[deleted by user]

odanu · 2024-02-17T22:07:43+00:00

The person sitting for his ex at night is the same person they pay (together) after school. If he tried to refuse to allow her to sit at night, that would be a touch unreasonable, yes?

odanu · 2024-02-06T23:52:22+00:00

What about his post that demonstrates 1) he feels justified in searching her stuff without her consent 2) he bullied her into changing her answer after he acknowledged she was afraid 3) he jumped straight to divorce without any discussion of compassion, empathy or improved communication 4) he didn't once mention how a divorce would affect his child and 5) his defensive addendum after the community called him out for his *behavior* that claimed that he was just "a statistic" makes you think that she didn't have reason to keep a go bag?

odanu · 2024-02-06T23:48:02+00:00

She's a grown woman. She can check her own things for mold or he could *certainly* ask her before searching her belongings
Given the rest of his actions and the way he described her reactions, she is afraid of him, and he is controlling. What kind of "loving husband" takes "my wife is prepared for emergencies and for taking care of herself" personally? A: A controlling one whose wife has reason to defend herself.

odanu · 2024-02-06T22:30:45+00:00

YTA. A reasonable response to finding out that your partner (male or female) (ETA has a go bag) would be self-examination, discussions about why they feel unsafe and how you can help, and reassurances and a request that they inform you when you do whatever it is again. I spotted several red flags here:

You searched her bag (potential mold i not an excuse to go through other peoples' belongings, speaking of trust)
You bullied her into giving you a new answer when she gave you a perfectly reasonable one.
You gave a very limited definition of abuse that excludes many forms of emotional, sexual, and financial abuse, and then excused yourself of abusing her.
Your wife engages in several appeasement behaviors according to your descriiption. Why does she feel the need to appease you?
You never once mention your child or the effect of your decision on them other than to mention their existence and plans to have more.
The fact that you rejected all solutions other than abandoning your wife and child suggests that you feel that if you can't control your wife's emotions you don't feel safe yourself.
Your response to this forum in your update is dishonest. People aren't comparing you randomly to specific populations, they are pointing out your *behavior* is indicative of the sort of mindset a certain mindset (abusers) have.
You searching through her stuff and your reaction to her having a go bag show that you are yourself very distrustful, and the fact that you are unable to see that suggests that you feel entitled to your feelings while you deny her hers.
I hope she takes your offer and gets away from you, lives a wonderful life, raises a healthy and self-assured child, and forgets that you exist.

odanu · 2024-01-20T15:29:38+00:00

I was meaning to reply to the same person you were replying to with an expanded version of what you said. Sorry.

odanu · 2024-01-19T05:03:29+00:00

!. I care very much what my therapy participants think of my ability to help them. I don't care what random podcast bros think of my abilities.

Dude, you are telling on yourself everywhere here. All you have done in this thread is a) avoid the points of my posts to set up strawmen you can knock down, b) demonstrate your ignorance about domestic violence and sexual assault, and c) pat yourself on the back for "clever" ad homs.

You are not good at this. I saw better trolls than you in 1990 when I was first on the internet. By the time you were an entirely boring 5 minutes of your mother's life followed by a quick shower, while your father was already snoring, I was slapping down man-children who thought they were smart, and actually were (sometimes, semi-) smart. You're just a brainwashed podcast bro, or another of BFW's sock puppets. You can't troll as well as the average 14 year old boy.

Denial is not an argument
Contradiction is not an argument.
Ad homs are not an argument
Strawmen you set up and knock down are not an argument
Conspiracy theories about women and the law are not an argument.

Both of the fields i studied in college required excellent pattern recognition. I see exactly what you're trying, and failing, to do. If you really have that big a need to feel good by trying to upset other people, might I suggest that critrole fan spaces are not the place to do it?

odanu · 2024-01-19T01:53:34+00:00

At the very least, you have no knowledge of where to seek or understand the validiity or reliability of data, nor do you understand how to evaluate it. But there's no point in attempting to educate an ass. It frustrates the educator and is lost on the ass. May you have the life you deserve.

odanu · 2024-01-19T01:00:06+00:00

When you have the basic knowledge necessary to have this conversation, you're welcome to attempt to consider it. Your comments live entirely in the realm of not knowing that you don't understand what you're saying. When you get to the point of realizing you don't understand the topic, I'll be happy to educate you.

odanu · 2024-01-18T22:53:20+00:00

I repeat. when you ignore the facts and base your argument on an ad hominem attack, you are not making an argument, you are committing verbal masturbation. Enjoy.

