Lovefraud.com recently heard from a woman in Illinois, who we’ll call Mary. Mary is trying to protect herself and her eight-year-old daughter from her ex-boyfriend, the daughter’s father, who has guns and has threatened to use them. Not only is Mary fighting the ex, but she’s fighting lawyers—both hers and his—and an unresponsive family court.
Mary left the ex for good in 2001, when their daughter was three. The guy has an alcohol problem and a 20-year arrest record. He has five arrests for DUI (driving under the influence of alcohol) and 14 DWLR arrests (driving while license revoked). He has two arrests for domestic battery. Two different women have sought protection orders against him, including Mary.
In July, 2004, after three years of seeing his daughter sporadically at best, the ex decides he wants to be an involved parent. Coming from a wealthy family, he can afford to initiate a lawsuit and hauls Mary into court to get visitation rights. Mary works full time, but as a single mom, struggles to support her child. She can’t afford the best lawyers money can buy, and she doesn’t qualify for public assistance.
Arrest and conviction
Now, prior to filing his petition for parental rights, the ex was arrested for DUI and DWLR in February, 2004. He gets arrested two more times, in July and November, 2004, for DWLR. So on November 15, 2004, family court awards him supervised visitation rights. Eight days later the ex beats up his current girlfriend. She gets a protection order against him. Then in December he goes to jail for the DUI conviction. He serves 90 days of an 18-month sentence and is released on parole.
All of this happens while he is petitioning the court for his parental rights. The court appoints a clinical psychologist to evaluate both parents and the child. After 20 hours of interviews and evaluation over four months, the psychologist reports that the ex has a history of alcohol abuse and is vulnerable to relapses. He recommends that visitation continue to be supervised, and that the father complete an intensive substance abuse treatment program before overnight visitation is allowed.
Mary’s days in court
On November 15, 2005, Mary is back in court with the ex. Her legal counsel is less than stellar. Mary’s lawyer refuses to subpoena the woman who filed a protection order against the father. Mary talks the woman into showing up in court anyway, but Mary’s lawyer never calls her as a witness. And, Mary’s lawyer never asks the psychologist any questions related to the ex’s violence.
After a six-day trial, the judge rules. In giving his decisions, the judge notes that the ex’s alcohol dependency has not been resolved, and that the man’s mother and stepfather both believe he still has an alcohol problem. The judge notes that the ex has a tendency to disobey court orders. Yet he says the psychologist’s recommendation of no unsupervised visits until after the father completes a chemical dependency treatment program is an unwarranted restriction of his right to visitation. The judge rules that there is no risk to the child, apart from the alcohol issue, and awards the ex unsupervised visitation. He orders the father not to drink alcohol during visitation or for 24 hours before visitation.
Threats of violence
Two days later, the ex calls Mary and tells her he still has his handgun and that he would be a better parent if Mary were no longer around. Mary interprets this as a threat on her life, and asks her lawyer to get an order of protection against the ex. Her lawyer refuses.
The ex continues his threatening and abusive behavior. By February 8, 2006, Mary has had enough. With the help of a family advocate, she gets a protection order on her own. A different judge hears her case.
In the meantime, the ex’s lawyers file a petition to reconsider the parental rights decisions. They want the ex to have unsupervised overnight visitation immediately upon completing a substance abuse program, without an additional court hearing. And, they want his support payments to be reduced, arguing that he really doesn’t get any income from his two trust funds.
On February 16, five days after being served with the order of protection, the ex follows Mary as she drives home from work. Mary photographs him in his car with her cell phone camera and calls the police. The ex is arrested again for DWLR and charged with a criminal felony.
Mary is nervous about testifying against her ex in the felony case. Here’s what the police officer says to Mary: “I have his record in front of me and I can tell you from experience that he is capable of killing you whether you are a witness to this case or not. You need to make a choice to stand up for yourself or let him keep coming after you.”
Back in court
The ex’s lawyers ask the court to combine the protection order hearing with the parental rights case. So on March 1, Mary is back before the family court judge about the protection order. She no longer has a lawyer, so she tries to represent herself. Her ex has two legal teams, who claim that the man has never harassed her. The judge refuses to admit any of Mary’s evidence and vacates the emergency order of protection. The judge further orders that Mary and her ex communicate in a non-abusive and non-harassing manner, and that the father is entitled to telephone visitation daily with his daughter from 7 to 7:30 p.m.
Mary begs the judge to allow her to communicate with her ex only by e-mail. The judge refuses, stating that all communication must be by telephone.
Last week the ex harasses Mary over the phone again. She gets another order of protection.
The next day Mary is back in court in response to her ex’s motion to reconsider the rulings on his parental rights. Although she contacted 43 attorneys, none will take her case, so she is there alone. The judge postpones the hearing, but tells her that if she doesn’t have an attorney on the next trial date, Mary will have to represent herself.
On March 23, 2006, the ex’s home is searched by his parole officer and a representative of the sheriff’s department. They find guns and drugs. He is thrown in jail again.
Can you help?
“It took a long time for me to really understand that he is as dangerous as he is,” Mary says. “I have always been someone who believed all people had some good. I don’t believe that anymore. No matter what I do (try to help him or speak out against him—I have done both), his only goal was to manipulate me and keep me from achieving success of any kind in any aspect of my life. If he does kill me I am not taking his secrets with me.”
Now that’s courage.
