and i thought about that harvard law i don't think it takes an attorney i don't think it takes a judge to look at these facts and conclude that this just isn't right now you have a situation here where a man finds out that he has a child he takes steps to talk to any we'll see who isn't that time divorced from jason is not here she's found nothing jason willis is here with his attorney and he's the former spouse spends four to five days a week with the child he does all these things yet look at the pictures pictures in this case really do say a lot you have dozens of photographs of my client with his family in jail in these pictures are remarkable that they're smiling very age then basically what happens is there's a judicial or the judicial order in the divorce case really mr wills didn't like the fact that my client was not getting out so he gets  to the future about steve being my real there and these other daddies and so forth you also don't stand that not only was steve taylor involved in this child's life so jason wells was involved in the stepfather mr merrill so you have multiple different layers of individuals here that get involved time to time the one thing that's been consistent throughout this case is that my friend steve said hey look whatever you do make certain that you don't do anything that's going to compromise ja mental more emotional out let's assume for the moment that we step away from again the gag case and we do apply it was fact what should have happened in the trial should happen is or should have found that there is no evidence to support serious change there's not even really an allegation of serious and change the courts should have then said that there is some evidence that it could be confusing yes  discretion to figure out which reason absolutely and what's reasonable might be something that you don't even agree with but it might be something i probably wouldn't disagree if the court said you know what this child we don't want to make sure this trial isn't over whel loss to this child of having a family support that is significant you could i guess take the position that put it child in the bible and you protect the child from everything but that's true in any case if you have an actual father if you father illegal my motion i don't believe that mr will should have standing to come here and complain about my attempts to have this poor person truck or with respect to his  what isn't just right the fact that that individual can simply six years seven years eight years after the birth of a child simply deciding that he can inject with evidence either support or of detract from this individual was filed a petition from entering into the child's life at this time and i think what's interesting you're in high school you're learning you can accept it oh this is why and with respect to take up you know this is how he is my real bad because at this words natural father she said this is your real dad what does that mean i mean we know what it means to the child and what it doesn't mean to the child because the expert dr march by the way all parties stipulated relation ship he has to take up ajay w stage of development there is no grey everything is white and white right or wrong she identifies greatly whether her believe it was judge clary who said wait a minute i'm not going to disturb the status quo you guys proceed like the state action sets backs the reason why there wasn't any any permissible just you know a couple e mails a couple tweets and a couple of face books and she's out there or you know judge react and from what i read in this case the most stable person seems to be the child what no matter what the court does the person who is controlling the future interest in the welfare of the child is this woman who is not even here at least for now else in her life that she's now a strange from or divorced so she's been she's back with me with mr merrill or she's back with me and they have a child between themselves there are three other children or two other children living i asked directly for the other children mr what we're going to do as opposed to the standing in jurisdiction which i think of the fate of the matter remains is if taylor is afforded this patient it certainly impacts with mr marrow impacts that a judge or remarriage again impacts their but more mystery mr wills marrying somebody impacts that because baby might bring children to the family or they might not be as interested in this trial but the impact that we're talking about is the right for visitation of mr wills which is going to be diminished by forty i mean how far how  i remember correctly it's been a long time but i can also picture twelve year old adolescent pre adolescent jonell turning and looking at the people in a line in s raise me and there's this cow here that did this but that's the guy who just brought me into the world along with my mother and then turning it looking into people or life and saying and you kept hearing from me no matter what because of the way the people in your life and behave i agree but if for example in this case i mean it's really funny because when people with up with a juvenile you make sure here's the question i asked dr wright so what you're really saying is that you don't have any hard evidence at all that any sort of the bottom with steve would have a negative effect until correct there is no hard evidence or research there's no medical evidence this is simply a theoretical proposition this is not a case where a guy sits back and does not think he finds out about it immediately takes action immediately gets involved in this child's life is the good guy in this case be honest with you he's the you know th