14 Years in Court: Mom Grilled Over Toxic Litigation!

Ajouté : 2026-05-31

[00:00:00]Uh David Lane, attorney for petitioner Bethany Spencer. We're ready.

[00:00:05]>> Bob Widner, attorney for Mr. Stewart, uh respondent.

[00:00:10]>> At this time, Attorney Lane, would you like to make an opening statement?

[00:00:13]>> Um I know I would like to kind of invoke the rule, but really I want some clarity on whether or not the child is at Mr. Stewart's house no and if that child can hear the testimony we're about to go through.

[00:00:24]>> Okay, Mr. Stewart, where is the child?

[00:00:27]>> Um he is at my home. Um he is currently on the other side of the house in his own room. Um I'm in a separate room with the door locked away from him so he can't participate in this proceeding.

[00:00:39]>> Okay. Just for um I guess peace of mind, could you just move your camera around so everyone is able to see what's in your room? I noticed the background is a little blurred and and that's that's okay. I know it's it's stuff going on back here, too. So, I get it.

[00:00:58]Okay.

[00:01:01]All right. Attorney Lane, um, is that satisfactory for you?

[00:01:04]>> Yes. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

[00:01:06]>> You're welcome.

[00:01:07]>> I would like to make a brief opening and then I'll I'll call some my witness.

[00:01:13]If if the court would please take judicial notice of the contents of the file, you'll see this litigation has been pending off and on between the two parties for many, many years. There was an order that was modified in 2019 and entered into the record that made a change that was due to Miss Spencer moving a few miles outside of the geographic restriction at that time. Um there was a petition to modify filed by Miss Spencer and [clears throat] Mr. Stewart's now respondent. Throughout the course of those proceedings, since that modification has been filed and with taking judicial notice of the contents and reviewing some of the rulings by Associate Judge Lee, the court will see that there's an underlying theme that's been going on since this case started, which is Mr. Stewart is of the belief that he doesn't have to co-parent.

[00:02:12]that when the child's with him, it's his rules and that when the child's with Miss Spencer, that's her rules. Uh we intend to offer testimony and evidence to support the fact that he doesn't confer with opposing party on residency, on education, on medical decisions and offes the child to be a go-between between the parties.

[00:02:35]Um, prior to the 2019 order, Miss Spencer had the primary custody of the child.

[00:02:43]Mr. Stewart was on a standard or expanded standard at that time. Um, with that, we we feel the respondent is going to has a lot of confidence that the child is going to voice to the court his preference. And although uh persuasive that's not dispositive of the issue and here we're to decide what's in the best interest of the child of course and we would p we would posit that the stability offered by petitioner and Miss Spencer is in the best interest of the child and that utilizing the child as a go-between and not co-parenting on behalf of the child is not in the best interest of the the child. Um, with that, if it pleases the court, I'd like to call Miss Bethany Spencer.

[00:03:39]>> Okay. Thank you, council. Um, one one moment. Attorney Widner, did you want to make an opening statement?

[00:03:44]>> I'll make a short one.

[00:03:45]>> Go ahead.

[00:03:46]>> I've been involved with this case since my client has had primary since 2019.

[00:03:54]That's five years. There's only one party litigating in this. this Miss Spencer is the last five years consistently.

[00:04:02]You're going to hear testimony how first of all, Judge Lee ordered on June 15th to have a custody study. If they were serious about changing the final order, um they would have followed through with the custody order. They would have paid the money because it's not that expensive on the second floor and we would have a custody study. Well, we've got a 15year-old here. We all have 15 year olds. I used to run the teen training program for Dr. Phil McGrath and we had a lot of 15y olds in that teen training and 15 year olds are different than 10 year olds and 8-year-olds. They asked in their only relief in their pleading was to confer with the 15year-old. Now we're hearing it's not dispositive even though that's what their pleading says. We filed a motion to confer with the 15year-old. So, what's happened is Judge Lee about a year ago when my I didn't represent my the only time I didn't represent my council, she said, "Well, let's give Darren a shot at the school year and see how he likes it."

[00:05:03]So, they went to a 50/50 and you're going to hear testimony from the parties that it's been latigious, but it's only been latigious on one side. And what's really exemplifying the whole situation is Judge Lee ordered the parties to go to compassion counseling with Julie Weaver.

[00:05:22]In the phone call, you're going to hear my client testify to what his client did. She slammed the phone down on Miss Weaver. She can't co-parent with my client. She can't even go to co-parenting counseling with Miss Weaver. And she's been difficult. But, you know, it really comes down to the fact that we have a 15year-old and tomorrow when the 15-year-old comes by, we're gonna find out if that 15year-old is telling my client one story or his client one story. And it's going to be dispositive because that that kid's going to tell probably the judge a clearer idea of what he wants to do than either one of the parents in this case.

[00:06:01]And the last thing we want to do is put this kid in the middle anymore. But our position is is he has been miserable the last year. Mom is very difficult in a lot of respects as exemplified by the meeting Miss Maver.

[00:06:16]And I don't think it's going to take us more than 15 or 20 minutes to talk about what we need to talk about. And I would just defer tomorrow and just find out what this 15-year-old wants to do. He's like a little video camera. He's going to tell you what dad does right wrong.

[00:06:30]He's going to tell what mom does right wrong. And your honor, you have a 15-year-old. You talk to 15 year olds just fine. You're going to figure it out probably better than we will wasting an hour today. And that's our position, your honor.

[00:06:42]>> Thank you. Um, Attorney Lane, you said you call your client.

[00:06:47]>> Yes, your honor. Call Bethany Spencer.

[00:06:50]>> Okay. Miss Spencer, you may proceed.

[00:06:52]Attorney Lane.

[00:06:54]>> Would you please state your name uh for the record, please?

[00:06:58]>> Yes, it's Bethany Spencer.

[00:07:00]>> And how are you related? this lawsuit to the other party.

[00:07:05]>> Um, I guess we share a child would be the correct way to answer.

[00:07:11]>> And did you just hear the opening statement of opposing counsel?

[00:07:15]>> I did.

[00:07:16]>> And would you agree that uh the only relief you requested was a custody evaluation?

[00:07:22]>> Absolutely not.

[00:07:24]And can you give us a summary of the custody arrangements since this case has been litigated? Not from 2019, but just from the beginning.

[00:07:33]>> Um, the beginning was in 2010. It was originally filed in January 2010 uh by Mr. Stewart. Um, and at with Judge Tenike and then Judge Hockett, I was awarded primary and Mr. Stewart was awarded um extended standard visitation.

[00:07:52]He was also ordered to pay child support, um, which he only paid when he was trying to file against me again. He filed against me multiple times to bring this back into litigation. We've already had two custody evaluations in this case. We've already done mediation twice in this case. We were ordered to do um, co-parenting classes twice. I completed them twice. Mr. Stewart never completed it. We were ordered uh to do co-parenting counseling by Judge Hockett. I went by myself for a year. He never attended. Um during all of that time, I had primary. Mr. Stewart had standard extended visitation.

[00:08:33]Um in 2015, he again sued me. I was within the Dallas or county re geographic restriction. He didn't like that I had that restriction. He demanded that I move to Dallas County within 25 miles of him. Judge Cooks awarded that um and stated if he moves more than 25 miles from mom, mom can go wherever she wants. Uh which is in line with standard statutory language. Uh in 2017, I want to say, uh Mr. Stewart moved with his family from Dodto, which was 24 miles from where I was living at that time, to Cedar Hill, which was 30 miles from where I was living at that time. And based on that, my previous council said, "You can go wherever you want. Geographic restriction is lifted."

[00:09:23]So, I did um I moved out to family property in Vanzant County. And at that time, I still we were on a week on week off at that time. Um, and so >> I'm gonna object just a second. This is turning into a really long narrative. If we could just do question and answer, I I think it might move faster and quicker.

