You caught your spouse with someone else, and now you’re going to make them pay. Your spouse left you and the children, and now you want revenge.

Divorce is already one of the most stressful things that a family can go through. Adding your anger and possibly violence to the mix is not the solution. It is completely understandable to be upset and very angry even when a marriage does not make it. But letting that hurt turn into aggression or any kind of violence will compound the problem and bring even more sorrow to your family, as well as yourself.

In addition to the emotional aspects of carrying your anger through your divorce, there is a very real financial burden and time delay that will occur if you plan to be disagreeable throughout the process of your divorce.

Clients need to ask themselves what their ultimate goal is in obtaining the divorce, what kind of relationship they want to have with their ex-spouse (if any at all), what assets they want to claim or keep, and most importantly – if there are children involved, to what degree are parties willing to go to achieve their ends.

Rui Alves is the kind of divorce attorney who can help you sort out your differences within the boundaries of the family law system. Clients often are so enraged or emotional during the divorce process that they forget that having a vendetta out against their soon to be ex will only prolong the process, cost more money, and do more emotional damage to the entire family.

Additionally, if you are seeking a divorce on the grounds of your being angry over a single incident, you need to evaluate the situation and ask yourself if it is the best course of action for your circumstances. Anger will only cloud your judgment and cause you to do and say things that you will regret later.

If you need help with marital issues, or are ready to move forward with the next step and start the divorce process, call Mr. Alves at (401) 942-3100 or use the contact form HERE for more information.

  We are all fairly familiar with the traditional grounds for divorce, “Irreconcilable Differences.” Yet, few if any of us understand that there are eight other categories that can be taken into consideration as grounds for a divorce between two p…

Common law marriage, occasionally referred to as “Sui Juris” marriage; is an informal unions of interpersonal status which is legally recognized in specific jurisdictions as being valid even though no legally recognized marriage ceremony has been perfo…

We all love weddings and seeing someone happily married, and always wish for the continuation of their wedded bliss. However, sometimes, situations arise that require us to protect ourselves in the face of unforseeable changes in our circumstances. Hav…

It has been in the news over and over, people who have had information taken from their conversations on social networks, and used against them in everything from divorce hearings to criminal proceedings. Your social musings on the Internet are public,…

There are two documents that are required by statutory law in order to allow your loved ones to institute your preferences in situations where you are seriously ill, or cannot make decisions for your own care. They are a Living Will, and a Durable Powe…

Having a baby and getting married are all joyful times in our lives. The one thing that we may forget to do during this happy period is update our Will to reflect our changed marital status or new parenthood status. However, these are some of the most …

With the popularity of social media, and the shrinking of our world as a result, it is understandable that many people have connections through online social networks, like Facebook and MySpace.

Unfortunately, the same laws apply to these environments that apply to in person contact between jurors and defendants – and when the courts are faced with the decision of whether someone is in violation of those laws in an online environment, they must use the same guidelines.

This situation is discussed in detail in the article below in which a juror in Britain was held in contempt of court for contacting the defendant through her Facebook profile. And although this situation takes place overseas, the results in the Criminal Courts of the US would be very similar.

Juror in Facebook contempt prosecution after ‘contacting defendant during trial’
By Andrew Hough
13 Jun 2011

A female juror will stand trial this week accused of contempt of court after she allegedly sent messages to a defendant through Facebook, causing a multi-million pound drug trial to collapse.

In a British legal first, Joanne Fraill, 40, will be prosecuted for allegedly exchanging messages on the social networking site with Jamie Sewart, one of the defendants she had been trying.

Prosecutors will claim Mrs Fraill allegedly chatted online to Mrs Sewart, who had been acquitted in the case, while verdicts on other trials were still being discussed.

Mrs Sewart, 34, also faces contempt proceedings because she is alleged to have asked Mrs Fraill, of Blackley, Manchester, for details of the jury’s deliberations.

Mrs Frail, who denies the charges, is also accused of using the internet to research the case against the judge’s orders. The pair could face jail if found guilty.

Dominic Grieve, the Attorney-General who will open the case at the High Court on Tuesday, will argue their actions cause a major drugs trial to collapse, leaving taxpayers facing a bill of more than £6million.

The case, to be heard by Lord Judge, the Lord Chief Justice, coincides with an appeal by another defendant in the trial, who is challenging his conviction because of the alleged conversation.

The aborted trial involving Mrs Sewart, of Bolton, occurred in Manchester last year and involved multiple charges and defendants.

It exposed a corrupt police officer’s links with a drugs gang in Bolton. Mrs Sewart also denies the charges.

After the Facebook conversation was discovered, the jury at Minshull Street Crown Court in Manchester had to be discharged from the 2½-month trial.

It was one of a series of four trials that had been sitting, which involved 500 witnesses, 14 barristers, five juries and more than 160 days in court.

One of the defendants, Gary Knox, a convicted drug dealer is appealing against his conviction on the basis of alleged jury misconduct, with the appeal also to be heard by Lord Judge.

Knox, 35, was jailed for six years for conspiracy to commit misconduct in a public office.

The court heard he bought sensitive information on drug dealers from police in return for a £20,000 BMW and Premier League match tickets.

A police officer, Phil Berry, 44, who received the gifts and admitted the same charge, was jailed for four years.

Lord Judge is reportedly expected to issue tough new guidelines on internet use by jurors, which he will argue will lead to contempt of court prosecutions.

New measures will include warnings from judges to jurors at the start of trials, information videos and notices throughout jury rooms.

Christopher Kinch, QC, chairman of the Criminal Bar Association, said comments assuming the guilt of the defendant were possible grounds for appeal.

“The situation is a potential time-bomb for the jury system,” he told The Times.

“Left unchecked, we could move towards trial by X-factor-type online polling; or jurors might find themselves put under pressure by correspondents online.”

In the heat of the moment, tempers flare, emotions run wild, and decisions get made that unfortunately affect everyone in the short and long term. The simple act of taking a breath before saying or doing something you may regret, especially during th…

No matter what kind of divorce situation you are in, one thing is certain, it will have significant costs associated with its resolution. That is true whether you hire an attorney or not. The areas where attorneys help divorce clients the most are gath…