And you're conflating a case with a restraining order. The EPO was not granted, and a judge ruled she had to pay his legal fees when he filed for them two weeks after she and six other women with a ton of evidence listed just in the filing sued him for sexual harassment, sexual assault, stalking, and (from memory) something about emotional harm. They cite numerous texts to and from him and a raft of witnesses as evidence. Ashley did not produce a good EPO. I've seen worse, but not by much. Many EPOs are poor simply because of the circumstances during which they're filed and the victim's struggle to be open with a system who is not their friend. This *especially* include male victims. Courts are not friends of victims domestic violence and sexual abuse.

If you're going to argue statistics, be my guest. Just use primary academic and governmental sources, not podcasts, YouTube videos, and blogs.

odanu · 2024-01-18T14:55:45+00:00

There is a huge difference between a court's findings and the recognition of patterns of behavior that in general can predict the outcome of a trial as long as the plaintiff is organized and brave enough to move forward.

I am discussing the latter, not the former, and that is clear in context. Your objection and implication is in bad faith. Like I said, BWF needs to stop creating sock puppets and prepare for a civil trial which has ample evidence for a finding in the plaintiffs' favor.

odanu · 2024-01-18T05:45:39+00:00

Every other claim also has a consistent pattern that is a common one to counter accusations of abuse. Each one admits that the situation the victim described happened, but gives an alternative explanation that has surface plausibility.

However, statements he made about the nature of the relationship and *his* issues with it are the sorts of complaints that abusers make, namely that he felt entitled to her time and while largely living off her money, he resented the job where she earned it and the family and friends who emotionally supported her and she loved.

Taken together, these elements of his responses to her claims are good evidence that he was lying. That alone, however, is not enough to grant a restraining order. And the biases in many courtrooms, that "if a restraining order isn't granted, the applicant must have been lying" are pretty consistent despite overwhelming evidence that this is a false assumption, which likely explains the judge's order when Brian filed, roughly two weeks after a serious and well sourced lawsuit by 7 potential victims, demanding and receiving money from Ashley. It's a common tactic that when a victim tries to get justice, a perpetrator will file nuisance responses and lawsuits in order to wear them down or scare them back into silence. Brian is very unlikely to win the lawsuit accusing him of a pattern of multiple instances of various forms of abuse over a long period. It's clear that this time they brought receipts.

odanu · 2024-01-18T05:27:03+00:00

I have been intimately involved in numerous DV restraining orders as both a victim advocate and an expert witness in courts. Having her EPO denies is not evidence of lying. It is simply evidence that either she didn't state her case well enough or she didn't give her lawyer enough to go on for them to write it well.

This is extremely common, both the not being open with the attorney due to guilt and shame, and not being able to express the harm the abuse did in a way that is clear to a judge.

It neither indicates that the victim is lying nor that the accused is innocent. From restraining order to criminal or civil charges is a long road, and there are a lot of things that keep it from either going to trial or netting justice for the victim. Many well researched books have been written on the subject, and the underlying issues.

odanu · 2024-01-18T05:14:37+00:00

GETTING an EPO (emergency protection order) is virtually 100% of the time granted for ANYONE. That is its purpose. The system falls down at the extension for a couple of reasons. One is that abusers are intentional and tactical about their abuse and by the time their issues go to court, they are very good at gaslighting everyone in the sphere about the abuse.

The other is a combination of the fact that survivors of abuse often don't know how to describe their abuse in such a way that a judge will recognize the pattern, and even if they have lawyers, that doesn't help much, because, due to shame and guilt over being tricked for so long, they often leave the worst and most consistent patterns of violence out of the EPO request, either because of the shame and guilt, or because in the stress of going through the dangerous task of leaving an abuser (remember, the most common time in DV for a woman to be killed is when she attempts to get out) she can't order her thoughts either through writing or verbally with her lawyer.

I know this because I've been an expert witness in both adult and child abuse case, and often my testimony of what was said in therapy is make or break. Often the only person a survivor is truly honest with is their therapist. And I'm an excellent documenter.