[00:09:46]>> I'm almost done, your honor.

[00:09:47]>> Hold on one second. Wait for the next question.

[00:09:50]>> Okay.

[00:09:52]>> And that brings us up to 2015. And then at some point, Mr. Stewart filed for modification based on the fact that you had left the geographic.

[00:10:00]Um I believe we were already in litigation at that time um when I moved based on the advice by my council. Um and so Judge Cooks did not uphold the the the geographic restriction applied to both parties that it she really only applied it to me. Um and so uh she awarded Mr. Stewart primary conservatorship based on that fact alone. Um, in 2021, I purchased a home in Dotto, Texas with my wife. We own our home. Um, and it's approximately four miles from where Mr. Stewart is living now. Uh, which is the material change, one of the material changes that, um, prompted me to file this suit.

[00:10:45]>> Okay. Um, and that's a lot of information to try to provide short amount of time. Um, may I share my screen, your honor?

[00:10:53]>> Yes, you may.

[00:11:06]If someone would please tell me if it's popped up yet?

[00:11:09]>> It has.

[00:11:10]>> Okay. And so to assist with today's proceedings and to make them a little bit more efficient, did you provide a summary of actions based off the registry of actions?

[00:11:20]>> I did.

[00:11:21]>> And can you identify what's been marked as exhibit P2? I can.

[00:11:26]>> What is exhibit P2?

[00:11:28]>> It is a summary of actions since 2019.

[00:11:32]>> And is it a true accurate correct copy of the summary of actions that you prepared for trial today?

[00:11:39]>> Yes.

[00:11:40]>> Has it been changed or altered in any material way?

[00:11:43]>> No.

[00:11:44]>> Your honor, I move to admit P2.

[00:11:46]>> Any objection?

[00:11:47]>> No objection as to the summary of witnesses testimony. No objection.

[00:11:51]>> Okay. P2 is admitted.

[00:11:53]>> Thank you. And in the interest of saving time, Miss Spencer, you're asking that >> Hold on one second. Hold on one second.

[00:11:58]It looks like Let me stop the time. It looks like Mr. Stewart dropped out. Oh, here he comes.

[00:12:09]Okay, Mr. Stewart, you back with us? Are you you're good?

[00:12:12]>> Yes. Yes, I'm I'm still there.

[00:12:14]>> Okay. Um, Attorney Lane, uh, do you remember your last question or >> Um, I do. If I'll just repeat um and are you asking the court today to review the summary of events and the evidence before making a decision based on what's in the best interest of the child today?

[00:12:33]>> I am.

[00:12:35]>> And briefly with regard to P1, if you can just identify, is this the registry of actions that's already in the court record?

[00:12:43]>> It is.

[00:12:44]>> And uh is it true, accurate, correct copy?

[00:12:48]>> Uh yes, >> your honor. are moved to admit P1 which is just registry of actions.

[00:12:53]>> No objection.

[00:12:54]>> P1 is admitted.

[00:12:55]>> Thank you. Returning to P2 which is your summary of actions um on February 28th, 2024. One of the things that you mentioned in your summary is that dad is refusing to parent and that that occurs on 1023 22 24.

[00:13:13]What is the uh failure to co-parent in what way does Mr. Stuart failed to co-arent.

[00:13:21]>> Um, he continued to refuse to provide any information regarding Darren's education. He would not communicate or respond to anything that I communicated about Darren. Um, at that time there, you know, had been several things that had come to light that I asked him about that he just ignored. Um, I mean, there's just there's just no there's no form of commun of co-parenting at all.

[00:13:47]And when you say no form of co-arenting, does that mean he refuses to respond to you when you ask him information?

[00:13:53]>> Yes.

[00:13:54]>> Although ordered in the AJ ruling of June 2023 that he's to provide you educational access. Did he provide you educational access in June of 2023 to the records of the child?

[00:14:06]>> No.

[00:14:07]>> Have you since gathered those records >> um through a couple of different means?

[00:14:13]Yes.

[00:14:13]>> Right. And so ultimately, did you learn that the child was excelling in school or struggling in school?

[00:14:20]>> I learned that he was failing math.

[00:14:23]>> And there did the associate judge make rulings and recommendations because of that.

[00:14:30]>> Um I I don't recall off the top of my head what she said. That was almost a year ago.

[00:14:38]>> Very good. If you would please look at the screen, I'm sharing with you what's been marked as P3. Can you identify exhibit P3?

[00:14:47]>> Yes.

[00:14:49]>> Is this a summary of your requested relief for today?

[00:14:53]>> It is.

[00:14:53]>> Is it a true, accurate, and correct copy of the summary?

[00:14:56]>> It is.

[00:14:57]>> Your honor, move to admit P3.

[00:15:01]>> P3 is immediate.

[00:15:02]>> Thank you. And so today, you're not asking that Mr. Stewart not have anything to do with the child, are you?

[00:15:08]No, >> you're just asking that we return to the pre209 orders that uh you and Mr. Stewart both be JMC joint managing conservators. Correct.

[00:15:19]>> Yes.

[00:15:20]>> And you're asking that you continue to have the exclusive right to make educational decisions for the child.

[00:15:26]>> Correct.

[00:15:27]>> That you have the continued right for major medical and psychological for the child.

[00:15:32]>> Correct. And so the only ruling that was reserved in the June and November AJ rulings was who would have the right to determine primary, right?

[00:15:42]>> Yes.

[00:15:43]>> Okay. You're also asking the court today that if we return to a pre uh previous orders where you have the joint the right to determine primary residency, are you also asking the court to put Mr. Stewart on child support or return him to child support payments?

[00:15:59]>> Yes. And are you asking that he also return to having to make medical support payments?

[00:16:05]>> Yes.

[00:16:07]>> And and moving forward, has it has the last year of school been good for the child's education going back and forth, one week at your house, one week at Kevin's house?

[00:16:20]>> Um I I think he did the best that he could. Um, I know in my home that I am I sit with him to help him do his work in December with the Chromebook issue. Uh, when I found out he was without his required technology, which was why he was failing math, I was able to obtain a new one for him. Sat with him for four hours, got him back up to passing. Um, you know, my wife and I are both available to help with any schoolwork.

[00:16:51]Uh, we have conversations every day about what's going on at school. I have no idea if these things are occurring at Kevin's house. Um, I'm under the impression that they are not.

[00:17:02]>> I see. Um, and speaking of the AJ ruling, I'm going to uh ask you to identify what's been marked as P4. If you can identify that on the screen for us.

[00:17:12]>> I can.

[00:17:14]>> And is that the associate judge's ruling from June 15 of 2023?

[00:17:20]>> Yes.

[00:17:21]And is this a true, accurate, and correct copy of that ruling?

[00:17:25]>> It is.

[00:17:26]>> I move to a P4.

[00:17:28]>> Any objection?

[00:17:29]>> Okay.

[00:17:30]>> Thank you, council.

[00:17:31]>> Where's the meeting?

[00:17:32]>> And we understand that there's some relief that was granted. There was relief that was reserved, but in the notes of the AJ ruling, um the court awarded you exclusive right to make major medical, dental, and psychological decisions. And was that based on the fact that the opposing party hadn't taken the child to the >> dentist?

[00:17:54]Objection leading >> um in the notes on the bottom of page three, you were awarded the exclusive right to make medical, dental, and psychological decisions.

[00:18:07]>> Correct.

[00:18:08]>> And what was the reason that uh you provided at that time before at that ruling? Um because it came to my attention that Mr. Stewart had not taken the child to the doctor or the dentist in 3 years. Um when I asked him about those things, he gave me some vague responses but would not provide any information about who was the treating physician or dentist, what dates, phone numbers, information, nothing. And so it came to my attention that he actually hadn't provided any of that care. um which was the other reason that prompted me to to file my petition last year.

