This is about a break-up.
She just left the entire relationship.
He had threatened to kill me twice.
Absolutely not.
I just wanted to disappear.
Putting aside whatever he did or didn't do,
it should make you very, very careful. Really, it should.
[narrator] Today on Tribunal Justice...
[theme music playing]
This case was filed in St. Paul, Minnesota.
Your Honor, this is case #1061 on the calendar,
in the matter of DeLisle versus Olson.
Parties have been sworn in. You may be seated.
-Thank you, Byrd. -[Byrd] You're welcome, Judge.
Okay. You're ex-boyfriend and girlfriend of five years.
And what you're saying, Miss DeLisle, is that you shared a love of animals.
But apparently, not love for one another, it seems,
having read through these papers.
You say that you started to get into arguments in January.
These things escalated, you became frightened for your safety,
and you moved out mid-March, moved into an Airbnb.
After a couple of weeks at this Airbnb, you claim that you felt a little bit safer
reaching out to him, and you did. You said, I'm gonna break up with you.
You wanted him to return your animals; four cats, six tarantulas, one hedgehog
and a snake. And he refused. He became abusive.
You filed an Order of Protection on May 4th.
Thereafter, you went with the police to his home.
You say all he did was return one cat to you.
The police went back a month later and he gave them the snake and the hedgehog.
You say that he still has three more of your cats,
six of your tarantulas. You also paid for some vet bills
when these cats were kittens. So, you're seeking
either the value of these pets, which would be $2,750
including the vet bills, or the return of the pets.
Mr. Olson, you say you never got violent towards her.
She filed the Order of Protection against you because she was angry
that you only gave her one cat, one hedgehog and one snake.
And you weren't going to give her the animals that you paid for,
which as I understand it were six ducks, six snakes, 13 tarantulas,
two geckos, five cats and a partridge in a pear tree.
[laughter]
-[DiMango] Right? -That is correct.
You thereafter, on May 19th, filed an Order of Protection against her,
so you now have mutual Orders of Protection,
assuming that you went to the hearings you were supposed to go to afterwards.
If you're so afraid, why don't you just go on with your life?
Why do you need six tarantulas?
You know, I was looking through a couple of things. One,
you were texting his mother for $60.
That was when I first got the Airbnb.
Yeah. I mean, you're claiming how frightened you are,
you're going for Orders of Protection, and you're threatening his mother for $60.
What is wrong with people today?
Don't shrug, you're in the same boat. You're the one who can't part
with one snake. You have six of them.
-That's my life. Yeah. -Your life are snakes?
-Well, don't emulate them. -It's my passionate hobby.
-I'm not trying to... -[audience laughs]
All right, now, why should you not give her back the kittens?
I've been the sole caretaker of them and she was just the support.
When did you adopt these kittens?
We got them the summer of 2020.
[DiMango] And you'd been living in the house together for two years.
-Yes, ma'am. -So, you both shared the kittens.
This is when you first adopted them?
It was well established that I was gonna get them.
I paid for all the vet bills. I paid for the spay and neuter.
She did pay for those things.
Why aren't you paying her back for all the bills?
We never got to a discussion of that. I would've gladly taken care of that
outside of the court system.
So, you would be willing to pay her the vet bills for those kittens.
I mean, if you're gonna keep them.
I will keep them. And yes, I do...
You'll only keep them if we say you will.
Yes, I will pay her back for whatever she needs.
What'd you pay for these kittens, the three of them?
I think I gave her like $100 for three cats.
[DiMango] You said he has six of your tarantulas and you want those too.
That's what I'm here for. That or compensation of them.
And if you don't get the six tarantulas, we don't have any value.
I didn't even see a picture. I didn't see even an ad:
tarantulas for sale, wonderful pets. And actually, surprisingly,
I swear I looked it up... I said, who wants a tarantula?
And meanwhile, they're touted as these amazing pets.
They sit in your hand. If they bite you, of course, they have poisonous venom.
But I think that... You know, maybe you want to
leave the 13 with him and see what happens.
