Response to petition for annulment

Hello, Desiree.

I'm assuming by now you're received your mail and you've convinced 
yourself that my resposne to your petition for annulment is irrelevant 
because the California court has dismissed the petition for dissolution 
that I filed back in November 2012.  But as far as I recall the 
California court did no such thing.  At our last hearing the clerk asked 
the court about how to proceed with the dissolution and the commissioner 
responded that if you wanted to go forward with that you'll have to file 
in Arizona.  That, unfortunately for you, is not a dismissal.  Moreover, 
a court does not have the authority to arbitrarily dismiss a petition - 
there MUST be a legal basis for such a dismissal, and the California 
court provided no such legal basis.  As far as I can tell, the only 
basis the California court provided for NOT proceeding with litigating 
my petition at that time was that it couldn't find the petition in the 
case file - but you and I both have our stamped copies so that's all we  
need to provide as proof that the petition was filed...and that the 
matter IS pending before the Compton court.

And, finally, what is important right now is whether or not the matter 
of our marriage was already pending before another court *on the date 
you filed your current petition in Arizona*.  So, even if the California 
court dismisses that petition tomorrow (which it can't because, again, 
it requires a legitimate, legal basis to do so), then you'd still have 
to refile and start the process over in Arizona.

I could have saved you a lot of time and effort and told you this a long 
time ago, but why would I?  How would that serve my interests? And 
remember, in order to use bigamy as a basis for an annulment you will 
have to prove that I was already *legally* married to another person on 
August 26, 2000.  The important part there is already "legally 
married".  Meaning that the person I was allegedly married to was not, 
herself, already married to another person at the time I allegedly 
married her...and that I was the actual person that she married.  I have 
documentation and the witnesses to contradict your claims - including an 
affidavit from Kim Shires stating that I am not the person she married.  
But, we'll deal with all that when it becomes relevant :) .

Good day, Desiree.  I hope you enjoyed your week in Alabama and Tampa.

Cheers,
Fox

P.S. I've decided to put your seb site back up but haven't had time to 
update the content.