[00:18:44]>> And if you can see there at the bottom of the the handwritten notes or type notes of the court, the father is to ensure that mother has such access to the education records within seven days.

[00:18:56]Do you see that?

[00:18:57]>> I do.

[00:18:58]>> And did Mr. uh Stewart provide you educational records within the seven days?

[00:19:03]>> No.

[00:19:04]>> Um did he do it within three or four months?

[00:19:07]>> No. In fact, at the November AJ ruling, did we have to revisit this issue?

[00:19:13]>> We did.

[00:19:14]>> And that's one of the reasons because one of one of the reasons you're asking the court today to return to you having the primary. Were any of these issues present up before 2019?

[00:19:28]>> No.

[00:19:30]If you have the the right to determine primary for residency, education, medical, do you keep opposing party involved in what those things are going on with the child?

[00:19:42]>> I do.

[00:19:43]>> And so are you asking the court today to grant you those rights so that the court can rest assured that at least both parents have knowledge and access what's going on with the child?

[00:19:53]>> Yes.

[00:19:54]>> And is that's because you think Mr. Stewart does co-arent or does not co-parent.

[00:20:00]>> He does not co-parent.

[00:20:03]>> And I'm going to show you what's been marked as P6. If you could please identify P6 for me.

[00:20:11]>> Yes.

[00:20:12]>> And is this the AJ ruling from November of 2023?

[00:20:18]>> Yes.

[00:20:19]>> Is it true, accurate? Correct. Copy that.

[00:20:22]>> Yes.

[00:20:22]>> Move to admit P6. Any objection?

[00:20:25]>> No objection, your honor.

[00:20:27]>> P6 is admitted.

[00:20:29]>> Thank you. And in addition to the holiday season and getting the 50/50 scheduled there, um was there an order from the judge in that second paragraph to provide these records again, including grades, attendance, teachers notes on a periodic basis?

[00:20:45]>> Yes.

[00:20:46]>> And did Mr. Stewart comply with that ruling?

[00:20:50]The only part of that ruling he complied with is that he forwarded, you know, like notification emails from the school, but he did not provide grades, attendance, teachers notes or anything of the like. It was just, you know, the spam email from the schools that he was forwarding me.

[00:21:07]>> Right. And at some point, did you learn the educational status of the child?

[00:21:13]>> I did.

[00:21:14]>> And was he passing or failing school?

[00:21:17]He was failing math and struggling in a couple of other subjects.

[00:21:22]>> And is is do you think it's in the best interest of a child for the either parent not to know that the child is having trouble in school?

[00:21:31]>> Absolutely not.

[00:21:33]>> Do you think it's in the best interest of the child for either parent not to know that the child's dental hasn't been to the dentist in years?

[00:21:41]>> No.

[00:21:46]And I'm going to skip five and seven, your honor, on my exhibits just because those are uh screenshots of the what's already been admitted as R OA, the registry of actions. I'm going to show you here uh P8 and uh ask you to identify this document.

[00:22:05]>> Yes, that is the full um record of the conversation between Mr. Steuart and I on app close since we signed up for it uh the end of 2019 >> and it goes from 2019 up until the most recent to prepare for today's trial.

[00:22:23]Correct.

[00:22:24]>> Yes.

[00:22:25]>> And you'll note that it's uh 70s something pages long and of course we're not going to go through all of that today. Right.

[00:22:31]>> Correct.

[00:22:32]>> Um but you'd like to lay this a basis for some other exhibits. So um is this is this the complete text communications between the two of you on applose? It is.

[00:22:43]>> Has it been altered, changed, deleted in any way?

[00:22:47]>> No.

[00:22:48]>> I'd move like to move to admit P8.

[00:22:51]>> Any objection? No objection. And it's automatically admissible. So, >> thank you, Mr. Wer. Okay. Um, and to be clear, are you asking the court today to read 72 pages of text messages and the limited amount of time we have with the court?

[00:23:08]>> No. [laughter] So, did you make summaries of some of these issues we're covering in your testimony for the benefit of the court?

[00:23:16]>> I did.

[00:23:17]>> Are you just simply asking the court to take under consideration those summaries and so the court can make reference back to this exhibit at the court's leisure?

[00:23:27]>> Yes.

[00:23:28]>> I'm going to show you what's been marked as P9.

[00:23:33]And can you uh identify this document?

[00:23:38]Yeah, that is a summary um that I prepared regarding um residency issues co-parenting with Kevin.

[00:23:47]>> And is this true, accurate and correct copy of that summary?

[00:23:51]>> Yes, >> your honor move to admit P9 as summary.

[00:23:54]>> Any objection?

[00:23:55]>> No objection as a summary.

[00:23:57]>> And so it as a summary.

[00:24:00]>> Thank you, your honor. And for example, like on number two, at the end there, you say, "See page 21 of exhibit 8 and the respondent's counter."

[00:24:09]So the court can follow along. This is more like an index of the the text communications that you're asking the court to review.

[00:24:16]>> Yes.

[00:24:17]>> And you're just asking the court to make that review before it makes a decision on this final matter. Correct.

[00:24:22]>> Yes. And I'm going to show you what's been marked as P10 and entitled the summary of respondents refusal to co-parent on education. Can you identify this document?

[00:24:34]>> Yes, it is.

[00:24:35]>> True.

[00:24:37]>> Is it a true accurate and correct copy?

[00:24:39]>> Yes.

[00:24:40]>> Of the summary. Move to admit P10.

[00:24:43]>> Objection. [clears throat] >> P10. And does this >> and does this summary follow the same structure as the summary prior by identifying the pages of exhibit 8 where the court can make reference to?

[00:24:59]>> Yes.

[00:25:00]>> Thank you. And going to show you what's been marked as P1 which is the summary of the refusal to co-parent on the medical issues. Is this a true accurate and correct copy of that summary that you made?

[00:25:14]>> Yes, it is. The honor move to admit P11.

[00:25:17]>> Any objection?

[00:25:20]>> I didn't hear you, councel.

[00:25:21]>> No objection.

[00:25:23]>> Okay. P1 is admitted.

[00:25:25]>> Thank you. And on P12, uh, can you identify what's been marked as P12?

[00:25:35]>> Yes.

[00:25:37]And is this a summary of where the court can find and exhibit a evidence and examples of when the respondent didn't communicate or try to use the child to communicate? I'm sorry.

[00:25:47]>> Yes.

[00:25:48]>> And is this true, accurate, correct copy of that summary you made?

[00:25:52]>> Yes.

[00:25:53]>> Move to admit P12.

[00:25:55]>> Objection.

[00:25:56]>> Okay. P12 is admitted.

[00:25:58]>> And lastly, um, can you identify what's been marked as P3?

[00:26:04]>> Yes.

[00:26:05]And what is P13?

[00:26:08]>> Um, it is a summary of communications and and violations uh between Kevin and I. Um, violations of court order um that can be found um in the applo communications.

[00:26:23]>> Thank you. Uh move to admit P13 >> just as a summary of the uh her testimony. I have no objection.

[00:26:32]P3 is admitted as a summary.

[00:26:35]>> Thank you. And at some point when you finally learned of the when you got some educational records, um did you have an opportunity to take or to review any emails related to that?

[00:26:51]>> Um yes.

[00:26:53]>> Did you take a screenshot of those communications?

[00:26:57]>> Yes.

[00:26:58]And can you identify exhibit P14?

[00:27:01]>> I can.

[00:27:03]>> And is this the photographs that you took of some of those screenshots of those communications?

[00:27:09]>> Yes.