Mary still needs to respond to her ex’s demands for visitation rights. Her goal is to keep her daughter safe. If you know an Illinois attorney who can win her case, please contact Lovefraud.
Kathleen: Regarding your suggestion to think about what you would do if you had all the money in the world and do that:
Thanks for the offer to correspond separately. I’m truly not falling apart over this, just mulling over options. My original post asked for examples.
I have already sent out notices to various networking contacts, and there’s a deadline for people to respond as potential investors.
So maybe the decision will take care of itself based on how many people are interested in investing.
Recovering:
I’m sorry I confused your ‘story’. My mistake.
Am I right in understanding you believed you were involved with a Cluster B in this former relationship with $$ man in question?
If he wasn’t any of the above and it was just a bad relationship…..then different story all together….
But your original question was:
“Are there any examples from LF involving two people (one a N/S) who play some new non-romantic role in each others’ lives in a new situation with positive, mutual benefit years AFTER the relationship ended and enough time had passed for the non-disordered person to heal and have clear boundaries?”
They don’t have to fit ALL the ‘bills’ or characteristics to be ‘dangerous’ in your life. And they evolve as they learn what works for them…..so ‘who’ he may have been yesterday is NOT who he is today…..but evolved…..and not in a good way. (IF n/s is indeed an issue with him)
Dangerous means a number of things…not just violence.
Emotional, financial, physical and all around wellbeing.
A con is a con.
Your a smart person….you’ll do what’s best for you.
I guess the only answer you needed from the original question was a simple.
NO.
ErinBrock — No problem with the spirited responses. It all makes me think, so it’s all good.
But also: I’m not enamored with my ex. I see him as a reg person, disordered however he is, no magic to make me forget myself.
I think I’m coming to terms with the fact that I have to deal with all kinds of people. You wouldn’t believe — or maybe you will — how many people (probably otherwise nice) never follow up as they say they will after business networking events. Nor turn promises into action. I don’t take it personally anymore.
So I guess I’m just taking a lot with a grain of salt and not having major expectations; just paying attention to what people do more than what they say, and quitely making my assessment of them in my own mind and dealing with them accordingly.
So it’s new territory, but having a small business with majority ownership is important to me — I know I can’t do corporate America anymore. Too taxing.
Gotcha.
And being a small business owner myself, I TOTALLY understand the lack of follow through, promises, promises, promises and lack of action by others.
My biggest frustration.
Fortunately, I am in a position where my business is based on ME and the work I do, the promises I make and rarely do I have to rely on others to fulfill my income….in a sense.
I trust myself, show up when I say, keep all promises, return all calls and am in control of the product produced…..so it’s all up to me.
It’s a nice feeling, in these times. After the S (who btw was my bus. partner) I swore I would never rely on anyone in business or for my living ever again. It was good while it lasted, probably the best part of him…….but in the end…..he destroyed his reputation and fortunatly mine spoke louder along with my character. I have kept 100% interest and pushed him out.
Good luck to you, I hope you can find alternate investors…..
ErinBrock: Thanks for sharing your business journey. It’s a different life, but worth the struggles.
By the way, my ex, who I know for sure is NPD and believe he overlaps into S, came from a culture that breeds narcissism.
And yet, he always got “outwitted” by his girlfriends, including one of his ex’s I talked to once, whenever he tried to manipulate usually for keeping control over the woman during a relationship.
He has a basic honesty and even gave me access to so many of his personal resources that, if I had been a S/P, I could have ripped him off. LOL.
At any rate, sometimes I wonder if my ex’s N/S is more culturally-rooted versus personality structure…in part because he talked more “con” than he actually carried out during the time I was with him. He gives himself away — his lack of patience with outcomes accounts for this in part, I believe. He’s generally a loner NPD — a paradoxical one — is all I can say.
We didn’t work out because of emotional abuse from a lot of projecting and immaturity/non-sense taking up too much of my time. He was just too unconscious about a lot of stuff and wasn’t working on his issues. I got worn out — didn’t have the energy to keeping playing lover/mother to “fix” him — when I had my own life to live and businesses to run.
The cases of sociopaths conning trusting individuals out of their money is very well-documented all over this website.
I believe the owner of this site was taken for approximately $250,000 herself.
I stand by everything I posted, and I hope anyone out there searching for help will take it seriously.
Rosa — We have the benefit of knowing that conning is part of what N/S/P might do — they are certainly capable of it! As a result, we have the ability now to decide what to give and not give away, and can deal accordingly in our interactions with others regardless of their intentions.
Have you heard it said that when someone tries to dig a grave for someone else, they might just end up falling into it themselves? Many N/S/P end up going in circles too.
I owe my ex money, not the other way around. I’m not so much blindly trusting as I am a negotiator these days, willing to do mutual benefit — giving only what I’m comfortable with. I’ve learned not just from my own experience but from the lives of others.
Trust me on that.
It boils down to the concept of gambling……
Bet only what you can afford to lose.
Recovering:
Are we really talking about sociopaths here??
Conning is not what a sociopath MIGHT do.
It’s definitely what they do, at least from my experience.
One big walking lie.
Be careful, recovering.
Yes, Rosa, I agree conning can happen on many levels — financially and emotionally, in terms of people lying about love, intentions for a relationship, etc.
So yes, one must be careful.
But must I deny my own experience — I have $25K from my ex, given in increments of $5K at a time over a year. He has not yet been paid, and didn’t even require anything in writing from me — I’m the one who insisted on putting it in writing for his protection, in case something happens to me.