Stephanie please specify which website the documents are available for viewing.
Eva's supporters speak of Eva as if they lived under the same roof as her. The only people that truly know Eva's true colors are her exes and current spouse. It speaks volumes that Eva's oldest daughter's father wanted nothing to do with his daughter because of Eva. When Ramon would pick up his then 3 yr old son from Eva, Eva would tell Ramon "Why dont you get the f*** out of our lives!" The boy even told Ramon "My mom says you are mad at me". What kind of mother says things like that to a child. Eva's parting words to Ramon were "You'll never see your son again". Eva kept her word. Eva wanted to have a perfect life, when she married her current husband. Unfortunately that is kind of hard to do when you already have children from two different men. How in the world was Ramon supposed to visit his son in Mexico and enforce a court order when he could not do that in the U.S. Eva's supporters are naive and foolish to think a petition will get the criminal charges dismissed. Ramon is not vindictive all he ever wanted was to have a relationship with his son. Hold Eva accountable and make her explain all her lies.
When Ramon was given temporary custody of his son, the criminal court ordered that Eva have no contact with her son. During the short time, Ramon had his son, he took his son to one of the boy's soccer games. While at the soccer game, Eva's family gave the boy a cell phone so he could secretly communicate with his mother. The cell phone was later found hidden underneath the boy's mattress. If Ramon was uncaring and vengeful like he is being portrayed, he could have easily reported the incident to authorities, and additional charges could have been filed against Eva. Eva herself admitted secretly communicating with her son via the cell phone in one of the media articles. On one occasion Ramon overheard his son speaking with Eva. He could hear Eva ask their son, "Did you tell them about......how do they know about.....?" Eva was interrogating their son and asking him what information he had divulged. The boy was on the verge of tears. Ramon has been accused of being a "dead beat" dad and only wanting to use his son as a tax write off or reduce his child support. That is absolutely not true! Ramon continued to pay child support for his son until it was stopped by the dept. of child support services. Ramon's entire family has been emotionally and financially effected by Eva's actions. Ramon's young children are also being effected by the separation from their brother. They often ask for him and ask when they will be able to see their brother. Both Ramon and his wife work full time to provide for their young family and to cover Ramon's attorney and legal fees. Eva has stated she and her family are financially strained because her husband is the sole provider. These days being a stay at home mom is a luxury and more of a personal choice. Times are tough! One final suggestion to all of Eva's supporters, I suggest you find an honorable worthy cause like cancer research or donating money to a local food bank. Eva's legal defense for a criminal case is NOT a worthy cause. Eva is not being "persecuted" because she is Hispanic or a female. Eva broke the law, simple as that! Is your head spinning from so many inconsistencies?! I have only scratched the surface, there are so many deliberate lies and half truths. The views herein expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of Ramon, his attorney or any other person.
Eva has gone through at least three different attorneys in the criminal case. Her supporter's say that is because she is not willing to "cop" to a plea bargain. Her attorneys have filed the same motions over and over again with no success. Perhaps to delay the criminal case even longer. Eva has also gone through at least three attorneys in the civil case. I think this is indicative that Eva is not willing to compromise and is against Ramon having a relationship with his Ramon has only had ONE attorney for the civil case. Eva and her many attorneys have alleged that Ramon improperly served Eva with a subpoena when he filed for visitation in the early 2000s. Eva and her attorneys initially stated that Eva was not in the country during that time. After Ramon provided date and time stamped photographs of both Eva and his son that were taken at her mother's apartment (in Seaside) Eva changed her story. Eva also alleged that her then 16 year old sister was improperly served. The process server knocked on the door of Eva's mother's apartment and asked for Eva. After the door was opened, the process server saw Eva (whom she recognized from photographs) run into a bedroom and hide. The process server left the paperwork in the apartment and left. Eva was adamant that she was not in the apartment. Why would she not call her sister to testify on her behalf? Her sister is of legal age now. Eva told a reporter that she and her sister have a strained relationship. Their relationship is rumored to be strained because of an inheritance. Eva's deceased aunt left Eva and her siblings an inheritance that Eva allegedly used to start her bed and breakfast. Eva allegedly did not divide the inheritance among her siblings. Eva also stated that her 19 year old daughter graduated from high school in Mexico where the family was living. Eva's daughter graduated from Carmel high approximately 2-3 years ago. The D.A. investigator, Infantes, has been vilified by Eva and her supporters. They failed to mentioned that Infantes attempted to speak with both Eva and her husband, Mailo on numerous occasions. Infantes even left his business card for them. Eva never contacted Infantes perhaps thinking this would just go away. This case was no surprise to Eva.
