Lefebvre: Father Jean-Claude Lefebvre

Share Button

Jean-Claude Lefebvre (Father Jean-Claude Lefebvre)

priest Diocese Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario.  Late voctation.  Widower.  Ordained 2001.  Charged February 2010.  Nine charges relate to allegations of sex abuse of  two young boys.  One set of allegations relate to offences 30 to 32 years ago.  The other allegations date between 01 Jan. ’89 to 31 December 1999. Lefebvre denies the allegations.  30 August 2013:  found unfit to stand trial – all charges withdrawn.

(Picture above by Gino Donato, Sudbury Star, 03 November 2010. “Father Jean-Claude Lefebvre, is a new priest at St. Jacques Church in Hanmer.”)

30 August 2013found unfit to stand trial – all charges withdrawn

Court dates:  committed to stand trial in Ontario Superior Court (Trial date not yet set)

Next court date: 30 August 2013:   09:30 am, for adjustment of some sort, Sudbury, Ontario courthouse (155 Elm St.)21 May 2013:  10 am,  pre-trial motion, Sudbury, Ontario courthouse (155 Elm St.)17 April 2013: pre-trial (this is NOT open to the public), Sudbury, Ontario courthouse (155 Elm St.) ; 04 September 2012: 10 am, for “an application”  at Sudbury, Ontario courthouse (155 Elm St.)29 May 2012: 3:20 pm, pre-trial, Sudbury, Ontario courthouse (not open to the public);   13 December 2011:   pre-trial hearing in chambers – not open to public) 2 pm, Sudbury court house;  17 & 18 October 2011:  Preliminary hearing (Sudbury, Ontario) 10 am Courtroom “C,” Elm St. courthouse, Sudbury, Ontario; 16 September 2011:   Elm St. courthouse, Sudbury, Ontario (10 am. Courtroom “B”); 31 May 2011,  Elm St. courthouse, Sudbury, Ontario (10 am.  Courtroom “B” – Trial confirmation hearing); 23 February 2011 ; 19 January 2011:  to set dates for preliminary inquiry (10 am. Elm St. courthouse, Sudbury);  07 December 2010 to confirm dates for a preliminary inquiry.

Court file # 401199810108400 (before it was committed to Ontario Superior Court)


o5 November 2010:  BLOG I thank God


Priest denies charges

Sudbury Star

05 November 2010


A Roman Catholic priest facing nine counts of historic sexual abuse says he is innocent of all charges and that will be proven in court.

Rev. Jean-Claude Lefebvre, 75, says he is not afraid to face his accusers — both of whom are male — on charges that relate to abuse alleged to have occurred 30-32 years ago in one instance and about 12 years ago in the other.

None of the charges have been proven in court.

All charges relate to incidents alleged to have occurred before Lefebvre was ordained to the priesthood in 2001.

Lefebvre did not enter the seminary until after his wife died in the early 1990s. Before entering the priesthood, he had a 30-year career as an Inco miner and worked for a news-paper for five years.

Lefebvre told The Star on Thursday he was not angry about the story outlining the charges against him.

But the story was upsetting to his family. The soft-spoken Lefebvre has five children and several grandchildren.

He said there is another side to the story and it will come out in court.

He or his lawyer are scheduled to appear in Sudbury Court on Dec. 7 to set dates for a preliminary inquiry into the charges.

Lefebvre said he was sad to be relieved of his duties at four small parishes with a combined congrega tion of 5,000 members in Cache Bay, Field, Crystal Falls and River Valley.

“I don’t cry because I’m 75 and I know it’s time to retire,” he said.

He said parishioners often told him they enjoyed his preachings because he had experienced family life before becoming their priest.

When asked if he was receiving support from the Diocese of Sault Ste. Marie or its bishop, Jean-Louis Plouffe, Lefebvre replied: “Not at all.”

When asked how he felt about that, he said: “Very bad.”

He did receive severance from the diocese, he said.

Lefebvre said he has incurred thousands of dollars in legal fees to defend himself against the charges.

He is charged with two counts of sexual assault, two counts of sexual interference, two counts of sexual exploitation, two counts of invitation to sexual touching and one count of indecent assault on a male.

A phone call to Bishop Plouffe’s office Tuesday by The Star has not been returned.