[00:27:10]>> And to be clear, you're not offering this as as for the truth that this is the grade report. You're just saying this is a summary of your testimony about what you took pictures of.

[00:27:20]>> Yes.

[00:27:21]>> Is it a true accurate correct copy of that?

[00:27:24]>> Yes. Move to admit P14.

[00:27:27]>> Objection. It's here. Objection. It's here.

[00:27:31]>> Um, not being offered for the truth of the matter asserted. It's just being offered as a summary of her testimony.

[00:27:38]>> And this is a school record, correct?

[00:27:41]>> This is a photograph of a screenshot she took of the school record.

[00:27:47]>> Um, >> I agree. It would be hearsay if we were offering it as true act and authentic records and we're not. We're just offering that as a summary of her testimony >> response.

[00:28:04]>> Again, it's being offered for the truth of they're trying to say these are grades and I don't I've not this I've never seen this document. It's not been produced in discovery. I don't know if this is an accurate school record or not.

[00:28:16]>> We're not offering this school.

[00:28:17]>> I don't care if it's an accurate that she took the picture. I want to know whether the it's a correct document or not. And it's hearsay. It's a out of court statement that if it was a subpoenaed record from the school, okay, but it's still hearsay. I agree. We would need that if we were offering it as the school records, which she's not.

[00:28:35]She's not saying these are the authentic records. She's merely saying in support of her testimony regarding the child struggling in school. These are photographs she took and it's a summary of her testimony of that.

[00:28:48]>> Okay. Sustain. Thank you.

[00:28:52]And again, before we we're not going to spend a lot of time because we don't have a lot of time today, but you're just asking the court to take into account the fact that the child was failing at school and the repo the opposing party did not make you aware of that.

[00:29:07]>> Correct.

[00:29:09]>> And who carries medical insurance for the child?

[00:29:13]>> I do.

[00:29:14]>> And can you identify what's been marked as P15?

[00:29:18]Yes, this is um health insurance, a health insurance card.

[00:29:23]>> And have you been carrying that as ordered?

[00:29:26]>> Yes.

[00:29:27]>> And today, are you simply asking that the court continue to have you provide that medical coverage?

[00:29:32]>> Yes.

[00:29:33]>> And to continue to have unreimbured medical split 50/50 as st as would be standard?

[00:29:39]>> Yes.

[00:29:40]>> Move to admit P15?

[00:29:42]>> No objection.

[00:29:43]>> P15 is admitted.

[00:29:45]>> Your honor, that's our exhibits and chief. May I have an update on time?

[00:29:49]>> Sure. You have 6 minutes and 10 seconds.

[00:29:52]Attorney Widner, you have 26 minutes and 28 seconds.

[00:29:56]>> And with that, I'm going to pass the witness to Mr. Widner.

[00:30:00]>> Okay.

[00:30:01]>> If I can stop sharing my screen, I will.

[00:30:04]There we go. Thank you, >> Miss Spencer. We've spent 24 minutes testifying. Correct.

[00:30:13]>> Um thereabouts.

[00:30:15]>> Okay. And according to the Holly versus Adams decision, there's like 10 or 15 factors the court considers.

[00:30:24]One of them is the desires of the child.

[00:30:26]You've testified for 24 minutes and you >> object. This is a multifaceted question and she's not an attorney and can't make a legal conclusion about Holly or any other case.

[00:30:38]>> Sustain as to the legal conclusion.

[00:30:40]Reference counsel.

[00:30:41]>> Yeah. You you've not testified to the desires of the child in 24 minutes, have you?

[00:30:48]>> No.

[00:30:49]>> Is that immaterial?

[00:30:54]>> Is what immaterial?

[00:30:56]>> Do you care what your child thinks?

[00:30:59]>> I do care what my child thinks.

[00:31:01]>> Why did you just spend 24 minutes not talking about anything about your child and what they want to do?

[00:31:09]because I my child is 14, not 15. And first, I don't believe that it is fair to put a lifealtering decision to a 14-year-old.

[00:31:25]And second, I don't believe that a 14-year-old is developed enough or has the adult judgment to make a lifealtering decision in their best interest.

[00:31:36]So you believe that no we should disregard what as your attorney says the child wants to do?

[00:31:44]>> That is not what I stated. Okay.

[00:31:46]>> Do you think the court how do you think the court should weigh on the interest of the child?

[00:31:51]>> Action draws for calls for a legal conclusion.

[00:31:54]>> Sustain.

[00:31:55]>> Okay. Is your child honest?

[00:31:58]>> As far as I know.

[00:32:02]>> What do you mean as far as you know? I have no evidence or experience in him lying to me. I don't know about his interactions with other people >> and and you have no problem with the judge talking to your child tomorrow, right?

[00:32:19]>> If that is what the court wants to do, then no.

[00:32:22]>> Not responsive. You have no objection to the court talking to your child?

[00:32:28]>> No.

[00:32:29]>> Okay. And your child is trustworthy, right?

[00:32:34]with me, he is trustworthy.

[00:32:36]>> Okay.

[00:32:37]Now, with regard to your testimony, you you understand back in June 15th, um, Judge Lee ordered a child custody study, correct?

[00:32:49]>> I would have to see the documentation.

[00:32:51]Sir, >> it was one of your exhibits that your your council just covered with you. Do you remember when Judge Lee asked both parties to get a custody study done on June 15, 2023? Do you remember?

[00:33:07]>> I can't recall verbatim on what was in that hearing.

[00:33:11]>> Do you do you just remember seeing the the Judge Lee's opinion as one of your exhibits that said get a custody study?

[00:33:18]>> Yes.

[00:33:19]>> Okay. So, you remember that there's an order ordering a custody study, right?

[00:33:25]>> Yes.

[00:33:26]And you're very concerned about your child, Darren. Correct.

[00:33:31]>> I'm always concerned about my child.

[00:33:34]>> Why did you not go pursue to make sure the custody study was done over the last year?

[00:33:41]>> Because I wasn't the one that requested it.

[00:33:45]>> Did you think you didn't need a custody study?

[00:33:49]>> It's not up to what I believe I need. If the court ordered it as relief to Mr. Stewart. Mr. Stewart requested it. Mr. Stewart is responsible for initiating it.

[00:34:01]>> You had a chart of Mr. Stewart's violations. That was one of your exhibits, right?

[00:34:07]>> Yes.

[00:34:08]>> How many contempts have you filed against Mr. Stewart in the last year over those violations?

[00:34:15]>> How many contempts have I filed?

[00:34:18]>> So, we're already in litigation. I'm not going to bring every little thing to a court hearing every time he violates.

[00:34:23]I'd be in court every week. We're here now. We're already in litigation. We can bring it up at the next hearing.

[00:34:30]>> Objection, not responsive. Why did you not file a contempt on those violations that you're now alleging?

[00:34:38]>> I just told you why. We're already in litigation. We can bring them up at the next hearing.

[00:34:44]>> Now, your testimony, you went back to 2010. Do you think it's in your child's best interest to be relitigating stuff since 2010?

[00:34:58]>> Yes.

[00:35:00]>> Okay. So, you think 14 years of history is important for your child?

[00:35:06]>> I think that it gives the court a full idea of everything that has occurred given your misrepresentations.

[00:35:13]>> Okay. And do you think your child enjoys living in court for 14 years hearing about 14 years of litigation?

[00:35:21]>> I'm objection, your honor. She can't testify to what the child likes or dislikes.

[00:35:26]>> Sustain.

[00:35:28]>> How do you think your child has been affected by your focus on 14 years of litigation?

[00:35:34]>> No.

[00:35:37]>> Responsive.

[00:35:38]>> Question being a mischaracterization of the evidence.

[00:35:42]objection again. She's not being responsive. The question was, "How do you think your child has been affected with 14 years of litigation and focus on it?"

