Request for confirmation
From:
To:
Date:
Sun, Nov 18, 2012, 7:11 PM
Subject:
Request for confirmation
Desiree: I received (the week before last) the police reports and copies of the interviews regarding Lauchner's investigation and arrest and I was wondering if you might confirm a few of the statements you or Lauchner had allegedly made therein. 1. The house you are living in is owned by Kristopher Lauchner's cousin who lives in Prescott. 2. Your medical marijuana card expired on 11/07/2012. Did you renew it or obtain a new one? 3. You stated to the police that you and Kristopher were only "dating", not engaged. 4. Kristopher told you, before his arrest, that he had stolen the gun. 5. Kristopher told you, before his arrest, that the gun was hidden in the house. 6. You told the police that you knew Kristopher was hiding the gun in the house. 7. Kristopher would spend most of his time in the garage and you had no idea what he was doing in there. 8. You told the police you had no idea what was in the garage because Kristopher is the one that uses the garage, not you. 9. You told the police that you knew that Kristopher had been using meth. 10. Sage was home at the time the police searched the house and he was required to wait outside during the search. 11. During the search the police searched Gabriel's and Sage's bedrooms and belongings. 12. You were not at home when the police started the search. Thank you, in advance, for cooperation. Sincerely, Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 7:35 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
Number 1 and 2 are the only correct point you made. Yes, my card has been renewed.
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 8:02 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
I am curious about something, maybe you can help me understand. If you we're born in Florida and the issue with the immigration was all "mistaken identity" how is it that you know so many people in Canada that are willing to assist you but you don't know anyone in this country?
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 8:20 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
I did not say there was an issue of mistaken identity. ICE knew who i was - there was no mistake. They didn't want to let me go because they said I was refusing to cooperate (which I have the constitutional right to do), and because they believed (or so they claimed) I was involved with something (which they later had to concede I wasn't). I haven't spoken to my parents (or other family) in many, many years because my childhood was very unappealing and I hold my parents accountable for much of that. Therefore, I have no connection to any of my family. That is why I don't know anyone in Florida that I can turn to for help. Also, in 1996, when I began focusing on my career, I stopped concerning myself with developing long term relationships (friends) because I wanted to dedicate myself to my career and not be burdened with "emotional" ties which may have interfered with the possibility of advancement. As for the people in Canada, the reason they are willing to assist me is that I had offered them financial compensation for their assistance once I start receiving paychecks. Maybe they would have helped me for free but it's not my character to ask for free help and I offered to compensate them from the outset. I do know people in other cities (such as Phoenix and Colorado Springs) but that's not where the job offers are coming from. Does this answer your questions? Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 8:31 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
Clarifies that you continue to lie and make up stories. You are aware that you told the judge presiding over this custody case that it was all "mistaken identity."
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 9:01 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
I didn't say it was mistaken identity. The judge asked if it was a case of mistaken identity and I told him that it was not because ICE knew my identity. He then asked if it was just coincidence that there is another Richard Riess with the same date of birth and I said it wasn't really a coincidence, that I knew of that Richard Riess before I changed my name. I then stopped there because I didn't want to potentially incriminate myself. Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 9:06 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
You don't get it Fox. I was allowed to use marijuana the entire time I was in the TASC program. I never had to stop and I still completed the progr Thanks to your call to CPS I had to submit to both a urine and hair drug test and they still did not test for marijuana due to the fact that I'm legal.
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 9:10 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
You don't get it Fox. I was allowed to use marijuana the entire time I was in the TASC program. I never had to stop and I still completed the progr Thanks to your call to CPS I had to submit to both a urine and hair drug test and they still did not test for marijuana due to the fact that I'm legal.
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 8:03 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
Also, what are your parents names an dates of birth?
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 8:35 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
{H*****} and {R*****} Fox. I can't say with certainty what their dates of
birth are because I never cared to determine it and it holds no
relevance to me.
I will not provide any further information about any friends or family
as you have already proven that you are likely to contact them in order
to cause complications for me and Gabriel (case in point: you contacted
Steve Riess in an effort to establish I am his offspring (although I
suspect he discontinued any association with you when he read the police
reports about you and Lauchner)).
Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 8:47 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
You cannot speak the truth no matter what can you? I suppose that's your only defense. Lie so convincingly that even you believe it. Poor Gabriel, growing up and living in house of lies. Forced to keep secrets, always having to be aware of what he can or can't say and to whom. I suppose you have him well trained though.