Priest faces abuse charges

Sudbury Star

03 November 2010


A Roman Catholic priest who once served at parishes in Hanmer and Val Caron, and more recently in the Field area, will appear in Sudbury court Dec. 7 to confirm dates for a preliminary inquiry into historic sexual abuse charges.

Rev. Jean-Claude Lefebvre, 74, was charged Feb. 12 and Feb. 23 with nine counts relating to two victims, said Det.-Const. Norm O’Bonsawin of the Noelville detachment of the Ontario Provincial Police.

Lefebvre stands charged with two counts of sexual assault, two counts of sexual interference, two counts of sexual exploitation, two counts of invitation to sexual touching and one count of indecent assault on a male.

Both victims were minors at the time the charges are alleged to have occurred.

One victim alleges the abuse dated back 30 or 32 years and the other alleges abuse occurred between Jan. 1, 1998, and Dec. 31, 1999.

None of the allegations have been proven in court.

Lefebvre was not ordained into the priesthood until 10 years ago — after the incidents of sexual misconduct are alleged to have occurred.

Before that, Lefebvre, who is originally from Shawinigan, Que., was a 30-year employee of Inco Ltd., worked at a French-language newspaper, and was a volunteer hospital and palliative care chaplain.

O’Bonsawin confirmed Lefebvre was pastor at four parishes in Cache Bay, Crystal Falls, Field and River Valley when he was charged earlier this year. He retired some time after the charges were laid.

He said the OPP has closed its investigation into the complaints filed by the two victims and said no other complainants have come forward so far.

O’Bonsawin said he thought Lefebvre would be tried on both sets of charges at the same time. A call to the office of Jean- Louis Plouffe, bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Sault Ste. Marie, was not immediately returned.

58 Responses to Lefebvre: Father Jean-Claude Lefebvre

  1. Sylvia says:

    I just found out that Lefebvre had a court date in Sudbury today. If anyone knows anyhting about what transpired or the outcome please pass on the word

  2. Sylvia says:

    I have just updated the Legal Calendar. There are two court dates scheduled for Father Jean-Claude Lefebvre:

    (1) 16 September 2011: confirmation hearing (10 am. Courtroom “B.” Elm St., court house, Sudbury, Ontario)

    (2) 17 & 18 October 2011: Preliminary hearing. (I don’t have the time, but it will be in the Sudbury court house – I should have start time by the time October rolls around.)

  3. Sylvia says:

    Father Jean-Claude Lefebvre’s preliminary hearing is still scheduled for two days: 17 & 18 October 2011. The time 10 am. Courtroom “C”, the Elm Street courthouse, Sudbury, Ontario

  4. Sylvia says:

    Father Lefebvre has been committed to stand trial. A trial date has not been set but should be known within the next few days. There has been no media coverage because of a publication ban. I will check again in few days to see if a trial date has been set.

  5. Sylvia says:

    The case has been committed to trial in Ontario Superior Court. I may be able to find out a little more about where it’s at next week, but, I am told it could be ages for a trial date is set. I will stay on it as best I can, but it’s going to be a while.

  6. Sylvia says:

    The case has been committed to trial in Ontario Superior Court. Right now there is no further information to be had. I will find out a little more around the middle of next week, but it will only be info regarding the process of moving toward setting a trial date. Apparently getting to the point of actually setting a trial date can take quite some time. I will keep on top of it as best I can: we will walk through it and learn the ropes together, alongside the complainants.

  7. Sylvia says:

    There is a pre-trial hearing scheduled for Lefebvre 13 December 2011 at 2 pm. This is conducted ‘in chambers.’ It is NOT open to the public. There may actually be several of these conducted before the case is turned over to assignment court, at which time the process begins to set a date for trial. Because it is not open to the public we will probably not hear what goes on. Discussions will include which witnesses each side proposes to call. There will be a decision made for trial by judge or jury. There will be discussions on how many days to book for trial. If there are issues regarding disclosure of documents they are often dealt with here before a judge. It’s all the details of getting the case to trial.

    Setting a trial date entails finding dates which suit the calendars of both Crown and defence and the availability of court rooms. While it may sound as though trial is not too far away, it could be many months from now.

  8. Michel Bertrand says:

    Does this happen for other alleged criminals… no and why .. could it be that Judge Glaude is working his best to protect the integrity of the catholic establishment .. Sudbury a hole in a hovel run by red dragoons and all from Had’s alma matter St. Charles college.

