Former Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax - murder/suicide?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some real ogres on this thread.

Mrs. Fairfax is the victim. She likely was trying to do what was best for the kids. So sad.

Remember, at one time she loved him--maybe, she still did. Just proves that if a smart, educated woman cannot figure this out, how can those with fewer advantages?

Yes we know she was the victim. That is totally clear. And maybe this was the inevitable outcome no matter what she did. But I think it is really important for women to know that bad situations can get worse and nothing is worth staying with a spiraling or unstable man. Do what you can to get out even if it means living in a small apartment, your kids switching schools, whatever. Call a lawyer with DV experience and figure it out.

Stop. There is nothing to “figure out” here. She had a lawyer, she had a court proceeding, and the judge was more focused on giving her husband hype talks as if that man had anything good left to salvage, than protecting her.

There is a reason why women in this situation kidnap their kids and go into hiding - it’s because that is your only option. And for a woman who grew up dirt poor, I’m sure she wanted to do all she could to spare her children from that same fate.

She told friends her lawyer advised her she’d risk being found to have abandoned the home if she moved out.

Then she got bad legal advice. There is no legal requirement that you extend the misery of living with someone spiraling for years while a divorce moves forward. Or you prioritize your stability over the prospect that you could lose some equity.

If your spouse started abusing you, you would probably do the same thing. That’s the crux here. You’re so worried about you, you are projecting blame on to her. Please stop. And see a shrink, because you have problems.

What? No. I was in a mildly abusive situation and my friend was in a worse one. Neither of us prioritized some small gain in financial outcomes over getting away from our ex. It is not blaming Celina to say she was poorly advised. It is helping other women.

Some small gain? Seriously? And any situation that ends in murder is not “mildly abusive.” I’m sorry your spouse called you names.

Come back when he filed false reports against you, repeatedly threatened suicide as emotional blackmail, abandoned any financial contribution to his family and started wrecking up debt that could accrue to you, bought a gun with your kids activity money, and spent his days at the bottom of a bottle. And probably threatened to use his law license to make your life (ie your children’s lives) hell.

Then you can instruct is how you got out of that, and I will tell you that maybe you’re not so innocent because you picked an abuser in the first place.

So your idea is that we should advise women they need to stay in the same house as a spiraling, abuse man with a gun because they may give him a ground to claim fault in a divorce?

Lawyers don't generally tell their clients whether to stay or leave. They advise their clients of the risks of various choices and leave it to the client to decide what risk/benefit they're comfortable with. I really hope this is a wake-up call to the legislature about "desertion" being a ground for at-fault divorce in Virginia.

Well I was worried my ex would stop paying. Virginia doesn't care who pays for stuff so this is another issue. If you leave because of fear but still pay your share and arrange for help for the kids or whatever thats different than just deserting to be with your fling overseas.

The judge has an enormous amount of discretion in deciding what constitutes desertion vs justified departure. That’s why it’s so risky. You don’t know which judge you’ll get, whether they’re a men’s rights activist, and what they’ll personally conclude about the facts and circumstances of your case.

Well at a certain point you need to choose santity and safety. I’m sorry her lawyer wasn’t helping her figure that out.

The lawyer would not be doing their job by failing to advise the client of the legal risks associated with any decision, no matter how unjust the risk is.

I’m sorry, no lawyer anywhere is obligated to tell an abused woman she has to stay in the marital home. It’s the opposite.

You’re deliberately missing the point. No lawyer says “you must stay in the home.” The lawyer has a very real obligation to explain that in Virginia, deserting the home can make the divorce at-fault. If the woman is found at-fault, than can reduce the allocation of assets, eliminate spousal support, and potentially influence custody decisions. The defense to desertion is “justifiable departure,” but the lawyer has to advise that there is no guarantee the woman will win that defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some real ogres on this thread.

Mrs. Fairfax is the victim. She likely was trying to do what was best for the kids. So sad.

Remember, at one time she loved him--maybe, she still did. Just proves that if a smart, educated woman cannot figure this out, how can those with fewer advantages?

Yes we know she was the victim. That is totally clear. And maybe this was the inevitable outcome no matter what she did. But I think it is really important for women to know that bad situations can get worse and nothing is worth staying with a spiraling or unstable man. Do what you can to get out even if it means living in a small apartment, your kids switching schools, whatever. Call a lawyer with DV experience and figure it out.

Stop. There is nothing to “figure out” here. She had a lawyer, she had a court proceeding, and the judge was more focused on giving her husband hype talks as if that man had anything good left to salvage, than protecting her.

There is a reason why women in this situation kidnap their kids and go into hiding - it’s because that is your only option. And for a woman who grew up dirt poor, I’m sure she wanted to do all she could to spare her children from that same fate.

She told friends her lawyer advised her she’d risk being found to have abandoned the home if she moved out.

Then she got bad legal advice. There is no legal requirement that you extend the misery of living with someone spiraling for years while a divorce moves forward. Or you prioritize your stability over the prospect that you could lose some equity.

Well, if you want to keep your kids, there is. You keep on glossing over that.

You don’t lose custody of your kids if you move out and get a temporary custody plan.

You are not helping women here.

That means leaving the children alone with a violent abuser. Please be honest about what you are recommending women do here. You are saying abused women should move out, leave their minor children alone with a violent abusive man, and hope for the best with a temporary custody order.

Be very honest about what your recommendation for abused women is here. Don’t hide behind vagueness. And then tell us why you think your plan is a good idea for abused women.

Please be honest about what YOU are saying - women have to stay in the same house even with a dramatic breakdown of the relationship. It’s just not true. It is a difficult situation but there are legal options. Not saying it always works out but the idea of complete lack of power and agency is wrong too. Pick yourself up and get out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is reported they were in the middle of a messy divorce. So awful.

Ugh. Another layer of awful.

In Virginia, you must be separated for a year in order to get divorced and you can live in the same house while being separated (if you move you it can be seen by the court as abandoning your claim to the house, happened to my cousin). Reports are that the couple had started this process so I am not surprised they were both still living in the house.

Fairfax made an accusation against his wife earlier this year that she had physically assaulted him. Apparently she had cameras in the house and after reviewing the footage the police determined the assault claim wasn't valid and there was a scheduled upcoming court date re this incident which could be what triggered the current awful events.

There were 2 teen sons in the house. This is absolutely awful.

I hope this is a wake up call to change the law re: leaving the home. It forces women into staying in a potentially very dangerous situation.

That and the 1 year separation. What is the purpose??
Tragic.

Maryland recently shortened their one year separation requirement to six months if there are no children in the marriage. I think the rationale is that the state has an interest in wanting couples to be sure they need to get a divorce before they do? Not supporting this.

The part they need to change is about "home abandonment." Fine, make people wait, but don't penalize their assets for leaving to do so.

Can someone point me to the Virginia law(s) that make it financially risky to move out of the house before the divorce is finalized? What an insane game of gotcha for a couple in a contentious divorce. I hate everything about this story.

I don’t know the law but a friend of mine moved out of the marital home while her ex was away on a business trip and he claimed she had abandoned the home (as in abandoned her financial claim to the home) and the judge agreed, so the ex got the house and didn’t have to buy her out. This was 10 years ago in NOVA.

That is an outrageous law.

Virginia is incredible regressive when it comes to women's rights in marriage. It would behoove people outraged to call their elected officials rather than blame and express incredulity toward a woman just murdered by her husband.

I’m in blue California and have a close friend in a situation very similar to Cerina’s and the family court system is incredibly stacked against her. There is hard evidence (photos, witness testimony) of abuse and the courts will still give the abusive SAHD custody and she was told she couldn’t leave the house for abandonment reasons, not that she would have because she would never have left her kids. She was only able to leave when her kids were old enough to state their own wishes and even then, the courts bent over backwards to protect custody for dad, so she pays her documented abuser significant child support but his kids won’t stay with him, so he just pockets the money.

The reasoning behind protecting the abusive spouse is far left progressive perhaps, unlike VA, but the practical anti-woman outcome is the same.

Please stop this misinformation. Women are always able to leave. (Men too for that matter.) Women need to face reality and pick a healthy living situation and ideally get rid of bad men before the situation becomes extreme.

What misinformation, exactly? What about a situation I have recounted precisely is “misinformation”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some real ogres on this thread.

Mrs. Fairfax is the victim. She likely was trying to do what was best for the kids. So sad.

Remember, at one time she loved him--maybe, she still did. Just proves that if a smart, educated woman cannot figure this out, how can those with fewer advantages?

Yes we know she was the victim. That is totally clear. And maybe this was the inevitable outcome no matter what she did. But I think it is really important for women to know that bad situations can get worse and nothing is worth staying with a spiraling or unstable man. Do what you can to get out even if it means living in a small apartment, your kids switching schools, whatever. Call a lawyer with DV experience and figure it out.

Stop. There is nothing to “figure out” here. She had a lawyer, she had a court proceeding, and the judge was more focused on giving her husband hype talks as if that man had anything good left to salvage, than protecting her.

There is a reason why women in this situation kidnap their kids and go into hiding - it’s because that is your only option. And for a woman who grew up dirt poor, I’m sure she wanted to do all she could to spare her children from that same fate.

She told friends her lawyer advised her she’d risk being found to have abandoned the home if she moved out.

Then she got bad legal advice. There is no legal requirement that you extend the misery of living with someone spiraling for years while a divorce moves forward. Or you prioritize your stability over the prospect that you could lose some equity.

If your spouse started abusing you, you would probably do the same thing. That’s the crux here. You’re so worried about you, you are projecting blame on to her. Please stop. And see a shrink, because you have problems.

What? No. I was in a mildly abusive situation and my friend was in a worse one. Neither of us prioritized some small gain in financial outcomes over getting away from our ex. It is not blaming Celina to say she was poorly advised. It is helping other women.

Some small gain? Seriously? And any situation that ends in murder is not “mildly abusive.” I’m sorry your spouse called you names.

Come back when he filed false reports against you, repeatedly threatened suicide as emotional blackmail, abandoned any financial contribution to his family and started wrecking up debt that could accrue to you, bought a gun with your kids activity money, and spent his days at the bottom of a bottle. And probably threatened to use his law license to make your life (ie your children’s lives) hell.

Then you can instruct is how you got out of that, and I will tell you that maybe you’re not so innocent because you picked an abuser in the first place.

So your idea is that we should advise women they need to stay in the same house as a spiraling, abuse man with a gun because they may give him a ground to claim fault in a divorce?

Lawyers don't generally tell their clients whether to stay or leave. They advise their clients of the risks of various choices and leave it to the client to decide what risk/benefit they're comfortable with. I really hope this is a wake-up call to the legislature about "desertion" being a ground for at-fault divorce in Virginia.

Well I was worried my ex would stop paying. Virginia doesn't care who pays for stuff so this is another issue. If you leave because of fear but still pay your share and arrange for help for the kids or whatever thats different than just deserting to be with your fling overseas.

The judge has an enormous amount of discretion in deciding what constitutes desertion vs justified departure. That’s why it’s so risky. You don’t know which judge you’ll get, whether they’re a men’s rights activist, and what they’ll personally conclude about the facts and circumstances of your case.

Well at a certain point you need to choose santity and safety. I’m sorry her lawyer wasn’t helping her figure that out.

The lawyer would not be doing their job by failing to advise the client of the legal risks associated with any decision, no matter how unjust the risk is.

I’m sorry, no lawyer anywhere is obligated to tell an abused woman she has to stay in the marital home. It’s the opposite.

You’re deliberately missing the point. No lawyer says “you must stay in the home.” The lawyer has a very real obligation to explain that in Virginia, deserting the home can make the divorce at-fault. If the woman is found at-fault, than can reduce the allocation of assets, eliminate spousal support, and potentially influence custody decisions. The defense to desertion is “justifiable departure,” but the lawyer has to advise that there is no guarantee the woman will win that defense.

If a lawyer knows his client or the children are at physical risk in the home then he certainly needs to take steps to prevent that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is reported they were in the middle of a messy divorce. So awful.

