Beard v Beard 24-06-10 [PDF]
In this case the false allegation of family violence and absconding with the children backfired on the mother.
* * * *
In sum, the Mother, with no notice or explanation, stole the Children away, then used a “bogus” protection order to keep the Father away. Next, she sought to press the advantage of having the Children with her by getting them entrenched in her hometown area and immersed in activities that filled their time and encroached on their time with their Father. The Father testified that if he were the primary residential parent he would not enroll the children in any extracurricular activities that in any way compromised the Children’s time with their Mother. This Court believes him.
By referencing Mother’s admission that Father had not physically abused the family, the court in essence found her reason for going to the shelter, fear of Father, not credible. Still, Mother contends that there is no evidence that the dissolution court “appropriately weighed” the factor of domestic violence in determining custody. See Ind. Code § 31-17-2-8(7). She argues further that the definition of “domestic violence” in Indiana Code Section 31-9-2-42 is not limited to actual physical abuse. But Mother has not shown that the evidence in the record supports a finding of domestic or family violence under any of the definitions under that statute.4 Thus, Mother is merely requesting that we reweigh the evidence with regard to the dissolution court’s disbelief of her reason for moving herself and the children to the shelter. This we cannot do. See Borovilos Rest. Corp. II, 920 N.E.2d at 763.
No comment yet