Ex wife kept making mistakes & the judge made it crystal clear she only had herself to blame!

Added: 2026-05-20

[00:00:00]Next I have a Swindle, or Swindell, and Tucker and Sandana.

[00:00:04]And there we have Ms. McClain is representing Tucker Sandana. And Ms. McClain is present, I see her.

[00:00:13]And then I see Ms. Swindell is on the line. Is it Swindell or Swindell? It's Swindell. Swindell, thank you.

[00:00:20]Both are present, and looks like we're And then Ms. McClain, is your client Mr. Sandana on the line? I saw him earlier.

[00:00:28]Um Yes, I'm on the line. Okay, thank you for confirming that. Appreciate that.

[00:00:33]All right. Looks like Ms. Evalt is also present, the guardian ad litem.

[00:00:37]Great, thank you.

[00:00:39]So, we have Today's it was docketed for the final GAL report. And when I checked yesterday, I didn't see that it had been admitted. Has Has it been filed or is it still in process? We've received it by email. I understood that Ms. Evalt filed it. I can't remember which day, if it was last week or That is correct, Your Honor. That was filed last week at the courthouse.

[00:01:03]So, I've received it. Interesting. I think what happened, and I apologize for this, I I knew my week was going to be full this week, so I started filing prepping over the weekend. But even then, it was filed on the 2nd. So, in full transparency, I I didn't read it. I had noted in my notes here as that no filing of the final GAL report.

[00:01:26]And I just assumed I didn't remember that Ms. or that Judge Hahn wasn't going to be here today. She normally just uses these as place markers.

[00:01:34]Um and we would be following up with any motions if either of the parties desire to do so. So, that was just sort of my anticipation.

[00:01:42]Ms. Swindell, do you have any input?

[00:01:44]I don't really know what's going on. I'm sorry.

[00:01:47]That's fine. Um so so Ms. Evalt has has finished her report, and it's been submitted. And then generally that from what Ms. McClain is indicating, that I typically Judge Hahn will then await for parties to file some type of motion based on the information that's in the guardian ad litem report. So, kind of the next That would be the next step. So, today basically is kind of a a marker. The The report's been filed.

[00:02:13]Great. Thank you, Ms. Ewald. And then if either party feels so inclined, then you could bring a motion asking for some type of relief from the court based on that information that's in the report.

[00:02:24]So, I need to file a motion, then? If you're so inclined.

[00:02:28]That would be the next step, right.

[00:02:30]Thank you.

[00:02:31]Great. And then, anything else, Ms. McClain? No, thank you. Great. We'll conclude that and we'll allow all the parties to move forward as they see fit.

[00:02:38]All right. So, we have Ms. McClain. Do we have Sherry Ewald? Yes.

[00:02:44]Do we have Ashley Swindell?

[00:02:48]Yes, Your Honor.

[00:02:49]Okay. All right. Let's go first to the guardian ad litem report.

[00:02:55]The report that I have was filed on August 2nd. Um I've received a copy of the report.

[00:03:02]I would note that I had also requested a copy of Ms. Ewald's file.

[00:03:07]She has not provided the counseling records for the parties or the children or the medical records for the children.

[00:03:16]I'm assuming we need a court order for her to release those. Since I'm representing a party, I'd like to have access to those matter. I'm assuming it's going to have to move forward to trial. First, I guess we need to do a settlement conference.

[00:03:32]Ms. Swindell, any objections to that? Um I don't think so.

[00:03:38]But, I don't understand. Sorry. Want to restate your request, Ms. McClain? That the court order that Ms. is to release the copy of the children's and the parties' medical and counseling records that she reviewed for purposes of her investigation and the report that she submitted to the court.

[00:03:57]Oh, yeah. Okay.

[00:04:00]All right. So, with that that request will be granted.

[00:04:05]Um, Ms. Sevaldi, you'll have to provide that information. And I'll prepare a subsequent order to that effect so that she has that in her file to cover her.

[00:04:14]Anything else? I do not have a motion which I typically will require uh, before I adopt or make any changes, uh, based on a report. And that would be one of my initial objections is that there is no motion before the court. Uh, I would also object to the unsworn um, items that are identified as evidence, uh, that were filed by, uh, Ms. Swindell. Uh, those are clerk's papers 82 and 87. Um, and then I would also object to the basically, um, sealed, uh, personal health care that's clerk's paper 88, uh, because there's no >> on. Let's go through these one at a time. Sure.