  9. Sylvia says:

    There is no pending court date as yet for Father Lefebvre. Assignment court (for the Ontario Superior Court of Justice) is held the first Tuesday of every month. Dates are set at assignment court. I will check again around 08 March – IF his case goes to assignment court on the first Tuesday in March (7th) there should be news the following day.

  10. Sylvia says:

    Things have started moving again on the Father Lefebvre charges.  There is a pre-trial scheduled for 29 May 2012 at 3:20 pm (Sudbury courthouse).  This is not open to the public. (Lefebvre was charged in October or November 2010)  

  11. Sylvia says:

    Father Lefebvre has court date scheduled for 04 September 2012 10 am, for “an application” at Sudbury, Ontario courthouse.  I don’t know what the application is for, I know only that this is the next scheduled court date and it for “an application.”

  12. Sylvia says:

    Father Jean-Claude Lefebvre has a court date 17 April 2013. This is a pre-trail hearing: it is NOT open to the public.

  13. Sylvia says:

    The next court date for Father Jean-Claude Lefebvre is:

    21 May 2013: 10 am, pre-trial motion, Sudbury. Ontario courthouse

    This is open to the public. A motion will be argued in the courtroom. I don’t know what the motion is about. Those in the area who might be free to attend to find out what this is about please mark your calendars now.

  14. Sylvia says:

    The next court date for Father Jean-Claude Lefebvre is:

    09:30 am, for adjustment of some sort, Sudbury, Ontario courthouse (155 Elm St.)

    This is open to the public. If anyone in the Sudbury area is free to go please mark your calendar and try your best to get there next Friday to try find out what is going on.

    There is still no trial date set. I have been checking on that for months now.

    (A reminder that charges were laid in February of 2010. After a preliminary hearing in October 2011 Father Lefebvre was committed to stand trial in Ontario Superior Court. It’s now nearly end August 2013 and still no trial date )

    Please keep the complainants and their families in your prayers. This has been dragging on and on for ages.

  15. Michel Bertrand says:

    and guess who is the biggest sitting judge in Sudbury.

  16. Sylvia says:

    Father Jean-Claude Lefebvre has been found unfit to stand trial – all charges were withdrawn!

  17. Michel Bertrand says:

    yeah right…unfit to serve as well.

  18. 1yellowknife says:

    I am assuming Sylvia’s account has been hacked. I am contacting her directly to let her know.

  19. Sylvia says:

    That’s right Miecul. The comment was posted by Sylvie, with an “e” not an “a.” It was not I 🙂

    As for Sylvie’s comment, I can’t imagine why anyone would go to police if, as you say Sylvie, it’s “all over money.”

    • Sylvie says:

      Actually it was reported to the police my brother asked my dad for 50 grand or he was making these allegations i called the cops then he asked for 25 grand or was making thse allegations i called the cops then he told my dad to sign over the deed of his house or he was making these allegations i called the cops. It was all over his facebook how he was going to be rich soon. I wish it could of went to court so the truth could of been said and proven

  20. JG says:

    So….PJ thought Sylvia was on cheap drugs…1 yellowknife was looking for an imposter and Miecul would have run into the door if “he”/”she” hadn’t heard a noise coming from upstairs!…Television is Morse code compared to this!!
    I think it was Sylvie, in the library, with a candlestick… 🙂

    Sylvia was nowhere to be seen…or heard…or read, for a change and in her defence!
    Sorry, I couldn’t resist! This is serious stuff but sometimes…I wish I could invite Y’al for a Bar “NB” BQ in my backyard!
    On a more serious note, I am nonetheless curious about “Sylvie’s” comment, that it was her “brother” and that it was “for money”…
    Sylvie(with an E), you clued-in person, please justify!! …and no “goofing” off!
    We/I like to hear about all the “different” games being played. I absolutely need the truth especially if it means an “innocent” has been accused falsely…
    You opened the door…time to let in the breeze!..EXPLAIN!


    • PJ says:

      JG….actually, I had picked up on the sylvie thing prior to my post, which is why I questioned her drug use!! Sylvia and I have talked on the phone and pm’s so I wouldn’t have said that to the real Sylvia…she’s too intelligent to write that kind of dribble. Now as far as the bbq, time and date??

