Bethenny & Jason: The Divorce Showdown

[BBHN]

Quote

What is out there are her allegations towards Jason so her tendency to LIE does have something to do with the upcoming trial. Her LIES and EXAGGERATIONS could have set up the alleged grounds for these charges brought against Jason.

Probably not. I mean, if it's that obvious to you...

Quote

Beth has been shown to treat Jason like shit so believing that she is quite capable of spitting out baseless or exaggerated allegations against Jason to be taken into account during the course of the trial is a pretty safe bet using what I've seen from her.

Her past behavior at the same time shouldn't discredit her either.

Quote

Hey all I'm saying is that I use details from what I've actually seen with my own eyes and what's been already proven through film and footage of the participants in question.

Me too! I'm just sticking to stuff that is relevant to the case.

Quote

No one has to drink from my well of filtered water.  It's all good.

My route isn't for everyone and that's OK. :-)

No complaints from me on either account. :-)

Quote

Again, he has not been convicted of anything and until he is, he is considered innocent of all charges. 

Not being convicted isn't the same as being innocent.

[Yours Truly]

3 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

Not really. The restraining order is a TRO, which are not difficult to get against someone, hence why they are called "temporary" and as for the charges, all Bethenny had to do is file a complaint with the police telling them she "is afraid" and Jason would have been arrested. Again, he has not been convicted of anything and until he is, he is considered innocent of all charges. 

Which is why I opt to wait for the trial and ya know see ALL of the information.

It's kinda like when Bravo sets us up with those previews... We SWEAR that a certain dramatic reaction is based on a particular conflict that's been going on with some of the cast only to see it's some corny gasp and shout with their husband or a friend or something in jest and NOTHING to do with some crazy negative confrontation.

Sometimes it is but it's still not as solid of a strike or revelation of the smoking gun as we thought.

I'm just waiting to see what the hell comes out of this trial.

I'm thinking imma be rolling my eyes..... alot.

LOL!

[Celia Rubenstein]

6 hours ago, zoeysmom said:

I am not saying she cannot feel fear because she is a monstrous bitch, I am saying she has on a very regular and public basis delivered scorching often times unwarranted verbal assaults that have been shown to cause material harm to the person on the other end...

...  There have been ample examples of Bethenny dishing out harmful, hurtful comments to others with little or no provocation.  Bethenny has had several documented cases of exaggeration and out and out lies in describing events that have happened to her.  The most glaring being the Coast Guard had to rescue them when they were lost at sea.  It goes to the credibility of the witness and how they fit into the reasonable person box...

The prosecution is not relieved of their burden to prove and the defense has an absolute right to question and cross examine the veracity of the witness. 

Of course Bethenny's veracity will be at issue.  The veracity of every witness is a valid issue in every case.

But her veracity will be judged in terms of how truthful she appears to be being with regard to what went on between her and Jason - not with regard to what went on between her and LuAnn Des Lesseps, or about how she described a boat excursion.  There will be plenty of solid, tangible evidence in the forms of emails, messages, and eye-witness accounts of what went on that can be used to bolster or shred the credibility of her account of Jason's activity.  Really, this idea of her behavior on the TV show being relevant to the case is unfathomable to me.  It just has nothing to do with Jason's criminal case. 

Regarding the bold portion of your post ... there is this persistent argument being made that because Bethenny has some mean things to people, it somehow will effect what happens in court.  Why?  I sincerely don't understand what her saying rotten things to a castmate proves about ... anything.  Can anyone explain to me what the mean things she has said to others proves and how it's relevant to this case? Anyone? 

 

2 hours ago, Jel said:

And being really honest, I get a "oh well, sowed and reaped" vibe sometimes. Maybe I am misinterpreting that, but it is how it sometimes comes across to me.

Me too.

 

39 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

Once again, this is all based on Bethenny's word, there is nothing from Jason. These are not legal conclusions, he has not been found guilty by a court of law. 

Oh please Lord, let Jason decide to take the stand in his own defense. Otherwise, no one will ever accept a guilty verdict! 

 

23 minutes ago, BBHN said:

Bethenny's word and some shady shit too, I'm guessing...

There was a pile of emails turned over, correct?  Apparently there was enough in them to bolster the words of Bethenny, the lying liar who does nothing but tell lies. Or at least nothing in the emails contradicted her claims.  And she did demonstrate enough believability to obtain a restraining order, as Martinigirl pointed out.  Of course everyone is innocent until proven guilty and lots of innocent people get arrested ... but so do guilty ones, lol  

 

15 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

Not really. The restraining order is a TRO, which are not difficult to get against someone, hence why they are called "temporary" and as for the charges, all Bethenny had to do is file a complaint with the police telling them she "is afraid" and Jason would have been arrested. 

Temporary restraining orders are typically granted as a precursor to a more permanent restraining orders all the time.  The fact that what was put in place was a TRO does not mean a permanent order was unjustified.  It just means the situation hasn't reached the point of it being necessary to order a permanent barring of all contact yet.

 As to the portion of your statement I bolded, if this were true, the New York City police department would be busy doing nothing but defending itself from false arrest charges and paying out settlements. It's not as easy to have someone arrested as you suggest.

 

29 minutes ago, KungFuBunny said:

Jason is going to have to take a 3rd mortgage out on that apartment

Maybe he has a financial "backer" like he did in his divorce.  Because that worked out so well for him, snerk!

Edited June 19, 2017 by Celia Rubenstein

[Yours Truly]

2 minutes ago, BBHN said:

Probably not. I mean, if it's that obvious to you...

Her past behavior at the same time shouldn't discredit her either.

Me too! I'm just sticking to stuff that is relevant to the case.

No complaints from me on either account. :-)

Not being convicted isn't the same as being innocent.

Not completely but it at the very least makes me skeptical of her allegations.

Which is why I'm waiting for the trial to see what pours out.