Ugh. Another layer of awful.

In Virginia, you must be separated for a year in order to get divorced and you can live in the same house while being separated (if you move you it can be seen by the court as abandoning your claim to the house, happened to my cousin). Reports are that the couple had started this process so I am not surprised they were both still living in the house.

Fairfax made an accusation against his wife earlier this year that she had physically assaulted him. Apparently she had cameras in the house and after reviewing the footage the police determined the assault claim wasn't valid and there was a scheduled upcoming court date re this incident which could be what triggered the current awful events.

There were 2 teen sons in the house. This is absolutely awful.

I hope this is a wake up call to change the law re: leaving the home. It forces women into staying in a potentially very dangerous situation.

That and the 1 year separation. What is the purpose??
Tragic.

Maryland recently shortened their one year separation requirement to six months if there are no children in the marriage. I think the rationale is that the state has an interest in wanting couples to be sure they need to get a divorce before they do? Not supporting this.

The part they need to change is about "home abandonment." Fine, make people wait, but don't penalize their assets for leaving to do so.

Can someone point me to the Virginia law(s) that make it financially risky to move out of the house before the divorce is finalized? What an insane game of gotcha for a couple in a contentious divorce. I hate everything about this story.

I don’t know the law but a friend of mine moved out of the marital home while her ex was away on a business trip and he claimed she had abandoned the home (as in abandoned her financial claim to the home) and the judge agreed, so the ex got the house and didn’t have to buy her out. This was 10 years ago in NOVA.

That is an outrageous law.

Virginia is incredible regressive when it comes to women's rights in marriage. It would behoove people outraged to call their elected officials rather than blame and express incredulity toward a woman just murdered by her husband.

I’m in blue California and have a close friend in a situation very similar to Cerina’s and the family court system is incredibly stacked against her. There is hard evidence (photos, witness testimony) of abuse and the courts will still give the abusive SAHD custody and she was told she couldn’t leave the house for abandonment reasons, not that she would have because she would never have left her kids. She was only able to leave when her kids were old enough to state their own wishes and even then, the courts bent over backwards to protect custody for dad, so she pays her documented abuser significant child support but his kids won’t stay with him, so he just pockets the money.

The reasoning behind protecting the abusive spouse is far left progressive perhaps, unlike VA, but the practical anti-woman outcome is the same.

Please stop this misinformation. Women are always able to leave. (Men too for that matter.) Women need to face reality and pick a healthy living situation and ideally get rid of bad men before the situation becomes extreme.

What misinformation, exactly? What about a situation I have recounted precisely is “misinformation”?

That abused women have no option other than to stay in the home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some real ogres on this thread.

Mrs. Fairfax is the victim. She likely was trying to do what was best for the kids. So sad.

Remember, at one time she loved him--maybe, she still did. Just proves that if a smart, educated woman cannot figure this out, how can those with fewer advantages?

Yes we know she was the victim. That is totally clear. And maybe this was the inevitable outcome no matter what she did. But I think it is really important for women to know that bad situations can get worse and nothing is worth staying with a spiraling or unstable man. Do what you can to get out even if it means living in a small apartment, your kids switching schools, whatever. Call a lawyer with DV experience and figure it out.

Stop. There is nothing to “figure out” here. She had a lawyer, she had a court proceeding, and the judge was more focused on giving her husband hype talks as if that man had anything good left to salvage, than protecting her.

There is a reason why women in this situation kidnap their kids and go into hiding - it’s because that is your only option. And for a woman who grew up dirt poor, I’m sure she wanted to do all she could to spare her children from that same fate.

She told friends her lawyer advised her she’d risk being found to have abandoned the home if she moved out.

Then she got bad legal advice. There is no legal requirement that you extend the misery of living with someone spiraling for years while a divorce moves forward. Or you prioritize your stability over the prospect that you could lose some equity.

If your spouse started abusing you, you would probably do the same thing. That’s the crux here. You’re so worried about you, you are projecting blame on to her. Please stop. And see a shrink, because you have problems.

What? No. I was in a mildly abusive situation and my friend was in a worse one. Neither of us prioritized some small gain in financial outcomes over getting away from our ex. It is not blaming Celina to say she was poorly advised. It is helping other women.

Some small gain? Seriously? And any situation that ends in murder is not “mildly abusive.” I’m sorry your spouse called you names.

Come back when he filed false reports against you, repeatedly threatened suicide as emotional blackmail, abandoned any financial contribution to his family and started wrecking up debt that could accrue to you, bought a gun with your kids activity money, and spent his days at the bottom of a bottle. And probably threatened to use his law license to make your life (ie your children’s lives) hell.

Then you can instruct is how you got out of that, and I will tell you that maybe you’re not so innocent because you picked an abuser in the first place.

So your idea is that we should advise women they need to stay in the same house as a spiraling, abuse man with a gun because they may give him a ground to claim fault in a divorce?

Lawyers don't generally tell their clients whether to stay or leave. They advise their clients of the risks of various choices and leave it to the client to decide what risk/benefit they're comfortable with. I really hope this is a wake-up call to the legislature about "desertion" being a ground for at-fault divorce in Virginia.

Well I was worried my ex would stop paying. Virginia doesn't care who pays for stuff so this is another issue. If you leave because of fear but still pay your share and arrange for help for the kids or whatever thats different than just deserting to be with your fling overseas.

The judge has an enormous amount of discretion in deciding what constitutes desertion vs justified departure. That’s why it’s so risky. You don’t know which judge you’ll get, whether they’re a men’s rights activist, and what they’ll personally conclude about the facts and circumstances of your case.

Well at a certain point you need to choose santity and safety. I’m sorry her lawyer wasn’t helping her figure that out.

The lawyer would not be doing their job by failing to advise the client of the legal risks associated with any decision, no matter how unjust the risk is.

I’m sorry, no lawyer anywhere is obligated to tell an abused woman she has to stay in the marital home. It’s the opposite.

