But even at that, some people just have to carry everything to extremes.
This brings us to David Ostrom, 40, from Paola, Kansas. Long removed from the rice-and-shoes-at-the-reception days, things did not go well when he and Bridgette tried the marriage thing. So now, he's asking a judge in Iowa to grant him a trial by combat. He wants to take on his ex and her lawyer in a sword fight.
(Check your calendar. This is the year 2020 and you are still in the United States.)
Ostrom says Bridgette, now of Harlan, Iowa, and her attorney, Matthew Hudson, have "destroyed him legally," according to papers he dropped in court out there.
Accordingly, he's asked the Iowa District Court to let him have 3 months to find katana and wakizashi swords for his battle.
 |
| He seems normal. |
In court records, Ostrom is arguing that, "To this day, trial by combat has never been explicitly banned or restricted as a right in these United States," and that it was used "as recently as 1818 in British Court."
You won't find it surprising that the Ostroms are bickering over custody rights, visitation rights, and "who's gonna pay those property taxes?" - common themes in divorces, they tell me.
Mr Ostrom said that part of all this stems from frustration with attorney Hudson, whose legal training allowed him to deduce that since a duel could mean a death or two, “such ramifications likely outweigh those of property tax and custody issues.”
"It should be noted that just because the U.S. and Iowa constitutions do not specifically prohibit battling another person with a deadly katana sword, it does prohibit a court sitting in equity from ordering same," Hudson wrote.
Hudson asked the court to suspend Mr Ostrom's visitation rights and get him to have a court-ordered psychological evaluation.
Judge Craig Dreismeier, said in a court filing, not to look for his decision anytime soon. I guess not. He has to finish laughing first.
No comments:
Post a Comment