LEGITIMATELY

True. Which is why I'd rather wait for the ruling before crucifying Jason.

Especially since the only point of reference and lets just admit it is Beth who  has EVERY reason to paint the worse picture of Jason as she could.

That alone should throw up some doubt to her account of things. If nothing else.

[BBHN]

Quote

Not completely but it at the very least makes me skeptical of her allegations.

Yeah, who needs evidence when we have feelings about a person...

Quote

Especially since the only point of reference and lets just admit it is Beth who  has EVERY reason to paint the worse picture of Jason as she could.

Beth and enough shady shit on his end to get things rolling legally...

Quote

That alone should throw up some doubt to her account of things. If nothing else.

Naaah. Past behavior doesn't have anything to do with what happened in this case.

[Jel]

9 minutes ago, Yours Truly said:

Not completely but it at the very least makes me skeptical of her allegations.

Which is why I'm waiting for the trial to see what pours out.

LEGITIMATELY

True. Which is why I'd rather wait for the ruling before crucifying Jason.

Especially since the only point of reference and lets just admit it is Beth who  has EVERY reason to paint the worse picture of Jason as she could.

That alone should throw up some doubt to her account of things. If nothing else.

If Jason is found guilty on any of the charges, and people's minds are changed about him as a result, I will be seriously impressed and humbled by the open-mindedness of posters.  Similarly, if he is found not guilty of all charges, I will still believe he is creepy, and probably got away with something due to lawyerin'.

(Joking of course, almost completely.)

[Celia Rubenstein]

25 minutes ago, BBHN said:

Yeah, who needs evidence when we have feelings about a person...

I am going to giggle about this line all day!  

[zoeysmom]

2 hours ago, film noire said:

Here's the law (in full):

"A person is guilty of stalking in the fourth degree when he or she intentionally, and for no legitimate purpose, engages in a course of conduct directed at a specific person, and knows or reasonably should know that such conduct:

1. is likely to cause reasonable fear of material harm to the physical health, safety or property of such person, a member of such person's immediate family or a third party with whom such person is acquainted; 

2. causes material harm to the mental or emotional health of such person, where such conduct consists of following, telephoning or initiating communication or contact with such person, a member of such person's immediate family or a third party with whom such person is acquainted, and the actor was previously clearly informed to cease that conduct;

 3. is likely to cause such person to reasonably fear that his or her employment, business or career is threatened, where such conduct consists of appearing, telephoning or initiating communication or contact at such person's place of employment or business, and the actor was previously clearly informed to cease that conduct.

Stalking in the fourth degree is a class B misdemeanor."

http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/publicsafety/repository/files/New York Stalking Laws.pdf

Here is the jury charge which of course differs slightly from the statute:  http://www.nycourts.gov/judges/cji/2-PenalLaw/120/120-45(2).pdf

Under our law a person is guilty of Stalking in the Fourth Degree when he or she intentionally and for no legitimate purpose engages in a course of conduct directed at a specific person, and knows or reasonably should know that such conduct causes material harm, to the mental or emotional health of such person, where such conduct consists of following, telephoning or initiating communication or contact with. (snip)

NO LEGITIMATE PURPOSE means there is no reason or justification to engage in a course of conduct directed at a person other than to hound, frighten, intimidate or threaten the person.

 

Included in the charge are the five elements that must be met.  So this is a portion of what the lay people (the jurors) get before they deliberate. 

[KungFuBunny]

16 minutes ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

I am going to giggle about this line all day!  

I thought it was just me..I've been humming the song since I saw BBHN's post...and cracking up

Feelins, nothing more than feelings..

Teardrops....rolling down on my face....

[WireWrap]

52 minutes ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

 

 

Oh please Lord, let Jason decide to take the stand in his own defense. Otherwise, no one will ever accept a guilty verdict! 

 

 

How will you react if he is found "not guilty"?

Edited June 19, 2017 by WireWrap

[Martinigirl]

Feelings are so 1979

Satchels of Gold

[Lemons]

33 minutes ago, zoeysmom said:

Here is the jury charge which of course differs slightly from the statute:  http://www.nycourts.gov/judges/cji/2-PenalLaw/120/120-45(2).pdf

Under our law a person is guilty of Stalking in the Fourth Degree when he or she intentionally and for no legitimate purpose engages in a course of conduct directed at a specific person, and knows or reasonably should know that such conduct causes material harm, to the mental or emotional health of such person, where such conduct consists of following, telephoning or initiating communication or contact with. (snip)

NO LEGITIMATE PURPOSE means there is no reason or justification to engage in a course of conduct directed at a person other than to hound, frighten, intimidate or threaten the person.

 

Included in the charge are the five elements that must be met.  So this is a portion of what the lay people (the jurors) get before they deliberate. 

That sounds like what he was doing. It doesn't sound like he had legitimate reasons to email her excessively or talk to bethennys boyfriend. 

 Courts have come a long way in protecting people from harrassment.  Too many women ended up dead after their claims of stalking or harrassment were ignored by police. It used to be that criminal defense attorneys could ask rape victims what they were wearing or if they were or promiscuous as if they might have some fault in their rape. Women who claim they are being harassed or stalked by someone shouldn't be asked what they did to "deserve" it either. 

[Celia Rubenstein]

31 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

How will you react if he is found "not guilty"?

If after hearing whatever evidence is made available and reaching my own opinion, I will be pleased if the jury makes the same decision I made and disappointed if they don't. 

[film noire]

1 hour ago, Jel said:

If Jason is found guilty on any of the charges, and people's minds are changed about him as a result, I will be seriously impressed and humbled by the open-mindedness of posters.  

Whatever the verdict, not making up your mind until you hear the evidence should be the default, not an outlier, imo. 

Edited June 19, 2017 by film noire

[Celia Rubenstein]

I think Jel was referring to people's minds being changed about what kind of person Jason is, not about his guilt or innocence. 

