Posted on 08/14/2005 1:43:26 AM PDT by dangifiknow
There is a document on the website of the Superior Court of California County of Solano which describes Case ID: FFL087021 - SHEEHAN, PATRICK VS. CINDY, filed Friday, August 12th, 2005. The case is described as "D - Dissolution without kids".
This appears to describe a divorce between Cindy Sheehan and Pat Sheehan.
Pat is the Petitioner and his attorney is Glen Andrew Deronde. Cindy Sheehan is the respondent with no attorney listed. The judge in the case is Alberta Chew.
(Excerpt) Read more at dangifiknow.com ...
From interviews Cindy has given, she's basically destroyed her family in favor of her own 'needs.' She's on the road at least three weeks out of four. Her husband had enough and left. Her youngest daughter (19) has drowned her grief in drinking and partying. Her eldest daughter and surviving son see, to be doing okay from what she says. But she can't be there for any of them because she has to 'save the world' from George w. Bush.
Oh wow ... I just noticed the date on this petition
It sure doesn't sound like he's standing behind her as she claims
And if papers are served to her down in Crawford will we see pictures?
There's damn sure enough cameras down there to get the shot.
This thread should be pulled. What relevance does this have as to why she's in Crawford now?
| Case ID: | FFL087021 | |
| Docket Start Date: | ||
| Docket Ending Date: |
| Case ID: | FFL087021 - SHEEHAN, PATRICK VS. CINDY | |
| Filing Date: | Friday , August 12th, 2005 | |
| Type: | D - Dissolution without kids | |
| Status: | none |
So much for the "he supports" me diatribe, eh?
What was her "job" that she claims she lost because of Bush?
Just another pesky little fact she's lying about.
I would not be surprised to see that this is true, but I am cautious because of that phrasing.
Remember, feelings are running high and we must not be tempted into believing something fraudulent injected into the discussion. The left likes to make us look bad, and I don't want us to fall into a trap.
I went to the site and it looks legit; it's not a fake link.
Weird wording those, but, hey, it's California.
That's beginning to wear a little thin on me, too.
What site did you go to...the Superior Court?
Thank you. How did you find that? I went to the web site for the Superior Court, Solano County, but I couldn't find a place to look up the information.
It's Bush's fault.
Did you see her blog yesterday saying she was "doused" by rain?
I'm thinking she may have God in her sights.
I followed the second link in this post:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/1463027/posts?page=9#9
If you go to that site and click to their home page, all you have to do is Search his last name and it comes right up.
I don't think it's fake, even allowing for the "kids" being a word we don't think is a legal term.
Well, unless dangifiknow can explain how to duplicate that information on the court's web site, I will remain suspicious. Since dangifiknow is a brand-new poster, I would like an explanation of how he/she found the document.
Well, if you want my opinion, this poster saw this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1463167/posts
and has now posted it on his web site, claiming it as its own, trying to get hits -- and not realizing how FR works.
But that's just me. :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.