Maybe that's the answer to your Order of Protection.
So, did you replace any of your cats or kittens?
I did not replace them, no.
Why should we let you keep these cats?
In my opinion, she just left the entire relationship and walked out on everything.
Aha! And there we go. You feel like she walked out on you.
No, I wanted that. I didn't want to lose my animals
because they are my pride and joy and I will fall on a sword for them.
[DiMango] I think you should learn how to relate better to humans
than tarantulas and snakes, seriously. So, when she walked out,
why did you withhold them from her?
Well, I didn't see it that I was withholding anything.
I owned the home, they lived there. I take care of everything.
And I just feel like my home is the best place for them to be.
So, the two of you... This is about a breakup.
It's a bad breakup with two people who didn't divide their property properly.
You know, your excuse is 'cause they're still there with you.
You have a terrible personal demeanor and attitude by now.
-You know that, right? -Sure.
Which is very off-putting, which is why I kinda think
you get along with the pets you have.
And you, on the other hand, I mean, you've gotta move on.
But I have to say that some of this is really, on behalf of both of you,
in my view, is just spite work. Judge Levy?
Miss DeLisle, so, when you went to go file your Order of Protection,
and you did so on May 5th, 2022. You petitioned for an Order of Protection
because you alleged "an immediate danger of domestic abuse." That's what you wrote.
Yes, he had threatened to kill me twice, and that's why I left.
[Levy] Well, time out. According to what you said in those papers,
on May 5th, 2022, he threatened to kill you in January of 2022.
It was January and February were the two threats, and then...
I get it. And I'm not minimizing it. I just want to make sure
that it's not as though he made the threats on May 3rd or May 4th.
This is something that had happened months prior.
-Right? -Right.
-[Levy] Did you threaten to kill her? -Absolutely not.
Right. So, that's what he's gonna say. What I am more interested in,
is in that Order of Protection that was granted to you,
it authorized you, with police escorts, to get your four cats,
your hedgehog, your snake and six tarantulas.
So, why didn't you do that?
I tried. I went with the police escort, and then, Christian just said no.
And the police were like, well, we can't force him to do anything,
we just have to come back another day.
Okay. So, I'm gonna look to you then, sir, Mr. Olson.
You get served with this Order of Protection on May 5th, 2022.
-Right? -Mm-hmm.
[Levy] And you read, just like I did, in paragraph nine,
that the petitioner, the Plaintiff here, that she is to be permitted
to retrieve her four cats, hedgehog, boa and six tarantulas.
You knew that when the police showed up. Why didn't you give 'em to 'em?
[theme music playing]
[narrator] Coming up on Tribunal Justice...
What was it that he did that frightened you?
My brother shot and killed his wife the day she was moving out,
just a couple years ago. It was very real. It was very hard to go through.
And that day, he said that if I wasn't careful, I would end up like...
Which was terrifying.
[theme music playing]
[narrator] Janeice DeLisle is suing her ex-boyfriend,
Christian Olson for three cats, six tarantulas and vet care.
Christian claims they are his animals because he paid for them.
A judge issues an order directing you to turn over certain animals
What makes you think you don't gotta follow a court order?
It's not that I don't feel I have to follow it, it was simply, uh,
I felt like it was a very falsified document
and I wanted to make sure that before anything went further than them...
I'll give you that. However, whether you feel as though
it was a falsified, exaggerated document or not,
the place for you to argue that is not with a couple of police officers
standing in your home, your best bet at that point
would've been to turn over the animals as the judge instructed you to,
then you go to court and you fight that out in court.
-You follow? -Yep.
[Levy] All right, so that's one. The text messages, Miss DeLisle,
that you sent to the Defendant's mom. I'm gonna go over those.
So, on April 28th of 2022,
which was just about a week before you filed the Order of Protection. Right?
Yes.
You sent his mom a text. "Were you able to ask Christian about the $60 and mail?
At this point, I would not be surprised if he just threw it out,
but I'm not gonna pay for his weed, lol." That's what you wrote, right?