[zoeysmom]

9 minutes ago, Lemons said:

That sounds like what he was doing. It doesn't sound like he had legitimate reasons to email her excessively or talk to bethennys boyfriend. 

 Courts have come a long way in protecting people from harrassment.  Too many women ended up dead after their claims of stalking or harrassment were ignored by police. It used to be that criminal defense attorneys could ask rape victims what they were wearing or if they were or promiscuous as if they might have some fault in their rape. Women who claim they are being harassed or stalked by someone shouldn't be asked what they did to "deserve" it either. 

Why was Dennis at the school on Jason's day after sending a C&D?  If he is so annoyed and disturbed by Jason mere presence why does he place himself there?  To me it sounds like people abusing the system and I do believe and have said so forever that this is a Family Court matter and these two need to accept the fact they should never have any contact or MAKE PUBLIC STATEMENTS about the other.  There are many parents out there that pay $50.00 for every child exchange because they can't play well together. One parent delivers and a court appointed person walks the child to the other parent.  Bethenny pays nothing for the prosecution of Jason but makes all the comments and just loves the attention. 

I think Bethenny pushes the boundaries and I believe Jason is uptight and is ridged he cannot step away from the Bethenny PR machine.  Neither is really criminal court material.  Take Dennis the asshole is out of the kid's life and Bethenny's.  Married Dennis knew going in that Bethenny had an acrimonious relationship with Jason.   There was Dennis with his brood and Bryn, and faking engagement pictures (while married to another woman), laughing at Bethenny berating of Luann and being the man with the private jet. 

[Celia Rubenstein]

3 minutes ago, zoeysmom said:

Why was Dennis at the school on Jason's day after sending a C&D?  If he is so annoyed and disturbed by Jason mere presence why does he place himself there?   

My understanding is that yes, it was Jason's day to have custody of Bryn. But Beth had her the night before and it's her obligation to drop Bryn off at school in the morning. Jason is to then then pick Bryn up from school in the afternoon.

It seems like the person who was acting out of line was Jason by showing up at the school just so he could make his presence felt in those few minutes while Bethenny dropped Bryn off.

Regarding Dennis, how could he have even known that Jason was going to show up at the school that morning? Plus we are talking about a guy who went to the trouble to send a cease-and-desist letter to Jason.  I doubt that he was intentionally showing up at the school in hopes that Jason would magically show up just so they could have a confrontation. He clearly wanted nothing to do with Jason. 

[Martinigirl]

Two cease- and - desist letters and Jason says this, ""OK I see. This is how you want to do this. OK. You can play your game. It doesn't matter. You can get 10 lawyers. There's nothing you can do to stop me. You'll be sorry. You've been warned. I can't help it. She's pure evil. You've been warned. Don't say I didn't warn you."   What is he thinking? What is his attorney thinking?

[Jel]

Speaking of Dennis, has he gone back to his wife? Anyone know?

[Lemons]

3 hours ago, film noire said:

I think what you're seeing (in part) is that some people give great weight to charges being laid -- and point to that as proof Hoppy must be guilty (and see the emails/Bernadette/storage room through that lens)  -- and others don't consider the charges proof of anything.  Since I don't trust the justice system, the charge has little value in my eyes. It could be a "cover our ass" move, or it could be a serious thing. We won't know until they get into court -- and that means I'm seeing the Bernadette / emails / storage room as not enough to prove abuse without much more evidence.

And since I also don't trust Frankel -- who has a pattern of lying and exaggerating -- I'm really not assuming anything she says can be taken at face value. If the texts show abusive language, that's one thing.  Her just saying he sent abusive texts  is another.

By the way, her horrific storage room is bigger than my bathroom, where I've put my pup when maintenance has come in to work ; ) 

It's also on the same private floor as the apartment, so the only thing that would inch this towards animal abuse for me is if the dog barking - in distress -- could not be heard.

It's not the size that matters. I wouldn't  mind putting my dog in a small room in my apartment or my small bathroom. It's the fact that it's not in the dog's apartment and he has never been there before and was nervous at best, terrified at worst .

I would lose control if I left  my little Yorkie at home only to find him down the hall in the storage unit.  Everyone has different ideas about their dogs, but Jason knew that Bethany treated her dog like a child and that would upset her .    

[Jel]

53 minutes ago, film noire said:

Whatever the verdict, not making up your mind until you hear the evidence should be the default, not an outlier, imo. 

Yes, people should be presumed innocent until the evidence is heard. Definitely in a courtroom.  Ideally in life.

I guess my joke went over like a lead balloon.

[film noire]

15 minutes ago, Lemons said:

It's the fact that it's not in the dog's apartment and he has never been there before and was nervous at best, terrified at worst .

How do you know the dog has never been in the space before?  (Just asking b/c the Cookie story it's like a game of telephone --  first Cookie was locked in a the bowels of the building, in a basement locker,  with no water or her dog bed -- turns out, not so much.) 

10 minutes ago, Jel said:

Yes, people should be presumed innocent until the evidence is heard. Definitely in a courtroom.  Ideally in life.

I guess my joke went over like a lead balloon.

Sorry , Jel -- I've laughed lots of other times at your snark & wit  -- does that help get me out of the dog's storage space? ; )

Edited June 19, 2017 by film noire

[ZoloftBlob]

Quote

Off the top of my head:

"Bethenny will not listen,  so I'm hoping that you -- as a father - will. My daughter has expressed unhappiness with her mother's boyfriends being around when she's at her mother's.  Would it be possible to keep your dating life away from my daughter, until you become a permanent part of Bethenny's  life?"

"Bryn has said she's uncomfortable with you coming to her birthday party."

"Bethenny has asked if you can pick up Bryn at the hand off this Thursday.  I wanted to make it clear to both you and Bethenny that is not okay with me.'

Of course, this is all speculation but here's why, if someone's ex was my current relationship, I would have a problem with receiving even one phone call with these phrases.

