The tragedy of Vijayshree

Originally Posted by varalotti

The latest news is that CBI has traced her and the child in a house in RA Puram Chennai. They have been produced to the court which has remanded them to custody.

sridhar

here is more info

Fugitive NRI woman, son found in Chennai after two-year hunt - Chennai - City - The Times of India

Originally Posted by flowerlady

Micheal Jackson as far as I know was not married to the lady who bore his child, it was an arrangement made with the lady(his nurse ) being compensated for her labours and relinquishing all rights to the kid. This was agreed upon when she took up the job of bearing the baby.

MJ was married to debbie rowe and the children were not MJ's but were rowes children with another man. Still MJ was able to get complete custody of them without visitation rights. Even better for MJ, courts gave custody of the children to MJ's mother upon his death and not their biological mother, exactly as per MJ's will. This is a stunning victory for MJ's lawyers as in most cases custody of children, in case of a custodial parent death, goes to their other biological parent, even if they have lived all their lives with someone else.

Originally Posted by flowerlady

Thanks Rosequeen for filling in the gaps , Vijashri is well educated and well employed so she could have forgone CS and maybe the DH would not have been so vindictive. But he could have still asked for visitation rights.
It seems that the ex husband /wife have not been able to move on and are still caught in teaching each other a lesson and so the allegations and counter allegations keep flying and the lady has landed in a soup.

No, the Non Custodial Parent cannot demand visitation rights if no child support is agreed upon.
This fact is usually not mentioned by attorneys during divorce. They try to get you maximum CS, which leads to the other party retaliating for maximum visitation rights. Also guaranteed are future lawsuits if employment situation changes. My guess is no one told this to Vijayshri.

Originally Posted by SriVidya75

Nandu

Thanks to you...Am glad atleast someone realised this....Before we take any sides here...someone has to read the whole story first

Vijayshree agreed for joint custody and things were ok, until, her husband started framing her up...by recording the kids crying , saying that the kid doesnt want to live with mom, showing/proving to an extend that she is a bad mother, that sheis psychologically not capable.

I guess this is debatable, is it not?

(1) May be the kid really cried and did not want to go back?
(2) Living in US, just saying your partner is a nutcase won't work, unless it's medically proven, yeah?
(3) May be she is depressed? or May be he is framing?

He wanted the full custody of the kid and wanted to prove to the court that she is mentally not capable so he gathered all his evidences(framed up ones...) go to the site saveaditya to see what crap the father has posted on the web...

Why is it crap? If a father had taken a kid and a mother had such a site, it is not crap?

Again, how can we conclude that everything is framed. Are we going to be so naive that US courts we so dumb to accept his framing and gave him full rights? If it is in India, I would incline to believe that because of corruption at all levels and one can easily go through holes to get their job done. But in US, I agree it is not corruption free country, but not as bad as India.

This is where I differ, Being outsiders, we don't have 100% of information and whatever we have is THRU media which can be played by either parties, we have no clue.

its really very agonising to hear the kids voice..(no where the kid says daddy i want to live with you or no where the kid said mom is punishing me or i dont like mom...) seems like the kid already is going through great mental trauma, as he kept crying through out the recording.In one of the recording this crappy couple are fighting about some sweater of the kid and the bills...Both the parents have pushed each other so far that one kids life is spoiled

Now this is why we have courts. To analyse what's wrong with these 2 stupids and how the kid can be taken care off. So if she was really smart and educated, after fleeing from US, why not put a case in Indian courts and have her voice heard? Why keep running away and endangering the kid day in and day out?

Here the husband also is equally at fault, moreover...

IMO, he is sane and did not do anything STUPID. So I won't agree that he is equally at fault, unless the court proves otherwise.

Even if the husband, backs out a bit, leaves some room and takes relatives help to track down jayshree and kid, that would have beena good strategy than going to courts, police, getting restraint warrants, search squad, sealing her bank accounts, putting her in wanted list..(did that make the situation any better??? he is getting at her soo much, both of them are using the kid for their mental games)

When the US judge asked Ravi if he is OK Vijayashree taking the Kid on a vacation to India and bring him back, he did agree right?

So why screw up and be a runaway?

Are you expecting the father to still be understanding? And how do you know that he did not try all this before getting the help of law?

Not everyone is waiting something bad to happen and then immediately jump on them, right?

As I said before, if Ravi was an abusive, rich guy and was buying verdict in US with all his money, shouldn't an educated lady, on immediately landing in India, put a case and have her voice heard? Indian law is more considerate to women and atleast she would have got help from different organizations, right?

What she did is STUPIDITY to the core and there is no justification for that.

