The divorce

[walter]

Feb 11, 2019 22:32:15 GMT magnumforce73 said:

Feb 11, 2019 19:51:51 GMT walter said:

My grandparents always had separate beds - it's a generational thing with a lot of older people and among certain religions like strict roman Catholics.  Both of them were as far apart as you could be from serial killers/rapists.  Other couples also held those beliefs/values and shared the same bed.   You can't read anything into that.

In terms of the eyes - I would refer you to a thread prior to his arrest where some people, for bizarre reasons, were convinced he must have been a glazier.  Someone managed to get the name of glass company that had been around and soon photos of every single employee were being pasted everywhere.  People found an older guy and targeted him as likely the GSK because of how his eyes looked and facial expressions.

Of course the company and individual had nothing at all to do with the GSK and as soon as he was caught, everyone could not have cared less that they passed some really horrendous judgements on people (particularly this one poor guy) based on a look they gave at a random moment in time during a picture.

We don't know what the individual is going through, their normal look, what they are thinking, etc.  It's impossible to make any interpretation of them and especially what sort of knowledge they might have of someone else's criminal behavior.  Perhaps they knew something, all of it or absolutely none of it.  But without knowing them even in passing we are in no position whatsoever to 'read into' their body language at all.  It's pointless and almost assuredly incorrect.

Walter--

I normally try to avoid your posts, but since you engaged me, I'll bite.

"You can't read into anything like that."  This is the second time you've counseled me on this.  Duly noted.  That said, I disagree with you--and much of that into which you "read."  Likewise, I don't care all that much for your condescending tone--I qualified my statement by saying she is entitled to the presumption of innocence, so lighten up.

We all have our own personal experiences.  I personally have looked into the eyes of Evil--whether or not you have only you can answer--so I have different views on it than YOU, and I'm not wrong because my views don't concur with yours.

Look below.  Look into those eyes--and no, you need not respond--and make whatever value judgment you wish.  "The Eyes are the windows to the soul."  Not a flattering picture down below, and not a very benign look, either.  Guess what, Walter?  That's my interpretation--and you need not agree.

mf73

Perhaps she knew something.  Perhaps she knew everything.  Perhaps she knew nothing.

In short, it is not a flattering picture of her - I could find a not flattering picture of anyone alive that would have you saying you see evil in them.  People ultimately see whatever they want to in pictures - it's just a picture. 

This case has shown me people are far too quick to judge all kinds of people and say terrible things or cast terrible aspersions on people.  After they say terrible things and are proven wrong, I never see anyone saying 'oh man I feel bad for making those judgements' and NEVER does anyone say 'huh, maybe I shouldn't say those things based off a picture of someone I have never met - maybe I SHOULDN'T just accuse someone of being a serial killer and mass rapist based off nothing'.  Everyone just moves on to judge the next person they see and crank out the same reasoning of 'they can tell from the eyes'.  No one apologizes, it's all 'just my opinion - can't hold it against me'.

[magnumforce73]

@f1 and almagata--Valid points, and totally reasonable.  Being a bit younger than some of the regulars here, and being well versed in his special brand of terror, joey's sordid story is very quick to get my dander up.

I still view their sleeping/bedroom arrangement as weird, but everyone's entitled to take that how they wish.  Ultimately, despite whatever concerns I harbor, I am well aware that his ex and his children and his grandchild are not responsible for his sins--and truly, I feel sorry for them because regardless of how upright they live their lives, they will be haunted by joey's deeds, by that ugly stigma--no, not everyone will be that way, but some will, and I'm not saying it's right; I'm saying it's simply human nature.  Whatever happens--and this especially applies to his daughters--I hope they're able to find some peace in their lives.