""Bethenny will not listen,  so I'm hoping that you -- as a father - will. My daughter has expressed unhappiness with her mother's boyfriends being around when she's at her mother's.  Would it be possible to keep your dating life away from my daughter, until you become a permanent part of Bethenny's  life?""

That's Betheny's decision to make, not *Jason's*. Saying something like this to your ex's new squeeze can be interpreted as attempting to control the ex's relationship with the new squeeze and the child with guilt. Jason has NO RIGHT to ask any boyfriend of Betheny's to keep the dating away from Bryn. That's Betheny's decision to make for Bryn when Bryn is with her.

I suspect that Jason would NOT appreciate Bethenny calling his new girlfriend and explaining that Bryn is unhappy with the new girlfriend being around so the new girl friend needs to keep the dating away until Jason puts a ring on it.

""Bryn has said she's uncomfortable with you coming to her birthday party.""

That's for Bryn to address with her mother, or for Jason to address with Bethenny. It is not Jason's place to dictate who Bethenny invites to a family party when Bryn is in her custody. I doubt very much that Jason would appreciate Bethenny calling his girlfriend and telling her that Bryn is uncomfortable with her attending the party.

""Bethenny has asked if you can pick up Bryn at the hand off this Thursday.  I wanted to make it clear to both you and Bethenny that is not okay with me.'"

Then Jason needs to call *his lawyer* and see if that is or isn't acceptable under their custodial agreement. If it IS acceptable, then he needs to address it with Bethenny. If it isn't acceptable per the custodial agreement, then he has a legit legal gripe. It still isn't something he contacts Bethenny's current fella over.

If this was something Jason was actually doing and not just speculation, examples like this would only be making the point that Jason was harassing Bethenny's boyfriend to get his way, and trying to control his ex by manipulating the people around her.

Quote

Why was Dennis at the school on Jason's day after sending a C&D?  If he is so annoyed and disturbed by Jason mere presence why does he place himself there?   

Because he's allowed to live his life as he normally would.

[Lemons]

25 minutes ago, film noire said:

How do you know the dog has never been in the space before?  (Just asking b/c the Cookie story it's like a game of telephone --  first Cookie was locked in a the bowels of the building, in a basement locker,  with no water or her dog bed -- turns out, not so much.) 

 

People don't put their dogs in storage units so I guess I was taking liberty in saying that Cookie has never been there. 

I don't think it matters if it's in the basement or down the hall once that door is closed.  I live in the city with storage units down the hall. It's windowless and locked when you open it there are cage like units, about six of them. If I saw a dog in there I would call the concierge. And I would be horrified. 

[film noire]

3 minutes ago, Lemons said:

I don't think it matters if it's in the basement or down the hall once that door is closed.  I live in the city with storage units down the hall. It's windowless and locked when you open it there are cage like units, about six of them. If I saw a dog in there I would call the concierge. And I would be horrified. 

Yes, if I saw a dog locked in one of six, cage-like storage units -- all at the far end of a public hallway --  I'd call too.  But that's not the situation Cookie was in.

[Jel]

39 minutes ago, film noire said:

How do you know the dog has never been in the space before?  (Just asking b/c the Cookie story it's like a game of telephone --  first Cookie was locked in a the bowels of the building, in a basement locker,  with no water or her dog bed -- turns out, not so much.) 

Sorry , Jel -- I've laughed lots of other times at your snark & wit  -- does that help get me out of the dog's storage space? ; )

You know what they say Film Noire -- if the audience doesn't laugh at your jokes, it ain't the audience's fault.  

Tell you what -- and only because I'm a fan, I'm going to upgrade your dog house stay to our deluxe, within-apartment storage space. But shh, because I can't do that for everyone.

[film noire]

1 minute ago, Jel said:

You know what they say Film Noire -- if the audience doesn't laugh at your jokes, it ain't the audience's fault.  

They also say the comic is too smart for the room ; )

Quote

Tell you what -- and only because I'm a fan, I'm going to upgrade your dog house stay to our deluxe, within-apartment storage space. But shh, because I can't do that for everyone.

Yay!  Do I get my own bowl?  (Preferably of ice cold vodka!) Plus, some dim sum?

 

~sit ubu, sit!

[Lemons]

2 minutes ago, film noire said:

Yes, if I saw a dog locked in one of six, cage-like storage units -- all at the far end of a public hallway --  I'd call too.  But that's not the situation Cookie was in.

The unit would be locked just like Bethany's unit. Once you unlock the door, you have your own locked unit. No one else would have the key. Otherwise they are both airless, windowless, locked storage units. Bethany didn't live in a stand alone home, there were other residents with apartments on her floor. How was Cookie's situation so different?

8 minutes ago, Jel said:

 

Tell you what -- and only because I'm a fan, I'm going to upgrade your dog house stay to our deluxe, within-apartment storage space. But shh, because I can't do that for everyone.

Ahhhhhhhhhhh!  If it's a storage unit, it's not in the apartment.  That would be called a closet!!!!!  Now a closet with the door open would make a nice dog house.

[zoeysmom]

Quinn M-who knows the most about Bethenny, said her assistants said the dog was in the storage area in the office, which is located inside the apartment.  They would come in and let the dog out in the morning.  Why would Jason be tasked with care of the dog while Bethenny was off in Hong Kong with Warren or St. Barths?  A dog Cookie's size probably needs to go outside three or four times a day.  Should Jason have been tasked with that chore? How did that become Jason's responsibility? 

I would think Bethenny would make arrangements for HER dog. 

It is similar to Betheny claiming she would have to change her clothes in the car on the way to her talk show.  First off put on what you want to wear at your apartment or at the dressing room at your talk show with your full on Glam Squad or change at your corporate apartment. This is why I find her hard to believe. 