[00:35:54]>> Overall, ma'am, you may answer that.

[00:35:57]>> I think the child has been very negatively affected by 14 years of litigation. However, this is only my second time filing a petition against your client. The entirety of the rest of the registry is due to your client.

[00:36:13]How did you refer to your child as the child?

[00:36:17]>> Because we're on YouTube and I don't want to say his name.

[00:36:25]>> Do you think that you've lived too much in this litigation over the last 14 years?

[00:36:30]>> I don't understand that question, sir.

[00:36:33]>> Do you think you're focusing too much on all this history for 14 years?

[00:36:38]>> No.

[00:36:39]>> Okay. Do you think it may give other people a headache hearing about 14 years of toxic >> objection? Your honor, she doesn't know what other people can conclude.

[00:36:50]>> Sustain, rephrase.

[00:36:53]>> Do you think this is productive reliving 14 years of litigation?

[00:36:58]>> Object. That's that's not what our testimony was that we're here today reliving um >> assuming facts, not in evidence.

[00:37:08]sustain.

[00:37:12]>> You want to go back to the order back in 2019, right?

[00:37:17]>> No.

[00:37:18]>> Okay. What past order do you want to go back to?

[00:37:23]>> We need to go back to the original order, >> the 20 2011 order.

[00:37:29]>> Okay. So, you're asking as relief for the court in 2024 to put the 2011 order back in place.

[00:37:41]>> Correct.

[00:37:42]>> Okay. How many years have happened since then?

[00:37:47]>> The 13 if I'm not mistaken.

[00:37:50]>> So, you're asking the court to put an order back in place that we had 13 years ago.

[00:37:56]>> Correct.

[00:38:02]How do you rate the co-parenting relationship?

[00:38:06]10 being the best, zero being the worst.

[00:38:11]>> Maybe a two or three.

[00:38:13]>> Okay. Can you give me se since you gave it a two and not a 10, can you give me eight things that can improve this co-parenting relationship?

[00:38:24]>> I only need to give two.

[00:38:27]Okay. And what are those two?

[00:38:30]>> Mr. Stewart, first of all, needs to focus on the best interest of the child.

[00:38:35]Set aside his ego, focus on the best interest of the child. Mr. Stewart needs to communicate honestly with me.

[00:38:46]>> And what do you need to do to improve the co-parenting relationship?

[00:38:51]>> Sir, I've been trying to get your client to co-parent for 14 and a half years.

[00:38:55]Objection not responsive.

[00:38:57]>> Sustain.

[00:38:58]>> This is going to be a hard question for you to answer. How can you improve as a co-parent?

[00:39:08]>> I'm doing the best that I can to co-parent. So, I'm going to say in no way can I approve.

[00:39:16]>> Oh, you're testifying to the court. You are a perfect parent.

[00:39:19]>> I am not testifying. I did not say that I'm a perfect parent.

[00:39:23]How can you be better?

[00:39:28]>> There's no way for me to be better.

[00:39:34]>> You think that's the problem with this co-parenting relationship?

[00:39:37]>> No, I don't, sir.

[00:39:39]>> Okay. And why don't you think that's the problem?

[00:39:42]>> Because I'm not the one that's creating the conflict. Your client is.

[00:39:47]Do you think you have an inability to or any self-awareness as to what you are required to do to improve as a co-parent?

[00:39:56]>> No, I don't.

[00:39:59]>> You had a conversation with Julie Weaver on compassion counseling, didn't you?

[00:40:08]>> Yes or no?

[00:40:12]>> I did. I had several conversations with co with co-parenting coun or compassion counseling.

[00:40:17]And you hung up on Julie Weaver, didn't you?

[00:40:20]>> No, I did not.

[00:40:22]>> Tell me what your version of that co-parenting counseling session. What happened during that session? What's your version of it?

[00:40:32]>> Objection. It's not specific. She said there were several sessions. Can you clarify which session you're referring to, Mr. Widner?

[00:40:40]>> The session?

[00:40:42]>> Yeah, the session you were both on the phone call with.

[00:40:49]My version of that is that she stated clearly at the beginning before either of us spoke that she would not be involved in any co-parenting litigation and that the session was confidential.

[00:41:04]>> Did you feel did you feel anything was accomplished from that phone call?

[00:41:10]>> No, there was not.

[00:41:12]>> And why not?

[00:41:14]Because when I listed the very real and current issues, your client was rolling his eyes, making noises, making faces, looking off, doing other things. And then when he began to speak, he was mischaracterizing facts that happened 12 years ago that have nothing to do with the current issues or what we can do moving forward to improve the situation.

[00:41:39]Quite frankly, some of the statements that he made were both inflammatory and false, and I'm not going to participate in that. That's not helpful. It's not productive. All it's going to do is create more conflict. There's no point to that. That is not what the court ordered us to do. It is not a couple's counseling session. It is a co-parenting counseling session. And he was more focused on airing his grievances from when we were a couple 16 years ago.

[00:42:06]>> Did you get frustrated with the phone call? Of course I did. Anybody would get frustrated sitting there listening to lies about themselves.

[00:42:15]>> And did you hang up?

[00:42:17]>> I did not.

[00:42:19]>> Well, you had to hang up sometime, right?

[00:42:22]>> Um when the session was over >> Why did you How was the session concluded?

[00:42:30]>> The therapist concluded the session. Our time was up.

[00:42:34]And did you have a second phone call with Miss Weaver and my client?

[00:42:39]>> No.

[00:42:40]>> Why not?

[00:42:41]>> Because I told your client that he was responsible for setting the next appointment since I jumped through all the hoops to get it started to begin with.

[00:42:48]>> Are you angry?

[00:42:50]>> No.

[00:42:52]>> You're not angry at all?

[00:42:55]>> No.

[00:42:55]>> How are you feeling right now?

[00:42:59]>> How is that relevant?

[00:43:03]not responsive.

[00:43:06]>> How do you feel right now?

[00:43:13]>> Hold on one second. Um, council, what is the relevance of that question?

[00:43:19]>> Her obvious anger is an interference with his co-parenting situation. I want to know why she's angry.

[00:43:26]>> Object to him stating as if he's testifying there. There's been no evidence introduced that um she's angry or slammed a phone or anything else.

[00:43:36]>> Okay. Um >> councel rephrase.

[00:43:43]>> How do you feel right now, Miss Spencer?

[00:43:46]>> I'm irritated that an officer of the court is offering mischaracterization of facts.

[00:43:52]>> Okay.

[00:43:55]>> Okay. Pass the witness.

[00:43:57]>> Okay. Any redirect?

[00:43:59]>> Yeah. briefly, your honor. Um, to be clear, you're asking for the relief that's provided in your summary of requested relief. Correct.

[00:44:07]>> Yes.

[00:44:08]>> And while some of those provisions may mirror the 2011 order, at no time have you actually said, "I want to go all the way back to 2011 and just put in that order again." Correct.

[00:44:18]>> No.

[00:44:22]And at any time, how many times did you attempt to uh set counseling sessions with Miss Stewart?

[00:44:31]>> Um, multiple times. The court did not order us to compassion counseling. I found compassion counseling. I reached out to them. I got on the waiting list.

[00:44:42]I got I provided Mr. Stewart's information. I turned in my paperwork timely. He turned in his paperwork 3 weeks later. And then he was wishy-washy going back and forth for several days about setting up an appointment.

[00:44:54]>> Okay. And have there been any child custody evaluations in the history of this case?

[00:44:59]>> Two.

[00:45:00]>> And in [clears throat] December, did opposing party request a child custody evaluation of their own?

[00:45:07]>> Um I believe so.

[00:45:09]>> And what steps, if any, have they taken to have that child custody evaluation performed?

[00:45:15]>> None to my knowledge.

