Yeah that’s all I could focus on - her filthy top!
My niece with the three little ones picked up just one day back at her work as her job as a pharmacy tech. It wasn't dire financially necessary - but it keeps her 401k, stock options, etc. And her husband works two jobs but she felt she needs to contribute to a growing food and clothes bill.
I just don’t get this idea of spousal support or my ex paying my way for a life I ‘deserve’… ok maybe if I was in debt and he was a millionaire… but seriously, making a way for myself and working hard for myself and my kids, spending 5 years working off joint debt that my ex walked away from… best feeling in the world. It was hard but my god it makes me feel like a powerful woman and a kick ass Mum. It’s a shame that Alice is so hung up on what she should have, and she’s so entitled… she will be so much happier if she takes a different approach. But that of course applies to so many aspects of her life and likely will never happen… I think she wants to be miserable. Forever. Just so she can blame him.
(that's 4 sets in the past 38 years and they have all been identical so not genetic. I thank God I couldn't get pregnant) found out that daycare will cost her approximately 700 US dollars a week.I think Alice is about to learn the difference between her 1st Amendment rights and harassment.
She has 100% perjured herself.
www.bostonglobe.com
When Ioan left he basically left all his belongings behind didn't he?
Lucky for Alice she did a lot of it in private to his phone and his mums email. Her social media use wasn’t even the main focus of the TROIn 2020, Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that: “Divorcing couples have a First Amendment right to disparage each other on social media even if probate judges are worried the bitterness will impact the mental health of children caught between their warring parents, the state’s highest court has ruled.”
Obviously, Massachusetts precedent would not have authority over California law but this is a fascinating interpretation on the matter and, despite this ruling not having precedent over California, Alice’s lawyers are not barred from introducing this argument to potentially influence how California case law is eventually molded.
Divorcing couples have First Amendment right to disparage each other on social media, SJC rules - The Boston Globe
In a unanimous ruling, the state's highest court said free speech rights were wrongly curtailed by a non-disparagement order forbidding the husband or wife from posting about the divorce on Facebook and other social media sites until their child turned 14.
Sorry been affa busy this weekend (not with any kind of fun but with 14 hour shifts unfortunately lol) - I must have missed this, what happened with Victoria?
Why do people want balance? Maybe people enjoying reading different viewpoints and considering different perspectives? It's a healthy thing to do, IMO. We can accept Alice has behaved despicably and hurt/continues to hurt people but also discuss how the situation must have been hard for her. In acknowledging that, we're not saying it's okay that she's been acting abhorrently, we're just acknowledging the full picture.
A *little* Vaseline on the lens, Alice - not the whole tub!
The balance argument was more relevant 12 months ago. So much has changed. It’s not that people do not want it, it’s that despite having balance, there is never a good reason or excuse to harass someone like she has been. You can’t balance out Ioan’s involvement based on what Alice has told you. She is a liar. He has never spoken up and the only information you have from Ioan is that he says he didn’t cheat, left a marriage and tried to divorce Alice collaboratively
