Editor’s note: Lovefraud received the following story from a reader whom we’ll call “Cassidy.”
I was married for 2 years. The problems emerged after my daughter was born.
Jumping to the end of the story, we separated and divorced. We had final court orders for parenting and property in 2010. Since then I have been back to court at least 20 times, we have 3 final orders.
My ex now has custody of my daughter, even though he was accused of domestic violence and pleaded guilty to the charges. In Australia the presumption for shared care is set aside if you can prove this.
I was given custody of my little girl the first and second court cases. He was given sole parenting on the third.
Needless to say, I rarely get permission to see or speak with this little girl. She must now live with and understand how to survive day to day living in this situation and without her mummy and sissy.
The property orders were for him to transfer the house into my name. He refused and the house was sold by his solicitor 3 years later whilst I was away for 2 weeks. His solicitor has kept all the proceeds of sale, and I have been in court for another 3 years trying to get the court to recognise the issues and release the funds. I have not had a home in all of that time.
On Friday this week I am again in court because now he has lodged another application to overturn the 2010 orders because he has custody if the child. He works but that is not enough. He made 3 mortgage payment of $7000 and wants $100,000 property proceeds. So far most of my share has been paid to lawyers, about $65,000 so far.
Where does it end? When do i get the opportunity not to be constantly in court?
I am told my case is extreme, but I am left to battle on my own … so finding your site is like a godsend.
On Independence Day: 6 Strategies to break free of the sociopath
This is ludicrous!
This is a travesty. I am so sorry. We can only hope that a ‘good’ and decent judge will see through him…
Good luck to you. My god…
Thank you Bev
I think if the judge had actually read the affidavits the outcome might have been different. But he is a charmer and a very good liar.
Yes, precisely, they are all charmers and very good liars.
All the best 🙂
I’m sorry to hear abour this. Yet there is SO much missing here that any reader must want to know about! We would need to know many more details to understand the root cause or causes of what looks like a grave miscarriage of justice. Are there loopholes in Australian law? Was an incompetent or corrupt judge at fault for what happened here? Wasn’t the husband’s solicitor in violation for refusing to disburse the proceeds of the sale? And so on.
All kinds of history may be relevant, such as who owned the house initially (was it bought before or after you married, and by whom?), whose name it was deeded in, who put most of the payments into it, and what rights this gives to each party under Australian law (with which most people here—myself included!—are not familiar). Does it vary from one state or territory to another, as it does in the U.S.?
Most important of all, on what grounds (valid or not) was the custody of your daughter taken from you and given to your ex-husband? There had to be some pretext for it, if he’d admitted to some form of “domestic violence” before. Even without that, you should still have been entitled at least to JOINT custody! There had to be some excuse for this transfer. Were you accused, or convicted, of some “offense” yourself, whether it was “fair” or not? Did it have to do with your “homelessness,” or some other circumstance? Anyway if you’re “homeless,” where DO you live? You and your other little girl, the one you called “sissy”? I’m sure many readers here are dying to know.
Please, “Cassidy,” tell us the WHOLE story! And this time, DON’T leave anything out!
Hi Redwald thank you for your comments.
YES there is a loophole in Australian Family Law. The law is for shared care in parenting UNLESS there is proven domestic violence. My ex proved this was applicable so the presumption of shared care was set aside. A REASONABLE person and law abiding parent would assume that custody would then be given to the parent who was NOT the one guily of domestic or family violence. Unfortunately the judge decided to grant the father sole parental care and allow him to continue his abuse now with the blessings of the family court.
Was this wrong? YES
DO people believe my story ? NO
Just look at the post from Peter below.
WAS THE COURT OR DID the judge get this wrong? Absolutely
I have been trying for a year now to meet with my local politician to bring this loophole in the law to a law makers attention. With no success.
The second loophole is that there is no criminal law to charge someone for financial abuse in Australia. Yes there is domestic violence and the definition includes but financial abuse is not yet included as a criminal act. There is fraud but the police tell me to take it to the family court. So again i am caught in legal loopholes and jurisdiction issues.
We have just had an election in australia and i have a new member so I am hoping for a more proactive response.
I cant take my story to the media and alert other people suffering in the same way, because the case is still in the courts.
A COMPLAINT has been made to the legal services commissioner about his solicitor holding the funds. HE IS IN BREACH of the solicitors code of conduct but that does not get back my home or any interest on the money or the increase in equity on the property that has occured whilst the funds have sat in the solicitors trust fund.
I will keep posting details over the next few weeks so please keepnreading as the details of the story unfold
Hi Donna. This is such a small world, and the post by “Cassidy” is proof that wolves move amongst the flock even in these sites that are designed to inform, educate and seek to protect victims of spaths.
I’ve been reading your site for a couple of years after my experiences with a spath. I’ve been fascinated by the remarkable similarities in the tactics and modus operandi of spaths and my experiences have been no different to those posted by so many here.
