Ioan Gruffudd & Alice Evans #196 Sure, Jan
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Alice Evans Threads Wiki
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I misread that as ‘Beau Brummel’ and wondered what the hell the most elegant dandy in history would be doing in the company of Malodorous Tone and Fag Ash Al!
Okay, I'm still summarizing this thing but here is part 1. At the end there will be a link to the entire summary for the Wiki, so if you'd rather wait for that, it's on its way.
PART 1
Ella B. Evans (“Ella”), Petitioner, representing herself
Ioan Gruffudd (“Ioan”), Respondent, represented by Anne Kiley (also present)
Bianca Wallace (“Bianca”), Respondent, represented by Gregory Jessner and Kyle McGuire (also present)
Also Present:
Alice Evans (“Alice”), representing herself
The hearing begins. The Judge greets Ella and introduces himself to her. The Judge asks Alice if she is Ella’s mother and she responds that she is. Anne Kiley introduces herself as Ioan’s attorney and states that Alice is a party in the dissolution case, not the Domestic Violence Restraining Order (“DVRO”) or Civil Harassment Restraining Order (“CHRO”) request. Anne Kiley states that Alice is not only a party but a potential witness. The Judge notes that Alice may be there as “a support person” for Ella. Gregory Jessner introduces himself and Kyle McGuire as Bianca’s attorneys, and states that the CHRO proceeding is related to the DVRO proceeding against Ioan by Ella. The judge acknowledges this and states that he is going to use the court time before lunch to get everyone “calibrated” and that the main issues probably won’t come up until after lunchtime.
The Judge states that there is an upcoming contested evidentiary hearing on custody on July 13 and July 20, that there is a Domestic Violence Restraining Order against Alice, and that there is Family Code 3044 “lurking in the background.”
(Note: Family Code 3044 is a California law that states that if a party seeking custody of a child has perpetrated domestic violence against the other party seeking custody of the child or against the child or the child’s siblings within the previous 5 years, there is a rebuttable presumption that an award of sole or joint physical or legal custody of a child to a person who has perpetrated domestic violence is detrimental to the best interest of the child.)
The Judge states that he has read through the DVRO request Ella filed against Ioan and the CHRO request that Ella filed against Bianca, and the responses and supportive declarations. He also read Ioan’s response to the DVRO request that morning. The Judge states that his concern is, though Ella has a prerogative and a right to try to bring a domestic violence and civil harassment restraining order case, but that she is 13 years old, and because there is a custody hearing coming up, he wants to make sure that Ella has someone neutral advocating for her. His inclination was to appoint minor’s counsel for Ella and continue the CHRO and DVRO hearings since they all arise out of the same alleged facts that occurred on May 23, 2023. However, he understands that everyone wants to go forward that day.
Alice interrupts the Judge and says “No, not me. I would love for her to have her, your Honor.”
Judge: “Huh?”
Alice: “I would love – she wants a minor’s counsel.”
Judge: “So with – with so much respect, because today you don’t have standing. Okay? You’re not a guardian ad litem—”
Alice: “Yeah. Okay.”
Judge: “And you’re not a party in either of the actions before me.”
Alice: “Oh.”
Judge: “So I really—I can’t hear from you—”
Alice: “Sure.”
Judge: “—in that capacity. Okay?”
Alice: “Sure.”
The Judge addresses the audience and asks if Ella, Ioan, and Bianca want to go forward. Bianca’s attorney agrees. Ioan’s attorney brings up the Family Code as well as a case decided in April of 2023 (A.F. v. Jeffrey F.) which held that the court cannot appoint minor’s counsel in an action seeking relief under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act. The judge states that he hasn’t read that case, but will read it closely over lunch, and that the cases here are so intertwined that it’s difficult to separate them with regard to appointing a minor’s counsel. The judge acknowledges that the court cannot appoint a minor’s counsel in a CHRO proceeding but wants to make sure someone is advocating for Ella.
Anne Kiley states that Ella had every opportunity to have someone represent her; that Ella and her mother prepared the papers with someone’s help; and that Ella brought the request for the restraining order and appeared to seek the restraining order. She could have hired an attorney and she hasn’t.
Alice interrupts the court.
Alice: “Her wants to—sorry. Can you please—”
Judge: “Yes, ma’am?”
Ella: “I’m confused. Like, I don’t know what’s going on.”
The Judge explains to Ella that in a family law case, the court has the authority to appoint minor’s counsel, whereas in a domestic violence proceeding, the court doesn’t have the authority to appoint minor’s counsel. So, the Judge explained that he was trying to see if there was an argument to distinguish Ella’s case from others and appoint minor’s counsel for her. He said, “My instinct is that we go forward after lunch and we don’t have minor’s counsel. And I assume you’re fine with that, because I haven’t heard you ask for an attorney, I haven’t heard you—you certainly didn’t prepare any of your documents and—you know, you’re representing yourself; correct?”
Ella: “I don’t really know. I thought—like I hoped to get one.”
Judge: “Well, I don’t have the authority to appoint one. If you wanted to go out on your own and hire one, I think you have the prerogative to do that.