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 9:04 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
Do you have any evidence or verifiable facts to support the claims you are making [above]? I suspect you don't. This is typical of you - whenever I'm able to provide reasonable and rational explanations for your allegations your respond with unfounded rhetoric. Provide verifiable facts or evidence or don't bother with such allegations. Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 8:06 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
Okay. Can I infer from that that you are still using marijuana? And that it's your contention that it is not you on the recorded interview talking to the officer? Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 8:22 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
I spoke with a detective but those are not my statements or answers. And yes, I am still legally allowed to have and consume marijuana. CPS, the police department, and the courts in both Arizona and California are fully aware of that fact and have no problems with it, so I'm not sure what you hope to gain from continuing to bring that up. Be my guest though - you clearly don't understand what being legal means.
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 8:50 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
With respect to marijuana use, the question at this point is not whether your use is legal, but rather whether it is potentially harmful to the children. The card allows you to possess and use marijuana but that would not be the court's concern. The Court's concern is whether you have a "problem" with it. It is comparable to alcohol in that sense. Alcohol is legal, but if the parent has a drinking problem then it becomes a child safety issue and the Court can intervene. By accepting the prop 200 deferred prosecution in exchange for taking TASC you admitted to having a drug "problem" (that's what prop 200 is for - to help people with a drug problem who are otherwise not bad people). But upon completion of TASC you returned to using it. That shows that there is a real problem. The fact that you have a card only helps in the criminal aspect - not in the family court matter. In fact, having the card, after admitting that you have a problem is a strike AGAINST you. As for what I hope to gain - to avoid putting Gabriel in a potentially harmful situation. I don't care if you use drugs, as long as Gabriel is not around them. But, by your own admission, you are continuing to use marijuana and you had no idea that Kristopher was using and keeping meth in the house. That shows that you have no idea what is transpiring in your own home. That the person you are engaged to can be using meth in your own home, under your very nose, and that you have no knowledge of it suggests that you have no control over, or concern for, the environment that you're raising your children in. It seems, once again, you made statements to cover your ass without thinking of the potential consequences of them (your statements to the police) and now they're going to bite you in the ass. Then again, I don't see how you could possibly have said something that would not have bitten you: if you said you knew about the meth and it's use then you would be criminally liable; if you said you didn't know then you would be negligent and not providing a safe environment for your children. So, I continue to bring up the marijuana use because a) you have implicitly admitted to having a marijuana problem by accepting prop 200; b) after such admission you continue to use it; c) you're technically not eligible for a medical marijuana card because of such admission (a history of drug abuse disqualifies you from receiving the card - clearly DPS isn't aware of it yet). Thank you for your time. Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 9:05 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
You don't get it Fox. I was allowed to use marijuana the entire time I was in the TASC program. I never had to stop and I still completed the program successfully and all charges were dropped. Thanks to your call to CPS I had to submit to both a urine and hair drug test and they still did not test for marijuana due to the fact that I'm legal. But nice try.
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 9:41 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
That's fascinating. I'll have to check with TASC on that and get back to you. Nevertheless, it seems you've covered your bases with respect to Arizona law. When Arizona passed the medical marijuana law they included a clause that prohibited the person's use from being used against them in family court. Not so in California. Under California law marijuana users don't receive such immunity and the decision has been left to the discretion of the individual courts. But, again, the question is not the legality of your drug use - it's whether that drug use creates a potentially harmful environment for Gabriel. Clearly, I contend that it does (based on your actions, lies, poor judgments/decisions). Don't you think that the enthusiasm with which you continue to defend your use of it is a very strong indication of a problem, or at least a dependency on it? Furthermore, I resent your assertion that I called CPS. In fact, THEY called me. That can be established with phone records. Fox P.S. I have to get ready for a 10 o'clock interview with RIM now.
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 10:00 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
That's fascinating as they never called Michael who is the father of the child that lives full time in the home where the events took place. CPS would not even know of your existence if you didn't reach out to them first (which was confirmed by the CPS case worker). Forgive me if I don't believe your account of how CPS became involved as it is another verifiable lie.
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 10:46 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
Okay. It's really quite fine that you don't believe me. I'm the one that always provides supporting evidence, admissions and/or documents for my claims and you're the one that make allegations and doesn't provide any supporting evidence. Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 3:40 PM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
Desiree:
I have looked into your statement (see [above]) that a CPS case worker confirmed that I was the person that filed a report against you. Before I explain, allow me to say that I believe you are full of crap. I don't believe for one second that anyone at CPS provided such a confirmation for you. You believe I am the one that called CPS because it is just easier for you to assume that I am the cause of all of your problems. However, ARS 8-807(K) prohibits the disclosure of the identity of a person that makes a report to CPS (see http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/8/00807.htm&Title=8&DocType=ARS).