    • tadano says:

      Here’s the breeze….Her Dad abused 3 of his step kids…..Then my son…well..that’s were it has to stop…Sure they found him unfit to stand trial…whatever at this point…5 yrs of stress.
      During the process or after court was cancelled…Sylvie
      Asked my brother you can tell me what happened….It’s all lies
      My brother did….Well wasn’t the answer she wanted to hear,
      …My brother said to her it’s all TRUE….all of it.
      I won’t get into personal Info…about her well being after she actually found out from my sibbling (brother) that the charges that were laid are a fact. She denies it….would be hard to take..no doubt.
      I haven’t seen or spoke to my brother in 25 friggins yrs because of the issues.
      The best thing that came out of this ordeal is…..
      As brothers we are rejoined and a predator is at bay.

  21. JG says:

    PJ, anytime , my friend!. Knock and I shall open…ask and you will get….misbehave and …Well! You know…I can get boring and/or intimidating at times!….be prepared to read the map both ways!… 🙂

  22. Michel Bertrand says:

    I am not a goof and would love to meet at a BBQ

  23. 1yellowknife says:

    I AM a goof. I still would appreciate meeting at a BBQ. Am I invited?

  24. JG says:

    After all this I think we are safer to meet at DQ where someone else is in charge of the propane!!
    …Sylvie or Sylvia, PJ or PG, goofs or spoofs, BBQ or DQ…
    Let’s sleep on this for a while…before the invitations go out to EVERYONE!…
    “Mr. Mustard, on the grill, with a fork…??”


    • Michel Bertrand says:

      ha ha ha ha…

      • Sylvie says:

        Ok like I wrote to Sylvia but she never posted on here my brother called my dad saying he wsnted 50 grand or he would tell the cops my dad abused him and his son. My dad told him to kiss his ass then I called the cops. A few weeks later my brother lowered the price to 25 grand and he was sending his buddies to pick up the cash i called the cops again. Then he said never mind the money give me the deed to your house or i’ll make these allegations. I called the cops again. 3 police reports that my brother tried extortion on his step father and nothing was done. My brother then started calling the bishop for money or this would happen. Bishop told him no. He tried 3 times to get money off the bishop to no avail. The cops were not called until 6 months after the last contact from him. In the meantime it was all over my brother ‘s facebook page that he would be rich soon. We have been fighting this for 3 years now hoping it will go to court so the truth could be heard and i just happenned to stumble on this site and it pissed me off as my father is a good man. My kids now adults adore him and can tell you a whole different story from what brother portrayed him as and his son. Unfortunately my father is severly ill now (not going in details) but I wanted this to end and the city and people to know my father is an innocent man who just happenned to be at the brunt end of my brother’s drug deal gone bad. He needs to pay his debts off and seen my dad as easy money. He never knew i would stand behind him all the way because i know from experience that he is innocent

        • tadano says:

          You got your answer from your brother…
          Hard to accept…but it’s a fact….
          Why don’t you write on here what serge told you…
          So everyone knows. ..
          Have a great day

  25. Sylvia says:

    It really is unfortunate Sylvie that your father was found unfit to stand trial. But the bottom line still is that there was no money to made by your brother going to police.

    My thoughts and prayers are with you, and your father, and your brother and nephew.

    • Sylvie says:

      No but my brother was hoping if my father was found guilty he’d be able to start a civil suit against the diocese and now well he’s screwed cause you are right he’s not going to make a penny from his none sence

  26. JG says:

    Thank you for your explanation and your courage. We are all only in search of more truth and for that you will get all the respect deserved. The best to you and all your family.

  27. Gilles Lefebvre says:

    Why then, is this man’s name even on the list?

    The allegations were from incidents that took place before he was ordained (so I can’t see why his being a priest even has anything to do with the accusations) and were not proven in court. Now members of his own family have come forward to deny the allegations and no one, it seems, have answered to the fact that it was nothing more than an extortion scam gone wrong. This man’s life was ruined by people he may have thought he could trust and ruined even more by false allegations fed by what it seems like a reverse witch-hunt.

    I’m in total agreement to someone having to pay for their crimes and being punished because of them but I don’t think that in this particular incident, it was the case.