Ella: “Okay.”
Judge: “But you didn’t do that. And so, I suppose if you wanted to do that, you could.”
Ella: “Okay.”
Judge: “That’s up to you.”
Ella: “Could I—”
Gregory Jessner states that he would oppose a continuance of the matter. The Judge inquires further of Ella.
Judge: “Ella, do you feel like you want to go forward today if you didn’t have a lawyer? Do you know what you want to do?”
Ella: “No. I don’t want to push it if I don’t have—”
Judge: “Okay. You understand that the court doesn’t have the authority to—I don’t believe, have—to appoint one for you. And so, that would mean that if I were to entertain a continuance, you would have to go out and get your own lawyer. Do you understand that?
Ella nods affirmatively.
-END OF PART 1-
PART 1
Court Transcript Summary
In re The Matter of: Ella B. Evans v. Ioan Gruffudd (Case No. 23SMRO00218) and Ella B. Evans v. Bianca Wallace (Case No. 23STRO03504)
June 23, 2023 – Los Angeles County Superior Court
Hon. Josh Freeman Stinn, Superior Court Judge
Appearances:In re The Matter of: Ella B. Evans v. Ioan Gruffudd (Case No. 23SMRO00218) and Ella B. Evans v. Bianca Wallace (Case No. 23STRO03504)
June 23, 2023 – Los Angeles County Superior Court
Hon. Josh Freeman Stinn, Superior Court Judge
Ella B. Evans (“Ella”), Petitioner, representing herself
Ioan Gruffudd (“Ioan”), Respondent, represented by Anne Kiley (also present)
Bianca Wallace (“Bianca”), Respondent, represented by Gregory Jessner and Kyle McGuire (also present)
Also Present:
Alice Evans (“Alice”), representing herself
The hearing begins. The Judge greets Ella and introduces himself to her. The Judge asks Alice if she is Ella’s mother and she responds that she is. Anne Kiley introduces herself as Ioan’s attorney and states that Alice is a party in the dissolution case, not the Domestic Violence Restraining Order (“DVRO”) or Civil Harassment Restraining Order (“CHRO”) request. Anne Kiley states that Alice is not only a party but a potential witness. The Judge notes that Alice may be there as “a support person” for Ella. Gregory Jessner introduces himself and Kyle McGuire as Bianca’s attorneys, and states that the CHRO proceeding is related to the DVRO proceeding against Ioan by Ella. The judge acknowledges this and states that he is going to use the court time before lunch to get everyone “calibrated” and that the main issues probably won’t come up until after lunchtime.
The Judge states that there is an upcoming contested evidentiary hearing on custody on July 13 and July 20, that there is a Domestic Violence Restraining Order against Alice, and that there is Family Code 3044 “lurking in the background.”
(Note: Family Code 3044 is a California law that states that if a party seeking custody of a child has perpetrated domestic violence against the other party seeking custody of the child or against the child or the child’s siblings within the previous 5 years, there is a rebuttable presumption that an award of sole or joint physical or legal custody of a child to a person who has perpetrated domestic violence is detrimental to the best interest of the child.)
The Judge states that he has read through the DVRO request Ella filed against Ioan and the CHRO request that Ella filed against Bianca, and the responses and supportive declarations. He also read Ioan’s response to the DVRO request that morning. The Judge states that his concern is, though Ella has a prerogative and a right to try to bring a domestic violence and civil harassment restraining order case, but that she is 13 years old, and because there is a custody hearing coming up, he wants to make sure that Ella has someone neutral advocating for her. His inclination was to appoint minor’s counsel for Ella and continue the CHRO and DVRO hearings since they all arise out of the same alleged facts that occurred on May 23, 2023. However, he understands that everyone wants to go forward that day.
Alice interrupts the Judge and says “No, not me. I would love for her to have her, your Honor.”
Judge: “Huh?”
Alice: “I would love – she wants a minor’s counsel.”
Judge: “So with – with so much respect, because today you don’t have standing. Okay? You’re not a guardian ad litem—”
Alice: “Yeah. Okay.”
Judge: “And you’re not a party in either of the actions before me.”
Alice: “Oh.”
Judge: “So I really—I can’t hear from you—”
Alice: “Sure.”
Judge: “—in that capacity. Okay?”
Alice: “Sure.”
The Judge addresses the audience and asks if Ella, Ioan, and Bianca want to go forward. Bianca’s attorney agrees. Ioan’s attorney brings up the Family Code as well as a case decided in April of 2023 (A.F. v. Jeffrey F.) which held that the court cannot appoint minor’s counsel in an action seeking relief under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act. The judge states that he hasn’t read that case, but will read it closely over lunch, and that the cases here are so intertwined that it’s difficult to separate them with regard to appointing a minor’s counsel. The judge acknowledges that the court cannot appoint a minor’s counsel in a CHRO proceeding but wants to make sure someone is advocating for Ella.
Anne Kiley states that Ella had every opportunity to have someone represent her; that Ella and her mother prepared the papers with someone’s help; and that Ella brought the request for the restraining order and appeared to seek the restraining order. She could have hired an attorney and she hasn’t.