I logged in yesterday to casually read up on the latest posts on your site when I saw the story of “Cassidy”. My heart skipped a beat and I have read and re-read the post several times and I’m absolutely convinced that “Cassey” is in fact my ex partner whom I have long been convinced is a sociopath of the highest order. I believe I know who this person is based on the style of writing, the expressions used and most importantly the so called alleged facts of her circumstances that run far too many parallels to be co-incidence.
The article as it is written is so typical of a sociopath’s word salad. As “Redwald” pointed out in their comment, there is just so much missing from “Cassidy’s” story that it is simply not possible to make any assessment as to whether she was wronged. Yes, Cassidy, you need to tell the “whole story”.
As I’ve said, I’m convinced I know who this person is for the reasons outlined. I have previously told “Cassidy” some years ago that I believed she was a sociopath and I’m pretty certain I even commented to her about this site. So let me fill readers in on the real facts of this case lest anybody believe that she was the vicitim in this matter. I will in part be directly responding to Redwald’s queries and filling in the obvious blants that “Cassidy” failed to address.
Firstly, I live in Australia, in the State of Queensland. I have three young daughters aged under 10 and I do have primary care of all three children.
To answer your question Redwald, there are no loopholes in the Australian legal system that could possibly afford one parent sole custody in the absence of a parent being proven to pose an unacceptable risk to the welfare of the child. Family laws in Australia operate under a unified code at a Federal level i.e. it is not a State based system as it is in the US. However, as a former British colony (not unlike the US and Canada) the fundamentals of our legal system are drawn from England. We have the separation of powers doctrine and laws are passed in the Legislature and administered through the Judiciary (court system). Case law is also important in interpreting and applying Statute based law.
Australia is not some backwater country. We have a very strong legal framework and like the USA the rights of the individual are paramount and for the most part take precedent over State powers. Contrary to popular perception, most Australians live in large, modern cities. Sydney, for example, has a population of 4.5million, Melbourne approximately 3.5million and the city I live a population of 1.5million.
“Cassidy” was not stripped of her parental rights because of a loophole or corrupt legal system. In Australia, like many other Western Democracies, there is a legal presumption in relation to custody matters of equal shared parental rights and responsibilities. However, in practice, owing to the traditional social norms of the mother being the primary care giver, it is rare that men get shared equal time with the children, and far rarer again that a mother is stripped of her parental rights altogether, as is the case with “Cassidy”. Essentially, for a mother (or father) to be stripped of contact with their child the courts would need to be satisfied that the parent was of such a high risk to the welfare of the child that ongoing contact was unsafe. This would need to amount to systemic abuse, either physically or emotionally. “Cassidy” does not address this issue, in fact she seems mostly preoccupied with financial matters revolving around property. Sociopaths are always more concerned about money than they are their own children. The children are merely a means to an ends.
If “Cassidy” is who I believe she is, she is correct in saying that there were court proceedings in 2010, which is when I filed my initiating application in the Family Court. She is also correct in saying that there were three Final orders made by the courts but she is not accurate in saying that she was awarded custody in the first two. We agreed to final orders in the first instance in 2012 in which we shared equal time with the children and shared parental responsibility. “Cassidy” reluctantly agreed to this arrangement as she wanted to be primary carer (I say to advantage her in property proceedings and generous social security rights) but was convinced to settle on the advice of her lawyers after a “Family Report” made recommendations strongly in my favor.
Shortly after the first “Final” orders were made in 2012 (only a matter of weeks later) one of the children was badly injured when in “Cassidy’s” care. As this was one of numerous injuries to the children whilst in her care the Department of Child Safety commenced an investigation based on a report from the treating hospital. “Cassidy” believed I instigated the investigation and so in response made every imaginable allegation against me, including entirely false allegations of domestic violence as well as abuse towards our three children.
The disgraceful allegations made by “Cassidy” resulted in further court proceedings. I maintained the argument that “Cassidy” presented as an unacceptable risk to the physical and emotional welfare of the three children because of the injuries they sustained but more importantly because of her emotional and psychological abuse of the children by encouraging them to make false allegations against me.
As a result of the allegations the Court appointed an “Independent Children’s Lawyer” (ICL) to represent the children’s interest independently of “Cassidy’s” and my legal representatives. The ICL has a lot of power to conduct their own investigations.
To cut a long story short, the Federal Family Court found in mid 2013, after a 6 day trial, that the mother (Cassidy) represented such an serious risk to the children’s emotional welfare (due to her persistent manipulation of them) that her time with the children was to be limited to 3 hours twice a week. In a separate trial in relation to alleged domestic violence, the Magistrate threw the application out and identified “Cassidy” as a habitualised liar that was prepared to use her own children to advance allegations against other people (not only myself).
