In regard to my own personal observation ~ I firmly believe that RJ is definitely an upfront straight forward intelligent attorney who can be trusted ~ who will tell you like it really is. I found that Dee Ann is very aggressive and extremely intelligent. She didn’t hesitate to obtain a protective order when I expressed deep concerned for the safety of my family. However, I did learn the very costly lesson of “proceeding with caution” while building a team of attorneys, psychologist and drug testing facilities during the discovery phase of the person who has continuously terrorized my family for over a decade. I expressed my concerns of our opponent having ability to manipulate and deceive professionals that she is the victim. I provided evidence that our opponent was suicidal & hearing voices to end her own life, and dishonest about her mental state. She has been telling my family for years that she has been receiving treatment from MHMR for these issues. I provided evidence that our opponent was mentally unstable, dishonest, and a direct threat to my family and herself. I believe that the hard evidence we provided was not taken into serious consideration. During the team building process, we were referred to an attorney to represent my son and work with Dee Ann while representing my wife. During the consultation, the attorney informed us of the conflict of interest & would not be able to work with DeeAnn as he was her spouse. We were then referred by this attorney to another attorney. During consultation with the new attorney we expressed to her, our desire for the two attorneys to work together. I feel like there was an obstruction between the two attorneys professional relationship, as teamwork and communication was slim to none. During the selection of a psychologist to evaluate our opponent, we expressed our genuine concerns of our opponent possessing the ability to manipulate & deceive, “pulling the wool over the eyes of professionals”. During the consultation with the psychologist, these concerns were expressed and discussed. However, the proof that we provided supporting all of the concerns were discarded after payment in full was received by the psychologist. I strongly feel that our case was pre-judged by our team before it even made it to court. I am convinced that our opponent successfully manipulated and deceived a professional psychologist who should normally be able to detect these patterns and characteristics, especially after evidence was provided. The drug test results of our opponent were given to her, not to our team, creating a possibility of inaccurate or tampered findings. Once is enough ~ Never again!!!!
Analyzing Data...