Telephone call
From:
To:
CC:
Date:
Wed, Dec 17, 2014, 8:30 PM
Subject:
Telephone call
Desiree: You don't mind if I post that telephone call on the web site, do you? Anyway, listen, I was hoping to not mention that Kim Baker thing until we went to court - I like to surprise you at the last minute - you're so amusing the way you always lose control and freak out. As I was saying when you hung up (a very white trash response to losing a debate, by the way), if you don't allow Gabriel to proceed with the visitation as previously agreed you are actually helping my cause. I know that the best way to hurt you, permanently, is emotionally, not through your reputation, finances, or career (remember I told you many months ago that that other stuff I was doing was just to distract you?). And what could be more effective than for your child to utterly despise you because of your own actions? By telling Gabriel he could visit for the entire break, then completely revoking that for no reasonable cause you have completely obliterated the last shred of respect and tolerance he had for you. And there's the other aspect: the court! You see, the court has never seen you try to interfere with visitation before because there's always been an order compelling you. Now, I can show the court that you absolutely agreed, in writing, to the visit, then after I payed for the plane tickets you refused for what the court will consider a very unacceptable reason. You see: YOU DON'T THINK THINGS THROUGH! You're a fool, Desiree. That's why you are where you are. On May 27, 2014 you sent me an email, wherein you called me Fox. Therefore, as of that time you clearly knew my name was Fox. Your's truly, Fox P.S. Please try to understand, I have no emotional interest in any of this - I don't believe in emotions, remember? I'm sure you could tell by my tone on the telephone that it is very unlikely you could do anything to upset me.
From:
To:
CC:
Date:
Thu, Dec 18, 2014, 4:20 PM
Subject:
Re: Telephone call
Fox, You do NOT have my permission to post "that" or any other phone call to any other site, storage, or other location. Further, you do not have my permission to record me, use my voice, photo, or likeness in any way. As for the rest of your diatribe... Stating a name does not make it reality. I know you believe that stating something with enough conviction, and repetition backed by falsified documents changes reality, but that is not the case. I regularly call you all sorts of names. For example, when I called you Asshole, does that constitute a name change? Will your next Alias / Stolen identity be Asshole Smith? Will you expect that since I have now called you Asshole in writing that it is a form of formal acknowledgement? Just curious... I know you like to make these rules up as you go, so any response I will consider to be factual "at this point in time." As for the visitation, you have met my stated criteria. As such, per prior agreement, Gabriel will be visiting his father Richard Riess. (We discussed this already, remember?) Had you not dragged this out with theatrics, slander, and baseless accusations, it would never have been an issue. Please just get to the point next time. ~ Doris Day (aka Desiree)
Desiree: I was being sarcastic. I don't need your permission to put the audio of the phone call, or anything else, including your likeness, on the web site - First Amendment. The Constitution of the country you seem to think is so great, and all that. I'll read the rest of your email when I get home. Cheers, Fox
The First Amendment doesn't protect Canadians... But nice try "smart" guy. Cheers
The US Constitution applies to, and protects, all "people" regardless of citizenship. And yes, I am a "smart" guy. Thank you for noticing. Moreover, since the web site and domain are now hosted outside the US nothing I put on there would be subject to US laws or restrictions. Fox
Desiree: I'm still waiting for you to tell me which document(s) you believe are falsified. The PAL? The birth certificate? Hey, maybe it's the temporary travel document issued by the Canadian Consulate for the purpose of removal from the US - the thing that you accepted as a basis to allow Gabriel to come on this visit. Funny thing about THAT document: I told the Canadian Consulate, while I was in ICE custody, that I make no claim of being that person and I openly declared I'm NOT that person; I admitted to them that I applied for, and obtained the previous passport in that name using false information (again, statute of limitations had expired so I didn't care). And they said they believed I am the person named on the passport because the US government has already proven I am, so they issued the travel document for the purpose of deportation. But the US government's "proof" that I'm that person consisted of the prosecutor showing the passport to the jury and saying "that's his picture and his signature" and me (and my attorney) saying nothing...no argument in response. I didn't say I was or wan't. So, it was purely by implication that the US government "proved" I was that person. Once again, we see the power of letting people assume things...and choosing to remain silent rather than correcting them. What a wonderful legal system we have:). Fox
From:
To:
CC:
Date:
Thu, Dec 18, 2014, 6:57 PM
Subject:
Re: Telephone call
Desiree: Which documents do you believe are falsified? Which statements I made are slanderous? How do you conclude that I am making up rules as I go? There was at least a two year gap between when I first disclosed, in court, that my birth name was Patrick Fox and when I actually started going by Patrick Fox again. That doesn't seem very ad hoc to me. And how do you conclude that I'm the one that has dragged anything out? As I remember it, I had to hound you just to get clearly stated, written approval from you for Gabriel to visit. Then YOU were the one that changed the terms less than one week before his travel date. I simply stated I cannot meet your new requirements because you were asking for something that didn't exist. And what baseless accusations are you referring to? I always provide specific references and examples to support my accusations - perhaps that's why my emails are so long. You're so ridiculous that all these things you keep accusing me of are exactly the things that YOU have just done. I really believe you need to seek psychiatric help - not psychological, you need medication to fix what's wrong with you. At least if it's a chemical imbalance in your brain then it means you're not really a bad person - but if it's not an imbalance then I guess you really are just a bad person. Fox