TAUCK V. TAUCK

Now I thought my divorce was bad, but little did I know!  

For a really, truly bad divorce take a look at Tauck v. Tauck.  In 2007 when this case was at its height, it had taken up to 82 days of trial and counting, plus 100 witnesses, and costs had added up to $11 million and counting.  How could that be possible?  

Well, I know how that could be possible.  Think corrupt courts in Connecticut, the theme I began this blog with last August 2010. 

The Superior Court Judge involved in this case was Judge Holly Abery-Wetstone--not exactly the brightest bulb among the bunch.  

Then there is Peter Tauck, Nancy Tauck and their four minor children plus all the lawyers sucking up all the money for all they are worth.  What a truly sad scenario!  

Again, I do not take sides here between the parties in the case, because how is anyone supposed to know the truth from a distance.  No matter how it sounds, you can never tell what was actually going on, and good lawyers are capable of blackballing the most innocent party and cleanscrubbing the most guilty, and you would never be able to tell what had actually happened.  That's how law in practiced in Connecticut where no one gives a hoot about the truth.

But one thing I do know is that you've got to be crazy throwing out major sums of money like this.  Of course, if you are used to having large sums of money, you might not even notice.  Apparently, Mr. Tauck has a fortune of up to $53 million arising from his family's luxury travel agencies, plus a house in Westport, and a home at Lake Placid.  Still, honestly!  

Each side in this case accused the other side of wrong doing.  Each accused the other side of drug addiction and suicide attempts. On his side, Peter Tauck was accused of having child pornography on his laptop computer, molesting two of the parties' children, and raping his wife.  On her side, Nancy Tauck was accused of severe alcohol abuse and being a neglectful mother.  

As the case stacked up in 2007, it looked as though Peter Tauck was doing better than Nancy Tauck in the court battle.  Apparently, evidence showed that Nancy Tauck may have set up her husband by downloading pornography into the laptop while he was in Tahiti.  Also, there was, apparently, no evidence substantiating the accusation that he sexually abused the children, and if you have made accusations you can't substantiate, you are in trouble.  It's better to keep silent.  

In contrast, Peter was scoring points against Nancy.  For example, she failed an alcohol test administered at the court house and was accused of not attending the AA meetings regularly that she was supposed to attend.  Furthermore, the parenting supervisors who were in charge when Nancy Tauck spent time with her kids stated that she didn't put her children to bed at night and didn't wake them up in the morning, leaving the parenting supervisors to do that job as well as other parenting tasks.  

During the divorce period, the couple were doing what is called "bird nesting" where the children remain in the home and each parent comes in and out of the home on an equal basis.  Apparently, the couple had video cameras throughout the house to make sure they were under observation at all times.  

This case was so overwhelming that at one hearing during the litigation, the judge had to contend with 41 outstanding motions in the case on a single day.  When one of the attorneys said, this case isn't over until the Judge has filed a decision, Judge Abery-Wetstone responded, "I can't write a decision until you all stop filing motions!"  

I just picture all those folks surrounded by multiple piles of paper costing multiple millions of dollars.  It is just mind boggling.  But, nonetheless, nothing to be surprised about.  After all, we are talking Connecticut, aren't we!

Best guess is Peter won and Nancy lost.  Does that mean that justice was done?  No one will ever know but Peter and Nancy in the dark hours when they each sit alone with themselves.  Do I say both are wrong like so many attorneys who support abusers?  No I don't.  One is likely wrong, but with all the dust that has been kicked up I just don't know who. What we do know,without doubt, is that if anyone lost this case, it was the children who lost.