You are stalking him.
-I did not do that. -Really?
You committed a crime against him.
The property damage, the rants in public.
Threatening to take away his children.
He had blocked me on text and social media. I had no way to contact him.
He just doesn't want anything to do with you.
[narrator] Now on Tribunal Justice...
[narrator] Today's case was filed in Mojave, California.
Your Honor, this is Case #3001 on the calendar
in the matter of Simpson vs. Oliver.
-Thank you, Byrd. -You're welcome, Judge.
Parties have been sworn in. You may be seated.
Ma'am, have a seat, please.
[Acker] Miss Simpson and Mr. Oliver.
The two of you were in a three-year relationship,
but you did not live together.
And Miss Simpson, you allege that the defendant bought your son a bike.
He kept the bike at his home, because you didn't have enough space.
At one point, you gave him the bike for some repairs.
He takes the bike to get it fixed.
At some point shortly thereafter, the two of you break up,
he does not return the bike.
And you're suing him now for either the return of the bike,
which is here, or for $383.89
so you can buy your son a new bike.
Mr. Oliver, you say this wasn't a gift for her son,
it was a bike that you actually bought for your daughter.
And so, while he was allowed to use the bike,
the bike was never a gift to him. And you maintain that you owe her nothing.
This case is about so much more than just the bike.
I've read the text messages, restraining orders.
But you're suing for a bike and that's the legal issue.
I'd like to take a look at the evidence that the plaintiff submitted.
The plaintiff's video of her son riding the bike.
May we see that please?
When was that taken, ma'am?
[Rachel] Um, sorry, I don't know the exact date.
They were opening a new freeway.
When they did a grand opening for the freeway,
everyone could ride their bikes on it
before it was opened to the public for cars.
Now, I'd like to see the video that the defendant submitted
of his daughter riding the bike.
When was that video taken?
Um, that was pretty recently. About a month ago.
After a lawsuit's filed, and there have been multiple allegations
about who actually owns the bike.
But I'd like to point out another piece of evidence.
Can we please put up on the screen Exhibit #3?
Ma'am, just for the record, that is you saying to the defendant,
"Thank you for getting Bray a new bike."
Do you ever say, "Well, not so fast. It's not so much a gift"?
You don't really clarify her on this point.
You kinda let it go, yeah?
Right, yeah. So actually, um, it's always been known,
like whenever anybody's at my house, they always have something to ride.
I have lots of mountain bikes.
And it's always been smart for me to buy one bike at a time,
rather than two at a time, so that one could grow into it.
-How many children do you have? -[Steven] Two.
I made it pretty clear that the bikes always stay at my house.
These are for my children to grow into.
I don't know that I saw that clarity. What was clear to me
was that the bikes, at least this bike,
-was at your house... -Correct.
[Acker] ...because she didn't have room for it.
In fact, that became a bone of contention. I saw some of the relationship texts.
Like, wasn't he upset that you were looking for a bigger place,
and thought you weren't serious about him.
-Yes. -[Acker] So, there was all of that drama.
But here's the other drama; you became friends with the ex-wife.
And he got really annoyed by that.
I did, yes.
And I know that she submitted a statement,
but she didn't want to show up because she didn't want to be part of it.
Just so you know, for my purposes I'm not considering that statement,
because if you don't want to be a part of it,
don't write something that an ex-husband can't challenge in court.
Yes.
Your position is you became friends with the kids
she shared with the defendant, so you guys hung out.
-Yeah. -[Acker] You say she was hanging out
with your ex to try to wrest information
about you and your new life from your children.
Yeah. It'd bother you, too, if your kids are asking you questions...
It would totally bother me if I had two exes
who all of a sudden started hanging out.
I want to talk about an incident that resulted
in your filing a restraining order against the plaintiff.
Can we put up Exhibit 14?
Because you allege that... I think it was in May
-she showed up at your home. -Yes.
[Acker] Causing a scene. What happened when she showed up?
So, a few times before this, she had showed up at my house unannounced.
And this time, she showed up at my house standing in front of my door.
Eventually, I opened my door. And she was asking who my new girlfriend was,
and just with my decision making and stuff like that.
May 24th, you go to his house. What do you say happened?
[Rachel] I came for the bike.
And you were like, where's the bike? So you had to smash a bunch of stuff?
No, on April 27th, he said Brayson's bike won't be ready for a couple days.
So, it was three weeks later.
He had blocked me on text and social media.
I had no way to contact him.
So, I went to his house to ask for the bike.