On the matter of joey and his ex having children--they made time to procreate, an act which isn't necessarily time consuming; fire off a live round--so to speak--and your job is done.  They're still husband and wife, but residing in different bedrooms--sorry, that dog just does not hunt in my book, but individual mileage will vary on that 'un.  My own view on why joey became a father: one, Sharon probably wanted them (totally reasonable and normal); and two, like many others, I would be willing to wager that joey probably figured, "if I become a father, maybe this will 'fix' my problem(s)."  As it turned out, bad things tended to happen anytime Sharon was near due date.  That's a very common justification for it--this idea that making a baby will solve whatever problems (small or large) plague a couple in a relationship--and more often than not, it only exacerbates existing problems.  Interestingly, he and his ex waited eight years after tying the knot to procreate--and the first child arrives not too long after his disgraceful firing from Auburn P.D., and when he added a whole new, deadlier twist to his "thing."

A third reason--as a father, especially the father of three girls, joey The Rapist and Murderer knew that his domestic arrangement would make him blend in further and appear "normal."  If given the opportunity, I'd ask him to his face--nose-to-nose, Gunnery Sergeant Hartman style--"how would you like it if some scumbag did your daughters what you did to your victims?"  I'm confident we all know how joey'd feel about that.

mf73

[looking4justice]

Feb 2, 2019 15:42:28 GMT f1guyus said:

On a more practical note now that JJD is locked up he can’t kill Sharon for finalizing the divorce. My guess is that’s why she stayed in sort of legal limbo all these years.

My thoughts exactly.

[looking4justice]

Feb 3, 2019 0:20:23 GMT almagata said:

Feb 2, 2019 15:42:28 GMT f1guyus said:

On a more practical note now that JJD is locked up he can’t kill Sharon for finalizing the divorce. My guess is that’s why she stayed in sort of legal limbo all these years.

That was my guess too. 

I think the Granite Bay murders of Suzette Jennifer Willis (11/21/1991),  Cindy Wanner (11/25/1991)  and Cherilyn Hawkley (10/31/1993)  were messages to Sharon. 

These are the dates of the legal separation and divorce filings. 

Petition for legal separation 11/4/1991 but on the divorce papers filed it says they separated 12/30/1990. 

Petition - DV Prevention w/o Minor Child filed on 08/06/1993

Thank you for laying these dates out. These filings would have been big stressors for JJD. What better way to make his point to Sharon than to amplify the murder coverage by choosing people close to Sharon's parent's home and a local school teacher. Do we know whether one of JJD's kids attended the school at that time?

Imagine these convos...

Sharon's parents: "Sharon, did you know that Wanner girl who disappeared was killed? They found her today up on Forestville road. Isn't it just terrible what happened to that poor girl? What kind of a monster would do this? Be very careful Sharon, there's a nut job in the area."

Sharon's kids: "Mom, a teacher at the school died and we did a memorial. Ann said they found her in her car!" 

Sharon knew it was him.

[trabuco]

Feb 12, 2019 4:24:55 GMT f1guyus said:

I don't know why but this reminds me of a quote I read recently: "Young people know the rules. Old people know the exceptions."

Not the rules I lived by.

Me either. This is a time when I think about how well MF73 can convey thoughts into words. I had some thoughts but not the words. 

[trabuco]

Feb 12, 2019 20:19:11 GMT looking4justice said:

Feb 3, 2019 0:20:23 GMT almagata said:

That was my guess too. 

I think the Granite Bay murders of Suzette Jennifer Willis (11/21/1991),  Cindy Wanner (11/25/1991)  and Cherilyn Hawkley (10/31/1993)  were messages to Sharon. 

These are the dates of the legal separation and divorce filings. 

Petition for legal separation 11/4/1991 but on the divorce papers filed it says they separated 12/30/1990. 

Petition - DV Prevention w/o Minor Child filed on 08/06/1993

Thank you for laying these dates out. These filings would have been big stressors for JJD. What better way to make his point to Sharon than to amplify the murder coverage by choosing people close to Sharon's parent's home and a local school teacher. Do we know whether one of JJD's kids attended the school at that time?

Imagine these convos...

Sharon's parents: "Sharon, did you know that Wanner girl who disappeared was killed? They found her today up on Forestville road. Isn't it just terrible what happened to that poor girl? What kind of a monster would do this? Be very careful Sharon, there's a nut job in the area."