[00:05:00]So, looking at number 82, Mhm. uh, it looks like they are text messages. Yes, but there's also boxes of basically what appears to be a declaration. If you look at the top uh, of the first two pages. I believe they're just explaining what's in the pictures. Okay.

[00:05:24]So, Ms. Swindell, when you are filing anything that's a statement, it has to be a sworn statement. Um, and if it's not a So, I understand you're just explaining the pictures, but if it's not a sworn statement of what's being seen, then it can't be considered by the court. Okay?

[00:05:48]Can you just look at the pictures and not Sorry, just like not read the top?

[00:05:54]Well, I would agree with Ms. McClain, it appears to be a form of a affidavit or a declaration.

[00:06:02]I you're going to have to uh comply with that requirement or it won't be considered. Okay?

[00:06:11]Ms. McClain, what was the next one?

[00:06:14]I'm making the same objection as to number 87, which is paper 87. This again identified with the title page of evidence. So, this is similar, Ms. Swindell. Uh it's my idea you'll need that sworn affidavit.

[00:06:29]Uh okay? Yes, ma'am.

[00:06:32]Um this relates to clerk's paper 88, which is a sealed personal health care record. I have no idea who this is from.

[00:06:40]Um I don't know as far as what provider this came from. There's nothing that tells me, you know, the name of the facility or the address. Um so, I'm concerned about that. Um they don't have those types of identifiers. What was this?

[00:06:55]This is your sealed personal health care records. Oh, for Jackson? That's part of the problem is it doesn't give the detail that would be necessary to identify who the provider is and who it's even having to do with. Okay. You can't tell from just looking at what's in the file.

[00:07:16]Okay? Okay.

[00:07:17]>> Again, the court will not be considering it until it has the correct personal identifiers. Ms. McClain?

[00:07:26]Um uh the other issue um that we've had is that um Ms. Swindell will either not serve my office or serve my office with um items that don't correlate with ultimately what she files with the court.

[00:07:43]Uh for example, I was served with a docket notice for um August 20th, but she filed a docket notice for August 27th.

[00:07:52]Um we only found that because it was on Odyssey.

[00:07:57]Um and so my concern is that consistently I'm not being served with the correct or the same documentation and information that she's filing or I'm not served at times at all.

[00:08:10]Um so I I don't which has been an ongoing issue.

[00:08:15]Um I guess the uh only other potential would be for the court to say that it has to be court approval before she files with verification that she served me the actual stuff that's been filed. I don't know how to rectify that.

[00:08:29]But we've This isn't the first time we've had this discussion. This has been an ongoing and consistent problem. So the court's not going to order court review at this time. Ms. Swindell, you have to understand anything you file with the court, Ms. McClain has a right to to a copy of exactly what you file. I Yeah. I And I am sorry that that happened. What it was was a typo and I rectified it in the following email. What she's trying to get thrown out is the proof that I rectified it in the following email.

[00:09:02]So she's manipulating and lying. So So I'll go back to prove that she's manipulating and lying, but So you have have to do that or it won't be considered, bottom line. Okay. All right. So these are legal questions that you can always consult with Call to Kaya Legal Aid. They come, I think, on Mondays or Northwest Justice Project.

[00:09:28]Those are the two possibilities that are here locally. All right. So with that, Uh, this is in regard to the Guardian ad Litem and the parenting plan. Again, I take a motion. I will not make changes uh, without that motion uh, except in exceptions to that. Um, that was filed with that. Anything further at this time? Um, I have submitted a proposed order to the court. We are asking uh, for the court to award my client $750 in attorney's fees for having to be here.

[00:10:03]Um, it's not technically she did not provide uh, notice correct notice and then it wasn't timely notice which meant that we had to engage in additional communication with all the parties involved and the clerk's office in order to set this matter over uh, so that I could have appropriate time for my client to uh, respond. And of course my client has responded which again is time and effort which means he's expended attorney's fees.

[00:10:30]Uh, I would submit that even if you look at the sufficiency of the information is no been as a of a substantial change in circumstances since the last time we were before the court in regards to contempt. So we're asking the court to adopt uh, the order that I have presented to the court and award my client the fees. Miss Swindell. Um, the reason I filed this was because I assumed the court would read uh, sorry.