Alice interrupts the court.
Alice: “Her wants to—sorry. Can you please—”
Judge: “Yes, ma’am?”
Ella: “I’m confused. Like, I don’t know what’s going on.”
The Judge explains to Ella that in a family law case, the court has the authority to appoint minor’s counsel, whereas in a domestic violence proceeding, the court doesn’t have the authority to appoint minor’s counsel. So, the Judge explained that he was trying to see if there was an argument to distinguish Ella’s case from others and appoint minor’s counsel for her. He said, “My instinct is that we go forward after lunch and we don’t have minor’s counsel. And I assume you’re fine with that, because I haven’t heard you ask for an attorney, I haven’t heard you—you certainly didn’t prepare any of your documents and—you know, you’re representing yourself; correct?”
Ella: “I don’t really know. I thought—like I hoped to get one.”
Judge: “Well, I don’t have the authority to appoint one. If you wanted to go out on your own and hire one, I think you have the prerogative to do that.
Ella: “Okay.”
Judge: “But you didn’t do that. And so, I suppose if you wanted to do that, you could.”
Ella: “Okay.”
Judge: “That’s up to you.”
Ella: “Could I—”
Gregory Jessner states that he would oppose a continuance of the matter. The Judge inquires further of Ella.
Judge: “Ella, do you feel like you want to go forward today if you didn’t have a lawyer? Do you know what you want to do?”
Ella: “No. I don’t want to push it if I don’t have—”
Judge: “Okay. You understand that the court doesn’t have the authority to—I don’t believe, have—to appoint one for you. And so, that would mean that if I were to entertain a continuance, you would have to go out and get your own lawyer. Do you understand that?
Ella nods affirmatively.
-END OF PART 1-
I have ADHD so this doesn't count for a great deal but anyone waiting for the link to the final document is a more disciplined person that I am
Jesus Christ, that poor child.
What a bleeping mess. Her mother put her through that.PART 1
Why would you go into debt to go to a Fan Convention. That makes no sense. My two older boys just went to Vegas for the Final Fantasy Convention that they paid for out of their own pockets. They decided two years ago that they wanted to go, then saved their own money to pay for it. And they had a ball and spent 1/3 of what the A&F Con asks. Plus it was Vegas Baby! not some one horse town which is what Conyers looks like from its Website. It smelled like a rat from the beginning. I guess there's a sucker born every minute
Thank you @CookieMonsta, we’ve had a lovely day, lots of laughter, teasing, and reminiscin. We went out to eat as my anniversary present to Mr Looo was a night off from my cookingHappy Anniversary Lulooo and Mr Lulooo
"Alice interrupts the Judge"
Christ on a bike. Alice has just shown this to be her doing by her interruptions. Poor Ella too, she’s clearly out of her league here. bleeping Alice making her do this.
So Alice showing she knows FA and she has made it doubly difficult for Ella. Own goal to Alice. Actually 2 own goals to Alice.
Waiting with bated breath for Act II in what promises to be a French farce ( the elements of clowning, acrobatics, caricature, and indecency found together within a single form of entertainment.)
Waiting with bated breath for Act II in what promises to be a French farce ( the elements of clowning, acrobatics, caricature, and indecency found together within a single form of entertainment.)
Thread title, surely.
Ok I stopped to read this and already this goes against Alices narrative! She was accusing Anne and Ioan of being underhanded and making sure Ella didn’t have a lawyer. It was her own fault! She didn’t hire one. Seems she wanted to delay again to drag it out. She lied about all of this. It was the judge who said he can’t appoint a lawyer. Wow. Clearly Alice was told this yet she blamed Ioan.
Wow.
Alice really did feed her own daughter to the wolves.
Alice really did feed her own daughter to the wolves.
Just watched that Diane Downs programme you put up @CookieMonsta! Wow unbelievable and I see what you mean with regards to some of the similar inappropriate emotions that we have seen on recent posts. Gives you goose bumps really,I watched this news story on Diane Downs earlier today and in some ways Alice reminds me of her. The complete lack of appropriate emotion when she posts that comment of her kids being devastated if she were to kill herself in the same post saying there will be lots of receipts. I'm not suggesting Alice would kill her children but the complete self-absorption and lack of even understanding of appropriate emotion about the idea of or reality of her children being hurt is chilling.
---
Excuuuuuse ME! I'm first in line for the lady loving on Hiraeth thank you very much!
Ella thought the court would appoint one. Alice, trying to do things on the cheap again. Monster mother.
Of course she did. The child probably didn’t even understand what she was asking for.
And we already know how she'll spin this on twitter, sadly. "The judge said Ella couldn't have a lawyer! I didn't know I could have got her a lawyer!" (because Loopy misread all the documents). Not that twitter really matters, but whatever she's saying on twitter she's also screaming at the girls, and that's the sad part.
Ella knows EXACTLY what she is doing.
I've not said a word against her til now but that is disgraceful attempt to manipulate the judge.
I've not said a word against her til now but that is disgraceful attempt to manipulate the judge.
- Status