[00:45:17]And would you consider the questioning from opposing counsel uh designed to make it look like you didn't follow uh through with the child custody evaluation offensive to you?

[00:45:30]>> Absolutely.

[00:45:31]>> Because this is a final trial.

[00:45:34]>> It is.

[00:45:35]>> And the best interest of the child is important to you.

[00:45:40]>> That's the paramount of my life is the best interest of my children.

[00:45:44]And do you think Mr. Stewart focuses on the best interest of your child?

[00:45:49]>> No.

[00:45:50]>> Ask the witness.

[00:45:51]>> Okay. Anything further?

[00:45:53]>> No more questions, but subject to recall.

[00:45:56]>> Okay. Attorney Lane, you may call your next witness.

[00:45:59]>> Um, I was going to call Mr. Stewart, but in light of time, I believe I'm going to rest and let Mr. Widner do that, and I'll reserve mine for cross.

[00:46:08]>> Okay. And you all have Attorney Lane, you have four minutes and 9 seconds.

[00:46:13]Attorney Winner, you have 12 minutes and 54 seconds and you may call your first witness.

[00:46:19]Attorney Winner.

[00:46:20]>> Mr. Stewart. I call Mr. Stewart.

[00:46:22]>> Okay.

[00:46:24]>> Yes.

[00:46:26]>> What's your son's name?

[00:46:29]>> Um I'm just wondering is it okay to say it because we're online doing >> Yeah. Yeah, you're fine.

[00:46:36]>> Just to be clear, there is no prohibition on saying the child's name.

[00:46:41]Although mother doesn't, you know, really want you to do it, there's nothing that says you can't say the child's name.

[00:46:49]>> Okay. Well, if it pleases the court, I'll just say his first name. His his name is Darren.

[00:46:53]>> Okay.

[00:46:54]>> Tell the court about Darren.

[00:46:56]>> Um, well, Darren's 14. He'll be 15 and on August 13th. Um, he's a smart young man. He's actually really really clever.

[00:47:07]Um he's he like most kids his age, he kind of bounces around here and there between interests and stuff, but he's he's kind of showing that he has a big interest in like electronics and robotics and things like that. Um the thing that I always kind of point out when people ask me about my son is that he's he's re he really is like the kindest and sweetest uh young man I've ever met. like he's he really does actually care about other people's well-being. He cares about what's going on with other people. Um he's really uh he just has a great amount of empathy for for other people.

[00:47:45]>> And so he's a very sensitive young man.

[00:47:48]>> Yeah, you could say that. Yeah.

[00:47:50]>> How has he responded the last 14 years of toxic legal battling?

[00:47:56]Um, that's a really hard question for me and I honestly just say that he has become a great person in spite of all the difficulty he had to go through with this. Um, you know, I do the best I can to not let him know what's going on or whatever, but kids aren't dumb. You know, they they they pick up on what's going on. They hear things. They they know that when like there's a change of custody, oh now all of a sudden I have to go over mom's house more often or whatever. Like he's he's acutely aware and I think he's just does the best he can with it. But he could be better.

[00:48:35]>> Okay. So since 2019, you've been the primary or the managing conservator, correct?

[00:48:43]>> Yes.

[00:48:44]And what now with with regard to material change, has there been any kind of substantial material change since 2019?

[00:48:53]>> Not not that I would call significant.

[00:48:55]Nothing I would define as significant.

[00:48:57]>> I'm going to object there, your honor.

[00:48:59]We've already had a hearing on that very issue because Mr. Widner attempted to strike pleadings based on that.

[00:49:06]>> Objection. Council's going to have his chance to cross-examine. I can ask my questions anything I want.

[00:49:12]Okay. Council, what was your legal objection?

[00:49:16]>> That he's assuming facts not in the record >> overrule.

[00:49:23]Now, since 2019, you've been the managing conservator, correct?

[00:49:28]>> Yes.

[00:49:28]>> And then we had a you had a hearing where you didn't have counsel, correct?

[00:49:32]With Judge Lee.

[00:49:34]>> Yes, that's correct.

[00:49:35]>> And when was that?

[00:49:37]>> That was about this time last year.

[00:49:39]>> Okay. and Judge Lee decided, okay, we're going to try the 50/50 deal with the 15 14y old and see how it works, right?

[00:49:47]>> Uh yes, at that time he was 13, but yes.

[00:49:51]>> And how has it worked?

[00:49:52]>> Uh uh I would say that it has been a complete and utter kind of failure to be quite honest with you.

[00:49:59]>> And why is that?

[00:50:00]>> Um so from the very moment of it when cuz obviously Darren had to be made aware. Hey, you're going to go to your mom's house for a week and my house for a week. From the moment he was made aware of that, um he got extremely upset. He cried for about an hour. I I it took a significant amount of time for me to console him. He he just didn't want to do that. Um I think he remembered because we had a 50/50 many years ago. I think he remembered that and it's just it's not the situation he wanted. Um, but I even still we went on and we did the 50/50 and it's just been the entire school year.

[00:50:37]He's struggled. He's it's and it's not been just a a struggle of just like an emotional struggle. It's just been his entire attitude has sort of shifted. Um, I've noticed that he has a few more outbursts and he's become a little bit more aggressive and angry. Not at any one particular person, I don't believe, but at the situation as a whole.

[00:50:58]Is he just frustrated with all the legal stuff?

[00:51:01]>> Objection. He can't testify to what the child is frustrated about.

[00:51:05]>> Okay. Council, what's your legal objection?

[00:51:07]>> That it's calls for hearsay and an assumption and conclusion.

[00:51:11]>> Sustain.

[00:51:12]>> You have an impression. Okay. Let me So the child has not adapted well to the 50/50. Is that your testimony?

[00:51:20]>> Um yes.

[00:51:22]>> Okay. And um now you've heard what mom has said. basically that let's talk about Miss Weaver and compassion counseling. When did that joint session occurred?

[00:51:32]>> Uh it was a few months ago. I don't remember the exact date >> and and within 20 30 seconds just tell the court what happened in that session.

[00:51:41]>> Um so we started the counseling session.

[00:51:43]She explained how the process was going to work. Pretty straightforward stuff.

[00:51:47]Uh Miss Spencer went first and gave her description much like she did at the beginning of this hearing. just sort of an uh her her version of events throughout this thing up till now. Uh when Miss Spencer was done speaking, I it was directed to me to respond back and give my version of events so so you know the council can understand where we're both coming from.

[00:52:07]Um, when I began to speak, um, I didn't get very far into my explanation before Miss Spencer began to interrupt me and constantly state that, um, that I was lying or that I was I I was defaming her and all these other different things.

[00:52:23]Um, and it became such an issue that the counselor had to mute Miss Spencer so I could actually talk and then unmute her when it was her turn to talk. And this went on um, for quite some time. And and to be honest, the counseling session went very slowly because of that. Um, ultimately what it ended up being was Miss Spencer got muted and during a point in time where it was my turn to talk about, for instance, things I felt about Darren's upbringing and Miss Spencer turned off her camera and the counselor tried to get Miss Spencer. She was like waving and saying, "Hey, you know, Miss Spencer, if you can hear me, please come back. You need to participate." And when Miss Spencer finally came back, I remember the counselor made a comment that, "Well, Miss Spencer, it seems like you're the reaction here as to what the counselor said."

[00:53:08]>> Sustain. Uh, Mr. Stewart, don't tell us what the counselor said.

[00:53:12]>> Just tell us what happened in the rest of the session.

[00:53:15]>> Well, she came back on, the counselor made some statements, and Miss Spencer got upset and she exited the session.

[00:53:22]Um, and it left me and the counselor together. We had a me and the counselor had a small conversation afterwards about how to go forward. And generally my my perceptive perception of it was that the only way to go forward is if Miss Spencer willingly wanted to go forward with it, which didn't happen.