You’re deliberately missing the point. No lawyer says “you must stay in the home.” The lawyer has a very real obligation to explain that in Virginia, deserting the home can make the divorce at-fault. If the woman is found at-fault, than can reduce the allocation of assets, eliminate spousal support, and potentially influence custody decisions. The defense to desertion is “justifiable departure,” but the lawyer has to advise that there is no guarantee the woman will win that defense.

If a lawyer knows his client or the children are at physical risk in the home then he certainly needs to take steps to prevent that.

That is not the lawyer’s job. The lawyer’s job is to advise the client about their options and the potential ramifications of each choice. The lawyer should be empowering the client to make their own decision, not selecting for the client. You completely misunderstand the attorney-client relationship and the attorney’s duties to the client.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some real ogres on this thread.

Mrs. Fairfax is the victim. She likely was trying to do what was best for the kids. So sad.

Remember, at one time she loved him--maybe, she still did. Just proves that if a smart, educated woman cannot figure this out, how can those with fewer advantages?

Yes we know she was the victim. That is totally clear. And maybe this was the inevitable outcome no matter what she did. But I think it is really important for women to know that bad situations can get worse and nothing is worth staying with a spiraling or unstable man. Do what you can to get out even if it means living in a small apartment, your kids switching schools, whatever. Call a lawyer with DV experience and figure it out.

Stop. There is nothing to “figure out” here. She had a lawyer, she had a court proceeding, and the judge was more focused on giving her husband hype talks as if that man had anything good left to salvage, than protecting her.

There is a reason why women in this situation kidnap their kids and go into hiding - it’s because that is your only option. And for a woman who grew up dirt poor, I’m sure she wanted to do all she could to spare her children from that same fate.

She told friends her lawyer advised her she’d risk being found to have abandoned the home if she moved out.

Then she got bad legal advice. There is no legal requirement that you extend the misery of living with someone spiraling for years while a divorce moves forward. Or you prioritize your stability over the prospect that you could lose some equity.

If your spouse started abusing you, you would probably do the same thing. That’s the crux here. You’re so worried about you, you are projecting blame on to her. Please stop. And see a shrink, because you have problems.

What? No. I was in a mildly abusive situation and my friend was in a worse one. Neither of us prioritized some small gain in financial outcomes over getting away from our ex. It is not blaming Celina to say she was poorly advised. It is helping other women.

Some small gain? Seriously? And any situation that ends in murder is not “mildly abusive.” I’m sorry your spouse called you names.

Come back when he filed false reports against you, repeatedly threatened suicide as emotional blackmail, abandoned any financial contribution to his family and started wrecking up debt that could accrue to you, bought a gun with your kids activity money, and spent his days at the bottom of a bottle. And probably threatened to use his law license to make your life (ie your children’s lives) hell.

Then you can instruct is how you got out of that, and I will tell you that maybe you’re not so innocent because you picked an abuser in the first place.

So your idea is that we should advise women they need to stay in the same house as a spiraling, abuse man with a gun because they may give him a ground to claim fault in a divorce?

Lawyers don't generally tell their clients whether to stay or leave. They advise their clients of the risks of various choices and leave it to the client to decide what risk/benefit they're comfortable with. I really hope this is a wake-up call to the legislature about "desertion" being a ground for at-fault divorce in Virginia.

Well I was worried my ex would stop paying. Virginia doesn't care who pays for stuff so this is another issue. If you leave because of fear but still pay your share and arrange for help for the kids or whatever thats different than just deserting to be with your fling overseas.

The judge has an enormous amount of discretion in deciding what constitutes desertion vs justified departure. That’s why it’s so risky. You don’t know which judge you’ll get, whether they’re a men’s rights activist, and what they’ll personally conclude about the facts and circumstances of your case.

Well at a certain point you need to choose santity and safety. I’m sorry her lawyer wasn’t helping her figure that out.

The lawyer would not be doing their job by failing to advise the client of the legal risks associated with any decision, no matter how unjust the risk is.

I’m sorry, no lawyer anywhere is obligated to tell an abused woman she has to stay in the marital home. It’s the opposite.

You’re deliberately missing the point. No lawyer says “you must stay in the home.” The lawyer has a very real obligation to explain that in Virginia, deserting the home can make the divorce at-fault. If the woman is found at-fault, than can reduce the allocation of assets, eliminate spousal support, and potentially influence custody decisions. The defense to desertion is “justifiable departure,” but the lawyer has to advise that there is no guarantee the woman will win that defense.

If a lawyer knows his client or the children are at physical risk in the home then he certainly needs to take steps to prevent that.

That is not the lawyer’s job. The lawyer’s job is to advise the client about their options and the potential ramifications of each choice. The lawyer should be empowering the client to make their own decision, not selecting for the client. You completely misunderstand the attorney-client relationship and the attorney’s duties to the client.

wtf of course it is the lawyer’s job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some real ogres on this thread.

Mrs. Fairfax is the victim. She likely was trying to do what was best for the kids. So sad.

Remember, at one time she loved him--maybe, she still did. Just proves that if a smart, educated woman cannot figure this out, how can those with fewer advantages?

Yes we know she was the victim. That is totally clear. And maybe this was the inevitable outcome no matter what she did. But I think it is really important for women to know that bad situations can get worse and nothing is worth staying with a spiraling or unstable man. Do what you can to get out even if it means living in a small apartment, your kids switching schools, whatever. Call a lawyer with DV experience and figure it out.

Stop. There is nothing to “figure out” here. She had a lawyer, she had a court proceeding, and the judge was more focused on giving her husband hype talks as if that man had anything good left to salvage, than protecting her.

There is a reason why women in this situation kidnap their kids and go into hiding - it’s because that is your only option. And for a woman who grew up dirt poor, I’m sure she wanted to do all she could to spare her children from that same fate.

She told friends her lawyer advised her she’d risk being found to have abandoned the home if she moved out.

Then she got bad legal advice. There is no legal requirement that you extend the misery of living with someone spiraling for years while a divorce moves forward. Or you prioritize your stability over the prospect that you could lose some equity.

Well, if you want to keep your kids, there is. You keep on glossing over that.

You don’t lose custody of your kids if you move out and get a temporary custody plan.

You are not helping women here.

