Foregone Conclusion
I now realize that from the moment I stepped into the courtroom the outcome of my divorce was set in stone. It didn't matter what I filed. Everything I presented that showed or could demonstrate Kathy was a prostitute hiding income was going to be, and was, either ignored or subjugated by Nevada County Commissioner Yvette Durant.

Kathy was not to be assigned any financial obligations, especially child support based upon Kathy's pay history or earnings capacity, as doing so were threats to Kathy's prostitution. Kathy and Durant only succeeded at minimizing and delaying chuild support and it came at a very high price . . . exposure.

The only unknowns when I walked in court were how obvious Durant’s corruption and Kathy's bad faith and collusion was going to have to be in order to defraud my children out of child support because nobody knew what I was capable of doing.
As it turned out I was capable of a lot. Much more than anyone thought. There was only so much Durant and Kathy could do as a team which is why Kathy had to drop out of the proceedings. She would never have withstood my examination and could not file any briefs or final financial disclosures without both Kathy and Durant committing blatant fraud and perjury, so Durant was left to do the dirty work and attempt damage control at pre-trial hearings by throwing me a bone on the form of an impotent order to compel Kathy's response to interrogatories and then deny me a trial continuance.
No Financial Obligations 
The only impediment Commissioner Durant has to breaking the law is if the law doesn't allow for the discretion she needs to break it, and even that doesn't stop her. Durant will shamelessly abuse her discretion so skillfully it will make your head spin. She is well practiced in the art of using manipulation, deception and conspiracy to bully and defraud her victims.

It's when Durant's discretion ran out that caused Kathy's prostitution to be exposed, specifically Durant's discretion with regard to child support and the final declarations of disclosures. Prior to judgment Durant was able to "safely" do almost anything she wanted and easily get away with it. Not so on final orders at judgment. Kathy would have had to commit clear fraud and withstood my examination under oath leaving Kathy with no option but to drop out of our divorce proceedings before trial which is what Kathy told me she was going to do months before.

Kathy jumped ship because she was not skilled enough to successfully argue a case to avoid taking on any financial obligations, so Durant did Kathy's dirty work for her and did a very fine job at that.   Durant did so well in fact, Kathy walked: (1) without taking on any community debt  including income tax liabilities and the costs I bore to store our community property both of which Durant just simply ignored, (2) getting all of our community property at auction, not appraised or sale value in spite of my protest and Kathy saying nothing leaving me owing Kathy $7,000 after sale of our property (See "Third Party Events" > "Vanzant Auctions") and (3) without me getting a child support judgment (See  the "Dr. Jakal and Mrs. Hide" page).

And Kathy was granted all of that without having to: (1) disclose any financial information, (2) file a settlement statement, (3) attend the settlement conference (two) (4) attend the pretrial hearing, (5) file a trial brief, or (6) appear at trial! That's because the outcome of my divorce was . . . a foregone conclusion, KATHY WAS NOT TO BE ASSIGNED ANY CAREER ENDING FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS IN OUR DIVORCE.

Also, in clear collusion with Kathy again, Durant cleverly worked the disclosure requirements to try and prevent me from motioning to have Durant's predetermined judgment set aside due to it being clearly fraudulent. I am certain that is why Kathy filed with the court and mailed to me a cleaned up income and expense statement with no material changes (all zeros again). The statement was requested by and should have only been sent back to DCSS as I did mine.

But we're not done! The judgment that was mailed to me after trial somehow got lost in the mail and the clerk would not mail me another copy. I had to send the court a postage pre-paid envelope so by the time I received the judgment it was too late for me to request a new trial which I intended to do. There just so happens to be specific exceptions in law governing new trial requests that do not allow extension of the deadline due to mailing.  Knock me over with a feather.
More Child Support Problems on the Horizon
​The next problem Kathy will face is a child support judgment. State guidelines all but eliminate the discretion Durant needs to order support in Kathy's best interests, not our children's, and since I would not stipulate to the temporary child support amount Durant worked her magic on to pull out of thin air, child support was reserved at trial due to the DCSS not showing due to not being timely noticed (the DCSS did appear  for pre-trial the week before that was noticed at the same time as the trial). I believe Kathy could also be trying to avoid post-judgment discovery.

My goal is to push Kathy into getting a job and pay guideline child support based upon Kathy's true earnings capacity, or pay child support based upon Kathy's recent pay history at the very least. That could require Kathy exit prostitution which would obviously be in our children's best interests who nobody involved in this (Kathy, Durant, Truckee PD, etc.) seem to care about except for me. To say this is disgusting and obscene is beyond inadequate. It's inhuman and will not be tolerated. I am hoping I'm seeing the next legal angles Durant's trying to work correctly so Kathy can't weasel out of paying child support that meets our children's needs at judgment too.