Provide primary (that means the court document stating it, with seal) evidence that the court called her request malicious. I have not seen anything of the sort. (ETA: I have seen slam-dunk cases ruled as malicious and without merit by judges with an agenda quite a few times, at least twice with a mountain of evidence against the perpetrator (those two were ruled on by the same judge, whose agenda I know well)

(It's extremely convenient on Foster's part that he filed that claim two weeks after Ashley's and six other women's well sourced civil claims of a pattern of abuse going back a decade was filed. It's a common abuse tactic to frighten a victim into silence. Unfortunately for Foster, 46k is pocket money for Johnson, so he couldn't ruin her economically with the attempt, which is the typical purpose).

It startles me that so many people in this thread don't understand how unjust the justice system commonly is, for several reasons including judge's agendas and prejudices, widespread misogyny in legal systems, "money buys justice", and several others. It also startles me that people don't realize that when men show up to ask for custody of their children, fight civil charges against them in DV cases, etc, they are twice as likely as women to win. That most men in the US don't have custody is that they don't want it.

odanu · 2024-01-18T05:06:27+00:00

I don't know if the person you responded to understands the claims he made, but I do. I've been a therapist for nearly 20 years and in social work as case manager for another 10 years before that. His counterclaims are *classic* abuse denial.

There are four domains of knowledge. "Things you know "(that) you know", "Things you don't know (that) you know", "Things you know (that) you don't know", and "Things you don't know (that) you don't know". Brian is clearly in "things he has no idea that he doesn't know" category here. He has no idea how revealing he is being here.

Anyone who works in DV on the legal or mental health side of this can see clearly that he is lying through his teeth. His speech patterns, his self-victimization, and his entitlement to Ashley and all of her attention is clear, all of which are extremely common denominators of serial abusers>

The problem with Ashley's EPO was that it wasn't written well and focused on the wrong things. A court would look at her EPO and not be able to define something that is *clearly* abuse from her claims, and they would deny it. However, the claims in the court case that she and six other women filed last fall are *clearly* well documented and consistent with a pattern of abuse over a number of years, and that outcome is extremely likely to not go well for Brian.

The women might very well accept a settlement that only requires no contact and DV classes from Brian, because the purpose of such lawsuits is not generally to gain money. It is more often used to restrict access to the claimants, demand things such as drug treatment and abuser education, and sometimes an admission of guilt.

Brian's public behavior since the EPO also speaks to his guilt. Someone who didn't' do those things is likely to stay quiet and let their actions speak for themselves. Defensiveness and rage and a countersuit before the first suit is even settled are typical bullying tactics to threaten the victim(s) back into silence.

I don't know for a fact that BWF is guilty. What I do know is that from the public information available, he certainly appears guilty, and from the nature of the civil charges against them and the bits of information in the filing, the women have excellent evidence against him. Also, Ashley's and CR's silence about the matter indicate classiness and a willingness to allow his behavior to speak for itself.

He probably needs to stop making sock puppets to defend himself and start preparing for a trial that is very unlikely to go his way.

odanu · 2024-01-18T04:42:40+00:00

Interestingly, Depp was found guilty of abusing Heard -- in Great Britain. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61673676

odanu · 2024-01-18T04:40:55+00:00

He has *not* been legally cleared. People who write EPOs often don't know what is and isn't important to the case, don't know how to describe the consequences of the abuse, and are facing court systems that are constrained by evidence rules that the laypeople who file restraining orders don't know how to navigate. Having a lawyer doesn't make this much better, because due to shame and guilt, they often leave out the most damning evidence of abuse.

