Annulment Fighting for Dummies

Defending Marriage Yahoo groups.. ^ | unknown

[1stFreedom]

Chapter One

Thirteen irregularities in Canon Law from an actual case researched by a respondent who is not a Canon Lawyer. Respondent's comments are underlined.

Canon 1544 Documents.. . .may be inspected. . .by the opposing party.

If there were any documents in the case, I was not given the opportunity to inspect them.

Canon 1554 Before witnesses are examined, their names are to be communicated to the parties.

The names of witnesses were not communicated to me before examination.

Canon 1555 . . .a party may request that a witness be excluded.

Canon 1576 Experts can be excluded or objected to for the same reasons as witnesses.

I was never given the opportunity to request that all witnesses alleging to be "experts" on the so-called disease of alcoholism or "adult children of alcoholics" be excluded. The theories and hypotheses regarding the co-called disease of alcoholism and behavior patterns of ACOAs are conjecture and are not based on scientific fact.

Canon 1564 The questions. . .are not to be leading questions.

The purpose of most of the questions asked me was to gain evidence against the bond. As I recall, almost no questions were asked to gain evidence in support of the bond.

Canon 1567 The use of a tape-recorder is allowed, provided the replies are subsequently committed to writing and, if possible, signed by the deponents.

There is no legitimate excuse why I was never given the opportunity to sign my replies.

Canon 1569 (1) At the conclusion of the examination, the record of the evidence, either as written down by the notary or as played back from the tape--recording, must be communicated to the witness, who is to be given the opportunity of adding to, omitting from, correcting or varying it. (2) Finally, the witness, the judge and the notary must sign the record.

The record of my evidence was never communicated to me and I was not given the opportunity of adding to, omitting from, correcting or varying it, or signing said record.

Canon 1579 (2) When he is giving the reasons for his decision, the judge must state on what grounds he accepts or rejects the conclusions of the experts.

I don't recall the decision stating on what grounds the conclusions of experts were accepted or rejected.

Canon 1598 (1) When the evidence has been assembled, the judge must, under pain of nullity, by a decree permit the parties and their advocates to inspect at the tribunal office these acts which are not yet known to them. . . .he must take care. . .that the right of defence always remains intact. (2) To complete the evidence, the parties can propose other items of proof to the judge.

I was not given the opportunity to inspect the acts and contest the many falsehoods that went unchallenged. The right of defence was, therefore, denied me. It was only after a decision had been rendered that I was given the opportunity to propose other items of proof, that being in the second instance, not the first instance as specified. See enclosed copy of my letter of ( date ) to Father ( ) for other items of proof and part of my defence that was denied me in the first instance.

Canon 1608 (1) To give any judgement, the judge must have in his mind moral certainty about the matter to be decided in the judgement.

It is inconceivable that moral certainty could have been reached in the affirmative, in light of the negative animadversions given by the defender of the bond.

Canon 1614 A judgement is to be published as soon as possible, with an indication of the ways in which it can be challenged.

It was never indicated in the judgement, nor in a subsequent discussion with the judge on (date) regarding an appeal, that I could challenge the judgement by proposing a plaint of nullity, or appeal in the second instance to the Roman Rota. I was only told that an appeal in the second instance to the Court of Appeals in (diocese) was automatic.

Canon 1616 (1) A judgement must be corrected. . .if, in the text of a judgement, there is an error in. . .the presentation of the facts. . . .

Please see my letter of (date) to Father ( ) describing examples of erroneous facts that require a correction of judgement.

Canon 1620 A judgement is null with a nullity which cannot be remedied if: (7) the right of defence was denied to one or other party.

I was denied the right of defence by not being given the opportunity to contest the substantial amount of erroneous testimony, upon which the decision was based.

This case was sent to the Rota and the decree of nullity was overturned.

[Don W]

Much as I empathize with your dilemma, this is a (mainly) POLITICAL discussion board.

Your personal problems really shouldn't be discussed in such a public forum, should they?

[1stFreedom]

Considering that many Catholic politicians are involved in anulments, as well as the political aspect of the Rota, this issue is right at home on FR.