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.

You are insane. Leaving doesn't stop abuse. There's a researcher in the UK named Emma Katz who has devoted her entire career to showing just exactly how bad post-separation abuse is, and over there they even have stricter laws against non-violent forms of abuse. In the Commonwealth of VA you pretty much have to be in fear of actual physical injury for pretty much any legal standard (harassment or the protective order standard, for instance) to kick in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were living in the house that they bought with two incomes, but relying on hers alone. In addition to not wanting the divorce to become at-fault, she may simply have lacked the funds to add a rental to her financial burden. From her perspective, the end was in sight. While he has accusations of sexual assault, there were no incidents of physical violence that she reported to police. She did not appear to have a case to get a protective order. She may not have felt fear of physical harm, or she felt uneasy but had no documented incidents to use to make a case to keep him away from her and her children.

Clearly, from the outside in hindsight we see the signs of fatal violence at the end of a relationship. But there are lots of deadbeat men who don’t kill their wives over a divorce.

I’m sure that was part of it and maybe she had other motives. But this was clearly a spiraling and dysfunctional situation regardless of how it ended. Having been through this and seeing my friends navigate the situation (and also reading DCUM posts about it) the lesson I think women need to hear is that at some point you need to prioritize getting out and establishing one stable home for yourself and your children. The money doesn’t matter.

But the money does matter. Because women trying to get out are in a catch-22. If you can't show you can provide a stable home for your kids, that matters for custody too.

Unless and until this country realizes what family court does to women in these situations, it won't get better. And study after study on this issue shows that family court is awful to women in these situations. Ironically one of the premier places where studies on this topic are done is Georgetown Law.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were living in the house that they bought with two incomes, but relying on hers alone. In addition to not wanting the divorce to become at-fault, she may simply have lacked the funds to add a rental to her financial burden. From her perspective, the end was in sight. While he has accusations of sexual assault, there were no incidents of physical violence that she reported to police. She did not appear to have a case to get a protective order. She may not have felt fear of physical harm, or she felt uneasy but had no documented incidents to use to make a case to keep him away from her and her children.

Clearly, from the outside in hindsight we see the signs of fatal violence at the end of a relationship. But there are lots of deadbeat men who don’t kill their wives over a divorce.

I’m sure that was part of it and maybe she had other motives. But this was clearly a spiraling and dysfunctional situation regardless of how it ended. Having been through this and seeing my friends navigate the situation (and also reading DCUM posts about it) the lesson I think women need to hear is that at some point you need to prioritize getting out and establishing one stable home for yourself and your children. The money doesn’t matter.

As has been repeated ad nauseum in this thread, but the incel troll keeps ignoring, women cannot leave with their children. They have to leave without their children or leave their kids with a violent abuser alone. What you suggest is that women have to make a Sophie’s Choice and most women will not abandon their children with a violent man.

Women can leave with their children, providing the husband some parenting time (50/50 if necessary). Saying that, their children were old enough to voice their preference to stay with the mother.

Since there was no evidence of physical abuse prior to this horrific event, the court surely would have mandated a custodial division that was reasonably generous to him. Would you be willing to leave your kids with a severely depressed narcissistic alcoholic, who showed no interest in caring for them and could potentially have hurt them due to his (misplaced) anger toward her? Come on.

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:

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.

I suspect she would be paying alimony as well since Fairfax didn't have any source of income.

That is probably the reason why she was fighting in court. I doubt the house has too much value. It is debts and spousal support that was an issue.

She was fighting in courts because she's married to an abuser. He wasn't about to settle when he has the opportunity to torture her and truly believed that he would win.

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: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.

I suspect she would be paying alimony as well since Fairfax didn't have any source of income.

That is probably the reason why she was fighting in court. I doubt the house has too much value. It is debts and spousal support that was an issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were living in the house that they bought with two incomes, but relying on hers alone. In addition to not wanting the divorce to become at-fault, she may simply have lacked the funds to add a rental to her financial burden. From her perspective, the end was in sight. While he has accusations of sexual assault, there were no incidents of physical violence that she reported to police. She did not appear to have a case to get a protective order. She may not have felt fear of physical harm, or she felt uneasy but had no documented incidents to use to make a case to keep him away from her and her children.

