@ehBeth,
ehBeth You Asked...
January 2009 - Since I met my Immigrant wife during September 2005, I had never met anyone from the United States Department of Homeland Security. I sensed something was not right at home so on January 27, 2009 when my Immigrant wife went to stay with her Thai employer (under the table); I started to write down my thoughts about our relationship and marriage.
I was my Immigrant wife’s sponsor and I was responsible for her actions. I thought it would be best if my concerns were on record with the Department of Homeland Security before anything in the future might take place and / or said. I did not know what my Immigrant wife was doing, and our marriage was very unstable with no communication.
---------------
January 27, 2009 - Immigrant wife went to stay with her Thai employer.
February 9, 2009 - In 90 days (May 9, 2009) Immigrant wife’s Permanent Resident Card expires.
February 12 to 16, 2009 - Immigrant wife un-expectantly returns home for a 3 day well planned visit to get her personal items.
February 13, 2009 - Things were not right, so I hand deliver my 1st letter (relationship and marriage, 10 pages) to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration Custom & Enforcement office (7th floor) at the Prince Kuhio Federal Building.
DHS Agent XXX informed me he / the Department of Homeland Security could only take my paperwork, and they could not discuss anything with me.
February 16, 2009 - While I’m at work my Immigrant wife disappears, and overnight her family in Thailand are not worried, and they will not cooperate with any conversation.
---------------
February 23, 2009 - I hand deliver my second letter to the Department of Homeland Security - U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services on Ala Moana Boulevard.
I did not know where my Immigrant wife was staying, or what she was doing. I was her husband and sponsor and I was responsible for her actions, so I informed the Department of Homeland Security that I would return each week with a written update.
March 3, 2009 - I hand deliver my third letter to the Department of Homeland Security.
March 9, 2009 - I hand deliver my four letter to the Department of Homeland Security.
March 19, 2009 - I hand deliver my fifth letter to the Department of Homeland Security.
March 25, 2009 - I was served with a Petition for an Order for Protection (TRO) at the Kaneohe police station. I was to be in court on April 8.
March 27, 2009 - I hand deliver my sixth letter to the Department of Homeland Security, and I informed them; “I told you something was going to happen to me”. I leave them a copy of the March 25, 2009 Petition for an Order for Protection (TRO).
Again, each time I hand delivered one of my six letters to the Department of Homeland & Security, I was informed that I could leave my paperwork, but nobody could meet, or discuss anything with me.
---------------
March 27, 2009 - I walk into the respected law office of Coates & Frey. I explained to the law firm that my Immigrant wife’s 7 serious verbal allegations were false, and I wanted them to defend (USD 3,000 retainer fee) me of these charges.
Summarized Version
April 6, 2009 - My attorney waited until 2 days before my court appearance to have our strategy meeting. I kept informing my attorney that I did not do what my Immigrant wife alleged, and I wanted to fight the charges.
My attorney asked me point blank, “can you prove 100% that all 7 serious verbal allegations are not true”? I told her “of course but we have to be in court in two days, let’s get to work”. I explained to my attorney about my weekly letters to the Department of Homeland Security, and I informed her that my Immigrant wife left her diary.
My attorney told me I would go to court alone to save attorney expenses, and if my Immigrant wife asked for more than a 1 year Petition for an Order for Protection (TRO), that I would ask for a continuance without any findings that any of the written language is true.
I remember immediately saying to my attorney, “I’m not agreeing to that”, and she shot back and said “yes you are”. I told her again “I’m not agreeing to that” and she shot back again “yes you are”.
** My attorney then asked me if I still wanted to see my Immigrant wife, to which I replied “will I guess not, it does not appear she wants to see me anymore”.
** My attorney then told me that my Petition for an Order for Protection (TRO) would be buried so far in the State of Hawaii records that nobody would know.
---------------
Very Important - Then my attorney spoke to me those Golden Words. My attorney told me that if I wanted to continue to Attempt to communicate with my United States “federal” Department of Homeland Security & Immigration, that I should agree to the Time Only portion on the Petition for an Order for Protection (TRO), with the wording: The Parties have agreed to the issuance of this Order but the Respondent (me) denies the Allegations in the Petition.
Of course I had to Attempt to communicate with my “federal” Department of Homeland Security. My Immigrant wife had already lied to the “state” of Hawaii and she served me with a 7 serious verbal allegations Petition for an Order for Protection (TRO).
Also, I had already hand delivered 6 letters to my United States Department of Homeland, and who knows what other lies and tales my Immigrant wife was telling my "federal" government. In my eyes and thinking; the “federal” government trumps the “state” government…
One more time:
1. Since I met my Immigrant wife during September 2005, I had never met anyone from the United States “federal” Department of Homeland Security.
2. I was never arrested, and no city / state police officer or detective ever asked me "one" question.
---------------
April 6, 2009 - It is two days before my court appearance and my attorney had me so scared that no matter how much evidence I had, unless I could prove “100 percent” that all 7 serious verbal allegations are not true, then it would be unwise (the odds) for me to let the Circuit Judge make that decision.
But - If I agreed to the Time Only “state” of Hawaii Petition for an Order for Protection (TRO), with the following wording: The Parties have agreed to the issuance of this Order but the Respondent (me) denies the Allegations in the Petition, THEN I would still be able to Attempt to communicate with my United States “federal” Department of Homeland Security.
Coates & Frey is a well respected Hawaii law firm, and you listen to your legal team.
---------------
April 8, 2009 (court date 1) - I went to court and did what my attorney instructed me to do. My Immigrant wife was asking for a 3 to 2 year Petition for an Order for Protection. I asked for a continuance; without any findings that any of the written language was true.
April 22, 2009 (court date 2) - My attorney met me at court. I tried to discuss my innocence and defense with my attorney, but she was not happy with my discussion.
Because my Immigrant wife was asking for a 3 year Petition for an Order for Protection (TRO), my attorney told me she would attempt to negotiate a 1 year Petition for an Order for Protection (time only). Before the court proceedings, my attorney and my Immigrant wife’s attorney went back and forth.
Before we met the Circuit Judge, my attorney explained to me that a 1 year Petition for an Order for Protection (time only) had been agreed to.
---------------
When we met the Circuit Judge, my Immigrant wife’s attorney immediately asked for a 3 year Petition for an Order for Protection (TRO).
When I realized what was going on and they were attempting to negotiate a 3 year Petition for an Order for Protection right there in court, my innocence took over and I immediately said out loud “NO”! My attorney turned to me left and said in a certain tone of voice “Why”. The Circuit Judge did not say a word, nor did she question my outburst of “NO”; she just looked at me.
After my attorney’s outburst of “Why”, I was shocked and intimidated in front of the Judge / court and I agreed to a 1 1/2 years Petition for an Order for Protection (time only) WITH the following wording; The Parties have agreed to the issuance of this Order but the Respondent (me) denies the allegations in the Petition.
---------------
May 9, 2009 - Immigrant wife’s Permanent Resident Card expires.
February 18, 2010 - I went on the web and located CSI Consulting and Investigations. For the first time I read about the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).
ehBeth You Asked...
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace