There will be a happy ending to this sorry saga when the boys move in with their dad at the end of October. I don’t wish a happy ending for the ex. She’s in so much financial shyte its amazing she can breathe. Oxygen starvation might even be an improvement to the quarter of a brain cell she allegedly possesses (which is like the Yeti - we’ve heard about it, rumours of seeing it, but not actually witnessed it ourselves). If Karma wants to come and bite my ass its welcome. I’ll bite back, With interest. The past few months have been a rollercoaster for all concerned, family, friends and foes. I’ve almost run out of popcorn.
don’t underestimate the shit the boys will go through for some time…brain or no brain; a mother’s a mother. Even if she gave the kids shit, they seem to cope with that…
For crying in a fucking bucket!
I’ve been summoned to court on the 31st May to go testify as to what I have beholded that fateful Saturday morning. All this because my brother is sueing the bloody snotkop Peenut for a couple hundred thousand rand for “egbreuk”. Lovely stuff. In KROONSTAD of all bloody places, the place doesnt even appear on the nightly weathermap and now I have to put in a day’s precious leave, schlep to a godforsaken Free State one horse town to tell a courtroom full of conservate Afrikaners that my ex-sister-in-law slept with a snotkop of 26 in the marital bed on a Saturday morning.
Gods!
I’m claiming 10% of any takings in this case. >:(
Try for 25%
Come to think of it you could sue him for the emotional distress occasioned by the sight of his hairy arse.
;D ;D ;D ;D
Now there’s a thought!
Does anybody have a copy of the FSM “bible”? I need to lug it into court, I’m sure as hell aint plonking my right hand on the babble and swear to speak the truth in fear of a lightning bolt from a clear sky frizzing my hair to all eternity if I dont.
gods, its Kroonstad, and I’m probably going to have to be the hypocrite and do it.
I could cry.
As far as I’m aware in SA you’re not required to swear on a bible, you can just “swear”. How this will go down with the judge, I don’t know.
Can one claim from somebody that accused you of something if you are found innocent by the court?
No, certainly not as a matter of course. In a civil suit, the court would typically award you a cost order against the plaintiff to cover the costs of your defence, but it’s not guaranteed. In a criminal case, you’re on your own except when the state has handled things so extremely badly that the judge(s) or magistrate award you relief/compensation, usually in the form of money, which limited discretionary power they have. You are of course free to sue the plaintiff (or state in a criminal matter) for defamation or crimen injuria or similar (and/or false arrest/prosecution in a criminal matter) but your action may fail and end up costing you a packet.
It’s the difference between law and justice.
'Luthon64
It’s perfectly OK to affirm instead of taking the oath. I did this when I was called as a witness in a theft case. Just inform the shysters in advance.
Oh, by the way, the FSM bible is The River Cafe Cookbook.
So we pitch up there at the courthouse on Thursday morning, and find the ex and her Peanut sitting outside the courtroom already with their grey-headed lawyer, we make ourselves comfortable opposite them and rip out our chewy books to read considering that we might wait awhile. After a couple minutes, the S/O digs me in the ribs and whisper to me something about the book she’s reading. Turns out its titled “Screw it, lets do it” by Mr Branson. Not sure whether it truly impacted on the birdbrain or whether it was an attempt to impress us or something, but I had a bit of a ironic, sarcastic chuckle at the title.
Anyhows, I was called in a moment or so later. Asked whether I have any objection to being sworn in, I asked them what the oath was, turned out very unreligious with my conscience being called upon. I happily raised my right hand to it and duly sworn myself to Zeus’ wrath. I’m installed on a bench behind a fairly high counter type thingy with this hideous dangling microphone leering down at me. My eyes are level with the counter and I peek meekly over it. My brother’s attorney proceeded to ask me questions relating to the day in question, which was easy enough to answer, then the opposition’s attorney had an opportunity to cross-question me. At this point of time I was feeling a tad cold and proceeded to shove my hands under my bum on the hard little bench I was installed upon. Anyhows, in my opinion, the man was a bit slow, he had a ball with the other witness’ a bit later on, but I suspect I was a bit of a challenge for him – both my brother and the S/O agreed, and claimed that I was by the end of it, leading HIM instead of the other way around. I didn’t have that perception, but I can admit to looking at the little squat man and thinking that he looked like a overweight hobbit.
He asked a lot of questions relating to my relationship with my ex sister in law, which I answered honestly considering there wasn’t much of a relationship to begin with, she was never a friend, she was simply my brother’s wife and we got along well enough to serve the purpose. The attorney then attempted to question me as thus (loosely translated as it was all in Afrikaans):
Mrs M (and he emphasised the Mrs bit every time – quite odd), would you admit then that with the DEEP relationship you held with Mrs Ex… which is where I interrupted him – stating that there certainly was never a DEEP relationship between us and requesting that he rephrase the question. I did that three times. I think it annoyed him. It certainly amused my brother’s attorney as well as the Magistrate, and the S/O was sitting on the benches having a glorious little giggle. I don’t hold with people putting words in my mouth nor presuming anything about anything about me. On questioning the event, he made a statement that the Ex said that it didn’t take place on a Saturday, but rather on a Wednesday, the day after Valentines day. So I looked at him. And he looked at me. And I eventually asked him whether he asked a question? Upon which he stated, no, he was making a statement. So I looked at him. No question, no answer right? So eventually after a terse couple seconds, he asked whether I agreed with him. I said nope, not at all. He left it at that.
I don’t recall all the details, its gone murky already, but the man asked for a break in proceedings three times whilst I was on the bench, and each time conferred with his client. I suspect quite a few things didn’t gel well with what I was saying and he had to confirm some of it with his “clients”. The Magistrate asked a few questions herself and the dreaded “What exactly did you see?” question came from her. I just muttered about hairy male legs… and she dropped her head with a smile. I think she thoroughly enjoyed the show.
Personally, I suspect that the ex SIL duped this young man, for all his arrogance and stocky walk resembling carrying invisible watermelons under his arms, he’s just a kid and I suspect that he, up until Thursday, saw himself in the “knight in shining armour” role. The Ex SIL told him that her husband beat her and the kids and he had a drinking problem. After myself and the other testimonies, nobody would be able to think this about my brother.
I actually feel sorry for the lad, not excusing him from knowingly getting involved with a married woman, but for not having had the life experience and common sense to see bullshit when it hits you straight in your chompers.
Oh come on! You could’ve gone all Mills-and-Boon on the entire court. Would’ve been epic! >:D
Reminds me when I was a Judge’s Clerk in the 60’s we had a rape case in Springs Supreme Court of a 10 year old: Judge Viljoen takes over the questioning due to the child’s tender age: "En toe wat het jou oom gedoen? (this is after it was established that her uncle had pulled off her panties and stuffed them in his pocket)
Child: “Toe naai hy my!”
Later at lunch the judge comments dryly: “Ja Brian, toe naai hy haar! Teen ouderdom 13 is sy tien teen een 'n hoer”. The uncle got a looong sentence.