[00:10:54]The GAL [clears throat] report and understand what's happening here and do something about it. This is the second um, court hearing we've had for the GAL report. The first time it wasn't read. The second time apparently it does not matter and this is sad.

[00:11:13]This is very sad. But based on the files and record, I will grant the request and sign off on the order. Uh, Miss Swindell, have you seen a copy of the order or not? Yeah, I saw it. All right.

[00:11:25]Understanding that's the court's ruling whether you agree with it or not.

[00:11:29]Uh, are you okay if I put approved via Zoom? Yep.

[00:11:33]Ashley Swindell Uh we will provide a confirmed copy of the order that the court has signed. And I guess my question for you is um would you be opposed to just interlineating at 6D that the guardian ad litem shall disclose? Or do you want me to go ahead and submit um a subsequent order? I would rather you go ahead and do a separate order and then just put not approved for Ashley Swindell signature and then the date. And just uh provide it ex parte?

[00:12:04]As long as you put on there uh send it to my attention and just put that as she said she's not approving it, so just put not approved and the date. Free 26-08 Swindell v. Sandana Annelise McClain appearing on behalf of the respondent Tucker Sandana and I believe that Tucker is also present. Right.

[00:12:27]Uh and we have Ms. Swindell be just a second here. Your Honor, Sherry Ewald, guardian ad litem. Thank you. All right.

[00:12:36]Uh so uh with that uh I believe this is on for a request to uh adopt the recommendations of the guardian ad litem. Do you want to go ahead? Uh me, Your Honor?

[00:12:51]Yes. Um sure, Your Honor. I First, I wanted to apologize for how I've been mishandling my paperwork. Um I am currently trying to learn how to navigate the legal system.

[00:13:02]And I've spent countless hours in the courtroom with my 2-year-old trying to make sure things are filed properly. I would also like to talk about the TikTok videos that Mr. Sandana has referenced. The videos he cites with the Nicki Minaj song which include the lyrics I just fell in love with the gangster is simply a part of a popular trend and gesturing of the flipping of the bird. And the video was not directed at anyone in particular. It is important to note that Ms. Gobel herself has posted similar photos of her flipping the bird with captions, I guess I win again. After court, I have multiple photos and videos of me doing this directed at nobody specifically. The second video, um, I also used a viral sound that thousands of people have used and I titled it when your ex finally pushed your um, 6-ft-4 fully reformed ex-convict to his limit. Um, it was to try to make light of an incident that had already happened in the past where Mr. Sindona when I showed up to Mr. Sindona's house to drop off things for my kids, um, at Mr. Sindona's home, a visit that he was well aware of. When I arrived, he refused to let the children come out to meet me, which forced me to approach his home. When he answered the door, he was visibly armed and told me that I cannot speak to the children while having the children having confiscated their phones.

[00:14:24]>> Objection. Object at this point as this exceeds the scope of the declaration.

[00:14:29]Uh, Ms. Sindona, you need to only you can only argue what's in the documents that you have filed. This is the very first page of my document. Ms. McClain, do you have a child present? I'm sorry.

[00:14:42]Yeah, my 2-year-old. I am waiting for my fiance to get home from lunch break to help me. She's just playing in the other room. As long as it's in your declaration, go ahead. Um, yeah. Uh, he When I was there, I expressed my concerns then at the time for parental alienation as he had taken my children's phone and would not let me speak to them.

[00:15:03]And would not let them come outside to get the the stuff that they had requested. Um, Mr. Sindona has exaggerated this situation, falsely claiming that my partner, Mr. Musso, showed up to threaten them and him and his girlfriend, Ms. Gobel.

[00:15:17]We went to court for that cuz he tried to file a restraining order, which was dropped. and Mr. Santana has continuously claimed that my partner, Mr. Musso, is a white supremacist based solely on his appearance. Mr. Musso, while physically imposing, is not and has never been affiliated with any STGs.