Sharon's kids: "Mom, a teacher at the school died and we did a memorial. Ann said they found her in her car!" 

Sharon knew it was him.

Well said. Very chilling to think about but I think they are likely scenarios.

[alexenjie]

I'm not certain that JJD's wife was terrified that he would kill her and therefore stayed married to him. Yes he was an awful and unusual husband who I think she felt suspicious of what he did in the hours that he was not physically with her. I think she suspected him of the ransacking robberies based on the stolen items LE saw in his house but I don't know if she was suspicious of his being a rapist and I tend to doubt that she thought he was a murderer. She knew that their precious daughter and granddaughter moved in with him and that's the main reason I think she had no clue to his most serious crimes. How could any parent sleep at night if she felt her daughter and granddaughter's lives were danger every moment that they lived with him?

[jenn]

Regarding the divorce, I obtained a copy of the file. As of February 15, 2019 there are 51 pages in the file. JJD filed his own response himself, hand written by himself "in pro per". No one is representing him. In JJD's response in section 5 c. he checked the box RESPONDENT REQUESTS divorce, irreconcilable differences. In section 9, SEPARATE PROPERTY, he hand wrote the following statement. "As stated in our unfiled agreement to dissolve marriage in case no. SDR0054921 signed by me on October 6, 2018." This same exact statement is handwritten again in section 10 COMMUNITY AND QUASI-COMMUNITY PROPERTY. The document is dated January 17, 2019 and signed by JJD. A court date was assigned in Placer County as March 5, 2019 in Department 41. But that judge immediately filed an order changing the date and location to March 6, 2019 in Department 63 at the Sacramento County Jail. That order was served on JJD via mail. JJD filed a written response to this change of venue order on February 1, 2019 and he checked off the box I CONSENT TO THE ORDER REQUESTED. So, he is not fighting the divorce at all. So far, he has gone along with the program and he has filed all documents representing himself.

[casita57]

Feb 1, 2019 20:12:34 GMT dogs said:

Feb 1, 2019 4:32:45 GMT almagata said:

Sharon Huddle filed for divorce in Placer County 7/31/2018.

There is supposed to be a hearing on 2/5/19. 

It looks like JJD's attorney's filed a response the dissolution with the court on 1/25/19.  JJD may have filed an "Order to Show Cause" motion but the notes on the court's page are hard to interpret. 

webportal.placerco.org/ecourtpublic/?q=node/45/939464

If he fights a divorce from jail, I think he is showing part of his personality and belief system. 

It also could be a request to place the proceedings under a gag order. 

OK, found it, though I don't know what any of it means.

View Attachment

Hello everyone I was gone for a while. I am not a lawyer but for my experience looks like she already file RO is Request for order, it talks about dissolution only that means she want the divorce immediately. What is a single woman.Looks like the court considers JJD as " default ". Then later she can file a RO in reserve issues, like money , property etc and at the end if they have property will be the final decree or Qdro. That includes pensions etc

[casita57]

In my case I file dissolution, like Her. Then the divorce lasted more years in my case. I don't think there's any disagreement, looks like normal fillings,considering that is in jail forever and ever. It looks like Sharon had a meeting with the Judge first.

[jenn]

One of the interesting items in this divorce file is the POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF UNFILED DISSOLUTION AGREEMENT document that Sharon filed. It is her official reasoning where it sites case law for not filing the record of the separation of property. She obviously does not want the list to be made public. The document reads as follows: A MARITAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE FILED WITH THE COURT TO BE EFFECTIVE In Flynn v. Flynn (1954) 42 Cal. 2d 55 the court held that an adequately identified unfiled agreement of the parties can be incorporated by reference into a dissolution judgment. The fact that the parties agreement is not part of the permanent records of the court does not vitiate the decree. It is requested that the court grant the dissolution judgment without attaching the parties agreement and that the original agreement be returned to Petitioner. Respectfully submitted, (dated October 22, 2018) Sharon Huddle