[00:53:41][laughter] >> I think that's for her in Did she really want to work on co-parenting in your opinion after the session or or or work on it or not work on it?

[00:53:53]Um to to just give an honest answer, at no point do I ever believe that Miss Spencer ever wanted to actually co-parent with me. Um anytime I've ever given suggestions at all, whether the past or even current, it really is one of those things where if I don't do what Miss Spencer demands as far as Darren's care, then I'm threatened with legal action or I'm I'm called names or whatever. It becomes an argument. And to be honest, in the co-parenting session that we did, it was sort of so to speak some more of the same where anything I say um in her mind I suppose is a lie or is disingenuous. So there's not really room to co-parent. Um so it makes it very difficult.

[00:54:38]>> Had that reaction to me when I was asking her questions, didn't she?

[00:54:42]>> From my opinion, yes, I would say.

[00:54:44]>> Is that kind of how the co-parenting counseling session went? and how she was treating me.

[00:54:49]>> I I would say crank it up to 11. There was quite a few swears and quite a quite a bit of inappropriate statements made.

[00:54:57]>> Now, she's accused you of not communicating about school. Has she had access to all the school information?

[00:55:03]>> Um, actually, I want to point out one of the first the exhibit she posted that was all of our communications. The very first communication I noticed in that list actually was when I informed her of the school Darren was enrolled to uh and that I had listed her as the mother on record for him from the very moment in 2019 where I registered him for him registered him for school. He has she has always had access to all of those things. Um and even when we were brought to court I pointed that out to the judge that I'm not denying her anything. She simply call the school and ask them anything she wants. She can request to be on any mailing list. She can speak to any teacher. She has full access to that. She just never took advantage of it.

[00:55:42]>> She doesn't have to work through you to get that. As a parent, she has every right, just like you do, to find out what's going on.

[00:55:49]>> Yes, 100%. I've I've never denied her anything any access.

[00:55:52]>> She's she's had the right to get grades anytime she wants since 2019, right?

[00:55:57]>> Yes.

[00:55:58]>> And have you ever withheld medical records or any kind of medical updates from her since 2019?

[00:56:05]>> Uh, no. And actually to that very point, one of the big issues that I had with this situation was >> objection nonresponsive >> sustain.

[00:56:13]>> Just answer the question. Have you withheld medical records?

[00:56:16]>> Uh, no. No. No, I haven't.

[00:56:18]>> Have you?

[00:56:20]With regard to the communication, you heard her testify that she's pretty much the perfect co-parent, right?

[00:56:29][clears throat] >> In not so many words. That seems to be what she said. Yes.

[00:56:32]>> How can you improve as a co-parent?

[00:56:36]Um, so I'm very logical in my approach to things and I don't always take into consideration maybe sometimes other people's feelings on matters. Um, it's it's just a general thing that I should probably work a bit more on. Um, I'm a little bit straight to the point and pragmatic on a lot of these things. Um, so I could I could definitely work in just understanding other people's feelings a little bit better on the matter, even if I disagree with them. Um and um I I would say that like I try to be as patient as possible. Clearly my patience is not up to par to deal with uh this particular situation all the time. So I could work in those areas definitely >> feel like you have the ability to selfanalyze yourself as a co-arent.

[00:57:22]Uh that's actually the basis of my parenting strategy is I always try to look at what I'm doing and I I have a life mantra of everything is my fault and that every situation that happens I have some culpability in it at least so that way I know how to approach situations better in the future and to work better.

[00:57:40]>> Do you think after hearing her testimony does she have any ability whatsoever to criticize herself or be better as a co-parent?

[00:57:50]I I hate to say this, but unfortunately I don't see that trait in her.

[00:57:55]And >> is there any way to co-parent any better than you are doing when one person can't selfanalyze?

[00:58:05]>> I mean, other than just simply giving the other party everything they want, which I don't think is actually a valid strategy to success. I I don't see another way to work on it. Do you think that the hourlong session with Julie Weaver is representative to the court of what the co-parenting situation is >> with regard to Miss Weaver having to mute Miss Spencer several times in the conversation?

[00:58:32]>> Um, I think it's representative, but at the same time, I think it's just the tip of an iceberg.

[00:58:40]Then how do you do you think that Miss Weaver's turning off her camera in the middle of the co-parenting? Was that something that a good co-parent does?

[00:58:50]>> Of course not. No, I mean just not participating fully in the process and like giving a real honest try like it just defeats the purpose at that point.

[00:58:59]>> Just to clarify on the record, council, you said Miss Weaver turning off her camera.

[00:59:05]>> I'm sorry.

[00:59:07]Miss Miss Spencer. Yes. Thank you. You >> welcome.

[00:59:11]>> Okay. And so because Miss Spencer likes to turn off the camera and she has to be muted, she wants to go back to the 2010 order, right?

[00:59:22]>> Um well, I I know she said she doesn't or at least her lawyer says she doesn't want to exactly go back to that, but for the most part, she's asking for all the things that would be that again.

[00:59:32]>> 20 seconds. Council, >> no more questions.

[00:59:37]>> Okay. Cross.

[00:59:40]>> Yes, your honor.

[00:59:41]>> Go ahead.

[00:59:46]>> You say that uh Miss Spencer has never made any effort to really co-parent with you, but isn't it true that she purchased a home just to be close to you to facilitate a better relationship?

[01:00:00]>> I wouldn't characterize it as that.

[01:00:02]>> Okay. Did she move to be close to you?

[01:00:06]Um, that was not the reason I was told.

[01:00:09]>> Did she move closer to you?

[01:00:11]>> Yes, she did.

[01:00:12]>> And did that move put her in the same school district as you?

[01:00:15]>> No, it did not.

[01:00:17]>> And how many times during the last year have you moved?

[01:00:21]>> In the last year?

[01:00:23]>> Yep.

[01:00:23]>> Zero.

[01:00:24]>> Last two years.

[01:00:26]>> Last two years. That would be 2022.

[01:00:29]Zero.

[01:00:30]>> Okay.

[01:00:31]Um, you say that at all times she's had access to educational records, right?

[01:00:38]>> Uh, she's had the ability to go access them. Yes.

[01:00:41]>> At all times is what you're saying.

[01:00:43]She's had that that she didn't have to go through you, right?

[01:00:46]>> Since 2019. That is correct. Yes.

[01:00:48]>> And were you in court when Associate Judge Lee made her ruling regarding access to those records?

[01:00:56]>> Um, yes, I was obviously. And did did Judge does Judge Lee's opinion say that there's going to be that you are required to grant her that access?

[01:01:06]>> Objection, speculation. The document speaks for itself.

[01:01:11]>> Sustain as to speculation.

[01:01:15]>> It is true that Judge Lee ordered you to provide this access. Correct.

[01:01:20]>> Um, I believe so.

[01:01:23]>> You're not sure what judge orders you to do? Well, again, your your your question I'm not sure how to answer your question to be honest.

[01:01:32]>> Honestly, preferably, sir.

[01:01:34]>> Well, it's not a matter of lying or honesty. It's Judge Lee ordered me to do something I had already done.

[01:01:42]>> And in no in the November ruling of 2023, have you have did you see the exhibit when it came in? Have you read the judge's ruling?

[01:01:51]>> Again, I I know what you're saying. The judge ruled that I was >> objection nonresponsive. Did you read the ruling?

[01:01:58]>> Yes.

[01:01:59]>> And doesn't it state that the father is to provide the mother school records including but not limited to grades, attendance, teachers notes, etc. beginning November 10th?

[01:02:10]>> Um, yeah, I believe that's what it said.