  28. Denis Lefebvre says:

    The supreme law of our land, being the Constitution, states that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. It befuddles me to no end when I see websites dedicated to the pursecution of an accused person who has not been found guilty in a court of copetent jurisdiction. I can list at least a dozen cases where persons sat in prison for a crime they never committed. I will list two: 1) Mr. Mullens-Johnson and 2) GP Morin. Both spent 10 years in jail. The common link between the two is that everyone (media included) were all “certain” they were guilty. The facts in both cases reveal that some evidence was simply ignored (because said evidence tended to point to their innocence), while some evidence was outright manufactured. In Morin’s case, the police suppressed evidence; in Mullens-Johnson’s case, the infamous Dr. Smith (if memory serves) actually manufactured evidence via his forensic pathology report. But, at the time, none of that mattered, because they were “guilty”, before during and after trial. Some years later, DNA clearly and unequivically exonorated Mr. Morin and a review of the pathologists’ evidence/report showed that the the death of the victim (Mr. Mullen’s niece) was of natural causes (SIDS). Finally, some 10 years later, they were not only found “not guilty” but in fact they were 100% innocent. Both were released after having spent 10 years in prison. Moreover, neither were eligible for parol because neither were prepared to accept guilt as a condition of parol. Why would they? Would you? So before anyone goes on and on about a peron’s alleged wrong doings, no matter how horrific said allegations may be, remember Mr. Morin and Mr. Mullen-Johnson. And before some half-wit decides to respond to my post and ramble off in regards to “what about the victim”, you may want to reflect about how useless this line of thinking is. To be clear, I am NOT adovocating for crimials. I am, however, advocating for justice.

    • Sylvia says:

      I hope you feel better having gotten that off your chest Denis. It’s true, our system is far from perfect. Sometimes, for any number of reasons, the innocent are wrongfully convicted. Sometimes, for any number of reasons, the guilty are set free. In both scenarios justice is not done. But, until things change for the better it’s the only system we have.

      • Denis Lefebvre says:

        To be clear, I have nothing that needs to come off of my chest. I am an advocate of justice. You are abolutely correct when you state that in some instrances the guitly are set free. That is the price we pay to live in a civilized society; one which requires/demands that we adhere to the Rule of Law.

        We must not confuse “Rule of Law” with “laws”, the latter being rules and regulations we generally follow to maintain the peace and for administrative efficiencies. In a society such as ours, where we value our individual freedoms, it is incumbent upon all of us to adhere to the Rule of Law. We are governed not by the whims of individuals (i.e., Kings, Czars et cetera), but by the Rule of Law. The minimal moral content of the Rule of Law (if we are to reduce the RoL to its roots) if for the protection of 1) individuals, 2) property; and 3) promises – each of there are found in the Criminal Code and the common law of contract and torts.

        What does this all mean in the context of the subject matter of our email exchanges? Well, for starters (and this is something that I have already touched on in my last posting), everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. We cannot and should never take that lightly, nor should we take matters in our own hands (self-help and vigilantism is never a good idea) because the results can be (and often are) tragic and sometimes disatrous. The systems is not perfect and never will be because of the ease in which an innocent person can be accused of wrongdoing. As such, the rules governing evidence and the requirements for proof (and its standard) are very high in criminal law. Again, I point to the many innocent persons who were more than simply accused, but sat in prison for years for a crime they never committed. Milgard is another that comes to mind – he sat in prison for 25 years before DNA could prove his innocence.

        It is for that reason that I have to disagree with your last comment. The fact that our system is not perfect does not give citizens the authority to publicly lynch the accused, including dedicating websites to that end. You may feel that a person is 100% guilty, in fact, you may know that he is 100% guilty. That, unfortunatly, does not matter in the large scheme of things. However, continuing with public lynchings (figuratively speaking) may turn into a tort of defamation, breach of privacy or quite possibly criminal harassment.

        I agree that the system can improve. I am especially an advocate for a societly that works to prevent crime rather than simply building more prisons to punish those who have committed them. This will be a discussion for another day.

      • Gilles Lefebvre says:

        So if you admit he was wrongfully convicted, why is this man’s name still on the list?

        • Sylvia says:

          Gilles, I happened to come across a court document a long time ago which details the allegations. Those involved are identified only by initials, but I know it is the allegations against Father Lefebvre. For various reasons I am not posting that document – I am sure you know what those reasons are.

