Mother says “ Only Lower-Class People Expose…
Posted in the Louisville Forum
#1 May 30, 2007
their tawdry lifestyles.
What would you do if someone was alienating you from your son or daughter, denying you were his or her parent, and refusing to let you see him or her for no reason? What would you do if the courts were allowing this to happen? Most parents would do whatever was in his or her power to reveal the truth and fight to see their child.
I’m a parent living the above scenario and doing everything possible to be reunited and participate in my son's life.
No fault of his own, my son came into this world as the result of an extra-marital love affair - a historical fact that can never be changed nor should it.
No child should have to suffer because of their history. Children need both mommy and daddy. Keeping a child from a willing mother or father is wrong no matter how one paints the picture.
Mothers and fathers should share equal rights regarding their children. Saying a parent shouldn’t be in a child’s life because the child is the result of an affair is absurd!
As a parent, what do you do when the other parent and their spouse repeatedly said you should be in your child’s life but they repeatedly told the courts any involvement will cause irreparable damage? As a parent, what do you do if the other parent and their spouse continued to tell you they’re not keeping you from your child but they refused to acknowledge to the courts you’re the child’s parent?
I believe, as a parent, you do everything and anything you can for your child! It’s illogical to tell a father he should be in his son’s life and then request the KY Supreme Court to keep him out of his son’s life. And it’s irrational to tell everyone someone other than your husband is your son’s father but then refuse to acknowledge this to the courts.
Here’s two examples of such absurdity:
On September 13, 2006, Julia Ricketts (wife of attorney Jon Ricketts), wrote to James Rhoades,“ You just want ‘credit’ for being Julian’s father. I think its fine, I’m accepting the fact that I must own up to my sins and tell my husband about our affair and of Julian. Julian shouldn’t live in a lie. But that’s not enough for you. See at that point, you’d be able to see Julian. But that’s not enough, you also want custody.
On April 6, 2007, during sworn depositions, Jonathan Ricketts (a lawyer) answered the following questions posed by Rhoades’ attorney John H. Helmers Jr.:
Q:Are you claiming to be his (Julian’s) father?
A:I am his father.
Q:So that would be yes?
A:Well, yes. I mean, if James Rhoades is his father, you know, I can’t think of a better situation than to have two fathers as long as they are both good fathers.
Q:Are you claiming – and your claim of paternity or fatherhood is related – is that related to genetics or your marriage to your wife or both?
A: Both I would say at this point.
Q:And if you’re not the genetic father of Julian Anthony, are you making a claim of fatherhood based on your marriage to your wife, Julia Ricketts?
A: Yes, but not exclusively.
Q:So, in other words, if I understand the answer correctly, when you say not exclusively, you would be conceding some level of paternity to James Rhoades if he is the genetic father of Julian Anthony?
A:I’m sorry, can you ask that question again, John?
Q:I’ll try to. If James Rhoades is found by the latest DNA testing to be the genetic father of Julian Anthony, are you conceding some level of paternity, legal paternity, to James Rhoades vis-à-vis the child?
A:I guess – I guess my answer to that question is no. There’s several parts to it. But I don’t think – you know, I’m going to rely on the ruling of the court. I’m a lawyer and I believe in it.
But if the court says that he is in fact the biological father, then I think that – even if he doesn’t, you know, we want to incorporate him into the child’s life. We would like to be able to move beyond litigation. I’m sure that doesn’t answer your question and I apologize.
Learn more @ http://www.letmeseemyson.blogspot.com
#2 Jun 20, 2007
Sancitity of the "Ricketts" family was waived when Mrs. Ricketts choose to have an affair.
#3 Aug 21, 2007
James~if you see this I can tell you that the Fraudelant Rickets "family" with your baby (which they refer to as Anthony) were in a newspaper posing at a July 4th Picnic in Windy Hills. The name of the paper is The Voice Tribune. I think you can call them or track the paper via the web.
the baby doesn't have on his "helmet" anymore and he looked fine.
They go to my church so I knew who they were. I hope you can do something to see your son. The husband is a brut.
#4 Aug 24, 2007
Thanks for the information. Julia and Jonathan Ricketts have adopted a strategy of isolation and deception, which hinges on Jonathan's fathers influence. The Ricketts have no concept of truth or justice. Their actions illustrate hate, vengeance, and deceit. For the past year I've tried to get Julia to agree to a fair parenting agreement, but Jonathan thinks he is my son's father and wants to continue to have legal power over my son (Julia said he's a control freak). I'm not sure why Julia and Jon Ricketts refuse to face reality? They are the most selfish people I've ever known. They are thinking of themselves and only themselves, certainly not my son! No one will ever know how sorry I am that my son is living with such people. Please pray that God keeps my son safe, for I don't trust them.
#5 Sep 16, 2007
We love our grandson and desperately long to meet him. We are confident the Kentucky Supreme Court will allow us to see Julian Anthony very soon. We continue to pray for his mother and her family. We know the situation is difficult for everyone, not just James and Julia. Contrary to the statements of Jonathan's father Charlie Ricketts, we believe our grandson does have constitutional rights, which guarantee him the right to know and visit with us and his father before he turns 18. We will always love our precious grandson!