Determined to overturn the ruling in 2013, “Cassidy” used her limited contact with the children to continue to influence them into making yet more allegations. By this stage I had engaged a highly reputable child psychologist to help the children deal with the manipultation and to ultimately document the harm that their mother was causing to them. A further 5 day trial was held in 2014 in which the Judge again found that “Cassidy” was a habitualised liar of the highest order, had influenced a number of people to swear false evidence (her minions) and was systematic in her attempts to manipulate the children. By this time the Courts had enough and restricted “Cassidy” to just two hours of supervised contact with the children once a fortnight at a Government sanctioned contact centre. Cassidy was also referred by the Judge to various authorities for investigation for criminal activity that arose out of evidence that was tendered in court by subpoena, as well as matters of perjury arising out of her false testimony.
As a backdrop to the court proceedings, “Cassidy” was also under investigation for extensive criminal activity relating to the defrauding of men of means on dating websites. In May 2015 she defrauded a small business owner of $350,000, another for $18,000 at the time. In the year prior she defrauded another small business owner of $280,000 and several others for amounts in the tens of thousands.
I should mention that “Cassidy” is an American Citizen, born in Pittsburg and spending most of her life in Oregon (Creswell, Portland). She moved with her eldest daughter to Australia in 2005 after meeting an Australian man and subsequently marrying (months later). The marriage, like her previous three, lasted less than a year.
In November 2015 she returned to the US whilst under heaving police attention here in Australia for her various romance frauds committed over a number of years. She does have an older daughter from a former marriage (she has been married 4 times – we never in fact married) and my daugthers referred to their older sibling as “sissy” as “Cassidy” correctly states. I imagine “Cassidy” only mentions one child with whom she has lost contact because three is harder to excuse away.
I am aware that “Cassidy” returned to live in Washougal WA in November 2015 and has very recently moved again to Vancouver. She remains wanted by the police in Australia.
This post is already long enough, but I can also advise that she is also wanted by the taxation authorities in Australia, as well as social security fraud. She has operated under numerous aliases, is proficient at Photoshop which enables her to digital create multiple identities and supporting fraudulent documents. She has court judgements against her for $620,000 $142,000, $43,000 and numerous other claims that did not even make it to court including the hundreds of thousands she defrauded in the 12 months before she left the country.
I am happy to provide further details because USA, you have a high range sociopath living righ there in Vancouver who is already re-engaging in her the same criminal enterprise that she ran so successfully here in Australia, meeting men on dating websites and alleviating them of their hard won wealth.
As for all the claims about the property proceedings, this is just another red herring. She did file for property division when she thought she would succeed in winning custody of the children, but that too was full of utter lies. When she lost custody of the children she tried to distance herself from the property proceedings because she knew by then that I had the evidence to discredit her claims. She was a bankrupt when I met her (though she told me she was a successful business woman). As for the house, it was 100% financed, there was no equity whatsoever. The house was not sold without her consent by a solicitor whilst she was away for 2 weeks. I had to make an offer to relinquish her from all the debt in our joint names so she would transfer the house to me to enable me to remortgage the property at more competitive interest rates. It is also the house that my father and I built long before I met her, so it had a lot of sentimental value.
I’m happy to post more about this story. The one thing “Cassidy” did tell the truth about is that this was in fact this case “is extreme”.
One last thing before I sign off….. do you think she has ever paid anything towards child support?….. not a zip, but I never expected anything different. When she says that has to go back to court this Friday, I suspect what she is in fact saying is that child support are seeking her out. We have no ongoing matters before the court, and long may that last!
Oh boy…
I wish that I had not commented on this story at all now. I was ‘sold’ on the original story in this posting. having a 3 times diagnosed SP son, myself, I do fall easily into other peoples’ stories, maybe because I don’t want to be the ONLY one with an SP in my life?
Good luck to the children, more than anyone, in this instance.
This gets me to thinking…are everyone that we think are SPs REALLY SPs…or do some people just have some of the same characteristic traits as SPs? Of course, we want to label anyone who we think have done us wrong as such. It makes it easier for some not to take any blame and place it on someone else.
I am not saying this is true in THIS story…but doesn’t anyone else feel as I do? I wonder just how many REAL SPs live among us.
I know for certain that my son is disordered in this way…I only need piece his whole life together to see. I have been through his whole 35 years and have seen the destruction left in his wake. I suppose that is what Pete has done as well…you simply need look at ‘Cassidy’s’ past, as he tells it.
This ‘Cassidy’ certainly may fit the SP ‘bill’, based on Pete’s post. And, she has basically thrown that accusation right back at him, like SPs do.
I am confused by all of this, but cannot put it past a SP to haunt this site and get us all on their warped side.
Good luck to whoever needs it in this instance…but especially to the children.