[Acker] This is what really struck... How old is Brayson?
He's ten.
[Acker] So, Brayson is ten.
The bike is a subject of contention.
There are competing restraining orders. Nothing happened with either of them.
-They both got... -[Acker] You go to court?
No, it got dismissed.
The two of you decided to mutually dismiss?
-Mm-hmm. -Correct.
So, this bike, which has become an incredible bone of contention.
The defendant, your ex-boyfriend, has purchased it.
He has it. He doesn't want to give it back.
But didn't you buy Brayson a new bike?
I did.
So now, ma'am, you buy your son a new bike,
and then you said that he cried and said he missed his old bike.
-Really? -[Rachel] Yeah.
After that incident where I came to the house,
he didn't give the bike back,
I went and purchased him a new bike from Walmart.
It's a cheap bike. I think it was around $100.
We went for a bike ride, and it was uncomfortable.
He said his butt was hurting. He just, he was crying about it
and said he missed his old bike. And that just bothered me as a mom.
It's not fair. It was gifted to him. There's no reason he shouldn't have it.
I'm wondering, just did it occur to you to maybe, look, we gotta cut our losses.
This bike is making mommy very angry. It's making mommy's ex very angry.
And sometimes, adults have to know when to stop acting like children
and to tell children we have to move on.
Yeah, I could've just let it go and let it be,
but I was just upset because I saw my son crying over it.
And that makes me sad for him.
[Acker] Thank you. Judge DiMango?
Oh, please.
Really?
That's not what this is about. You want to see him.
[narrator] Coming up on Tribunal Justice...
He grabbed your wrists, according to what you said.
Pushed me three weeks after my back surgery
in front of all of the children.
-[Levy] In front of the children. -[Rachel] Yes.
[narrator] Rachel Simpson is suing ex-boyfriend Steven Oliver
for a bike she says he gave to her son
or $383 to buy a new one.
But Steven says the bike was no gift. It belongs to his daughter.
And that Rachel is just using any excuse to stalk him.
What kind of person goes calling his ex-wife?
Somebody's like stalking him, you.
Call his ex-wife because your kids need to be friends?
-Yes. -[DiMango] Give me a break.
The reason I became friends with her
was because my son was having a birthday--
But the point I want to make is that here you are, you go back...
The bike is damaged February 10th, if I'm not mistaken. Correct?
-You break up February 27th or 28th. -Um, I'd have to look...
-Twenty-fourth. -[DiMango] Twenty-fourth.
Boy, you've got that down. February 24th.
-She still has the bike at this point. -Mm-hmm.
She then decides, a month after the breakup, in March,
to bring you this bike so that you can then bring it to be fixed.
So, this is about you seeing him.
I watched you so carefully in this courtroom.
Most people come in here, they look straight on.
You know the way you looked?
This direction. All catchin' him. That's what you did.
'Cause when I see cases like this
with individuals hookin' up with ex-girlfriends,
bringing their kids together, making a ridiculous statement
like my son was gonna cry over some bicycle that was two years old
when I coulda gotten him a brand new one.
You know what I know? That you are stalking him.
And your T.O.P. wasn't dismissed.
Didn't you agree to reduce it to just a stay away order or something?
Yep. So, I reduced it to a stay away order after my...
Yours was granted and then you agreed to reduce it
-after the lawyer spoke to you. -[Steven] Correct.
Said, you don't want to be with her.
-Right. -[DiMango] So go along with this
-so she doesn't have to deal with this. -[Steven] Correct.
[DiMango] Yours was dismissed, not his.
This is about you. You go to his house unsolicited.
I went to his house because--
Because he cut you off, he blocked you. And you had to have this bike.
[Rachel] After we split up,
I gave the bike to him in April to get fixed.
[DiMango] Yeah, right, that's my point.
Why didn't you just keep it and bring it to be fixed and lay out $127?
-He... -[DiMango] Bring it someplace else!
Yes, but he had an REI membership which I...
I was under the impression it was under the warranty.
Ma'am, it was not under the warranty, you had the bike two years.
You ride bikes, you know. You laid out $100 for a bike,
and then you were gonna give him $127
to fix the bike that you were gonna go get.
So, for $227, you could've bought him the identical bike.
Do you hear yourself?
So, what do you and his ex-wife talk about?
Yes. Well, we became friends, my son...
You made a friend. You see,
you keep your friends close, you keep your enemies closer.
Yes. We became friends March, it was my son's birthday.
He was having a birthday party, and really wanted the kids to come.