#6 Sep 25, 2007
I hope you get to see your grand baby. The Ricketts are unbelievable. I will look for an update. I think about the dad and you guys whenever I see them with Julian (they call him Anthony)
#7 Sep 25, 2007
As far as this baby not knowing the truth. There are a lot of people that will make it known to him the kind of family he is with. The Ricketts are NOT LIKED HERE. Mr Ricketts represented and got a sadistic cold blooded killer off the hook and since then, that name is MUD.
After he got this killer off, he confessed and laughed because of double jeaopardy. Too bad for him~he was jailed for lying under oath.
#8 Dec 12, 2007
I came across your website today. My prayers are with you and your son. I too am a noncustodial father who fought to have a part in my son's life. I too was in Judge O'Reilly's court, but I did not receive fair treatment from him at all; in fact I was outraged by his behavior on the bench. You seemed to have done much better. My son is now six and though I get the standard Wednesday, every other weekend visitation, I still have to put up with a lot of controlling/abusive behaviors and mind games from the drug abusing custodial mother of my son. The mother and her family did everything they could to try to discourage me and run me off. I pray that you are victorious in the Kentucky Supreme Court. There are many noncustodial parents who have been treated as second class citizens hoping for changes in family law. Your victory would give many of us some hope. I am sorry for your long period of alientation. My son was kept from me for over 3 months until Judge O'Reilly finally had a little bit of mercy on me and ordered a temporary visitation schedule until a final order came out. I cannot imagine the heartache that you and your parents are experiencing. I realize the battle you have endured against the Ricketts. They are definitely part of the Louisville "GOOD OLE GUY AND GAL" club. I am sure they have a great deal of influence on the local judiciary. I pray that the Kentucky Supreme Court will realize that what is really in a child's best interest is to allow both parents to have equal involvement and that a child should have constitutional rights to equal protection on the law. Bless you and your son!
#9 Dec 13, 2007
Thanks for your prayers and words of encouragement during this very difficult time. I only pray the Kentucky Supreme Court allows me to participate in my son's life.
I must admit I'm a bit worried, for it seems my son's mother just recently got a new position at the U.S. 6th District Court of Appeals, Western District, in Louisville. And apparently she has changed her first name, for they have her listed as "Julie N. Ricketts". Seems kind of strange to change your name from Julia to Julie Ricketts, even if your husband never called you Julia.
Don't get me wrong, I'm very glad my son's mother is succeeding in her career, but it does seem kind of strange for her to change her name. And I'm also worried about my son, for this new position surely means he will be in day care 5 days a week.
Again, I thank everyone for your prayers.
#10 Jan 2, 2008
How in the world did she get such a position? Is she an attorney? I know that she didn't run for office-she would have never been voted in-sorry.
Her husband could not even win a community position that he ran for.
She should have changed her last name not her first. Are you sure that Julie N. and Julia are the same person? Yikes if so.
#11 Jan 2, 2008
Is she trying to be "Julian" by putting Julie N.? How very very bizarre.
#12 Jan 15, 2008
Couldn't it just be a typo? Why does a name have to have some sort of evil intent? Most people interchange different forms of their own name like Bill/William/Billy. Maybe James is some sort of stalker or just a real weirdo, who knows that half of the story. What does anyone know about him? Everyone is passing judgement on Julie based on information being handed out by Mr. Rhoades.
#13 Jan 15, 2008
get real...I'm not a weirdo, I'm just a father who wants to see and participate in his son's life. Why is that so very strange?
You question the validity of the information I've provided on this forum. Have you visited my blog or website? http://www.letmeseemyson.blogspot.com
The only reason I've provided any information is because Julia, my son's mother, is fighting to keep me out of our son's life. She has tried deceiving everyone she knows, including co-workers, friends, family, and the Courts. My web presence was to prove that I'm my son's father and that we had a relationship. And to reveal the truth to fight her deception.
Before I revealed this information, Julia told everyone I was a liar and stalking her. Of course she neglected to tell them I was the father of her third son. This is why I posted the pictures, video, DNA results, etc. I believe the only way to combat deception is by revealing the truth. Does that make me a stalker?
Julia tried to tell everyone I was obsessed with her while neglecting to tell them I wanted to play a role in our son's life. Heck, she didn't even want anyone to know I'm her son's father. See, Julia did this same thing regarding her first marriage, i.e. tried to pretend it never happened.
I believe it's important to tell children the truth. I believe children have a right to know and have both parents participate in their lives. Did I love and care about Julia, yes? The only problem was I love and care about our son more. This is why Julia and I ended the affair.
Surprisingly, Julia and her husband immediately made it known they intended to bleed me dry and outspend me before ever letting me play a role in my son's life. I only wish they would have thought of my son instead of themselves. See, I knew I couldn't trust them from the start and knew the judicial system was mine and my son's only option.
get real...What would've you done? They lied to the Courts for months and months while knowing I was the father. They lied to everyone about my intentions. They refused me access to my son. They denied me information on my son's health and development. They took me to the Ky Supreme Ct to cut me out of my son's life. What would you do if someone did that to you? I hope you'd find a way to reveal the truth in order to participate in your child's life.
