Part three - JUSTICE FOR DIVA. The unexpected witness.
There was a second defendant in this case, the daughter. As a result of my background in humane investigations, people who don't communicate have something to hide. Despite my numerous attempts and requests to get my dog Diva back failed neither defendant picked up the telephone and called me. They could have communicated with anyone to contact me and they chose not to - which ultimately lead to this lawsuit.
As stated, I flew to Missouri per the request of my attorney to do an inspection of a dog they claimed to be Diva. My attorney asked for "proof of life" for close to a year. Just prior to the inspection date and through the discovery process, the second to the bottom photograph was submitted. The top photograph I took of Diva shortly before she left to GOD KNOWS WHERE... During the inspection I expected to see the daughter standing next to the defendant. To my surprise the daughter was not there.
After the inspection came the videotaped depositions of both defendants. The daughter was the first to take a seat as her mother sat next to her.
Question - Should Diva have been returned to Debi? Answer - YES.
Whoa... wait a minute. Did she say YES?
Does Diva belong to Debi? Answer - YES.
Why hasn't your mother returned Diva? - Answer - I don't know.
Is this a bone of contention between you and your mother? Answer - YES.
Do you believe your mother fulfilled her contract with Debi? Answer - NO.
Do you believe Diva should be returned to Debi? Answer - YES.
Did your mother sign your name to AKC registrations forms taking your name off of dogs? Answer - YES... and went on to say that her mother signed her name to paychecks made payable only to her and deposited them. When asked if she reported this crime, the daughter stated that because she is my mother, her father, defendants ex husband decided to deal with it directly. (In Diva - Part four you will learn why this information is more than relevant.)
The daughter told the truth.
The daughter was not presented as a witness for her mother. The daughter was a no show in front of the jury.
We presented the daughter's videotaped deposition to the 12 jurors who quickly learned blood in not thicker than water in Missouri.
Court Documents
(Click documents/images for full view)
There was a second defendant in this case, the daughter. As a result of my background in humane investigations, people who don't communicate have something to hide. Despite my numerous attempts and requests to get my dog Diva back failed neither defendant picked up the telephone and called me. They could have communicated with anyone to contact me and they chose not to - which ultimately lead to this lawsuit.
As stated, I flew to Missouri per the request of my attorney to do an inspection of a dog they claimed to be Diva. My attorney asked for "proof of life" for close to a year. Just prior to the inspection date and through the discovery process, the second to the bottom photograph was submitted. The top photograph I took of Diva shortly before she left to GOD KNOWS WHERE... During the inspection I expected to see the daughter standing next to the defendant. To my surprise the daughter was not there.
After the inspection came the videotaped depositions of both defendants. The daughter was the first to take a seat as her mother sat next to her.
Question - Should Diva have been returned to Debi? Answer - YES.
Whoa... wait a minute. Did she say YES?
Does Diva belong to Debi? Answer - YES.
Why hasn't your mother returned Diva? - Answer - I don't know.
Is this a bone of contention between you and your mother? Answer - YES.
Do you believe your mother fulfilled her contract with Debi? Answer - NO.
Do you believe Diva should be returned to Debi? Answer - YES.
Did your mother sign your name to AKC registrations forms taking your name off of dogs? Answer - YES... and went on to say that her mother signed her name to paychecks made payable only to her and deposited them. When asked if she reported this crime, the daughter stated that because she is my mother, her father, defendants ex husband decided to deal with it directly. (In Diva - Part four you will learn why this information is more than relevant.)
The daughter told the truth.
The daughter was not presented as a witness for her mother. The daughter was a no show in front of the jury.
We presented the daughter's videotaped deposition to the 12 jurors who quickly learned blood in not thicker than water in Missouri.
Court Documents
(Click documents/images for full view)
WHERE  |
IS  |
DIVA???  |