vague comments such as "he always... ." and "she always... ."

The best advice I got on these forums was "document as much as you can". Personal testimony is not completely worthless, but nearly so except to the extent supporting evidence can be provided.

In my case and apparently many others, judges don't want to hear about claims or incidents older than about 6 months.  Anything older is considered 'stale' unless it is used to demonstrate a pattern of behaviors.

As regards the truth being virtually unbelievable, you could use the phrases 'projection' or 'transference' to say those things did happen but were actually done by the accuser.  Again, documentation is important.

[livednlearned]

When I testified, only a fraction of my story came out. 98% of my story was based on my L's strategy and what she thought was going to win my case. It was about 5% of the "truth" as I experienced it. She asked all the questions and set everything up. Most of my testimony was answering yes or no. When I was cross-examined by N/BPDx (who was representing himself), my job was to let my L object to things that were objectionable. And when I was expected to answer, my job was to be very brief and to the point. There is not a whole lot of time or interest in hearing the whole story, much less the truth.  

The whole "day in court" thing is very different than what I once thought it would be like. What happens is  the judge is looking for technical legal points that are largely obscure to us non-lawyers. He or she uses those points as "rules" to help narrow down the messiness of human conflict, and to avoid having too much subjective bias about the case. That's why people we know are criminals can get away (literally) with murder.

Also, you may run into this bias that a lot of people have, which is that we picked these people. We stayed in the marriage with them. We engaged with them when we should know better. We had bad judgment. We are so high-conflict we need the judge to solve our problems for us.

That puts the burden on us to be very matter of fact, methodical, organized, consistent, and credible. The truth that you're trying to convey is that you aren't the problem. The other truth - what really happened -- that's for the memoir.

[Nope]

I had the same fears at the beginning. When you are dealing with the behavior of an unstable person it is very difficult to explain things to a judge without bringing up their illness. Because after all, she is their mother so why would she do or say those things that you are accusing her of? What could possibly be a sane person's motive for any of it?

All previous posters are correct that if you have no documentation or evidence, then it's as good as if it never happened. Period. If you cut out all the stuff you can't prove and just focus on the concrete stuff then you don't need to worry about sounding like a liar.

[livednlearned]

I had the same fears at the beginning. When you are dealing with the behavior of an unstable person it is very difficult to explain things to a judge without bringing up their illness. Because after all, she is their mother so why would she do or say those things that you are accusing her of? What could possibly be a sane person's motive for any of it?

All previous posters are correct that if you have no documentation or evidence, then it's as good as if it never happened. Period. If you cut out all the stuff you can't prove and just focus on the concrete stuff then you don't need to worry about sounding like a liar.

I guess the simple way to say it is that you don't explain anything in court. You report on facts that can be backed up with documentation.

[GaGrl]

In my DH's case, the Truth was the hot button that finally helped him settle his case out of court.  If he had known that, he could have pressed the button earlier.  Since then, I've encouraged members of this forum to really look for the STBX's hot button -- what will it take to get to agreement?

DH's ex (the uNPD/BPD we call The Dark Princess) had left him years before.  She is uneducated (equivalent of elementary school education in her country of origin) and had limited work opportunities.  A friend hired her to work in an Asian massage parlor (yes, the kind with happy endings), and soon TDP had opened and was actively operating her own massage parlor.  DH lived in constant fear that she would be arrested and the resulting publicity would be even more humiliating than his knowledge of what she was doing -- he is a professional, involved in community affairs, former military officer.

This went on for 7-8 years, until DH and I reconnected (teen sweethearts) and decided to marry, meaning he had to get the divorce she had offered him several times.  Easier said than done.  Suddenly she wanted alimony, property, etc. that she had abandoned over 10 years previously.  Finally, DH had enough and just said, "Well, I guess we'll just file for a court hearing."  Knowing that her business would be examined in open court was what did it -- settlement was signed within 3 days.

Of course, DH's truth came with lots of business documentation.