PETER SORRY BUT CASSIDYS STORY IS NOT YOU STORY. The only somilarity is the reference to australia. I am a law abiding citizen, have never been arrested or charged and never neglected my child.
SORRY but I would suggest you remove your post on a story that has no similarities to Cassidy.
Thank you
PeterfromAus – Wow, what a story. You have certainly been through the ringer with a sociopathic woman. However, I don’t think it’s Cassidy. Many Lovefraud readers have contacted me to say that they are positive someone who posted a comment was their former partner, and it has never been the case. I can check the IP address, and Cassidy was in Australia when she posted, not Vancouver (which is in Canada).
Cassidy’s story may still be true. I know that U.S. courts often get child custody cases involving sociopaths wrong, sending the kids to the abuser. I doubt that any court gets it right 100% of the time.
Could be Vancouver, Washington?
Regardless, it is pretty cool that You can tell where the posts otiginate, Donna.
That is so helpful 🙂
I just wanted to note that the IP does not guarantee origination of the post. Anyone sufficiently tech savvy can spoof an IP, most commonly with VPN.
So be careful out there.
Thank you so much for this resource. As I am attempting to find the strength to crawl away from a marriage of 30 years from a diagnosed APD it has helped me a lot.
Thank you,
A
Thank you for letting me know that. I am not too tech savvy, myself 🙂
Hi everyone. Yes, I was referring to Vancouver Washington as opposed to Canada. That said, I accept Donna’s point that Cassidy’s IP address identifies her as being in Australia at the time of her post. Whilst I know people can use VPNs to mask their real locations I can’t imagine my spath would do so just for the sake of posting on a Web site.
If I am wrong about the identity of “Cassidy” I want to apologise whole heartedly. I’ve read hundreds of posts about sociopaths, particularly those with children, so I can best understand and protect my own children from what is an utterly destructive force. I can strongly identify with almost all articles I’ve read (sociopaths cookie cutter) but this one stood out to me because of the incredible similarities. The fact that there were three final orders, commenced in 2010, the first two providing what looks like at least shared care and a third sole custody to the father is an incredibly rare event. Once final orders are made it takes a very strong case to return to court as the family court is very reluctant to reopen a finalised case without a compelling reason, known as the rule in Rice and Asplund.
The courts do make grave errors, no doubt. The court process is soul destroying and financially devastating. I tried to settle with shared care out of court originally, but was forced to file an application when my ex kept unilaterally cutting my time with our daughters, zero consultation, then would send me photos of our children having a fun day out, with the new boyfriends, yes plural. I had no option but to go to court first time, borrowing from family to pay the lawyers. Second time around, after terrible allegations were made against me it cost me my business as I had to sell everything to return to court for contested proceedings. My ex would write to my lawyers often multiple times a day to drive my costs through the roof. Ultimately I was forced to spend the equivalent of a four bedroom house to save my girls from what would have been a life destroying experience living with their spath mother, and it was worth every cent because they are now happy and thriving.
In light of my experiences I would really like to know more details about Cassidy’s case if possible. What allegations were made against you that would see custody be reversed? One of the saddest byproducts of sociopaths is that they are such accomplished liars that they can cast suspicions over entirely innocent people because their stories, by function of the psychopath’s behaviour, do seem implausible.
PETER
There were no allegations made against me in the case. I am a mother who unfortunately did not realise my ex was a sociopath before this happened.
You are correct in saying my hurdle is the precident of Rice and Asplan. My lawyers say I cant take the case back to court without meeting this.
How did the father get the case back into court after the final hearing? A few easy steps …
1. He took the child on fathers day for a scheduled visit and didnt return her
2.He sacked his lawyer. Without a lawyer the court gives procedural fairness to the unrepresented party. And lenancy when he doesnt follow court rules or procedures.
3. Without a solicitor he ignored the Avo requirements for contact through his solicitor.
4. He makes accusatuon after accusation but it is all mud thrown at me. My time in court is spent proving his accusations are false, but the doubt and damage is done, similar to your posts. Already the reaction is of dis belief because you have posted your own attack…
So basically with a solicitor I am worse off than if I was self represented… what does that say about the legal system?
I have heard from “Cassidy” and she assures me that she is not the person PeterfromAus described. I’ll learn more about her case.
About the IP addresses – yes, you can mask the geographical area where you are posting from. But I’ve never heard of anyone going to those lengths just to post a comment on Lovefraud.
It’s not that much trouble to for those who know how to do so. People sometimes routinely show fake IP addresses. Also, depending on how the ISP hardware and software is structured and depending on the source of the geographical location of a particular IP, the location gleaned from the IP may not be right.
At one time, I monitored my ex P’s location from the IP address on his emails to me; and the associated geographical location was sometimes listed incorrectly, several states away, due to aspects of the ISP’s system. I wish it was more accurate. I identified some of his porn use by his IP, but IP’s are not always 100% unique so one can’t be 100% sure.