Originally Posted by rosequeen

MJ was married to debbie rowe and the children were not MJ's but were rowes children with another man. Still MJ was able to get complete custody of them without visitation rights. Even better for MJ, courts gave custody of the children to MJ's mother upon his death and not their biological mother, exactly as per MJ's will. This is a stunning victory for MJ's lawyers as in most cases custody of children, in case of a custodial parent death, goes to their other biological parent, even if they have lived all their lives with someone else.

Lots of assumptions.

And why are we comparing MJ here. MJ is a billionaire and a world renowned celebrity. Ravi/Voora are just another couple. How can semantics be the same?

Please...

Have you read the will or the contract between the mother and MJ. No.

There is nothing to be stunned about if contract is intact as to how MJ wanted and the mother agreed.

Originally Posted by Nandshyam

This is where I differ, Being outsiders, we don't have 100% of information and whatever we have is THRU media which can be played by either parties, we have no clue.
.

Nandu

My point too..Agreed thats wht I am also suggesting.....with what the press says/court says, or what recordings he collects, I dont find any reason to judge on who is right or who is sane/insane in this particular case of Aditya. Its all a big MESS and how it came to this extent of she running away with kid , I dont want to go there even.

No matter whatever it is..no matter what evidences the father was able to collect or produce, what the court thought or decided, no one would really probe into the truth and find out what really happened on personal front. Court has so many cases to care of daily, all they do is hear. They dont want to see or feel the situation. All the judgements are made on the evidences provided (Not only in this case, but in any case any where in court) all they decide is based on evidences. Now how the evidences are gathered?? Again unless the evidence is proved wrong, the court has nothing to say . If you cant prove that the evidence is wrong, alternate option becomes true....Now whether she wanted to really prove her sanity of mind or whether she was really insane only she knows and god knows.I too dont know any one there personally.

All I want to say is, any one can prove a sane person insane, or an insane person sane..in front of court...provided that person has enough money and power.

If you see that forum of 498a.org you would know how men are giving suggestions to each other on how to record or tape the mothers treatment to a kid. So when the kid does something wrong, when the mother is disciplining the kid, the father collects evidence by recording how the mother handles the kid (being stern or trying to tell the kid firmly...now when things turn bad in marriage, he can use this to show to court ) who knows what she was doing and when she was doing it..all they know is it happened and they have a recording of it .

Just like someone can file a wrong 498 case against a man, how can you prove the man is innocent , unless he has evidence, so if he doesnt/cant prove in court, alternate option i.e he was abusing for dowry becomes true....didnt we see such cases??...

There is no hard fast rule in court....and personally I never beleive in courts judgement...as I have seen men and women who were sane and soft being given judgement saying they cant handle things...reason those people didnt want to fight in court as they dont have that much of energy and emotional capability and money to go on and on infront of people to prove their innocence.

No matter which country it is....money and power can always do wonders!!!

I dont say what she did was right, however, I dont even find anything to say that the father was good...my reason...if someone writes nonsense letters and posts it on web for the whole world, knowing the fact that the son is being kidnapped and might not even have access to a computer...so what does the father want to show the world?? is it the world he wants to show to? or to his son???When I read the first letter the father posted on the web, I started wondering about the mental sanity of the father! now is that insanity because his son was kidnapped or is that insanity already in there deep down which lead to divorce is another question...

There were so many cases of children being kidnapped, so why CBI took this case as seriously? why so many escalations??? why so much of hype???I sense a very strong vindictive behaviour from both sides,however father has invested lots of money and power..hope he is happy in future with his priced possession " SON"...anyways finally I dont see any winner here....when the son grows and hears all the recordings his father used...am sure the son too would ask ..why they are so abrupt? what was i crying for???why r u guys fighting for a cash bill of sweater?why mom had to run away with me???that too to a diff country? why did she go insane??both of you fought so much, why no one thought about me???

Bottom line ...no point in arguing who is right or wrong in this particular Adityas case...Reason...we dont know any of them personally and the whole case....So making judgements based on just what we heard/read is not right!!! so lets not take sides...and lets not try to prove someone right / wrong....

Originally Posted by SriVidya75

here is more info

Fugitive NRI woman, son found in Chennai after two-year hunt - Chennai - City - The Times of India

The article says that the US court gave full custody of the son to the father. The mother seems to have been cornered tremendously by the smart father. As she lost the battle by fight in " Fight or Flight" response, she then seems to have chosen flight.

I feel the vindictive father has been trying to separate the mother and child before she took such a step. Taking away the child from the mother can be very devastating for the mother and the child compared to the father according to nature. Thanks to all the officials who helped the father do it.
Just my thoughts, may not be true as all the facts are not known.