Don't get me wrong, I know my son is also Julia's son, but don't I deserve to also be in his life?
#14 Jan 15, 2008
Im in school...Julia and Julie are the same person, for she worked part-time in the court library before getting this new job in the same court. And most people there know her by Julia, which will be proved when our case returns to family court.
Regardless, I believe she listed her name as Julie to distance herself or pretend she's not the woman involved in this situation. See her new position is high profile, i.e. she's continually communicating to other federal clerks of the courts around the country. And I believe she's embarrassed. Unfortunately, she's not embarrassed about how she's treated our son or me, rather she's embarrassed that people now know she had a lengthy affair.
Julie just doesn't want to take responsibility for Julia's actions. She's more concerned about cheating on her husband than cheating our son. I wish we could just move forward and do what's best for our son. All I've ever asked was that Julia tell the truth so I can participate in our son's life, which includes joint-custody and liberal visitation. I love our son and wish Julia would act like she does too!
#15 Jan 27, 2008
www.kentuckylawblog.com has reported that the Louisville Bar Association has bestowed the "Justice Martin E. Johnstone Special Recognition Award" to Charles E. Ricketts at the LBA 2008 Bench and Bar Dinner and Awards held 1/24/08.
It's very surprising the LBA would give attorney Charlie Ricketts this award, considering the award is connected to Louisville's most recently retired Supreme Court Justice and considering Ricketts has a case before Kentucky's highest court (a case directly involving his Louisville lawyer son Jon Ricketts).
And it's also disturbing considering Ricketts has actively and repeatedly attempted to hoodwink and bamboozle Kentucky Justices about the paternity of his daughter-in-law's third child. Ricketts, although possessing medical and scientific evidence, has repeatedly witheld information from the Kentucky Courts to deny this biological father the right to see his son! For Charlie Ricketts claims this biological father is an interloper and should not have custody or visitation rights, despite Kentucky Statutes and Kentucky case law repeatedly recognizing a biological parents superior rights to custody and visitation.
It's remarkable that the Louisville Bar Association would bestow such recognition to someone practicing such questionable ethics and values. Perhaps the LBA is not aware Mr. Ricketts has a pending case at Kentucky's highest court?
Charlie Ricketts told news media September 12, 2007 (after the KY Supreme Court oral arguements involving his daughter-in-law), "A lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client."
#16 Feb 9, 2008
Just checked out this guy's website and the Ricketts are un-freakin-believable!
Talk about talking out of both sides of your mouth, for both the mom and husband say one thing and do another. Do they even know the kid's dad posted a dump truck full of evidence? Bet they didn't see that coming.
No doubt the mom wanted her cake and eat it too.
They need to just let the guy see his kid already!
#17 Feb 21, 2008
After 5 months of deliberation the Kentucky Supreme Court still has not rendered a decision regarding my custody/visitation case.
Why is this father and his son being blatantly denied their constitutional rights to visitation? Doesn't this seem strange considering Kentucky Statutes and Kentucky Case Law also say the custody and visitation rights of biological parents are superior to anyone else?
Despite the vivid imagination of my son's mother, our son has a biological father as he has a biological mother. This leads to the question of why the Kentucky Supreme Court has denied the right of visitation to this biological father and his son for over 10 months?
See http://www.letmeseemyson.blogspot.com for a timeline of this seemingly simple custody/visitation case.
#18 Feb 24, 2008
Did anyone read the depositions? They blew me away! What does she gain by winning besides screwing up children? How did the case even make it so high? If she wins the child loses! Why I hope the dad wins!
#19 Feb 24, 2008
I hope that those that have the authority to right this wrong, do so. From where I am sitting and seeing all this evidence, this father has been denied a loving relationship with HIS SON.
Best wishes to you Sir as you continue to pursue your right to be a Father to your Son.
To the Mother....do the right thing for your SON. To the Step Father....yes you were disrespected by the affair, but under the circumstances, a child shouldn't suffer the loss of a loving relationship with his Father. Mother, Father, Stepfather you all can love the same child, and you don't have to like each other, just be civilized. Good Luck
#20 Feb 25, 2008
When you compare the husbands actions with his words it's pretty obvious he's exacting revenge on the dad. They talked about incorporating the father and then go to the supreme court to strip him of all visitation. I don't think the husband has the least interest in the child.
The mother and husband are make people in Louisville look bad, they need to get over it and let the dad see his son. Stop making the people of KY look bad!
Add your comments below
|Louisville's Toughest Street Gangs???||4 hr||pudgy||17|
|black women are lazy||9 hr||purple coco||26|
|Married men not getting enough sex at home. (Dec '09)||19 hr||Frustrated||275|
|Louisville: 5 homicides in 1 week||19 hr||Tough Guy||3|
|Grade lane hit and run (Travis Christy)This is ... (Nov '12)||Sun||SMELLMYASS||159|
|Funboomer's (Jun '13)||Sun||Xxxcpl||12|
Find what you want!
Search Louisville Forum Now
Copyright © 2015 Topix LLC