And Now … the Prequel:
The 1983 Decree of Dissolution evidences that Don was in arrears in his child support obligation at the time of the divorce, yet he had money to hire an attorney to represent him in the divorce. I appeared pro-se, without an attorney, as I could not afford one.
The campaign to rid himself of his child support obligation by gaining custody began when DJ was nine-and-a-half-years old and Doni was four-years old. Don’s first custody petition was denied in an order dated June 5, 1987.
A: Yes. He was $750 in arrears at this time, yet he had money to hire an attorney (Hepburn).
A: Don’s custody petition states that he was seeking custody because “DJ is older now, and being a boy, needs his father.” However, the real reason was to relieve himself of his child support obligation.
Lack of visitation or arguments as to his exercise of visitation were not reasons given by Don for seeking custody. In the affidavit in support of this custody petition Don stated: “As indicated in the previous paragraphs I have been seeing the children on an almost daily basis. Since the time of the Decree I have enjoyed very liberal visitation with the children.” Reference: “Motion and Affidavit for Order to Show Cause 2189F,” KCSC Cause No. 82-3-05162-8, p. 6, lines 4-8. Improper parenting by me was not a reason for Don seeking custody. The petition contains no allegations of poor parenting, abuse, or neglect by me. Lack of parenting cooperation between Don and me was not a reason for Don seeking custody. In an affidavit submitted by Don and dated March 27, 1992—four years after my “kidnapping” Doni—Don advised the court that there had been parenting cooperation between the two of us prior to my (1988) move to Arizona.
A: No. In fact DJ attended the hearing on this first custody petition specifically to inform the court that he did not wish to live with his father. Don’s rejection of his son began at birth as he chose not to be at the hospital when DJ was born.
A: Prior to filing his first custody petition Don had verbally agreed to increase his child support obligation to reflect the increased expenses in the children’s medical, dental, orthodontic, and day-care expenses since the entry of the Decree of Dissolution in 1983. He never paid it, however. On November 13, 1987 the court increased Don’s child support obligation $27 per month, per child. I had no money to hire an attorney and appeared pro-se. In granting the increase, the court stated that the children, not Don’s attorney (Hepburn), should benefit from his earning capacity. By this time Don was more than $1,000 in arrears in his child support obligation—money he was now spending on Hepburn’s attorney fees.
