rey is often immobilised through injection of debilitating venom, by wrapping prey in a silky cocoon for later consumption, or both. After injection of toxins, a masticating action of the fangs and maxillae reduces the prey's body and tissues to a chitinous liquid which, with the aid of a pumping pharynx, is sucked up into a funnel-type mouth. Little indigestible matter is consumed by the spider. That which does enter the system is eliminated in a crystallised form. The prey is drained dry, leaving an almost intact body husk behind. To the casual observer, they'd be none the wiser to the fact that the prey was severely compromised and near death.
Despite DF's departure in June 2003 more events occurred through the end of that year, put into play by both offenders. These waves of attack and threats to my safety and financial stability were, of course, a means to extract more from me. One such pressure tactic came in September 2003 when I had already ceased to pay the weekly stipend to DF from the jointly-owned operation. He'd been in default of the agreement to provide services and I fully intended not to have him continue to place a drain on what little resources remained. Drawing a line in the sand precipitated DF to steadfastly refuse to sign a new lease with the landlord, unless I complied with his aggressive demands. I didn't and the operation would continue functioning without a lease for the first time in more than 6 years and at a premium rental rate, as a consequence.
Then again, in early January 2004, a number of months into the second divorce process, DF sent an email asking to be bought out of the jointly-owned business. He established a price for his 50% portion that was ridiculous, claiming that the business was worth far more than it really was and for a business, mind you, that had no long-term lease in place, conducting operations on a month to month basis at a significant rental premium and had been severely compromised by DF's failure to tend to managerial duties. The instructions in the email indicated that I should give my response within 24 hours. Having absconded with the lion's share of the marital liquid assets and other items of value, I saw no need to entertain any buy out until the divorce was finalised, where a judge would determine how distribution of marital assets was be handled. I sent a reply that indicated that I was not interested in purchasing, but that he could, indeed, buy my share at the same price point if he wished. Of course, I received no response.
Six months had elapsed since he vanished and with no keys returned and actions that indicated no interest in preserving the success of our partnership or any intent on upholding his fiduciary duty, I kept watch by spending the vast majority of my hours in the building. It was during this time, while standing "guard" over any remaining assets I had, from dawn until the wee hours of the morning, that the ILW member who'd expressed interest in me and I would engage in chats.
Despite DF's departure in June 2003 more events occurred through the end of that year, put into play by both offenders. These waves of attack and threats to my safety and financial stability were, of course, a means to extract more from me. One such pressure tactic came in September 2003 when I had already ceased to pay the weekly stipend to DF from the jointly-owned operation. He'd been in default of the agreement to provide services and I fully intended not to have him continue to place a drain on what little resources remained. Drawing a line in the sand precipitated DF to steadfastly refuse to sign a new lease with the landlord, unless I complied with his aggressive demands. I didn't and the operation would continue functioning without a lease for the first time in more than 6 years and at a premium rental rate, as a consequence.
Then again, in early January 2004, a number of months into the second divorce process, DF sent an email asking to be bought out of the jointly-owned business. He established a price for his 50% portion that was ridiculous, claiming that the business was worth far more than it really was and for a business, mind you, that had no long-term lease in place, conducting operations on a month to month basis at a significant rental premium and had been severely compromised by DF's failure to tend to managerial duties. The instructions in the email indicated that I should give my response within 24 hours. Having absconded with the lion's share of the marital liquid assets and other items of value, I saw no need to entertain any buy out until the divorce was finalised, where a judge would determine how distribution of marital assets was be handled. I sent a reply that indicated that I was not interested in purchasing, but that he could, indeed, buy my share at the same price point if he wished. Of course, I received no response.
Six months had elapsed since he vanished and with no keys returned and actions that indicated no interest in preserving the success of our partnership or any intent on upholding his fiduciary duty, I kept watch by spending the vast majority of my hours in the building. It was during this time, while standing "guard" over any remaining assets I had, from dawn until the wee hours of the morning, that the ILW member who'd expressed interest in me and I would engage in chats.
No comments:
Post a Comment