A: No. Though Don was more than $1,000 in arrears at this time no payment of arrearages was sought. Though Hepburn tried to include the issue of arrearages in the trial on the child support increase the Special Discovery Master appointed by Judge Winsor prior to trial ruled that the issue of arrearages were outside the scope of my support increase petition and therefore, Hepburn’s attempt to include the issue of Don’s arrearages was denied. The Special Discovery Master ruled that if Hepburn wanted to include the issue of arrearages at trial she was required to file a counter petition. Hepburn did not file a counter petition. However, she did succeed in absolving Don of his child support arrearages.
The circumstances as to how Hepburn accomplished this provides insight into her and Don’s future activities.
The parties present in the courtroom on November 13th were the judge, Hepburn, the clerk, the court reporter, and me. As is custom, whenever a pro-se (non-lawyer) appearance is made, the judge directs the attorney to prepare the final order. Hepburn had already prepared an order and so presented it to the judge for signature—without allowing me to first read and sign the order, a violation of King County local court rule LR 56. The judge exited the courtroom after signing the order after which Hepburn literally grabbed the order off his bench, ran out of the courtroom and down to the Clerk’s Office Window where she submitted the order for filing without my signature. Don’t believe me? The November 13, 1987 order does not reflect my signature, but I was there!
The reason for Hepburn not wanting me to read or sign the order prior to submission to the judge for signing was obvious. Despite the ruling by the Special Discovery Master, Hepburn had fraudulently inserted a provision in the order absolving Don of his over $1,000 in child support arrearages. The order Hepburn prepared states: “There are no arrearages at this time.” Reference: pg. 6, line 19, order dated November 13, 1987, KCSC Cause No. 82-3-05162-8, “Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order.” When a revision was sought to remove this arrearages provision, the trial judge didn’t want to be bothered with “minor details.”
A: By fraudulently absolving Don of his over $1,000 in child support arrearages through this November 13, 1987 order, Hepburn better positioned Don for filing his second custody petition—a petition which was already in the works and would be filed within the next few days.
A: After Don’s failed attempt to gain custody in the first petition he began to show DJ some wanted attention. As a result of this attention, just before Thanksgiving 1987, DJ decided to move into his father’s residence. It broke my heart, but I said “go.” It was useless to try and convince DJ that he was being used by his father, not being loved by his father. I knew that Don was intending to use his son moving in with him as leverage to gain custody of Doni, as well.