[Otherkate]

4 hours ago, film noire said:

Off the top of my head:

"Bethenny will not listen,  so I'm hoping that you -- as a father - will. My daughter has expressed unhappiness with her mother's boyfriends being around when she's at her mother's.  Would it be possible to keep your dating life away from my daughter, until you become a permanent part of Bethenny's  life?"

"Bryn has said she's uncomfortable with you coming to her birthday party."

"Bethenny has asked if you can pick up Bryn at the hand off this Thursday.  I wanted to make it clear to both you and Bethenny that is not okay with me.'

"RUN RUN RUN!  RUN FOR YOU LIFE!" 

This is an extremely ill-advised way to approach the situation. If you have a problem with the co parenting situation with your ex and feel your child is unhappy because of it, you take it to a mediator or to your lawyer. There are decrees and rules for a reason. They should have set up rules around when to introduce a significant other to Bryn - it was the first thing we did - and that's what they should be going by. If someone breaks it, take it up with the lawyers. If they didn't and your child is still unhappy, you still need to take it to a lawyer, but no one is breaking any rules so you're probably not going to get very far. Either way, taking it up with your ex's SO is the worst thing you can do and probably the easiest way to make yourself look like you have boundary issues. 

[Happy Camper]

4 hours ago, BBHN said:

Probably not. I mean, if it's that obvious to you...

Her past behavior at the same time shouldn't discredit her either.

Me too! I'm just sticking to stuff that is relevant to the case.

No complaints from me on either account. :-)

Not being convicted isn't the same as being innocent.

Where there's smoke, there's fire.

[diadochokinesis]

9 hours ago, Jel said:

I think you are right, and that's the reason none of the tee vee Bethenny will be relevant.  I'm no lawyer, but it seems like an easy defense to say that's only tv me. Besides, she isn't on trial, Jason is -- I assume they are looking at real life events only in this case.  So, as Celia Rubenstein explained one million times better than I could, it's a reasonable person's interpretation of what would be frightening/intimidating that matters. Would brooding stares? Would showing up at places you need not be at, just to make your presence known, count?  Would a whole bunch of texts and emails? Would saying things like "You're evil" "I'll never stop" be considered scary or harassing? For me, the answer is yes, especially from someone with whom I have an acrimonious relationship.

Leaving personal opinion of Bethenny out of it for a second, I'll ask if everything that Bethenny is alleging about what Jason has said or done is true, is that kind of stuff scary or creepy or intimidating?  The trial will determine if what she alleges is true, but other parties, police, prosecutor have already determined that it's plenty creepy or they wouldn't have filed charges against him in the first place, right?  Of course it's okay to dislike Bethenny, but no matter how horrendous one might find her, she's still entitled to the same protection under the law as the USA's nicest person. Turnabout might be fair play in one's own life (I don't think it is, but no one asked, so whatevs!), but it isn't in a court of law. I think.  "You reap what you sow" is a good way to live your life, but it's not a carte blanche to commit crimes against someone who has sinned against you. In the eyes of the law anyway. (Gah, someone's going to point out that judges often point out that a person's past behavior factors in to decisions like sentencing, and to them I will say (criminal past! And mostly Pfft! Stop arguing with me! ;)

Granted, she may have some trouble in the court of public opinion with that though, and I agree with you that she should pick a lane, but in a way, I'm sure this all makes perfect sense to her, since she does not seem to be at all "literally minded" what with the being raised by wolves and giving zero fucks and all. I assume they try to pick jurors who don't watch RhoNY?

It'll be interesting to see how it turns out, but no matter the verdict, the verdict itself will surely not be the last word typed on the subject. I'm psychic like that ;)

Here is a good test...  Take Bethenny out of the equation.  Take all of this information that we have and pretend that the victim is your mom, sister, daughter...  Now, does that change your feelings about it?  Are you still ok with it?  I get that people don't like Bethenny but that doesn't excuse any of this from happening and that is what I read a lot of on the board.  "Oh, Bethenny deserved it because she's a horrible person."  No!  Nobody deserves this. 

9 hours ago, Jel said:

I think out of context is usually a fair point, ZM, but saying (and assuming we're talking about normal, non abusive parenting here, which I think we are in Bethenny''s case) "I'm sorry you have to go with Mommy", even if she was saying I DON'T WANT TO GO WITH MOMMY!, is not the right, or even an okay thing to say to a small child.  Imo, there's no context where it's okay to say that if you have the child's best interests in mind. You say things like, "You'll go have a wonderful time with Mommy, play with your toys, visit your friends, go to the park, blah blah, then soon you will come back to my house etc." Keep it light and positive for the kid to help with the transition. 

The Bethenny/Bryn pitching a fit scenario could legitimately be Bryn not wanting to go to Bethenny's, and wanting to stay with her dad right then. But it's his job to ease that burden for her, not make it worse with his sad sack facial expressions or hand wringing distraughtness. That's not going to help anyone.

Exactly.  Someone needs to be the adult in that relationship and it should be Hoppy, not Bryn. Yes, my daughter gets upset sometimes. We just had it the other day where she didn't want to go to school or her horseback riding lesson because she wanted to stay and play with her brother. But I'm the adult and explained how much fun she was going to have in school/riding horses, etc. I never said, "Oh, I know. School sucks and it's awful."  No!

8 hours ago, film noire said:

I don't think anybody said her craziness excused him stalking her (if that's what he actually did). What has been said is that her crazy behavior will be brought up by his lawyers. Nobody's coming out of this looking anything but unfit to be a parent (and the ultimate victim will be Bryn, regardless of who "wins").

I think the problem is that some posters have ventured very close to that line (and sometimes crossed over it). Implying that Bethenny is getting what she deserves or excusing it because they don't like her is problematic. People are wanting Bethenny to prove her innocence and that she isn't unreasonable and she's not the one on trial. 

6 hours ago, Martinigirl said:

I would think it impossible to get someone arrested AND a six month restraining order without a demonstrated need.