He really wanted the kids to come. He really wanted that bike.
He keeps crying, because he might hurt his behind.
He would call them his brothers and sisters.
-So I reached out to his ex-wife. -[DiMango] Mm.
and I said, I know we're not friends and we never have.
Honestly, I thought she didn't like me at the beginning.
-[DiMango] Probably didn't. -Probably not.
I said, Brayson's having a birthday party, and he really wants the kids to come.
If you're up to that, he would really like it. If not, I understand.
And then you all became best friends. Judge Levy.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
[DiMango] That's it. That was a better one than mine.
That's exactly right. Can we please put up photos 13 and 14 please?
This is the May 15th incident. Is that right, sir?
[Steven] Yes, sir.
-[Levy] That's right, Miss Simpson? -[Rachel] Yes.
[Levy] Photograph on the right, Miss Simpson? What'd you do there?
I kicked over the bricks.
I was upset because I asked for the bike back,
which he stated would be ready in a couple days,
and three weeks later, he said that he didn't have the bike.
[Levy] Can we go to the next one, please?
I think number 14. That's the damage on the right there?
That's a pot that you knocked over, ma'am?
[Rachel] Yes, that was my pot he was giving back to me.
[Levy] You were just mad and you let your anger get the better of you?
Yes. Our whole relationship was very volatile.
-[Levy] Yeah, I can see. -Yeah.
It's not something to be proud of.
[Levy] What damage did you do there?
I don't know what that is.
Why don't you tell us, Mr. Oliver?
That's a kick to my security door where she was standing behind
when that happened.
[Levy] Mm-hmm. So, here's a question I have for you.
And having done a fair share of these domestic violence requests,
both for battered women, and also
for members of the Father's Rights Association,
when they got accused of stuff they didn't do.
My question is, when you went to the domestic violence court
and you made your application for an order of protection against him,
that was on what day? May 22nd?
[Rachel] Yes.
-You provided this to us, correct? -[Rachel] Yes.
[Levy] All allegations, how terrible he is. He's bipolar.
He's violent around the kids. That's what you said, right?
Absolutely, yes.
[Levy] And when you said that, he wasn't in court to defend himself.
-You went alone. -[Rachel] Yes.
-[Levy] You filed it on May 22nd. -Yes.
And the most recent incident was the May 15th incident
that you committed a crime against him.
Did you tell the judge that you did that?
N-No, 'cause we never got to that point.
Yes, it does. It says here, when were the acts of violence?
When were the acts of crimes that were committed?
Those were the acts of violence from him.
I didn't take acts of violence from me.
You gotta read your application better.
The judge wanted to know what the history between the two of you was.
Okay, then I misunderstood that and that's...
I just wrote... 'cause he wrote what I did wrong and I wrote...
[Levy] By the way, you go to court because you felt afraid.
-Right? -Mm-hmm.
He threatened you on multiple occasions in the past.
Mm-hmm. And been physical.
And pushed me three weeks after my back surgery
in front of all of the children, yes.
In front of all the children. We're gonna get to that.
-[Rachel] Very traumatic. -I know!
So traumatic and so afraid were you that you went to his house,
you committed that crime, that criminal mischief,
without any fear that he would grab ya, throw ya on the ground.
Bop you over the head.
Because at this point in time we were still on good terms.
[narrator] Coming up on Tribunal Justice...
Your demeanor here is so out of line.
Are you in counseling?
[narrator] Rachel Simpson is suing her ex Steven Oliver
for the return of a bike she says he gave to her son
or $383, the cost of a new one.
But Steven claims the bike is his daughter's
and Rachel is using it as an excuse to remain in his life.
You committed that crime, that criminal mischief
without any fear that he would grab ya.
Because at this point in time, we were still on good terms.
Up until the incident.
From what I understand, you told my colleagues,
the judge didn't even grant you a temporary order of protection.
-No. -[Levy] After reading these allegations.
Because they were from in the past.
No, that's not why. Judges do that all the time.
I suspect that the reason the judge didn't grant your order of protection
based upon the allegations is because he didn't believe you.
[Rachel] Well, that's what I had noted.
They had noted it was part of the past.
You talk about threatening texts in which you claim
the defendant sent you texts saying, "I'll tear you both apart."
-Mm-hmm. -[Levy] "You will both find out
what happens when you take away my kids."
-That's what you claim he said. -[Rachel] Yes.
[Levy] We have no context in that.
Why don't you tell her what the context is of those texts that you told her
about you will both find out what happens when you take away my kids.