Yes.
She responds, "I'd rather not get in the middle
of whatever arrangements you two have made."
"The arrangement is your son isn't paying me money he owes me,
threatens to kill me and cuts off communication when he has all my animals.
Haha, haha, haha."
The way that you are presenting yourself in these text messages to the mom,
"hahahaha," it ain't serious. What you just said to his mother
is he threatened to kill you and in the same text, you respond "hahaha."
Miss DeLisle, do you understand how someone reviewing that text message
would have a problem with it?
I can see that out of context, yes.
Okay. Then you continue, "Would you like to cover the $60 that he owes me?"
You wrote, "I'll file the report tomorrow if I don't see anything."
What report were you talking about
and you telling the mother you were gonna file?
Earlier in that text message, I was like, "I'll file a police report."
You were gonna file a police report?
I mean, I was like, I can't file a police report over $60.
I don't know, at that time when I was texting her, I was so frazzled...
[Levy] Yeah. Well, hold on one second. Hold on one second.
We understand that you weren't gonna file a police report over the $60.
But you did go to court and you filed a formal request for an Order of Protection
-on May 4th, 2022. -Yes.
[Levy] What you told the judge in that Order of Protection
was that you were in imminent danger of domestic abuse.
Those texts that you sent to his mother don't support that, do they?
That I was in imminent danger?
Danger of domestic violence. Let me explain to you what happens
with real cases of domestic violence. Real cases of domestic violence,
when a judge gets a petition before him or her,
that says that a woman in your position who is fearful for her life,
fearing that she's gonna be killed. That makes the judge say,
let me give her what she wants immediately ex parte without a hearing.
What you did not do, most certainly in the 19 pages that I've read,
is explain to the judge and provide the judge your text messages to his mother
in which you said, hahaha, I'm not giving his $60 for his weed.
And you threatened him by threatening to send something to his school district
that you knew would get him in trouble. Correct?
I guess so, yes.
[Levy] Okay, good. So, you didn't tell any of that to the judge.
Because it's fair to say that if you were completely open
and honest with that judge, you knew he wouldn't, or she wouldn't,
give you what you wanted, which was an order directing him
to return the animals.
I was fearful, don't get me wrong. I was not gonna be able to go to his house
and get those. He still had those...
-[Levy] Well, hold on... -He is scary.
Yeah, I know he's scary, I know he's real scary.
But hold on. On May 4th, according to your text with the mother,
this is the same day you go to the judge!
May 4th at 8:09 A.M. to his mother, "A reminder, I'll be by
after six to grab my things today." And she gives you a thumbs up.
-Right? -Yes.
I can't see anywhere that you advised the judge
on the same day at 10:58 A.M. So, we're talking three hours later
that you had already arranged with the Defendant's mother
to go to his house and to pick up some of your personal items.
I got a real problem with people going in to domestic violence court
requesting Orders of Protection and making representations
that aren't 100% accurate. I got real problems with it.
I'll tell you why I got real problems with it.
It's because when that happens, it undermines the legitimacy
of legitimate cases. I don't know the two of you. I don't know what he did to you,
what he said to you in January of 2022. I don't. But what I know,
is that there was nothing that you suggested in any document,
in any text message, in any email, in any communication to suggest on May 4th
that you were in imminent danger of domestic assault. None.
'Cause if the judge found out what we found out with this evidence,
the judge would've thrown you out on your behind. Judge Acker.
Thank you, Judge. I do think Judge Levy's onto something.
And I don't know what happened in January when she says, sir,
that you made these threats, but what is abundantly clear to me,
is that you filed your TRO in order to get leverage in this civil situation.
You filed a competing TRO complaining about her showing up at your home
on May 19th, which was the day she was to show up and collect her animals.
So, both of you made these filings
in order to get some sort of tactical advantage
in this fight over the animals. Look, as I said,
don't know what happened in January, but I am very much convinced
that on May 4th, when you filed the TRO claiming to be so afraid
the day after you were taunting his mother,
the day after you were saying I'm gonna go file this police report
for the $60 and weed and get him fired.