It is. I'll put the link in the next comment. 

6 hours ago, WireWrap said:

Not really. The restraining order is a TRO, which are not difficult to get against someone, hence why they are called "temporary" and as for the charges, all Bethenny had to do is file a complaint with the police telling them she "is afraid" and Jason would have been arrested. Again, he has not been convicted of anything and until he is, he is considered innocent of all charges. 

Wrong. To get a TRO, you have to go in front of a judge with your petition that outlines all of the harassment/stalking/abuse. That judge then reviews the petition and determines whether or not a TRO is warranted. So, no. You can't just go to the police station and say, "Hey!  I want a TRO!" It isn't like a vending machine of restraining orders. 

Link: http://www.herjustice.org/assets/pdfs/TheBasicsSeries_English/Orders-of-Protection_ENGLISH.pdf

6 hours ago, Yours Truly said:

Which is why I opt to wait for the trial and ya know see ALL of the information.

It's kinda like when Bravo sets us up with those previews... We SWEAR that a certain dramatic reaction is based on a particular conflict that's been going on with some of the cast only to see it's some corny gasp and shout with their husband or a friend or something in jest and NOTHING to do with some crazy negative confrontation.

Sometimes it is but it's still not as solid of a strike or revelation of the smoking gun as we thought.

I'm just waiting to see what the hell comes out of this trial.

I'm thinking imma be rolling my eyes..... alot.

LOL!

Exactly. A lot of people have made up their mind that Hoppy is innocent (or guilty) and the truth is, we don't know. We know what has leaked out to the media but that isn't the whole picture. But the person on trial here is Hoppy and not Bethenny. 

4 hours ago, film noire said:

Whatever the verdict, not making up your mind until you hear the evidence should be the default, not an outlier, imo. 

It should be.  I think that is where some frustration is coming from because there are a few of us that are withholding judgment until the verdict comes through and there are some people that have decided Hoppy is innocent because Bethenny is ______. 

[BBHN]

Quote

I think Jel was referring to people's minds being changed about what kind of person Jason is, not about his guilt or innocence. 

Exactly.

3 hours ago, Happy Camper said:

Where there's smoke, there's fire.

Yeah, except when I used that same phrase, I was referring to stuff that happened that was relevant to the actual case. You are using it to point out how Bethenny's behavior in the past has relevancy with regards to the actual case, when it really does not. So, no, no smoke, no fire, until Bethenny gets arrested for stalking and harassment...

Quote

You can't just go to the police station and say, "Hey!  I want a TRO!" It isn't like a vending machine of restraining orders. 

Really? I thought it was so easy, Bethenny would start introducing her OWN line of TROs...SkinnyGirl TROs!

[film noire]

1 hour ago, diadochokinesis said:

Here is a good test...  Take Bethenny out of the equation.  Take all of this information that we have and pretend that the victim is your mom, sister, daughter...  Now, does that change your feelings about it?  

Conversely: take all the information you have and pretend the defendent is your father, brother, son.  Does that change your feelings about it? Do you still believe every arrest is always just and perfect, so your Dad must be guilty? Do you believe everything your ex sister -in-law has said on television and to the press must be true, so your brother is guilty? Your son is a stalker, just because she said he was? 

Quote

 and there are some people that have decided Hoppy is innocent because Bethenny is ______. 

And there are some people who have decided Hoppy is guilty because Bethenny is ______.

Pretty sure me going any further dissecting the motives of people  - even unnamed or in the aggregate - posting here is close to boards on boards, so this is my last word of the topic. (eta: just so you know I'm not ignoring you if you answer, I just don't want any modding coming my way ; )

Edited June 20, 2017 by film noire

[diadochokinesis]

2 minutes ago, film noire said:

Conversely: take all the information you have and pretend the defendent is your father, brother, son.  Does that change your feelings about it? Do you still believe every arrest is always just and perfect, so your Dad must be guilty? Do you believe everything your ex sister -in-law has said on television and to the press must be true, so your brother is guilty? Your son is a stalker, just because she said he was? 

And there are some people who have decided Hoppy is guilty because Bethenny is ______.

Pretty sure dissecting the motives of people  - even unnamed or in the aggregate - posting here is close to boards on boards, so this is my last word of the topic. (eta: just so you know I'm not ignoring you if you answer, I just don't want any modding coming my way ; )

You are basing this off of the false assumption that I presume Hoppy is guilty.  I don't.  I have not made up my mind that Hoppy is guilty or innocent. 

All I'm saying is that we need to wait to see what the court decides. Does Bethenny have a history of being overly dramatic?  Sure. But does it make her more entertaining and get her more time on camera (thus ensuring that she continues to get invited back and even her own spinoff)?  Of course. So, is that truly her personality or something she plays up for the camera?  Unless someone knows Bethenny personally then they really don't know. That's why I'm so interested in the court outcome. I highly doubt that all the evidence and everything will be put out for our consumption (let's face it, this isn't the OJ trial) but the outcome will be interesting. Just for Bryn, I hope that this is all blown out of proportion and they can move on after this. However, I doubt that. Even if it was all blown out of proportion, there will probably never be a healthy relationship between two parents that manage to successfully co-parent. 

I wish I could find old episodes of BEA online (I hate that Hulu doesn't have all the shows) so I could refresh my memory on everything. 

[film noire]

4 hours ago, zoeysmom said:

Quinn M-who knows the most about Bethenny, said her assistants said the dog was in the storage area in the office, which is located inside the apartment.  They would come in and let the dog out in the morning.  Why would Jason be tasked with care of the dog while Bethenny was off in Hong Kong with Warren or St. Barths?  A dog Cookie's size probably needs to go outside three or four times a day.  Should Jason have been tasked with that chore? How did that become Jason's responsibility? 

 

Okay, wait -- the friggin' storage space IS in the apartment, and Bethenny put Cookie in there every night and let her out in the morning? And Jason did it once and that's where the accusation of animal abuse is coming from? 