That means leaving the children alone with a violent abuser. Please be honest about what you are recommending women do here. You are saying abused women should move out, leave their minor children alone with a violent abusive man, and hope for the best with a temporary custody order.

Be very honest about what your recommendation for abused women is here. Don’t hide behind vagueness. And then tell us why you think your plan is a good idea for abused women.

Please be honest about what YOU are saying - women have to stay in the same house even with a dramatic breakdown of the relationship. It’s just not true. It is a difficult situation but there are legal options. Not saying it always works out but the idea of complete lack of power and agency is wrong too. Pick yourself up and get out.

You are twisting and turning to avoid saying with specificity what you are saying women married to abuser should do. So, since you won’t be honest, I’ll say it for you: you are saying that women with children in violent abusive relationships should leave their children with the violent abusers and leave the house, then seek temporary custody after having left the children with a violent abuser. That is your recommendation.

You are free to recommend that course of action, but most mothers, even ones being physically abused, will never leave their children unprotected and alone with a violent abuser.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some real ogres on this thread.

Mrs. Fairfax is the victim. She likely was trying to do what was best for the kids. So sad.

Remember, at one time she loved him--maybe, she still did. Just proves that if a smart, educated woman cannot figure this out, how can those with fewer advantages?

Yes we know she was the victim. That is totally clear. And maybe this was the inevitable outcome no matter what she did. But I think it is really important for women to know that bad situations can get worse and nothing is worth staying with a spiraling or unstable man. Do what you can to get out even if it means living in a small apartment, your kids switching schools, whatever. Call a lawyer with DV experience and figure it out.

Stop. There is nothing to “figure out” here. She had a lawyer, she had a court proceeding, and the judge was more focused on giving her husband hype talks as if that man had anything good left to salvage, than protecting her.

There is a reason why women in this situation kidnap their kids and go into hiding - it’s because that is your only option. And for a woman who grew up dirt poor, I’m sure she wanted to do all she could to spare her children from that same fate.

She told friends her lawyer advised her she’d risk being found to have abandoned the home if she moved out.

Then she got bad legal advice. There is no legal requirement that you extend the misery of living with someone spiraling for years while a divorce moves forward. Or you prioritize your stability over the prospect that you could lose some equity.

If your spouse started abusing you, you would probably do the same thing. That’s the crux here. You’re so worried about you, you are projecting blame on to her. Please stop. And see a shrink, because you have problems.

What? No. I was in a mildly abusive situation and my friend was in a worse one. Neither of us prioritized some small gain in financial outcomes over getting away from our ex. It is not blaming Celina to say she was poorly advised. It is helping other women.

Some small gain? Seriously? And any situation that ends in murder is not “mildly abusive.” I’m sorry your spouse called you names.

Come back when he filed false reports against you, repeatedly threatened suicide as emotional blackmail, abandoned any financial contribution to his family and started wrecking up debt that could accrue to you, bought a gun with your kids activity money, and spent his days at the bottom of a bottle. And probably threatened to use his law license to make your life (ie your children’s lives) hell.

Then you can instruct is how you got out of that, and I will tell you that maybe you’re not so innocent because you picked an abuser in the first place.

So your idea is that we should advise women they need to stay in the same house as a spiraling, abuse man with a gun because they may give him a ground to claim fault in a divorce?

Lawyers don't generally tell their clients whether to stay or leave. They advise their clients of the risks of various choices and leave it to the client to decide what risk/benefit they're comfortable with. I really hope this is a wake-up call to the legislature about "desertion" being a ground for at-fault divorce in Virginia.

Well I was worried my ex would stop paying. Virginia doesn't care who pays for stuff so this is another issue. If you leave because of fear but still pay your share and arrange for help for the kids or whatever thats different than just deserting to be with your fling overseas.

The judge has an enormous amount of discretion in deciding what constitutes desertion vs justified departure. That’s why it’s so risky. You don’t know which judge you’ll get, whether they’re a men’s rights activist, and what they’ll personally conclude about the facts and circumstances of your case.

Well at a certain point you need to choose santity and safety. I’m sorry her lawyer wasn’t helping her figure that out.

The lawyer would not be doing their job by failing to advise the client of the legal risks associated with any decision, no matter how unjust the risk is.

I’m sorry, no lawyer anywhere is obligated to tell an abused woman she has to stay in the marital home. It’s the opposite.

You’re deliberately missing the point. No lawyer says “you must stay in the home.” The lawyer has a very real obligation to explain that in Virginia, deserting the home can make the divorce at-fault. If the woman is found at-fault, than can reduce the allocation of assets, eliminate spousal support, and potentially influence custody decisions. The defense to desertion is “justifiable departure,” but the lawyer has to advise that there is no guarantee the woman will win that defense.

If a lawyer knows his client or the children are at physical risk in the home then he certainly needs to take steps to prevent that.

That is not the lawyer’s job. The lawyer’s job is to advise the client about their options and the potential ramifications of each choice. The lawyer should be empowering the client to make their own decision, not selecting for the client. You completely misunderstand the attorney-client relationship and the attorney’s duties to the client.

wtf of course it is the lawyer’s job.

You’re clearly not a lawyer, much less one who works with abuse victims. You don’t make the decisions as a lawyer, the client does. Your job is to accurately advise the client about their options. You do not make decisions like that for the client. And you cannot breach attorney-client privilege except in extremely rare circumstances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is reported they were in the middle of a messy divorce. So awful.

Ugh. Another layer of awful.

In Virginia, you must be separated for a year in order to get divorced and you can live in the same house while being separated (if you move you it can be seen by the court as abandoning your claim to the house, happened to my cousin). Reports are that the couple had started this process so I am not surprised they were both still living in the house.

Fairfax made an accusation against his wife earlier this year that she had physically assaulted him. Apparently she had cameras in the house and after reviewing the footage the police determined the assault claim wasn't valid and there was a scheduled upcoming court date re this incident which could be what triggered the current awful events.

There were 2 teen sons in the house. This is absolutely awful.

I hope this is a wake up call to change the law re: leaving the home. It forces women into staying in a potentially very dangerous situation.