Eva and her attorney also stated in their many declarations and responses that her son does not want to have a relationship with his father, Ramon. They also stated that if given the opportunity the boy would tell the judge this. The boy did get the opportunity to speak with the judge. To every one's surprise, the judge was the only person allowed to ask the boy questions. Neither Eva's or Ramon's attorney were allowed to ask the boy questions. The judge asked the boy something similar to "Is there any thing you want me to know or tell me". The boy, nonchalantly shrugged his shoulders and stated "no". He did not tell the judge that he did not want a relationship with his father. The 14 year old boy, who is articulate, did not tell the judge what Eva and her attorney were alleging. Of course Eva and her attorney were not happy with the outcome of the court proceedings. During the most recent court proceeding, the judge met with the boy again, at Eva and her attorney's request. The judge acknowledged the boy's dislike for the reunification therapy. The judge asked the boy what time his soccer games ended so his father, Ramon could pick him up. The judge also asked the boy if he would like his younger brother (Ramon's 8 year old son) to come along for the visits and the boy stated "yes". The boy NEVER refused to go or stated that he did not want to go with Ramon. The judge explained to the boy to meet his father outside of his residence at a specific time and that his father, Ramon would be picking him up for scheduled visits. The boy agreed to these terms without any objections. Despite the court ordered visits, Eva and her supporters have continued to interfere with these court ordered visits. During one of these court order visits, Ramon, drove to Eva's residence as scheduled. The boy was not waiting outside of the residence as directed by the judge. One of Eva's supporter's, Sylvia Shih, walked the boy to Ramon's vehicle where he and his young son were waiting. Sylvia stood in front of the boy preventing him from getting in his father's vehicle. Sylvia went on to ask Ramon if he loved his son. Ramon respectfully told Sylvia that he did in fact love his son and that was why he was there to pick up his son. The boy who was standing behind Sylvia, was unable to get into the vehicle and appeared to be on the verge of tears and walked away. The boy has never told his father that he does not want to go with him. He only says, "Im sorry....Im not going". Eva also brought Sylvia to one of the reunification therapy sessions. The counselors did not request Sylvia's presence and were oblivious as to who she was. Sylvia went as far as to give her input and ask the therapists questions about the therapy sessions. The therapists told Sylvia they could not discuss the therapy sessions with her. This is another example of how Eva will go to any lengths to tear down the relationship Ramon and his son have slowly started to rebuild.
There are so many false and inaccurate statements that have been fed to the media by Eva and her supporters. This latest article opens a can of worms for Eva. Several issues that Eva herself has brought up will be addressed. Even though the media has not disclosed the child's name, all one has to do is google Eva's name and her picture, her son's picture, and pictures of the rest of the family are all over the internet. It appears Eva will go to any length to gain "sympathy". Eva wants to be perceived as a "victim". Eva's alleged medical condition continues to be addressed in almost every article the media has generated. Perhaps in a attempt to gain sympathy? People with alleged medical conditions are capable of and do commit criminal acts and or violate laws. It is bizarre that when her son was asked if he had ever witnessed Eva having a seizure he stated "no". How is it possible that a 14 year old boy who has lived with his mother his entire life has never witnessed his mother's alleged seizures. Does that mean Eva's seizures only began to occur during the last two years? Is there any medical documentation supporting this alleged medical condition? The "seizures" seem to only occur during court proceedings. Even more bizarre is that Eva's own family (her mother and 19 year old daughter) seem completely unaffected by Eva's seizures. During one of Eva's seizures (during a court proceeding) Eva had a seizure while outside the courtroom. Eva's daughter stood near by and did not go to her mother's side. She did not appear to be at all concerned about her mother having a seizure. At another court proceeding Eva's mother had a similar demeanor while Eva was having a seizure. The most recent seizure was again outside the courtroom during court proceedings. Eva was instructed by the judge to call her son's soccer coach to ask him what time a soccer game was to take place the following day. Eva went outside to ask for a phone so she could call the soccer coach. Eva had a seizure, but even more peculiar is that the soccer coach was standing outside the court room and even stated something similar to "I'm right here". Eva intentionally omitted this fact to the judge that the soccer coach was outside the courtroom and there was no need to call him via telephone. Perhaps another tactic to make things more difficult for the father, Ramon Munoz, to spend time with his son. During one of the many family court proceedings, the judge instructed Eva to tell her son during a reunification therapy session, to tell her son that she wanted him to have a relationship with his father. Eva was instructed to do this in front of a counselor and her son. She never did this and was not held accountable because the statement the judge made was not put on the record.
Last login: Saturday, January 12, 2013
The mission of the Monterey County Weekly is to inspire independent thinking and conscious action, etc.
Serving Big Sur, Carmel, Carmel Valley, Castroville, Del Rey Oaks, Marina, Monterey, Moss Landing, Pacific Grove, Pebble Beach, Prunedale, Salinas, Salinas Valley, Sand City, Seaside and the entire Monterey County. © 2013 Milestone Communications Inc. All rights reserved. Formerly the Coast Weekly newspaper.