It looks to me both mother and father have extreme capabilits of doing things.May be over knowledge and over power and over capabilits (it looks to me these individulas have extremes of everything) of parents might have brought the child life to this stage.

Lots of assumptions.
And why are we comparing MJ here. MJ is a billionaire and a world renowned celebrity. Ravi/Voora are just another couple. How can semantics be the same?
Please...
Have you read the will or the contract between the mother and MJ. No.
There is nothing to be stunned about if contract is intact as to how MJ wanted and the mother agreed.

Reason to bring MJ was to show that complete custody with one parent is the best option in some cases.
MJ money and status is not the issue here, sure MJ had more money and got things done according to his wishes but the option of single parent custody without visitation is available to everyone.
I have seen time and again that only option discussed during divorce is custody with mother during weekdays, visitation with father during weekends and CS paid to ex wife by father.
Several times, I have also seen this is not the best option, but desire to get even with ex-husband by girl, her parents, attorneys etc. make it sound like the best option.
Custody passing to MJ's mother upon his death is stunning indeed. US courts usually give custody to one parent upon death of the other, unless one parent completely relinquishes his/her rights as a parent. Debbie did not do this but was still not able to get custody. That is surprising.

Originally Posted by rosequeen

]Reason to bring MJ was to show that complete custody with one parent is the best option in some cases.

Agreed. Each case is different and the best option can be validated accordingly.

MJ money and status is not the issue here, sure MJ had more money and got things done according to his wishes but the option of single parent custody without visitation is available to everyone.

Agreed again. The option to have sole custody without another partner in the picture is always an option. Again each case has to be validated for such decisions.

I have seen time and again that only option discussed during divorce is custody with mother during weekdays, visitation with father during weekends and CS paid to ex wife by father.

Several times, I have also seen this is not the best option, but desire to get even with ex-husband by girl, her parents, attorneys etc. make it sound like the best option.

Yes. All different scenarios you have mentioned here is possible.

But the point I am trying to make is.. EACH CASE is different and comparing such cases will not be any help, IMO.

Custody passing to MJ's mother upon his death is stunning indeed. US courts usually give custody to one parent upon death of the other, unless one parent completely relinquishes his/her rights as a parent. Debbie did not do this but was still not able to get custody. That is surprising.

How do you know that. You read the contract between MJ and Debbie?

We're comparing apples to oranges here. Debbie, obviously, did NOT want custody of the children and signed her rights off in exchange for $$$$. Also, this entire thread has been started based on the assumption that Vijayashree should have bought her ex out completely. This assumption is faulty because from everything that I read, Ravi Chandran is better off than Vijayashree is, and, in addition, loves his son very much and WANTS to be in that child's life.

Originally Posted by rosequeen

An interesting and tragic case, here divorce laws appear to have gone horribly wrong. That is why my consistent advice in these forums has been to shun vindictiveness during divorce and try to get complete custody of the child even if it means having to 'buy off your ex husband'. This is what Michael Jackson did when the paid money to his ex-wife to give up custody. However the younger generation of women in India cannot resist the urge to hit back legally during divorce and try to claim maintenance. This attitude of revenge rarely hurts the ex-husband and might backfire badly on the woman and children.

This OP ASSUMES that Vijayashree was misled, was attempting to hit back at her husband / was seeking revenge against Chandran etc. These are all just blind guesses and cannot be substantiated (unless you have personal inside-info on the couple's marital disputes and motivations). In addition, none of these assumptions are borne out by the publicly available facts of this case. Furthermore, Chandran does not seem to have been interested in being "bought out" of his son's life. He may have been a horrendous husband but he is obviously a devoted father, who, unlike, Debbie wasn't looking to cash in on the boy's paternity. So, this entire thread, based on the faulty assumption that Vijayashree erred in not paying her ex off, is completely and utterly wrong.

The entire thread ,as said earlier is about buying out the husband ,not demanding CS or maintenance for self in case of divorce as it makes the man vindictive and revengeful as in the case of Viyashri.
All women are not well off , working in high positions and well educated enough to be so magnanimous. After spending several years looking after the man, bearing kids and making adjustments everywhere if a woman demands CS and maintenance it should be taken in the right spirit. This defers a lot of men from throwing out their wifes out of the house for flimsy reasons.
Here in India most of the jobs are age related, even if the lady betters herself she would definitely be left behind in the rat race. In fact this is the reason why women stay back in abusive marriages . A roof over the head is important so is two square meals for the kids . If the man has to provide for this it should be no big deal . Let him pay off his wife for freedom and becoming a bachelor again!
If the lady wants a divorce then she may not demand anything as she is prepared, but if she is being divorced then the scene is different as she is generally caught unawares!!