That and the 1 year separation. What is the purpose??
Tragic.

Maryland recently shortened their one year separation requirement to six months if there are no children in the marriage. I think the rationale is that the state has an interest in wanting couples to be sure they need to get a divorce before they do? Not supporting this.

The part they need to change is about "home abandonment." Fine, make people wait, but don't penalize their assets for leaving to do so.

Can someone point me to the Virginia law(s) that make it financially risky to move out of the house before the divorce is finalized? What an insane game of gotcha for a couple in a contentious divorce. I hate everything about this story.

I don’t know the law but a friend of mine moved out of the marital home while her ex was away on a business trip and he claimed she had abandoned the home (as in abandoned her financial claim to the home) and the judge agreed, so the ex got the house and didn’t have to buy her out. This was 10 years ago in NOVA.

That is an outrageous law.

Virginia is incredible regressive when it comes to women's rights in marriage. It would behoove people outraged to call their elected officials rather than blame and express incredulity toward a woman just murdered by her husband.

I’m in blue California and have a close friend in a situation very similar to Cerina’s and the family court system is incredibly stacked against her. There is hard evidence (photos, witness testimony) of abuse and the courts will still give the abusive SAHD custody and she was told she couldn’t leave the house for abandonment reasons, not that she would have because she would never have left her kids. She was only able to leave when her kids were old enough to state their own wishes and even then, the courts bent over backwards to protect custody for dad, so she pays her documented abuser significant child support but his kids won’t stay with him, so he just pockets the money.

The reasoning behind protecting the abusive spouse is far left progressive perhaps, unlike VA, but the practical anti-woman outcome is the same.

Please stop this misinformation. Women are always able to leave. (Men too for that matter.) Women need to face reality and pick a healthy living situation and ideally get rid of bad men before the situation becomes extreme.

What misinformation, exactly? What about a situation I have recounted precisely is “misinformation”?

That abused women have no option other than to stay in the home.

Are you the same ignorant poster who keeps recommending abused women leave their children with the abuser? If so, you are too uninformed to be engaged in this discussion.

There is no good option for abused women with children under the law of most states. The family court system protects the abuser. That is grim reality. You are living in some crazy idealistic dreamworld and sound increasingly uninformed.

My friend’s situation in California is not unusual. It is reflective of the current state of the law in California.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some real ogres on this thread.

Mrs. Fairfax is the victim. She likely was trying to do what was best for the kids. So sad.

Remember, at one time she loved him--maybe, she still did. Just proves that if a smart, educated woman cannot figure this out, how can those with fewer advantages?

Yes we know she was the victim. That is totally clear. And maybe this was the inevitable outcome no matter what she did. But I think it is really important for women to know that bad situations can get worse and nothing is worth staying with a spiraling or unstable man. Do what you can to get out even if it means living in a small apartment, your kids switching schools, whatever. Call a lawyer with DV experience and figure it out.

Stop. There is nothing to “figure out” here. She had a lawyer, she had a court proceeding, and the judge was more focused on giving her husband hype talks as if that man had anything good left to salvage, than protecting her.

There is a reason why women in this situation kidnap their kids and go into hiding - it’s because that is your only option. And for a woman who grew up dirt poor, I’m sure she wanted to do all she could to spare her children from that same fate.

She told friends her lawyer advised her she’d risk being found to have abandoned the home if she moved out.

Then she got bad legal advice. There is no legal requirement that you extend the misery of living with someone spiraling for years while a divorce moves forward. Or you prioritize your stability over the prospect that you could lose some equity.

Well, if you want to keep your kids, there is. You keep on glossing over that.

You don’t lose custody of your kids if you move out and get a temporary custody plan.

You are not helping women here.

That means leaving the children alone with a violent abuser. Please be honest about what you are recommending women do here. You are saying abused women should move out, leave their minor children alone with a violent abusive man, and hope for the best with a temporary custody order.

Be very honest about what your recommendation for abused women is here. Don’t hide behind vagueness. And then tell us why you think your plan is a good idea for abused women.

Please be honest about what YOU are saying - women have to stay in the same house even with a dramatic breakdown of the relationship. It’s just not true. It is a difficult situation but there are legal options. Not saying it always works out but the idea of complete lack of power and agency is wrong too. Pick yourself up and get out.

You are twisting and turning to avoid saying with specificity what you are saying women married to abuser should do. So, since you won’t be honest, I’ll say it for you: you are saying that women with children in violent abusive relationships should leave their children with the violent abusers and leave the house, then seek temporary custody after having left the children with a violent abuser. That is your recommendation.

You are free to recommend that course of action, but most mothers, even ones being physically abused, will never leave their children unprotected and alone with a violent abuser.

Adding here that then the court or opposing counsel could argue, "Well, she left the kids with him [the abuser], so how bad could he really be?" Then she has an even more uphill battle for custody.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really irritated by all the social media posts I'm seeing blaming the rape victims for this as though 1) they weren't actually telling the truth and 2) that somehow explains murder.

+1. The story goes that Justin Fairfax was so despondent over these “false allegations” that he “spiraled into mental illness” and then just had to kill the mother of his children. PUHLEESE. Murder suicide is not about mental illness, it’s about control. If I can’t have it, you can’t either.

Now that the 48 hours is up, let’s just say I had the ick on this guy and I feel vindicated. The way he made it absolutely clear that he felt entitled to the governorship after Northam’s blackface scandal came out as a matter of racial justice, all the while knowing he had multiple and more recent gender violence skeletons in his own closet, just struck me as so cynical and gross. This guy amplified Republican crap, lead the pile on, and went after an objectively decent man who was doing good for Virginians because it served his own ambitions.

Not to excuse what Northam did one bit, but the 80s in the South was a different time. The consensus on blackface being unequivocally bad is a relatively recent cultural development. He was caught flat footed and rightfully paid the price.

But we all knew rape and assault were bad in the 2000s.

Both men saw the end of their political careers, but Northam at least had a legacy of distinguished service to marginalized populations that he could fall back on. Fairfax apparently was a miserable, lying drunk whose own wife installed cameras in her home to protect herself.