You may also find the following information helpful: https://extranet.azdes.gov/dcyfpolicy/Chapter_02/Chapter_2_Section_1_Interviews_with_ the_Child,_Family_and_C.htm
From what I understand the investigation is still being conducted so it is possible they just haven't gotten around to interviewing Michael yet. They haven't formally interviewed me yet either. My conversation with them was only an informal one, not the actual investigative interview. I'm sure they'll get around to it eventually.
Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 10:03 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
That's fascinating as they never called Michael who is the father of the child that lives full time in the home where the events took place. CPS would not even know of your existence if you didn't reach out to them first (which was confirmed by the CPS case worker). Forgive me if I don't believe your account of how CPS became involved as it is another verifiable lie.
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 10:48 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
Would you kindly provide the name and contact information of the CPS worker that "confirmed" that I was the person that contacted them? Thank you, Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 10:05 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
That's fascinating as they never called Michael who is the father of the child that lives full time in the home where the events took place. CPS would not even know of your existence if you didn't reach out to them first (which was confirmed by the CPS case worker). Forgive me if I don't believe your account of how CPS became involved as it is another verifiable lie.
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 10:08 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
That's fascinating as they never called Michael who is the father of the child that lives full time in the home where the events took place. CPS would not even know of your existence if you didn't reach out to them first (which was confirmed by the CPS case worker). Forgive me if I don't believe your account of how CPS became involved as it is another verifiable lie.
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 10:49 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
Why are you sending me 4 copies of each of your emails, one every 3-4 minutes after the other? Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 11:25 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
Okay, I spoke with Felix at TASC about your claim that you were permitted to use marijuana during your TASC participation (I spoke in general terms and did not mention your name). Would you be able to inform me of the process you had to go through to obtain the approval for that? Also, would you be able to provide a copy of the written authorization (TASC would have required that)? These are issues that are going to come up at the hearing because your zeal to continue using marijuana during your participation in a drug diversion program, and your withholding of your previously illegal use of marijuana from DPS, really supports my claim that you have a drug problem (i.e. a person without a drug problem would not be opposed to discontinuing their use for a few months while they participate in a diversion program). Remember, the issue is not whether your use is legal, it's whether your use is indicative of a substance abuse problem which might put your children in danger (I think your support of Kristopher and his activities has established the poor judgment aspect - I have many emails from you, defending his behavior and telling me to mind my own business). Thank you, Fox
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 9:08 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
You don't get it Fox. I was allowed to use marijuana the entire time I was in the TASC program. I never had to stop and I still completed the program successfully and all charges were dropped. Thanks to your call to CPS I had to submit to both a urine and hair drug test and they still did not test for marijuana due to the fact that I'm legal. But nice try.
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 9:10 AM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
You don't get it Fox. I was allowed to use marijuana the entire time I was in the TASC program. I never had to stop and I still completed the program successfully and all charges were dropped. Thanks to your call to CPS I had to submit to both a urine and hair drug test and they still did not test for marijuana due to the fact that I'm legal. But nice try.
From:
To:
Date:
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 1:39 PM
Subject:
Re: Request for confirmation
Here, this might help you a bit. You seem to be relying on ARS 36-2813(D) which provides that a person's child custody and/or visitation may not be denied based on their being a cardholder or testing positive for marijuana while they are a cardholder. However, that section also states: "...unless the person's behavior creates an unreasonable danger to the safety of the minor as established by clear and convincing evidence." It is my contention that the police reports and your admissions constitute "clear and convincing evidence" that your decisions, judgments and behavior have, and will, put Gabriel in unreasonable danger. But, at the same time, ARS 36-2813(D) does not apply in our circumstance because our case is in California and, therefore, governed by California statutes (not Arizona). ARS 36-2813 has no relevance to our case. And, California has no equivalent or comparable statute. In California a medical marijuana user may, most definitely, be discriminated against and their child custody and visitation may certainly be affected by their marijuana use - medical or not. And, even if the judge happens to be liberal on the issue of medical marijuana use, that is where the evidence of danger to the child comes in. Regardless of your claims that your ongoing use of marijuana is legal, you have admitted that you continue to use marijuana, have renewed your medical marijuana card (which further evidences your ongoing use), and boasted that you went through the extra effort to be able to continue using marijuana during your participation in a drug diversion program. That pretty much provides all the evidence required to establish that there is a drug problem. Your consistent defense of Kristopher's criminal activities (as demonstrated in your many emails), and your willingness to turn a blind eye to his meth use in the presence of the children, is irrefutable evidence of poor judgment and putting you and Kristopher before the needs and safety of your children. It's all in your emails over the last year. Dang, you've pretty much built my case against on your own. Good job and thanks for being you. Fox