[00:15:35]It is important to note that when he went to court to try to file a restraining order, he was not trying to change the parenting plan at any time. It was not until I filed to change the parenting plan because my my 15-year-old son asked to live with me full-time because him and his father had been fighting had been arguing. After my children and Mr. Santana moved in with Ms. Gobel, she she quickly became involved in our children's lives, including coaching our daughter's soccer team. While I appreciated her involvement, I was hurt by how clingy she became with our children, particularly our youngest, Jayda. Despite my best efforts to build a cordial friendship with Ms. Gobel, reaching out to express my appreciation, she often responded dismissively, rudely, or not at all. Though Ms. Gobel has portrayed herself as a mediator in the situation, she has been far from impartial. She has made hurtful comments to my partner, such as she she has a better relationship with my daughter, Jayda, than I do.

[00:16:33]She has exaggerated incidents, including a remark I made about her appearance in a private text message to Mr. Santana, and has said that I loudly proclaimed it in a soccer game, which was extremely untrue. I want to address the statements made by my father, Matthew Swindal. I've never accused my father of inappropriate actions towards me. However, I have accused him of inappropriate behavior towards my cousins, including one of of one one of which who lived in his home from the age of 7 years old. Additionally, the home I built next to my father's property was not a choice, but rather a condition imposed by my uncle, Scott Swindal, who was control who controlled my mother's trust who controlled the trust left to me by my mother.

[00:17:15]He restricted my ability to purchase any other property, forcing me to build next to my father, the property that him and my father both owned.

[00:17:22]The truth is I never had a meaning meaningful relationship with my father or his family during the time I lived there. I did ask to move in with my father in 2012, but this is only after Mr. Sandana's mother physically assaulted me in front of our three children. We were living in her house. It was a very run-down house and we're all five of us living in one bedroom.

[00:17:43]>> [clears throat] >> Mr. Sandana was not working at this time.

[00:17:46]After a month of living with my dad, um >> [clears throat] >> I was able to get a job and a home for me and my family.

[00:17:54]Um I have very vivid [clears throat] memories of my father verbally assaulting and degrading me from ages 11 to 17, but I have never said I have memories of him touching me inappropriately.

[00:18:04]However, I lived in his home when one of the inappropriate actions towards my cousin occurred, which eventually led to her running away as a senior in high school. Throughout this case, I have been open open about my mental health struggles and I have actively been working with my therapist, prescriber, and prescriber to manage my PTSD, depression, and anxiety. While I have had one attempt in my past, Mr. Sandana consistently uh >> [clears throat] >> exaggerates this, falsely claiming that I have had multiple attempts. He also manipulates my marijuana use, even accusing me of using hard drugs earlier in this case. Contrary to what Mr. Sandana claims, I have never expressed a desire to smoke marijuana with my children. His accusations are baseless and I believe it is fabricated to further his smear campaign. My primary concern has always been the well-being of my children. I have attempted to raise important issues with their doctors. Despite this, Mr. Sandana filed failed to refill Jackson's [snorts and clears throat] medication after March 19th, 2024 when he was placed in his care. Without consulting his doctor, while stopping the medication may ultimately have been Jackson's choice, the sudden discontinuation could have serious side effects, and I believe that these decisions should be made with medical guidance. Your honor, my concern in this case has always been my children's mental health and well-being. I feel this smear campaign orchestrated by Mr. Sindona, Ms. Gobel, my father, and Kristen Auto is designed to discredit me as a mother. While I'm not perfect, I have been doing everything in my power to heal from a lifetime of abuse and trauma. I'm working closely with my healthcare providers to manage my mental health, and I will continue to fight for what is in my children's best interest.

[00:19:39]The GAL report reflects the best interest of my children as it should.

[00:19:43]However, it is clear that anybody that doesn't side with Mr. Sindona becomes a target [clears throat] for his attacks, further demonstrating the manipulative tactics. Despite Despite everything, I will never stop fighting for my children, and I trust the court will see through See the truth behind these accusations. I also want to bring up the fact that our court hearings have been all recorded and posted um on YouTube, and then a TikTok account was made in August to also post all of those. They have reached over 120,000 views. Um I talked to the court um went to the court the day I found out, and I asked them if these were posted on YouTube, if they if anybody has any way to access them. They said no, that the only way anybody could access them was if they were logging into our Zoom courts and recording them.

[00:20:32]I feel like this is part of another um part of his smear campaign, that he's orchestrated other people to come into our court hearings and record them, and then post them to further his agenda. Um I'm hoping that the court takes what the GAL has to say seriously. Um makes several uh claims that Mr. Sindona is very controlling, that his children have claimed that he's very controlling and make them make him feel uncomfortable. Uh that he stands very closely to them to monitor any conversations that I have with the children.