It’s not like law firms shy away from aggressive lawyers with checkered pasts - people saw through this guy. All of his charm just hid the fact he was a narcissist who served no one it himself, and when people started to see that, he was cooked. Look at all the “friends” who wanted nothing to do with him after the scandal came out. Everyone suspected it was true.

All of this. He was a cowardly, rapey, murdering piece of sh*t. The mod of this site and other outlets are making up any and every excuse they can come up with because they too are tribal pieces of sh*t that will protect POC and Dems at all cost, even if that includes throwing women to their death.

+1 it’s gross.

+1

It is gross, but it’s 100% aligned with the current anti-woman bent of the Democrats. Just par for the course at this point.

Say the thugs who repeatedly bend over for a man who raped children and bragged about molesting beauty queens. Hit me again with your maternal deaths. Your bogus Bible literalism.

I’m a Democrat. And nobody said the Republicans were any better. You are just grasping for that immediately because you know it’s true the Democrats have enthusiastically leaned into misogyny. I mean, in this thread of all threads, you are going to reach for your talismanic prayer to Trump? You are proving the point.

What are you even talking about? And yeah right about being a Dem. You GOP thugs are salivating at the thought that it was a black Democrat who annihilated his family this time, and not another white conservative male with an arsenal.

You are a good example of a blue cultist, and why in polling the Democrats as a party remain less popular than the Republicans, even with a president as horrific as Trump.

Look at this thread. Look at it! It is an object lesson in Democratic failure and those of us who cling to some small hope of the Democrats maybe actively trying not to be genuinely awful are in despair. Of course I am a Democrat. I am just one who is profoundly disillusioned by the party, and this thread is a good object lesson in why. And I’m not alone. Outside of the blue cultists, the rest of Democrats are desperately trying to right the ship. People like you just want to sink it.

Absolutely. And true independents like DH and I will end up voting for the next Gary Johnson or whatever because neither party offers anything.

Np and I agree 100%.

The comments by people who proudly claim to be democrats are sickening.

I 100% do not understand the people saying this is an example of problems with Democrats. As soon as the allegations came out about Fairfax, the Dems dropped him like a hot potato. Unlike people on the right who continue to be embraced despite credible allegations. Dems don’t play with that sh-t. Even Franken, whom everyone liked and who was actually good at his job, got dumped.

Do you think it was a complete secret that he was an abusive jerk when the Democrats were initially promoting him? Like this is so, so surprising, goodness me nobody could have known?

It defies credibility. And this is a problem elsewhere in the party too. There were rumors about Swalwell’s behavior towards women for literally years, before he was even a representative. He got taken out by the party apparatus only now because the machine was afraid they’d lose California to the Republican with him on the race.

No, you are not going to convince me the Democrats care at all about the behaviors of their political candidates towards women. The party cares when they need to care, and at no other point.

So all Republicans would have to do is create bad-sounding whisper campaigns about promising young Democratic politicians and the party should just take them out of the running? What are you actually suggesting here?

DP. I guess everyone found out these were not some made up "whisper campaigns" when he killed her, huh?

Sounds like you would go right along with the Republican strategy for taking out the future Democratic talent pipeline. Well done.

A woman is dead and two kids are orphans and you’re worried about the dems’ “talent pipeline.”

Does it get any more sociopathic than that.

But you’re a dem, so it makes sense.

So your answer is yes. If you can't keep track of the various strains of conversation happening in this thread, you can go to timeout and take a breather.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is reported they were in the middle of a messy divorce. So awful.

Ugh. Another layer of awful.

In Virginia, you must be separated for a year in order to get divorced and you can live in the same house while being separated (if you move you it can be seen by the court as abandoning your claim to the house, happened to my cousin). Reports are that the couple had started this process so I am not surprised they were both still living in the house.

Fairfax made an accusation against his wife earlier this year that she had physically assaulted him. Apparently she had cameras in the house and after reviewing the footage the police determined the assault claim wasn't valid and there was a scheduled upcoming court date re this incident which could be what triggered the current awful events.

There were 2 teen sons in the house. This is absolutely awful.

I hope this is a wake up call to change the law re: leaving the home. It forces women into staying in a potentially very dangerous situation.

That and the 1 year separation. What is the purpose??
Tragic.

Maryland recently shortened their one year separation requirement to six months if there are no children in the marriage. I think the rationale is that the state has an interest in wanting couples to be sure they need to get a divorce before they do? Not supporting this.

The part they need to change is about "home abandonment." Fine, make people wait, but don't penalize their assets for leaving to do so.

Can someone point me to the Virginia law(s) that make it financially risky to move out of the house before the divorce is finalized? What an insane game of gotcha for a couple in a contentious divorce. I hate everything about this story.

I don’t know the law but a friend of mine moved out of the marital home while her ex was away on a business trip and he claimed she had abandoned the home (as in abandoned her financial claim to the home) and the judge agreed, so the ex got the house and didn’t have to buy her out. This was 10 years ago in NOVA.

That is an outrageous law.

Virginia is incredible regressive when it comes to women's rights in marriage. It would behoove people outraged to call their elected officials rather than blame and express incredulity toward a woman just murdered by her husband.

I’m in blue California and have a close friend in a situation very similar to Cerina’s and the family court system is incredibly stacked against her. There is hard evidence (photos, witness testimony) of abuse and the courts will still give the abusive SAHD custody and she was told she couldn’t leave the house for abandonment reasons, not that she would have because she would never have left her kids. She was only able to leave when her kids were old enough to state their own wishes and even then, the courts bent over backwards to protect custody for dad, so she pays her documented abuser significant child support but his kids won’t stay with him, so he just pockets the money.

The reasoning behind protecting the abusive spouse is far left progressive perhaps, unlike VA, but the practical anti-woman outcome is the same.

Please stop this misinformation. Women are always able to leave. (Men too for that matter.) Women need to face reality and pick a healthy living situation and ideally get rid of bad men before the situation becomes extreme.

What misinformation, exactly? What about a situation I have recounted precisely is “misinformation”?

That abused women have no option other than to stay in the home.