4 hours ago, Otherkate said:

This is an extremely ill-advised way to approach the situation. 

Oh, it might be worse than ill advised -- downright stupid in fact -- but the poster's point I was addressing was that Hoppy could not possibly have any "good intentions" in emailing Dennis. I disagree; if (for example) his kid was upset and his ex refused to listen to his concerns, then he might feel honestly driven to contact Dennis (however stupid that might be).  The contact alone is not necessarily proof of malevolent intent. 

58 minutes ago, diadochokinesis said:

You are basing this off of the false assumption that I presume Hoppy is guilty.  I don't.  I have not made up my mind that Hoppy is guilty or innocent.  

No,  I was just flipping your example to show it applies equally to anyone (in the world! not here! : ) who has already decided who they believe,  based purely on disliking one or the other.

Edited June 20, 2017 by film noire

[KungFuBunny]

12 hours ago, Martinigirl said:

Two cease- and - desist letters and Jason says this, ""OK I see. This is how you want to do this. OK. You can play your game. It doesn't matter. You can get 10 lawyers. There's nothing you can do to stop me. You'll be sorry. You've been warned. I can't help it. She's pure evil. You've been warned. Don't say I didn't warn you."   What is he thinking? What is his attorney thinking?

At the time Jason's stalking began, his divorce attorney was done. His divorce attorney got paid. I doubt Jason went to his divorce attorney because he knew what he was doing was wrong and this was not about Brynn. This was about using Brynn as a pawn to get more money out of Bethenny.

Jason is pissed because he realized how little he ended up getting in the divorce settlement. The spousal support - $12K a month for 4 years had to be paid back. During much of the divorce proceedings Bethenny paid his lawyer fees, again this had to be paid back. The divorce attorney got a percentage of the settlement. Had the douchebag been smart he would have spent the $12K a month on clearing the mortgage on the property he owned. Instead he ends up getting a second mortgage, how much of an idiot is he about spending money? I thought while living at Bethenny's apartment he was renting out the property he owned - what happenned to that money?

Even though his divorce attorney issued a statement when the divorce was finalized that Jason was very happy, I don't think he was.

The criminal defense attorney he hired is very expensive and known for pleading down his cases. Let's see how long the 2nd mortgage money lasts.

[diadochokinesis]

8 minutes ago, KungFuBunny said:

At the time Jason's stalking began, his divorce attorney was done. His divorce attorney got paid. I doubt Jason went to his divorce attorney because he knew what he was doing was wrong and this was not about Brynn. This was about using Brynn as a pawn to get more money out of Bethenny.

Jason is pissed because he realized how little he ended up getting in the divorce settlement. The spousal support - $12K a month for 4 years had to be paid back. During much of the divorce proceedings Bethenny paid his lawyer fees, again this had to be paid back. The divorce attorney got a percentage of the settlement. Had the douchebag been smart he would have spent the $12K a month on clearing the mortgage on the property he owned. Instead he ends up getting a second mortgage, how much of an idiot is he about spending money? I thought while living at Bethenny's apartment he was renting out the property he owned - what happenned to that money?

Even though his divorce attorney issued a statement when the divorce was finalized that Jason was very happy, I don't think he was.

The criminal defense attorney he hired is very expensive and known for pleading down his cases. Let's see how long the 2nd mortgage money lasts.

I bet he got used to living a certain lifestyle while with Bethenny and he feels like he deserves to be kept in that lifestyle even now. You look at some of these alimony payments (and specifically child support) and you see it.  I forget who it was but wanted something like $20k a month for wardrobe and plastic surgery.  Seriously?  And that was under child support! 

[KungFuBunny]

10 minutes ago, diadochokinesis said:

I bet he got used to living a certain lifestyle while with Bethenny and he feels like he deserves to be kept in that lifestyle even now. You look at some of these alimony payments (and specifically child support) and you see it.  I forget who it was but wanted something like $20k a month for wardrobe and plastic surgery.  Seriously?  And that was under child support! 

I don't remember all the details on the $12K a month other than $2K was for dry cleaning and $2K for vacation. She was also paying $11K a month on maintenance of the apartment he was squatting in. He used the accustomed to a certain lifestyle in the 2 years they were married to justify his "needs"

Bethenny paid all school's costs - Brynn went to private Pre-K, she also paid for extra curricular activities - dance, music lessons.

Hope the douchebag gets nailed

[diadochokinesis]

1 minute ago, KungFuBunny said:

I don't remember all the details on the $12K a month other than $2K was for dry cleaning and $2K for vacation. She was also paying $11K a month on maintenance of the apartment he was squatting in. He used the accustomed to a certain lifestyle in the 2 years they were married to justify his "needs"

Bethenny paid all school's costs - Brynn went to private Pre-K, she also paid for extra curricular activities - dance, music lessons.

Hope the douchebag gets nailed

Sorry not sorry but child support should not be used for things like dry cleaning. If she is paying for Bryn's school and extracurriculars then a nominal amount for housing and food should cover it. I believe California state law states that both parents must have housing, etc of equal measures so that the child isn't disadvantaged at one parent's place vs the other parent and even that irritates me. Bryn isn't going to be traumatized if her dad lives in a third floor walk-up in Hell's Kitchen. 

[KungFuBunny]

4 minutes ago, diadochokinesis said:

Sorry not sorry but child support should not be used for things like dry cleaning. If she is paying for Bryn's school and extracurriculars then a nominal amount for housing and food should cover it. I believe California state law states that both parents must have housing, etc of equal measures so that the child isn't disadvantaged at one parent's place vs the other parent and even that irritates me. Bryn isn't going to be traumatized if her dad lives in a third floor walk-up in Hell's Kitchen. 