[00:21:04]I believe that this is very unhealthy for my children and it needs to be addressed. Thank you, Ms. MacLean. Uh thank you very much, Your Honor. Um so, first off, uh obviously, uh I am concerned about the um declarations submitted by um Ms. Swindell that don't comply with the local court rules uh and the additional declarations that are beyond the page limits uh and the pagination of that.

[00:21:30]So, I'll just uh point that out to the court and leave that to the court's determination as to uh what you consider uh as it relates to those issues.

[00:21:39]Um and as you commented earlier on this docket, um regarding the Latin report is simply that. It's a report and it's totally up to the court to um put out the evidence uh and make a determination on what the court believes is in the children's uh best interest.

[00:21:56]Uh regards to the facts uh that are outlined in the guardian ad litem report, we've submitted my client's reply declaration as well as two witness reply declarations uh outlining the irregularities and the concerns as it relates to the um information or factors uh that were submitted as part of the guardian ad litem's report. Um and again, ultimately, it is the court that is to consider the facts and the information, uh weigh the credibility of the parties, and ultimately make the determination on what you believe is in the children's best interest.

[00:22:32]Um I would submit that given the substantial uh s in the information that's that we've provided in the declarations, that this is something that a trial court needs to hear.

[00:22:44]Um I believe that I've noted it up for mandatory settlement conference assignment. We haven't had a mandatory settlement conference yet, so we'll participate in that process.

[00:22:53]Uh and if we're unable to uh reach an agreement, then ultimately, um it's a matter that needs to go to trial.

[00:23:00]Um I would note that uh of there has been absolutely no substantial change in circumstances in the factual scenario of this case uh since the temporary orders were entered. Uh and Ms. Swindell uh has now been removed from that joint uh that they were previously exercising since early this year. Uh and because of her own uh behaviors, uh totally within her control, her own behaviors have resulted in her not having any contact with the children uh since May of this year. So, she's been 5 months without contact uh with the children. And the court has ordered her in two separate orders, uh one your contempt order that was entered on July 2nd, and as well as the order that you entered on September 17th, both of those orders required Ms. Swindell to participate in a new collateralized substance abuse evaluation within 30 days. We are 3 months removed since the July contempt order was entered, and she has provided absolutely no proof of any efforts to stop smoking marijuana, uh no proof she has a clean hair follicle in UA, uh no proof uh collateralized evaluation. Um so, right out of the get-go, we have absolutely no verifiable information um one, that her prescribing physician has or psychiatrist has approved her use of marijuana to uh treat her PTSD, depression, and anxiety as she uh suggests. Um these are significant concerns, particularly in light of her past behavior uh as a result of her depression with a attempt uh with the children in the vicinity. Um it's also concerning when you take a look at her reactive nature during the pendency of this case.

[00:25:03]Um, she certainly cannot control her reactions to uh, benign emails of information that are provided to her. She has to react and engage in conflict. And as the court knows, there's multiple studies about how dangerous conflict is to children.

[00:25:21]Uh, she attempts to switch it up and suggest that Mr. Um, Sendana is the one he and his girlfriend are the ones that are engaged in conflict, but you have no documentary evidence or factual evidence to support those baseless claims.

[00:25:38]So, at this juncture, you have a mother who, again, holds all of the, um, answers to her concerns. And that is she needs to get clean. She needs to do those evaluations that the court ordered. Um, and uh, follow through with her mental health. As she herself identified that her mental health is a concern and that she's done all of these things and yet we have no verification that she is stable.

[00:26:09]Um, in addition, concerning that her marijuana use is somewhat, uh, normalized in the guardian ad litem report and recommendations. The recommendation from the guardian ad litem was, well, maybe she needs to do, uh, substance abuse evaluation. The court's already ordered that and she's not complied.

[00:26:29]Um, we have concerns that, um, as it relates to, uh, her own documentation that we filed from her mental health provider, where Ms. Uh, Swindell uh, that she was, um, a an habitual user and she was engaging in excessive cannabis use and that was, um, uh, also adopted by her counselor. Uh, that was one of the findings. That's from November of 2023.

[00:26:59]The Columbia wellness record acknowledges that there was an increased risk due to alcohol and substance abuse.