Clearly, from the outside in hindsight we see the signs of fatal violence at the end of a relationship. But there are lots of deadbeat men who don’t kill their wives over a divorce.

I’m sure that was part of it and maybe she had other motives. But this was clearly a spiraling and dysfunctional situation regardless of how it ended. Having been through this and seeing my friends navigate the situation (and also reading DCUM posts about it) the lesson I think women need to hear is that at some point you need to prioritize getting out and establishing one stable home for yourself and your children. The money doesn’t matter.

As has been repeated ad nauseum in this thread, but the incel troll keeps ignoring, women cannot leave with their children. They have to leave without their children or leave their kids with a violent abuser alone. What you suggest is that women have to make a Sophie’s Choice and most women will not abandon their children with a violent man.

Women can leave with their children, providing the husband some parenting time (50/50 if necessary). Saying that, their children were old enough to voice their preference to stay with the mother.

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?

Education is not always equal to common sense. She clearly was behind him when he was aspiring lawyer and politician. She clearly knew all of his characters flaws early on, and clearly saw him going downhill with alcoholism.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We really shouldn’t be judging how Cerina handled any of this. This woman was managing a household, her own private dental practice, and a ticking time bomb living in her house. Expecting her to make absolutely perfect clearheaded decisions isn’t right. It sounds like she tried her best and that’s all anyone really can do.

But also this was the likely outcome no matter where she lived. I'm the DV survivor that doesn't truly believe my ex couldn't still kill me today should his life suddenly go to sh!t. Abusers believe they own you and that you are the source of all their issues.

I’m sorry but no one would ever believe that a man who once loved you and had two children with you, plus a public profile, would ever be capable of murdering you and leaving his own kids in this state. No one would have called this a likely outcome at this time last week.

If we knew all the facts? Of course it would be clear he was deeply dysfunctional and had a gun. I wouldn’t have predicted it but 100% not surprised in retrospect.

My point is, if I had been in her shoes, I never would have dreamed it would come to this.

She put those cameras up for a reason

Probably due to false allegations of abuse by Lord Fairfax.

I think that was a bonus. She knew he was going to try something. She just didn’t know what

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could there be processes that get guns temporarily confiscated during family law proceedings if there has been red flag behaviors like alcoholism and fights? Just getting rid of the easy access might help in situations like this.

Virginia has red flag laws. But someone has to feel comfortable making the report without fear of retaliation. The person responsible for half your kids' tuition and the mortgage - you comfortable reporting on them?

She was a dentist, FFS. Of course she could afford to walk away, rent a small apartment, either cover kids' tuition by herself or put them into public school for a period of divorce. This is really bothers me - according to the article, she knew he purchased the gun in 2022. She knew for at least several months he was heavy drinker. She knew that he does not value human lives. Why was she staying in the same house with him?

You really, really don't understand abuse, the addicted family system, or the cost of divorce, do you.

Even if her lawyer charged her $150,000+ for divorce, she certainly can afford it.

You're vile. You have no idea what her personal financial circumstances are and your non stop criticism of her is disgusting. You have NO clue. It's clear you're a misogynistic jerk who hates women so step off.

We have an idea how much she was making, we have a rough idea how much she was spending. She chose to put the kids into expensive private schools and on expensive travel teams, while she could have secured a small apartment for herself and children in a good school district. She certailiy could afford it. Instead, she kept up with appearances. If you are in danger, you should always put your and your children safety first.

If you are going to say stupid, ill informed crap like that, you had best come with receipts. Please tell me how moving out would have saved her. Or was she supposed to abandon her dental practice and her only way of supporting her family and go into witness protection so you could deem her sufficiently not responsible for her own murder?

You’re part of the problem, PP. You have internalized the victim blaming mindset that allows men to abuse and murder their wives with impunity. Sit on that a bit.

Living in the same house during high contested divorce can blow up things out of proportion. Living in a separate households when you are not facing each other every single day can reduce conflicts and escalations. What I wrote is not a victim blaming but a warning for thousands of other women that are currently in a similar situation.

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.

Monday morning QB but she should have. It’s not like he could pay for it. She should have made an arrangement with the mortgage company to assume it behind his back.

You should stop. Not only do you not have any grasp of VA family law you also don’t understand how one spouse acquires the house in their name during/after a divorce.