[01:02:12]I I don't have the document right in front of you at the moment, but I believe that's what it said. During the uh either hearing, did Judge Lee caution you against failure to co-parent?

[01:02:25]>> I don't recall that exactly.

[01:02:29]>> Do you recall exactly the judge telling you to give her access to those records?

[01:02:36]>> Um, I remember having a conversation with the judge about that.

[01:02:39]>> And would that conversation also say, "Well, she can go do it herself."

[01:02:45]Not to those not to that not to that language.

[01:02:49]>> But isn't it true that one parent has assigned ID to those records and that the only way Miss Spencer accesses those is through the child's account?

[01:02:56]>> That is incorrect.

[01:02:58]>> How do you know if she has those record access to those records? Um, so when I went to the school and I asked them about how records are accessed by the parents, the the counselor at the school informed me that as long as whoever is listed as the child's parents have full access to to all of his records, they can call the school or they can come in person, they can contact whoever they want to and and the school is is legally allowed to pass on those records. So from >> And is that what the judge Excuse me, sir. Is that what the judge ordered you to do? To go talk to the school and just see if she had access or did order you to turn them over?

[01:03:38]>> Uh, she ordered to for me to ensure that Miss Spencer had access to the records because Miss Spencer was accusing I didn't give her access.

[01:03:45]>> I remember that testimony and then >> council that was your last question. You just ran out of time.

[01:03:52]>> Okay. Okay.

[01:03:55]>> All right. Um, the court has a question. Um, Mr. Stewart.

[01:04:04]>> Yes.

[01:04:05]>> Um, why didn't you tell mom that the child was failing in school?

[01:04:11]>> Um, actually, there was a phone call that I had with her about Darren and his struggles in school.

[01:04:18]>> Okay. what if anything the two of you discussed on um working together to provide him some assistance with math?

[01:04:28]>> Um so the idea was just again to help him with the homework. I mean it was a very short conversation and um I'm sorry your honor I don't know how to answer without doing the hearsay thing and saying what she said to me.

[01:04:42]>> Well no it's not hearsay if she says something to you. Oh. Um, well, uh, when I had a short conversation with her and just said, "Hey, Darren's having some difficulty in some classes. I'm trying to help him with his schoolwork here."

[01:04:55]Um, there was an issue with a laptop that he had had some year he's been in the same school district years ago. He had a laptop and another student broke it. Um, the school wanted to charge us for that and I had a whole issue with the school. I was like, "No, the other child needs to pay to have it repaired.

[01:05:09]Darren didn't break it." I actually went and built Darren a computer. So he has a computer of his own at my house. So that's what he does his homework on.

[01:05:16]When we went to 50/50, I guess he doesn't have access to a computer at his mom's house. So um his mom took it upon herself to just go out and pay the fee and just get the laptop so she could have, I guess, one for while he's at her house. So when we had the discussion, it was just kind of more of a well, he's having some hard times, so we just double check on his homework. And so when he's at my house, I you know, ask him if he needs help. I overlook his homework and I try to help him out if he needs help. Um, but I don't feel that that's it's a matter of just him having difficulty with the subject matter is the reason he had difficulty in the class.

[01:05:53]>> Okay. Um, Miss does Darren have access to a laptop at your home?

[01:05:59]>> He has a computer.

[01:06:01]I'm sorry.

[01:06:02]>> Sorry.

[01:06:05]So, he has a schoolisssued Chromebook.

[01:06:11]>> Um, I've never had a phone call with with Kevin about Darren.

[01:06:17]>> Hold on. Hold on.

[01:06:19]>> You don't have to defend yourself. I asked him specifically because your testimony was that he didn't give you any, you know, information about the child's failing. You don't have to defend yourself. That's not what I'm doing. I I'm not trying to see you know you who's right or who's wrong. I'm just trying to get some clarity. The um online system that you all use for checking his grades, is that called Skyward?

[01:06:46]>> It is and I do not have access to it.

[01:06:48]>> Okay.

[01:06:49]>> They only issue one one access per child and Mr. Stewart has that and would not provide the login information for that.

[01:07:00]And what is the correct spelling of um the child's name? Because on pleadings it has one R but on that that >> it's two Rs.

[01:07:12]>> Two.

[01:07:13]>> Nope. No, it's D A R I N. That's how his name is spelled.

[01:07:17]>> Okay.

[01:07:17]>> Oh, yes.

[01:07:25]>> How far do you all live from each other now?

[01:07:28]Um, approximately four miles, 3.9 miles.

[01:07:32]I purchased this home specifically because of where Kevin was living.

[01:07:39]>> Which school district is this?

[01:07:41]>> I'm in Dodto.

[01:07:43]>> Okay. So, uh, >> I live in Cedar Hill, your honor.

[01:07:47]>> Okay. So, I'm assuming he attends Cedar Hill school.

[01:07:50]>> Yes, he does.

[01:07:52]>> Okay.

[01:07:54]All right. But um I would say that the child and I have discussed um converting to K12 online due to an incident where he was pepper sprayed at school. Um he was not the intended target and um my wife and I both have some serious concerns about continued incidents like that at at Cedar Hill.

[01:08:18]>> Okay. Um, so I'm going to I I obviously can't make a ruling right now because I first need to hear from Darren.

[01:08:30]I'm going to interview him on tomorrow.

[01:08:33]And um, you all do understand that even when Darren turns 18, even after he turns 18, you all have to deal with each other, right?

[01:08:46]>> I'm aware.

[01:08:47]>> Okay. So, the reason I'm saying that because as best as you can, y'all are going to have to co-parent. I mean, you know, you you have a couple of years left in terms of co-parenting before he becomes an adult. But even beyond him being 18 years old, he's going to graduate high school. He's going to graduate from college if he decides to go. If he does something in the military, he's going to be awarded things. He's going to get married, have kids, all these things. and he's going to want the both of you there. So, at this age in his life, even if you all do not like each other, because it's very apparent you all don't get along, but as best you can, you all are going to have to work together for his sake because believe it or not, he is paying attention to the both of you. Mom, he's looking at your reaction talking about dad. Dad, he's looking at your reaction talking about mom. he can sense, you know, tension. So, don't do him like that. You know, I you all may not get along, but that's not his fault. So, as best you can, I would encourage the both of you to try to work together. um if if access needs to be given in terms of schooling, whatever the case may be. Um and dad, I'm not saying you didn't do it, but as best you can, even if you have to do a screenshot to show mom, you know, you all are going to have to co-parent to some extent because he's in the middle of your disagreements.

[01:10:21]So that that would just be my little take and you know encouraging you all to think about him because that goes into the paramount of best interest of the child. It's all about him. It's not about how you all feel about each other.

[01:10:36]So um that's it for today. After I interview him on tomorrow, I will take notes and everything like that and get you all back a ruling. Now when I say take notes, let me just be clear. That doesn't mean I'm going to come back and tell you anything that the child says.

[01:10:52]>> Correct.

[01:10:53]>> Okay.

[01:10:53]>> Yes.

[01:10:54]>> I just want to make sure that I write down everything as accurately as possible to make sure that I get you all the um ruling that's in his best interest. Okay.

[01:11:06]>> Yes. Uh your honor, a question. Was it 12:00 or 12:30? I just want to make sure I have the right time.

[01:11:10]>> Thank you for asking that because I didn't say it again. It is 12:30.

[01:11:14]>> 12:30. Okay. Okay. And do you you you know exactly where we're located, right?

[01:11:19]>> I've I've unfortunately had to be the building many times. Uh and where?

[01:11:24]>> Okay. All right. So 12:30 and um I look forward to meeting come on tomorrow.

[01:11:30]>> Okay.

[01:11:31]>> Thank you, your honor.

[01:11:32]>> Have a good day. Thank you for your >> honor. You too.

[01:11:36]>> Thank you.