[00:27:06]A couple that with the CPS records where oldest child is reporting to CPS that he's aware of mom using. He's observed mom using. He's observed her using, um, a vape pen and a bong.

[00:27:20]Um, and again, we're talking about an impressionable uh, child who was 14 at the time, now 15. Um, couple that again with the fact that uh, one, we are because of her behaviors, uh, and her immediate concern was addressing those TikTok videos.

[00:27:39]She, um, uh, the TikTok videos as well as the, uh, court hearings that have been streamed. Um, we have literally no control, uh, and I don't know what control the court has over somebody recording those videos.

[00:27:54]Uh, we're aware that we're not allowed to do that. My client tells you he has not done that. My client has provided you, uh, documentation where he has reached out to the, uh, one of the posters, uh, one of the individuals who posts or the, uh, identifier who posts those videos, and there's been absolutely no response. Uh, my client, girlfriend, uh, Ms. Windell have not video recorded those, uh, and you'll even see in my client's, um, I think it's exhibit C, uh, this is attached to his declaration that we filed on September 17th. Oh, I'm sorry, not that one. Uh, we filed it on September 26th, where Ms. Windell engages in communication about at least her perspective of, uh, this, and you can see where there's multiple other hearings from different jurisdictions that are populated under these sites.

[00:28:51]Um but simply to point out that my my client has not an app. Yeah, I understand. Two is concerned about the children seeing that, and go back to Ms. Swindell's Tik Tok videos that she herself has posted, and she has #divorce and #coparenting struggles.

[00:29:09]Those are things that her children can see, and she's the one posting those, and yet she's complaining about uh these hearings uh being uh potentially available to the children. The children can search her name and see her Tik Tok videos.

[00:29:22]Extremely unhealthy, particularly following these hearings. My client tells you and and his significant other to you about the concerns where uh first off, Ms. Goebel was asked to be essentially a mediator uh between the parents uh suggestion by the GAL about her being the mediator, and yet her advising uh Ms. Ewald about the um significant other of Ms. Swindell, Mr. Musso, one, his felony history uh involving very dangerous um assaultive convictions, and uh two, ongoing threats of him essentially being the heavy to enforce Ms. Ms. Swindell's uh wishes.

[00:30:04]Um that type of optic is not good, particularly when you have an an individual such as Ms. Swindell who's invested in drama and conflict. Um the declarations outline significance about um the disruptions during some of the interviews, um the nature of some of the conversations, um even if Ms. Swindell in her argument says, you know, I've never made allegations against my father, look at the um guardian ad litem report. The guardian ad litem report in and of itself acknowledges that the father, the grandfather, maternal grandfather should not be present because of the um and this is number 12 on page 24, due to mom's statements regarding her childhood abuse um by maternal grandfather. Maternal grandfather father should not attend any event or function. That's the guardian ad litem's conclusion based on Ms. Swindell's own statements to her that she was abused as a child.

[00:31:11]She says something completely different today.

[00:31:14]So >> Objection. I believe I said I was not abused by my husband or by my father.

[00:31:20]Okay. All right, wrap it up, Ms. McLean.

[00:31:22]Okay. So, our position is that the court should not adopt the recommendations.

[00:31:27]Ms. Swindell has not complied with the court orders. She's continuing to use We have uh concerns that she continues to not be uh mentally healthy and we believe that the court should deny the request, um adopt my proposed order that I've submitted to the court, and award my client $1,500 in attorney's fees for having to respond to all of this.

[00:31:50]DeVault, anything you wanted to add?

[00:31:52]Yes, Your Honor, thank you.

[00:31:54]You know, I understand loving the report all the time, but I did have the opportunity, a unique opportunity to be able to speak to all parties, including the references, and the collateral. I've been able to see the substance abuse evaluation that was done. I've reviewed medical records. I stand by my report. I'm very comfortable with it.

[00:32:14]These children are older, and my job was to be their voice, and their voice is that they would want uh to be with their mom and dad. Both mom and dad are good parents. They're I didn't say they weren't.

[00:32:25]And I firmly believe that um that needs to take place. I did review my recommendations. I don't see anywhere where it stated that I felt mom needed to have another substance abuse evaluation. No, I would Ms. McLean have at all. I don't see it in the recommendations. I didn't review the full report right now, but I do stand by this report. I'm very comfortable with my findings. Thank you. Ms. Windell, to put it short, I still have other cases.