          The situation as it stands is that Father Lefebvre was charged. That’s a fact.

          Father Lefebvre was, for whatever reason, found unfit to stand trial. That’s a fact.

          Because Father Lefebvre is not fit to stand trial the charges were withdrawn. That’s a fact.

          And that’s it.

          I never said he was wrongfully convicted. That’s also a fact.

          We will never know what would have happened had the case gone to trial. That’s a fact too.

          The list is comprised of those who were charged, sued or publicly accused. And that’s a fact.

          That’s all I have to say Gilles.

          • tadano says:

            The accused wasn’t charged….but you got it straight from your brother(Serge)s mouth what happened. …and your doing this page…ridiculous.

    • PJ says:

      And you had me really thinking about what you were presenting in an intelligent manner, until you started that sentence with the derogatory word “half-wit”. You then lost your credibility with me.

      • Denis Lefebvre says:

        I really don’t care what you think. Try coming up with an intellengent and well reasoned response to the points raised in my analysis rather than whine over the use of the word “half-wit”.

        • PJ says:

          Hmmm…you’re quite the blowhard. BTW, you spelled intelligent wrong. And since you don’t care what I think, I won’t respond any further to someone who is that close minded as to believe he is the ultimate in wisdom for those who are “half-wits”. You are the weakest link in these posts, goodbye.

  29. JG says:

    Mr. Lefebvre,
    I don’t know what your relation is to the accused but it is obvious your heart is close to his….
    For some reason the subject was more or less closed and then you bring it back 13 months after the last entry in October of 2013.
    If you want to shine with your “intellengent”, just do like the little bird covered with cow poop and keep your mouth shut! Everyone had moved on and whatever you wanted to do, I guess you brought back on your own!
    This man was charged, not convicted but it remains of public knowledge. What you are asking is like asking to pull back a newspaper article, years after it was read by thousands of people.
    Simply silly!
    You don’t have to get upset or get even! If you just keep your mouth and arrogance to yourself, we’ll all forget to view this page again in a very short time.
    Learn to let sleeping dogs lie!.. and analyze yourself to find some Peace.

    • Gilles Lefebvre says:

      What you are implying then is that we should just sweep this incident under the carpet and forget about it. Not important that he is a priest or not, an innocent person does not deserve to have to prove his innocence where the burden of proof lies with the accuser.

      I’m sure you’d feel the same way if this was to happen to you!

      • PJ says:

        If he was “innocent”, why didn’t he bring charges against the complainants for slander? I think we all know the answer.

        • Sylvie says:

          He never sued my brother for slander because he doesn’t remember that he was ever charged so i would rather keep it that way. Let him wake up every morning to a whole new world. Either way my brother lost, the house was sold and he never got a dime and he never got the 25 thousand or the 50 thousand he demanded from my dad. My dad is an innocent man who was extorted. The cops failed to charge my brother before these allegations started because my father did not want to hurt his “son” that way. Fact is my brother is not his real son. His real father passed away when he was 5 yrs old. The only reason i’m replying is that i happenned to search his name to see if this site was still up and seen all those posts. My brother has nothing to offer my dad in case of a law suit. Karma bit him in the ass his lost his girlfriend his house his horses the nice car and was left with nothing but himself and his right hand. Moat of all he lost me as his sister and my father as his. He can kiss my ass and hope he rots in hell.

          • PJ says:

            I never mentioned a lawsuit…I said “charges”. That would mean a criminal process, not litigation.

        • Sylvie says:

          You can charge someone for slander any cop will tell you that. That’s why charges were never filed

      • Sylvia says:

        Yes, I agree with PJ. Those who say they have been wrongfully accused of sexually abusing a child should have the complainants charged. Such terrible accusations should not be taken lightly.

  30. Dan Zanchetta says:

    After 5 long years of court issues…My step Dad was found unfit to stand trial…Whatever at this point.
    What baffles me is that Sylvie/a
    Is blabbing on this forum about her Father being innocent.she knows the answer & it broke her heart. You want to keep this going…Sergio might need to remind you or state it on your public forum so everyone can read it for themselves …that all this took place…no need to explain myself to you…Sergio was clear in his verbal statement to you about the abuse….you have chosen to deny the whole thing.
    And after 25 yrs of separation we talk every day now since court.
    Have a FANTASTIC DAY….

Leave a Reply