I just don't think you were that scared. I think you were using the TRO
to get an advantage with respect to the underlying dispute
between the animals. And I think that's shameful.
So now, I want to go back to you, Mr. Olson, because the problem
from where I sit now is that I do think that, as Judge Levy pointed out,
this TRO was obtained using really questionable evidence.
Really questionable. I find it a weaponization of the legal system,
which troubles me. But Ms. DeLisle, with respect to the allegations
that you made against the Defendant in the TRO.
What was it that he did that frightened you?
My brother shot and killed his wife the day she was moving out
just a couple years ago. It was very real. It was very hard to go through.
That day, he said if I wasn't careful, I would end up like...
Which was terrifying. And then, there was one more threat.
And that's when I was like sitting with it and I was like,
okay, I have to get out of here or I...
And he made those threats in January. You moved out in May.
I moved out mid-March. I didn't really want to go to court
and do all this. I just wanted to disappear. Honestly.
Listen, I want to be really careful at how I communicate this.
-Yes. -[Acker] It's horrible.
I mean, I think putting aside whatever he did or didn't do,
your having to live with that is just horrible.
I mean, that's a trauma.
-I had to leave. -[Acker] No doubt.
When I got the Airbnb, I said I was dog sitting and I left.
So, he didn't know that I wasn't coming back.
That's a trauma. And I'm not giving short shrift to that trauma.
And that's a horrible thing and it might make you hypersensitive.
And it should make you very, very careful. Really, it should.
[theme music playing]
[narrator] Coming up on Tribunal Justice...
Did you ultimately consent to everything that was in there,
staying away from her, not going near her home, her school,
her place of business, etc. Did you consent to all of that?
Yes, but there was some negotiations, I might say.
[DiMango] And what were those negotiations?
[theme music playing]
Can I ask you something as someone who loves animals?
I believe you do, I do. All things being equal,
are the tarantulas better off to move them?
Or is the best interest of the animals to let them sit still
and to compensate you financially?
The tarantulas, I think will be fine in either spot.
And same with the cats. I don't really want to break up the family at this point.
It's been so long, like, it's not in my interest...
You really just want the money. You want the compensation.
Yeah, I'd like to rebuild my own little family again.
I hear you. And Mr. Olson, before we go,
I do think that because you had to listen to these allegations be repeated,
it's only fair that you have an opportunity to respond.
Yeah, thank you. [clears throat] So, I guess to sum all of this up,
I feel that I should be able to continue caring for the animals
that I have supported and loved.
What do you do for a living?
I'm a high school custodian.
Oh, and that's why you were making the threats...
I didn't think his employer would be too keen on the reason I had to move out.
No, but what you said to the mom was that you were gonna file a police report
over the $60 over weed. And you were gonna take that to the police.
-I mean, that just seems petty. -I was just upset. I mean...
I never thought that would come up in court. It is, it super is.
There was a lot of pettiness and also, perhaps, some reasonable fear.
You deny it. I think I've heard enough. Thank you both.
[DiMango] I just have one question. With regard to the Order of Protection,
did you ultimately consent to everything that was in there,
staying away from her, not going near her home, her school,
her place of business, etc.
Did you consent to all of that at the time of the hearing?
-Yes, ma'am. -[DiMango] And included in that,
would've been the consent to return certain pets to her.
Yes, but there was some negotiations, I might say.
And what were those negotiations?
Uh, yeah, so, between her lawyer attorney and myself,
we discussed that I would admit to fault but not go the full length.
Okay, so you admitted to fault so they would grant the order.
You basically weren't gonna admit to the substance of what was in here.
That is correct.
Okay, that's all I wanted to know. Unless there's any other questions,
we're gonna retire to deliberate at this time. Thank you both.
Court now stands in recess. Parties are excused.
[theme music playing]
Well, this is a prime example of abuse of a court process.