So, this incident here, I was walking into Walmart and I was minding my own business,
and she had come up behind me and got right into my face, harassing me.
And I pushed my cart away, I exited Walmart,
and in the parking lot she was, um,
saying that she's gonna team up with the mother of my children,
and try to get the kids taken away from me in court.
That's when I was like, oh, I will tear both of you apart in court,
if you try to take away my children.
-She was harassing me the entire time. -[Levy] Hold on.
You admit that you saw him in the Walmart.
-Yes, I-- -[Levy] When he walked away from you,
-you followed him into the parking lot. -[Rachel] Yes.
[Levy] And you exchanged words at his car.
I did not say those words, but yes.
Yeah, 'cause you're not gonna admit that you said those words.
Do you have reason to believe that that's what she did?
That she spoke to your ex-wife, told your ex-wife stuff
that interfered with your relationship with your kids.
Absolutely.
Because your wife filed a modification of your custody and visitation petition,
didn't she? That's what you did.
You chirped in his ex-wife's ear about--
No, that's not true.
-Oh, it's not? -[Rachel] That's not true.
Let me ask you this. It's all public record.
Now, your ex-wife goes to court,
and files a modification of the visitation order
seeking to suspend your contact with your kids
unless you went to forced mediation.
Yes, sir, and it was denied. I remember that.
[Levy] Yes, it was. The judge didn't buy her story, either.
My sense is the judge knew you were in cahoots.
I've seen it all too often, and it's disgusting.
Because you couldn't give him up.
I don't want him, no.
This relationship was horrific.
You knew exactly what going to his ex-wife was gonna do.
I didn't tell her that. We were planning on going on a trip together.
And I was supposed to pick up his kids from school,
and that day, he filed the restraining order,
and I was like, I can't pick up the kids, I'm so sorry.
-So, that's what started all this. -[Levy] Okay.
Noe, would you agree with me, Miss Simpson,
that it would be inherently unfair for a litigant
to go to one court and make a request for some relief,
have that judge deny the relief that's requested,
and then decide to go to another court and make that same request?
I did not do that.
In your application to the judge on May 22nd,
the one that you just admitted was dismissed,
-Mm-hmm. -[Levy] What did you ask the judge
-in court for? -For possession of my son's bike.
[Levy] And the judge denied and dismissed your complaint.
[Rachel] Yes, everything was dismissed.
And now, here you are in front of us, wanting the same bike back.
By the way, I believe you bought the bike as a gift for her son.
That's okay. I have nothing further.
I have a few more questions. May I hear from your witness, please?
Could you state your name for the record, please?
Jenna Jacobson.
[Acker] What's your relationship to the plaintiff?
She's one of my best friends.
Okay. I'm gonna take your testimony with a grain of salt.
Because frankly, you're not impartial.
That doesn't mean that I think you're a liar.
So now, what evidence do you have to offer, Miss Jacobson,
that this was in fact a gift from the defendant?
Um, I've been friends with her,
and they were in a relationship for the majority of our friendship.
Um, and we would go on bike rides.
And then, once his bike was getting fixed, I knew that it was with Steven.
And then, when he wouldn't give it back, then Brayson had no bike.
[Acker] Thank you, you can take your seat.
-Okay. -[Acker] And Miss Simpson,
I took some time at the outset of my examination
to go over some text messages that were sent between the two of you.
There's a later one that I think is pretty instructive from my perspective.
This was submitted by the defendant, and looks like the date was May, 2024,
after the breakup, when things are really messy.
And you're mad at her. You say,
priorities were debit card info, which you harassed me about.
And an... bike, and then slander and talk,
s-word, and stalked me. And now, you're mad.
Mm-hmm.
And in response to his anger, you say,
"By giving you a bike back because I bought a new one."
What that text message says to me is that you gave him the bike back,
you bought Brayson a new bike,
that you had no intention of making this bike a big issue. He's the big issue.
Judge, but he had the bike at his house because it needed repairs.
And then, I came back to pick up the bike.
So, I didn't have the bike, so I'm not sure why that text said...
Can we just start off with one thing? You had the bike.
[Rachel] Mm-hmm.
I know you went through this REI thing he belonged to,
but you would think, with all the turmoil and angst in this relationship,
and the alleged aggravation and fear that you felt,
that you would've kept the bike, 'cause you thought it was yours...
Mm-hmm.
...and brought it to be fixed. Instead of continuing to rely on the man
who you don't want to be in a relationship with any longer.