[00:32:52]You have a chance at rebuttal. Uh yes, ma'am. Thank you. I would like to I did do a substance eval.

[00:33:00]It was April 23rd, 2024. I had given Ms. Noel the copy of the substance abuse evaluation that said no treatment is recommended at this time and that I have no substance Mr. Sindana did not reach out. They claimed that I gave them the wrong number, which I followed up and corrected my typo.

[00:33:19]They're trying to say now that I did not give them the right number, but I did. And he has called the substance abuse abuse lady, Michelle Buckles. He's called and given her collateral information that did not change anything and he's unhappy with that situation. So, he wants me to convey and a whole 'nother one.

[00:33:36]I don't think that that's fair.

[00:33:39]I think that he is Anyone doesn't side with him, he's going to want something new. And I think that this is an abuse of power and abuse of money, quite. And I just hope that you see what's in the best interest of my children. I'm Like the GAL said, we're not bad parents, we're just we have conflict between us and I'm hoping that that conflict can be resolved and um we can move on with our lives. This is absolutely out of hand. So, I did review the files and record, the statements that have been filed.

[00:34:13]And the court recognizes the guardian ad litem spent a lot of time investigating this matter and appreciates the work.

[00:34:20]And again, as I say, guardian reports are a recommendation.

[00:34:26]Clearly, there are disputes as to what's been said, which is not necessarily unusual, either.

[00:34:33]Clearly the parties see things differently and there's only one way to get this matter resolved. And so the court is not going to be changing anything at this time. And the matter needs to get noted for trial. I I think you said there's >> I believe that I noted it up for an MSC.

[00:34:53]I apologize. I should have looked at that date.

[00:34:56]When is it? November 18th.

[00:35:00]Okay. So Miss Windell, do you know what an MSC is? Kind of. Okay. So it's called conference and it's an opportunity to meet with the judge. That judge then recuses himself after hearing and the MSC. But basically the attempt is to see whether or not the parties can reach an agreement rather than proceed to trial. So that's the idea of an MSC is to see if a settlement can be reached between the parties. And there is more information available on the court's website that she can access and we can forward that link to her if she needs it.

[00:35:39]So why don't you go ahead and just do that Miss McSwain if you would.

[00:35:43]And so that will be happening.

[00:35:47]But bottom line the matter needs to get set for trial and needs to be heard as a whole as to what needs to occur.

[00:35:56]As to the request for attorney's fees and the court understands why that request may be made but I think Miss Windell properly brought the matter before the court and the court doesn't find any faults in that just not agreeing at this time to make changes. So Do you want us to do a presentation or do you want to make adjustments to the order that I did provide to you or What I would suggest is just get me a clean order. Okay. And if you can't come up with an a a signature by both parties then note it on.

[00:36:33]Okay, I can do that.

[00:36:35]Thank you.

[00:36:36]Yeah. Right, number 11 you say?

[00:36:39]I do believe it's number 11, the Swindell and Sendona matter. 2432608 And I just I just entered my notice of appearance yesterday. I've been in correspondence with Ms. McClain and I believe we have an agreed order coming over ex parte. So, my understanding is we can strike today. Or if you have the doc the document in front of you, perhaps you can just acknowledge that Ms. Bliss um approves by Zoom. And that's fine with me as well. I'll have to hold on here. Let me get the folder. So, I do have the order that was sent over by Ms. McClain and that's the order that you are approving, Ms. Bliss? Assuming that's the order I saw yesterday, I'll defer to Ms. McClain, but I did sign off on the order that she presented yesterday. Yeah, it should be the two-page order that both I and Ms. Evolved had signed. That's what I have. Then yes, Judge, you can enter my approval via Zoom. Thank you.

[00:37:32]What do you think about this hearing?

[00:37:34]Should the judge have followed the GAL recommendation right away? Or was it reasonable to keep restrictions in place until the mother fully complied with prior court orders? Cases like this show how custody battles often shaped not only by parenting concerns, but also by credibility, procedure, and long-term compliance. And this case still had major developments ahead. The remaining hearings and final outcomes will be covered in the next video. So, drop your thoughts in the comments below. And if you enjoy real courtroom breakdowns, dramatic judge moments, and shocking legal cases explained simply, make sure to like this video, subscribe, and turn on notifications so you never miss the next update.