Oh she was paying child support too. The $12K a month I posted above was the temporary spousal support he got for 4 years that had to be paid back

[diadochokinesis]

2 minutes ago, KungFuBunny said:

Oh she was paying child support too. The $12K a month I posted above was the temporary spousal support he got for 4 years that had to be paid back

GO EARN YOUR OWN MONEY!!!!  Ok, I feel better now that I got that out. 

I get spousal support in some circumstances but honestly, if my husband and I divorced then I wouldn't expect it. I can support myself. I expect him to help out financially with the kids but I took care of myself before him and I will take care of myself after him. Jason has the ability to go back to work. He could have kept up his career while with Bethenny (I can't recall exactly what the deal was with that). Go back to work and pay for your own dry cleaning.  And who spends $2k a month on dry cleaning???  Is he dry cleaning his underwear?

[KungFuBunny]

4 minutes ago, diadochokinesis said:

GO EARN YOUR OWN MONEY!!!!  Ok, I feel better now that I got that out. 

I get spousal support in some circumstances but honestly, if my husband and I divorced then I wouldn't expect it. I can support myself. I expect him to help out financially with the kids but I took care of myself before him and I will take care of myself after him. Jason has the ability to go back to work. He could have kept up his career while with Bethenny (I can't recall exactly what the deal was with that). Go back to work and pay for your own dry cleaning.  And who spends $2k a month on dry cleaning???  Is he dry cleaning his underwear?

That's why I remembered that monetary detail in the itemized list of his expenses. Is he wearing specialized fabrics that are dry clean only? Maybe his undies are sequined? That's $500 a week..how many outfits are in your wardrobe that have to be dry cleaned. Color me flabbergasted

[diadochokinesis]

Just now, KungFuBunny said:

That's why I remembered that monetary detail in the itemized list of his expenses. Is he wearing specialized fabrics that are dry clean only? Maybe his undies are sequined? That's $500 a week..how many outfits are in your wardrobe that have to be dry cleaned. Color me flabbergasted

I live in Dubai so my prices might be off but my husband dry cleans his suits and shirts every week and it costs around 156 AED so around $40. 

Methinks someone is padding his expenses. 

[Jel]

32 minutes ago, diadochokinesis said:

GO EARN YOUR OWN MONEY!!!!  Ok, I feel better now that I got that out. 

I get spousal support in some circumstances but honestly, if my husband and I divorced then I wouldn't expect it. I can support myself. I expect him to help out financially with the kids but I took care of myself before him and I will take care of myself after him. Jason has the ability to go back to work. He could have kept up his career while with Bethenny (I can't recall exactly what the deal was with that). Go back to work and pay for your own dry cleaning.  And who spends $2k a month on dry cleaning???  Is he dry cleaning his underwear?

Lol, hat's just what I was thinking. Also -- the same amount per year for dry cleaning and vacations?  Say what?

26 minutes ago, diadochokinesis said:

I live in Dubai so my prices might be off but my husband dry cleans his suits and shirts every week and it costs around 156 AED so around $40. 

Methinks someone is padding his expenses. 

I feel second-hand ripped off by his dry cleaning expenses.  I guess bitterness, resentment and regret is a real bitch to get out of cashmere.

(I slapped my own wrist for that one).

[WireWrap]

9 hours ago, diadochokinesis said:

 

Wrong. To get a TRO, you have to go in front of a judge with your petition that outlines all of the harassment/stalking/abuse. That judge then reviews the petition and determines whether or not a TRO is warranted. So, no. You can't just go to the police station and say, "Hey!  I want a TRO!" It isn't like a vending machine of restraining orders. 
 

Actually, to get a TRO, all you do is fill out forms/file a complaint and the Judge reads it and grants it. The Judge my ask you a few questions but they don't ask for evidence, which is why you only get a temporary restraining order. They are rather easy to get.

[BBHN]

Quote

I don't remember all the details on the $12K a month other than $2K was for dry cleaning and $2K for vacation

Does John Mahdessian know?

[KungFuBunny]

22 minutes ago, BBHN said:

Does John Mahdessian know?

Possibility...dry clean 5 suits and provide some snowflakes? Just give me some false invoices

[Yours Truly]

17 hours ago, BBHN said:

Yeah, who needs evidence when we have feelings about a person...

Beth and enough shady shit on his end to get things rolling legally...

Naaah. Past behavior doesn't have anything to do with what happened in this case.

Do you KNOW what happened or just one persons account of what happened?

Evidence is what I've been waiting for.

But maybe there's some disconnect from the words I'm using and how they are being received. I dunno...

So I guess that mean Jason's "assholeness" in the past shouldn't factor in as well? Great I agree. LOL.

[Yours Truly]

17 hours ago, Jel said:

If Jason is found guilty on any of the charges, and people's minds are changed about him as a result, I will be seriously impressed and humbled by the open-mindedness of posters.  Similarly, if he is found not guilty of all charges, I will still believe he is creepy, and probably got away with something due to lawyerin'.

(Joking of course, almost completely.)

I just want to know the specifics.

I don't care about lawyerin' or the technicalities or loopholes that will be thrown into the courtroom ring. I'm sure this will be happening on both sides.

I'm am salivating to find out the content of those emails and other particulars that outline the behavior for which he is being tried for.

I have a feeling that I'm gonna be rolling my eyes but if she produces some "Well Daayyaamn" information then I'm more than ready to Tsk Tsk Jason all the way to his very sentencing. (If that's how it goes)

I still won't have any sympathy for Beth though.  I really just think she's despicable so I hate to say it but my interest in the outcome only has to do with me being nosy and about  how I'll feel about Jason from now on. 

It probably still won't reach the level of disgust that I feel for Beth but it will have an affect.

16 hours ago, film noire said:

Whatever the verdict, not making up your mind until you hear the evidence should be the default, not an outlier, imo. 

But those damn feelings tho..... who needs to wait for a trial before coming to an absolute decision?

I mean....

LOL

Edited June 20, 2017 by Yours Truly