The Orders of Protection, I think we all pointed it out
from a different angle in some way. But this is clearly a woman
who was not in imminent fear of her safety.
No woman in fear of her safety, as I said, would text the mother for $60,
threaten him, go back to the house, demand tarantulas.
So, that's troublesome. So, I think we're just looking at this now.
from a clean slate, basically. What is she entitled to
and what isn't she entitled to?
And I would be perfectly happy to dismiss the complaint altogether.
But I wouldn't mind giving her the $100 for the kittens.
I believe that the best thing for these people, the best thing for these animals,
would be to let him keep them, but I believe she needs to be made whole
for the contributions that she made. And he doesn't have an issue with that.
I think all we need to do is find out from her and from him
before that issue is resolved on the vet care bill, what were those bills?
I'm less concerned about the vet bills because they were living together.
I don't know what their arrangement was as to who was paying for what.
I'm not prepared to make any award on the vet bills.
I am prepared to award her $100 for the cats.
And I am prepared to consider some award for the tarantulas.
Can we just ask her what you paid for the tarantulas?
Listen, it would be well worth it to ask a couple of follow up questions of her.
Just... Yeah. Let's just dig in a little bit.
And if you don't mind, I would just include...
Because this was a big bill, that vet care bill.
That's $1,650 that she's asking for. Do you have any proof
that money was actually paid by you. Do you have that here?
If she says she doesn't have that... This is her court day.
If she doesn't have it, then I'm all for it, that's not something she gets.
I'm gonna tell you, no matter what they say, I'm at $100.
So, I'm gonna dissent unless... I'll look at the both of you,
you tell me what you want to do, and that's it, but I'm dissenting.
Should we have a code?
-Yes. -Wait and see.
Okay, so, we're not anything.
We're nothing. We've made no decision.
Court is back in session. Parties are reminded you're still under oath.
Thank you, Byrd. We just have some follow up questions which we think
might help clarify some issues that have, at this moment, still not been resolved.
Ma'am, do you have any evidence with you today,
as to what you paid for the vet bills?
No. He took me off of the account at the vet.
So, when I called to get the receipts, they wouldn't give them to me.
Okay, so that's out. And with regard to the tarantulas,
does anybody have any proof who purchased them,
how many were purchased at the same time
or what periods of time, and what they cost?
I again, don't have any of the actual receipts.
Four of them, I paid cash at a reptile show.
How much did you pay for those four?
I think that they were like $45 each and it was like a deal, or something.
Okay, so, at this point, I believe we're good?
I'm joining your tentative.
-Okay, thank you. And Adam? -Agreed.
All right, then. So, I think what we've all come to a conclusion with here
is that people should treat one another with at least as much respect
and love and dignity that they treat their pets.
The bottom line here is you have the kittens, you have all the animals.
None of them are gonna be heartbroken at this point
that you maintain them as the parent.
You on the other hand, you've already indicated to us
that you're willing to accept that you don't get the tarantulas,
that you've gotten one cat. You would be willing to let the other kittens
live with him in their environment and not break them up
because they were buddies all along. That's what love is about.
It's about putting others, the things you love, before yourself.
We're willing to reimburse you the $100. With regard to the other items
that you've requested, the veterinary bills, the tarantulas and all,
you have fallen short in your proof by a preponderance of the evidence
as to the value of those or that you're entitled to their return.
So, the unanimous verdict of this court at this time,
is that you receive $100. And hopefully, the two of you
would just stay out of each other's half a head of hair.
-All right? -[gavel bangs]
[Byrd] This case is now concluded. Parties are excused, you may step out.
Pretty fair decision. I mean, I feel like it, uh, couldn't have gone better.
The relationship just went sour. Just stayed sour.
It all ended kind of on a rough patch. So, I think it's just kinda,
she's riding it out, all the negativity.
Oh, God, I hope I never have to see him again.
That will be awesome.
[narrator] Have you been falsely accused? Let Tribunal Justice decide your case.
Find us on social media at Tribunal Justice.
[theme music playing]