He’s a disgusting man. To think he could have been governor of VA is crazy.

Makes me sick. Poor kids.

I don't know if it is law here in Virginia. Years ago I had a friend going through a divorce. Her husband wanted the divorce and when he told her, she packed up and left the house. (Their child was grown and out of the house.) That meant that she "deserted" him and was at a disadvantage.

Dr. Fairfax's lawyer may have advised her to stay put. Children really make it a different issue entirely.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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?

[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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. [/quote]

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

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. [/quote]

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

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

You are not helping women here. [/quote]

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. [/quote]

+1M

Dr. Fairfax knew her stbx had bought a gun and was in crisis.

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2026/04/divorce-judge-was-concerned-about-justin-fairfaxs-recent-mental-health-2022-gun-incident-court-documents-show/

The people who could have reported Mr. Fairfax or removed him from his residence or removed his guns from his residence did not take those steps.

The lack of comprehension being espoused by people who think and state that Dr. Fairfax should have 'correctly organized her priorities' is heartbreaking!

Dr. Fairfax obviously DID correctly assess the daily necessity of documenting what was going on at home, legal risks of abandoning her residence and the importance of NOT LEAVING her children alone with a man who had threatened to use his gun to kill himself.

Plus, clearly, Dr. Fairfax abided by the legal process and actions that were in place to dissolve the marriage and separate the marital assets.

https://people.com/crime/illinois-murder-suicide-dad-twin-daughters-5-things/
.
Why hasn't anyone posted organizations or legal safe house, temporary physical separation options for women or men who have jobs, children and mortgages? Because none exist! If you are a woman or man who has a job, children and a mortgage with an abusive spouse you are not deemed vulnerable or viewed as someone who needs assistance because the prevailing narrative is that people with jobs and mortgages "have resources" and should have been 'smart enough' to know better or should be 'smart enough' to figure it out.

A private dental practice and a NoVA mortgage are not ATM machines.

Praying for good, safe, healthy outcomes for the kids and extended families.[/quote]

She was the one who had the foresight to have numerous hidden cameras installed all over the house. That was what saved her from going to prison when her mentally-ill husband later lodged a false allegation she was physically abusing her husband.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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?

[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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. [/quote]

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

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. [/quote]

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

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

You are not helping women here. [/quote]

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. [/quote]

+1M

Dr. Fairfax knew her stbx had bought a gun and was in crisis.

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2026/04/divorce-judge-was-concerned-about-justin-fairfaxs-recent-mental-health-2022-gun-incident-court-documents-show/

The people who could have reported Mr. Fairfax or removed him from his residence or removed his guns from his residence did not take those steps.

The lack of comprehension being espoused by people who think and state that Dr. Fairfax should have 'correctly organized her priorities' is heartbreaking!

Dr. Fairfax obviously DID correctly assess the daily necessity of documenting what was going on at home, legal risks of abandoning her residence and the importance of NOT LEAVING her children alone with a man who had threatened to use his gun to kill himself.

Plus, clearly, Dr. Fairfax abided by the legal process and actions that were in place to dissolve the marriage and separate the marital assets.

https://people.com/crime/illinois-murder-suicide-dad-twin-daughters-5-things/
.
Why hasn't anyone posted organizations or legal safe house, temporary physical separation options for women or men who have jobs, children and mortgages? Because none exist! If you are a woman or man who has a job, children and a mortgage with an abusive spouse you are not deemed vulnerable or viewed as someone who needs assistance because the prevailing narrative is that people with jobs and mortgages "have resources" and should have been 'smart enough' to know better or should be 'smart enough' to figure it out.

A private dental practice and a NoVA mortgage are not ATM machines.

Praying for good, safe, healthy outcomes for the kids and extended families.

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:

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.

I am beginning to think that poster that you are responding to is just a misogynist incel. The ignorance is too profound.

The dangerous misogyny is everyone trying to claim here that an abused woman has no way to get away.

No. That is the reality. There is no safe way for a woman to get away with her children in tow and then permanently avoid future harm. At some point she will have to deal with custody. The court will likely grant time to the father. The risk of violence doesn’t necessarily end with a divorce decree. And you can’t just kidnap the kids.

You live in absolute la la land if you think getting away from a violent man is as easy as packing some bags and never seeing him again.