-Yes. -[DiMango] There's also something,
your demeanor here is so out of line
with what the things we've been saying to you,
and the allegations that we are putting out there about your behavior with him.
It's just incongruous. Are you in counseling?
-[Rachel] Huh? -Are you in counseling?
-Yes, mm-hmm. -[DiMango] Good.
I don't have any other questions.
We're gonna retire to deliberate. Thank you all.
Court now stands in recess. Parties are excused.
I think there are different types of gifts.
When you're in a relationship and your kids are playing together,
it is perfectly comprehensible to me that you'd say,
oh, yeah, it's his to use while he's here, while the kids are biking.
He never really had possession of the bike, Brayson.
I do not believe Brayson had such emotional attachment to this bike,
that after she buys him a new bike, after she essentially,
in my view, relinquishes ownership in this text message to the defendant,
that oh, no, my boy is so sad, I gotta go get him this bike.
Oh, he had a meltdown.
Yeah, I don't buy that.
I don't see any basis for either ordering him to return it or pay her.
I agree with you. But I think if you would listen to what she was saying,
like when you were asking, did you break that planter? Yeah, I broke that.
Did you kick that wall down? Yeah, I kicked that wall down.
Did you... It's almost as though acting out is acceptable to her.
And on the same level, her son acts out.
You know, he cries and cries, and she says okay.
I mean, it's perpetuating that type of inappropriate behavior.
I am appalled by the idea that she made friends with the wife.
Appalled. I mean, you see that so often in these situations
where they try and insert themselves in the person's life.
They can't get into them directly, so they become friends with their friends.
That was weird.
You know, friends with their friends. Friends with the ex-wife.
And I've heard people say, oh, yeah, those used to be his friends
but they're all mine now. It's like connecting to the person
any way you can. Stalking him in the store.
Hey, did you stalk him? Yeah, I did.
I mean, there was no end to her abuse of him.
So, I think she's entitled to nothing.
I almost wish he'd counterclaim for harassment.
[Levy] I agree with both of you,
and I believe that her case should be dismissed.
And the other reason is that she filed the same request
regarding the bike with the case in the domestic violence court
that the judge dismissed.
And she turns around and still can't let it go.
You all know how rare it is for a judge in an ex parte domestic violence petition
to deny a temporary order of protection.
It's usually, eh, give it to her.
On a temporary basis, better safe than sorry.
Because as the judges will say to themselves,
because if she or he ends up dead...
-I don't want it on me. -I don't want it on me.
So, what they do is they're just more inclined to grant it.
Luckily for him, the judge saw through her nonsense
when he denied her request.
So, if you didn't do anything wrong,
someone's manipulating the system, stick to your guns,
and hope and pray that you get a smart enough judge
who can see through it.
Sounds to me like we're unanimous.
-And it's not a good situation. -At all.
Thanks.
Court is back in session.
Parties are reminded you're still under oath.
Thank you, Byrd.
We have deliberated, and we've reached a unanimous verdict.
And I'm gonna tell you this, Miss Simpson,
you caught a break. And the break is that
the defendant did not countersue you for harassment.
The property damage, the rants in public.
Threatening to take away his children.
These are things that, had you asserted a counterclaim against her,
you very well might've prevailed. And the fact that he didn't,
is also further evidence that he just doesn't want anything to do with you.
You are suing him over a bike that one, you already replaced,
over which you relinquished ownership,
that was the subject of a claim you raised in another court,
and you still can't get enough. Court's a real thing.
People wait in line to have their cases heard.
Not heard and re-heard and re-heard.
I've already handled the property, but my son is really sad.
So, even though you allegedly had beaten me
while I'm chasing you down in Walmart,
showing up at your house and breaking your stuff,
you just gotta give me the bike back.
I mean, it just rings hollow.
Your case is most certainly dismissed.
Good luck to you, sir, and good luck with your family.
-Thank you, ma'am. -[gavel bangs]
This case is now concluded. Parties are excused.
You may step out.
I'm a little bit upset because... sorry, I feel like the characters...
They got it all wrong.
Just another attempt to harass me, to be honest.
The bike was a gift to my son. He loved that bike.
My children will grow out of that one.
I'll sell that one and they'll have new ones.
She's crazy, but really, he's crazy.
Uh, just go separate ways. Don't give any energy to her.
And just wish her the best.
That's okay. I'll just... I'm gonna buy the same bike.
It's just sad that I have to fork over the money myself.
[narrator] Got family drama?
Let Tribunal Justice decide your case.
Find us on social media @TribunalJustice.