Dp: Of course, they also have the option to leave, and thus lose their rights, money, and possibly their kids. The law should not be forcing this lose-lose situation. What good reason is there for such a law that outweighs the needs to prevent this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is reported they were in the middle of a messy divorce. So awful.

Ugh. Another layer of awful.

In Virginia, you must be separated for a year in order to get divorced and you can live in the same house while being separated (if you move you it can be seen by the court as abandoning your claim to the house, happened to my cousin). Reports are that the couple had started this process so I am not surprised they were both still living in the house.

Fairfax made an accusation against his wife earlier this year that she had physically assaulted him. Apparently she had cameras in the house and after reviewing the footage the police determined the assault claim wasn't valid and there was a scheduled upcoming court date re this incident which could be what triggered the current awful events.

There were 2 teen sons in the house. This is absolutely awful.

I hope this is a wake up call to change the law re: leaving the home. It forces women into staying in a potentially very dangerous situation.

That and the 1 year separation. What is the purpose??
Tragic.

Maryland recently shortened their one year separation requirement to six months if there are no children in the marriage. I think the rationale is that the state has an interest in wanting couples to be sure they need to get a divorce before they do? Not supporting this.

The part they need to change is about "home abandonment." Fine, make people wait, but don't penalize their assets for leaving to do so.

Can someone point me to the Virginia law(s) that make it financially risky to move out of the house before the divorce is finalized? What an insane game of gotcha for a couple in a contentious divorce. I hate everything about this story.

I don’t know the law but a friend of mine moved out of the marital home while her ex was away on a business trip and he claimed she had abandoned the home (as in abandoned her financial claim to the home) and the judge agreed, so the ex got the house and didn’t have to buy her out. This was 10 years ago in NOVA.

That is an outrageous law.

Virginia is incredible regressive when it comes to women's rights in marriage. It would behoove people outraged to call their elected officials rather than blame and express incredulity toward a woman just murdered by her husband.

I’m in blue California and have a close friend in a situation very similar to Cerina’s and the family court system is incredibly stacked against her. There is hard evidence (photos, witness testimony) of abuse and the courts will still give the abusive SAHD custody and she was told she couldn’t leave the house for abandonment reasons, not that she would have because she would never have left her kids. She was only able to leave when her kids were old enough to state their own wishes and even then, the courts bent over backwards to protect custody for dad, so she pays her documented abuser significant child support but his kids won’t stay with him, so he just pockets the money.

The reasoning behind protecting the abusive spouse is far left progressive perhaps, unlike VA, but the practical anti-woman outcome is the same.

Please stop this misinformation. Women are always able to leave. (Men too for that matter.) Women need to face reality and pick a healthy living situation and ideally get rid of bad men before the situation becomes extreme.

What misinformation, exactly? What about a situation I have recounted precisely is “misinformation”?

That abused women have no option other than to stay in the home.

Dp: Of course, they also have the option to leave, and thus lose their rights, money, and possibly their kids. The law should not be forcing this lose-lose situation. What good reason is there for such a law that outweighs the needs to prevent this?

That's the point. There was no law saying that she had to stay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is reported they were in the middle of a messy divorce. So awful.

Ugh. Another layer of awful.

In Virginia, you must be separated for a year in order to get divorced and you can live in the same house while being separated (if you move you it can be seen by the court as abandoning your claim to the house, happened to my cousin). Reports are that the couple had started this process so I am not surprised they were both still living in the house.

Fairfax made an accusation against his wife earlier this year that she had physically assaulted him. Apparently she had cameras in the house and after reviewing the footage the police determined the assault claim wasn't valid and there was a scheduled upcoming court date re this incident which could be what triggered the current awful events.

There were 2 teen sons in the house. This is absolutely awful.

I hope this is a wake up call to change the law re: leaving the home. It forces women into staying in a potentially very dangerous situation.

That and the 1 year separation. What is the purpose??
Tragic.

Maryland recently shortened their one year separation requirement to six months if there are no children in the marriage. I think the rationale is that the state has an interest in wanting couples to be sure they need to get a divorce before they do? Not supporting this.

The part they need to change is about "home abandonment." Fine, make people wait, but don't penalize their assets for leaving to do so.

Can someone point me to the Virginia law(s) that make it financially risky to move out of the house before the divorce is finalized? What an insane game of gotcha for a couple in a contentious divorce. I hate everything about this story.

I don’t know the law but a friend of mine moved out of the marital home while her ex was away on a business trip and he claimed she had abandoned the home (as in abandoned her financial claim to the home) and the judge agreed, so the ex got the house and didn’t have to buy her out. This was 10 years ago in NOVA.

That is an outrageous law.

Virginia is incredible regressive when it comes to women's rights in marriage. It would behoove people outraged to call their elected officials rather than blame and express incredulity toward a woman just murdered by her husband.

I’m in blue California and have a close friend in a situation very similar to Cerina’s and the family court system is incredibly stacked against her. There is hard evidence (photos, witness testimony) of abuse and the courts will still give the abusive SAHD custody and she was told she couldn’t leave the house for abandonment reasons, not that she would have because she would never have left her kids. She was only able to leave when her kids were old enough to state their own wishes and even then, the courts bent over backwards to protect custody for dad, so she pays her documented abuser significant child support but his kids won’t stay with him, so he just pockets the money.

The reasoning behind protecting the abusive spouse is far left progressive perhaps, unlike VA, but the practical anti-woman outcome is the same.

Please stop this misinformation. Women are always able to leave. (Men too for that matter.) Women need to face reality and pick a healthy living situation and ideally get rid of bad men before the situation becomes extreme.

What misinformation, exactly? What about a situation I have recounted precisely is “misinformation”?

That abused women have no option other than to stay in the home.

Dp: Of course, they also have the option to leave, and thus lose their rights, money, and possibly their kids. The law should not be forcing this lose-lose situation. What good reason is there for such a law that outweighs the needs to prevent this?

That's the point. There was no law saying that she had to stay.

Y’all don’t understand what “law” is. Virginia recognizes desertion as a basis for granting an at-fault divorce.