[jenn]

Another interesting fact about this divorce is that when Sharon started to proceed with the divorce as a "default" the Placer County Court wanted to meet with both of them to discuss it. Sharon did NOT want to do that so, instead, she dropped the default process and started over. When she decided to drop the default divorce process, she filed a letter with the court explaining why. Her letter is as follows:
Dated December 7, 2018 Clerk of Court, Placer County .... RE: Drop of Default Hearing Scheduled for December 17, 2018 Dear Clerk: The court has scheduled this matter in Sacramento County, Department 63. My attendance at such a hearing is medically inadvisable and I will not be able to attend. I will be requesting that the default be vacated, allowing Respondent to file a Response, and the matter proceed to judgment based on the parties marital settlement agreement. Sent herewith is the court's form for dropping matter on calendar. Thank you for your kind consideration of this matter. Best Regards, Sharon Huddle.

[jenn]

Next court date is scheduled for March 6, 2019 Time: 3:00 p.m. Department 63 Sacramento. Court address: 651 i Street, Sacramento (in the basement of the jail).

JOSEPH JAMES DEANGELO is now confined in SACRAMENTO COUNTY MAIN JAIL in Sacramento, California. His presence is required in the above-entitled court on March 6, 2019 at 3:00 PM in Department 63. IT IS ORDERED that the Warden, Superintendent or Sheriff of the aforementioned institution deliver said person into the custody of the Sheriff of Sacramento County for the purposes set forth. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Sheriff of Sacramento County execute this order by returning the prisoner from said institution to the Superior Court at the time and place indicated. The Sheriff of Sacramento County is further directed to return the prisoner to the institution when his presence is no longer required by this court. Date: Jan. 31, 2019 John H. Paulsen, Commissioner of the Superior Court

[alexenjie]

I don't blame JJD's wife for not wanting to have a divorce hearing with him in person with a judge while he is in jail. I wouldn't blame her if she never wanted to see him in person again in her life. It also makes perfect sense to me, wanting to keep whatever previous marital settlement they made private. I know that they separated in 1991, does anyone know if they ever made that separation legal? It doesn't seem like they did.

[ElfinEars]

Feb 11, 2019 18:06:50 GMT magnumforce73 said:

Feb 2, 2019 15:42:28 GMT f1guyus said:

On a more practical note now that JJD is locked up he can’t kill Sharon for finalizing the divorce. My guess is that’s why she stayed in sort of legal limbo all these years.

f1, I don't disagree with you, but allow me to put a slight twist on it--I don't have proof, but given certain events and the fact that they've been in a twenty-eight year "separation," it's my view that Sharon knows much much more than what she's indicated to investigators.  More importantly--factoring in "rules of evidence"--I think even J.J.D. was smart enough to realize that if any foul play befell Sharon, that even he'd have a hell of time slipping through that particular crevice.  That might be the only reason Sharon is still breathing.

I'll never forget the one photo shown of her very briefly following in the immediate aftermath of J.J.D.'s arrest, and I'll qualify my comment by saying that the woman is entitled to the presumption of innocence and regardless of how she fits into all this her life has been no doubt turned upside down by the press and the scrutiny associated with being linked to a serial murderer.  The look on Sharon's face--and in particular, her eyes--was not a pleasing sight.  In fact, her eyes had qualities that were eerily reminiscent of J.J.D.--take that how you will and for what it's worth.

One reason I'm inclined to look at Sharon with a wary eye--the separate bedrooms husband and wife had going back to basically the very beginning of their marriage in the 70s.  I've heard of couples doing this after years/decades of living "quiet lives of desperation," but I've never heard of such an arrangement taking place between a couple less than or within five years of tying the knot.

"Always look at the husband first."  So I"m told.

mf73

I'd love to be wrong but I agree with you 100%.
I know it's a sensitive and highly moderated subject but I think there's so much more to Sharon and their relationship and it is a big piece of the puzzle.

Would love to know what the story is.