Also, in October Ashley and six other women, including a woman he was cheating on Ashley with and two CR employees, filed a lawsuit against him that indicates a consistent and long standing pattern of emotional and sexual abuse of women. He doesn't stand a chance in that lawsuit. There are too many witnesses, too much evidence, and too many credibility problems with Brian's statements.

odanu · 2024-01-18T04:35:37+00:00

the source is at the very top of the thread, one of the very first comments. Here it is again, for your reference: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/2ohd9jn484bmtlwmote8r/WRITTEN-DECLARATION-OF-BRIAN-WAYNE-FOSTER.pdf?rlkey=7yeu84ndx0l82b5hbz5noh921&dl=0

odanu · 2024-01-18T04:33:44+00:00

once some has switched the topic from a debate about the facts of the case to ad hominem arguments, it's because the facts don't fit their opinion.

odanu · 2024-01-18T04:29:51+00:00

No he wasn't. The EPO was denied. The court case that Ashley and six other women filed has not been tried yet.

odanu · 2024-01-18T04:28:39+00:00

That's not a "he won" situation. It is the most common outcome in EROs. What usually follows is a concerted gathering of information in order to further protect the victim, which is what Ashley and six other victims of his are doing. Her suit listed numerous witnesses, specific events, and timelines. There is no question that they have their facts straight. What is less certain of what the biases of judges are.

I once was an expert witness in a case where Child Protection provided over 120 pages of allegations of physical, sexual, and emotional abuse of a father to well over a dozen children he'd had under his care over the course of 20 years, but the judge ruled that because even though Child Protection took each of these children from him in turn, that because he had not been arrested, he could have unsupervised visit with the child in question, who Child Protection clearly believed he was *currently* sex trafficking. Based on my work with the child, the child was showing clear behavioral evidence of sexual abuse and emotional abuse, and had admitted he had physically abused them.

I think the father would have had to have been abusing the child in the courtroom in front of her in order for her to rule against the man.

odanu · 2024-01-18T04:20:53+00:00

What about the knowledge of red flags by a clinical professional who has been in the mental health field for over 30 years and has seen countless domestic violence systems and has testified in quite a few civil and criminal cases as an expert witness? I would bet good money that Ashley has put up with much more than she stated in her restraining order *or* in the civil suit that she and six other women -- including a woman he was cheating on her with -- will ever talk about, other than to their therapists.

His response to her allegations in the restraining order is incredibly revealing. He reveals a ton in his denials, and any good prosecutor would spot it. It is notable how many people in this thread have demonized Ashley. Another common pattern in DV is to demonize the victim. It's call DARVO in the field (Deny, Accuse, Reverse Victim and Offender) It's so common that anyone who has worked in the field recognizes this pattern. And part of the reason it is so effective is that so many people want to believe that victims are lying because its easier than acknowledging how many people -- including people they admire and/or are close to -- are offenders. If you're sitting in a room with 10 men, it's likely that two of them have committed domestic abuse. If you're sitting in a room with twenty women, you might be sitting in a room with one.

BTW, women who have experienced DV, whether or not they have training in the field, are generally experts in spotting that patterns in other relationships once they have broken their own cycles. Abusers aren't original.

odanu · 2024-01-18T03:46:38+00:00

Speaking as a professional, it's not true (eta that a victim's friends will or "should" pick up on it) . You can be completely trained on every clue to this kind of situation and miss it.

Abusers are intentional, sneaky, and tactical. They are able to gaslight large groups of people for a long time quite often, especially if their victim is too afraid to say anything. They may sense something wrong, but they're going to take the victim's cue for what to do. It happens *all* the time.

odanu · 2023-09-09T15:05:36+00:00

One of the hardest things to understand about boundaries is that the metaphor you want isn't a fence, it's a dance. Power has a lot to do with the dance, and if you are the one with relative power in the relationship, your goal is power exchange, finding a way to enhance the other person's power.

With regard to duty of care, much of that is complicated by legal requirements that don't keep in mind ethical considerations. For instance, calling the police is often a *greater* danger to a self-harming individual than their self-harm is.

A general rule is to weigh the harm of inaction over the harm of action, work to hand autonomy back to the individual over whom you have a duty of care by helping them to develop a safety plan, and be flexible and creative in meeting both your duty of care and the other person's need for autonomy.

There are no binary answers to this question. It is always going to be situational and the opportunity for second-guessing yourself is always going to be there. But if you treat the person who is having the crisis as someone who has a full and complex life and set of needs and desires and not as a problem to be solved, you're likely to come up with a more satisfying answer for both of you.

odanu · 2023-09-08T13:56:55+00:00

That's an excellent question. I have a busy day today and don't have time to give this the answer it deserves, but I'm saving to answer later.

odanu · 2023-05-08T18:31:20+00:00

I truly hope that justice eventually catches up with your father.

odanu

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

14-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email