Urlacher: "I can't remember" text messages

[D3N7ER 8r0I\I<05]

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/463240,CST-NWS-urlacher11.article

Chicago Bears star Brian Urlacher remembered key dates and details of when Tyna Robertson failed to show up with their 2-year-old son for court-mandated custody exchanges Tuesday, but he couldn't recall sending her the dozens of profane text messages she claims he did.

"I'm not sure if I sent the message or not," Urlacher said in Will County court when questioned about a May 6 message. "I can't remember."

No Brian, I think you can't remember what your lawyer told you to say.

[Charlie Brown]

I ..... can't remember what I was going to .... say.

[DrunkPanda]

is he retarded? he really claims not to remember whether or not he sent profane messages? i agree with op, i bet his lawyer slapped himself in the forehead after he heard urlacher say that

[BaileyTheBest]

is he retarded? he really claims not to remember whether or not he sent profane messages? i agree with op, i bet his lawyer slapped himself in the forehead after he heard urlacher say that

he must have a sh*tty lawyer if he didn't prepare him for that question.

[Giveemlove]

Just pull the damn phone records.....

[// / yardo]

Give me a break! Why don't we look at the issue at hand. She's violating custody terms set forth by a judge and we're pointing out "nasty text messages." Big deal. I can write all the bad text messages I want. It's not against the law.

What's worse is if Urlacher decided, "hey I want to violate my CHILD SUPPORT terms" the courts would be all over him. How about checking into his child support payments and if he's missed one of those?

[Giveemlove]

Give me a break! Why don't we look at the issue at hand. She's violating custody terms set forth by a judge and we're pointing out "nasty text messages." Big deal. I can write all the bad text messages I want. It's not against the law.

What's worse is if Urlacher decided, "hey I want to violate my CHILD SUPPORT terms" the courts would be all over him. How about checking into his child support payments and if he's missed one of those?

I'm not disagreeing with you because he should be allowed time with his child, but if the text messages are threatening they are against the law.

As a mother, I have received those kind of messages from my ex, and the last thing I want to do after receiving them is drop my children off with him. You fear for your own safety as well as that of your childs after those kinds of messages.

Both sides should be following the orders of the court and minimalizing the amount of contact between each other. Rather than sending the messages, he should have taken her back to court and she would have been held in contempt.

Also, I'm sure if he missed child support she wouldn't be sending him profane text messages, she would have him back in court.

[// / yardo]

I'm not disagreeing with you because he should be allowed time with his child, but if the text messages are threatening they are against the law.

As a mother, I have received those kind of messages from my ex, and the last thing I want to do after receiving them is drop my children off with him. You fear for your own safety as well as that of your childs after those kinds of messages.

Both sides should be following the orders of the court and minimalizing the amount of contact between each other. Rather than sending the messages, he should have taken her back to court and she would have been held in contempt.

They specifically detail the apparent nastiness of the messages in the article.

When pressed by Robertson's attorney Heather Nosko on two specific messages, including one in which he allegedly told Robertson to "Quit threatening me with that spiritual bull s---," Urlacher's attorney, Anita Ventrelli, objected and said it was not relevant.

Out of dozens of nasty messages they decide to highlight this specific one in court? It's the media trying to sell papers. If people could get passed the bashing headline of the article they would realize who's really at fault.

1. Urlacher is taking the mother of the child to court. Not the other way around.
2. She's repeatedly failed to show up to visits designated by the court.
3. The headline is an easy way to sell papers in Chicago because one of its biggest stars is in court over custody issues.
4. He has everything documented. Good for him, he should.
5. She apparently has nothing documented that would support her defense besides a few "nasty messages" in which the worst one was, "Quit threatening me with that spiritual bull s---,."

If these messages were so nasty she could document the situation, present the evidence and put an order on Urlacher. If they were that threatening she has the ammunition to press charges on him, get a restraining order and ask the courts for full custody of the child with no visitation rights.

People are way to quick to pull out the noose and yell "HANG 'EM!!!" Read the actual context of the story and you might realize what's happening here.

Who knows, maybe news is slow today in Chicago.

[Giveemlove]

They specifically detail the apparent nastiness of the messages in the article.

When pressed by Robertson's attorney Heather Nosko on two specific messages, including one in which he allegedly told Robertson to "Quit threatening me with that spiritual bull s---," Urlacher's attorney, Anita Ventrelli, objected and said it was not relevant.

Out of dozens of nasty messages they decide to highlight this specific one in court? It's the media trying to sell papers. If people could get passed the bashing headline of the article they would realize who's really at fault.

1. Urlacher is taking the mother of the child to court. Not the other way around.
2. She's repeatedly failed to show up to visits designated by the court.
3. The headline is an easy way to sell papers in Chicago because one of its biggest stars is in court over custody issues.
4. He has everything documented. Good for him, he should.
5. She apparently has nothing documented that would support her defense besides a few "nasty messages" in which the worst one was, "Quit threatening me with that spiritual bull s---,."

If these messages were so nasty she could document the situation, present the evidence and put an order on Urlacher. If they were that threatening she has the ammunition to press charges on him, get a restraining order and ask the courts for full custody of the child with no visitation rights.

People are way to quick to pull out the noose and yell "HANG 'EM!!!" Read the actual context of the story and you might realize what's happening here.

Who knows, maybe news is slow today in Chicago.

Isn't it a bit ironic that they use that message trying to prove he's threatening her.....telling her to stop threatening him

I didn't read the full story, just what was posted in the original post. I guess the types of messages she got were completely different than the ones that I have gotten. And he has taken the correct steps, and hopefully the judge sees all of this and takes the appropriate action.

[jcdavey]

Give me a break! Why don't we look at the issue at hand. She's violating custody terms set forth by a judge and we're pointing out "nasty text messages." Big deal. I can write all the bad text messages I want. It's not against the law.

What's worse is if Urlacher decided, "hey I want to violate my CHILD SUPPORT terms" the courts would be all over him. How about checking into his child support payments and if he's missed one of those?

exactly

she's the guilty party here, if i was urlacher i would have texted or called her every name in the book for trying to kidnap their son, too

[jcdavey]

They specifically detail the apparent nastiness of the messages in the article.

When pressed by Robertson's attorney Heather Nosko on two specific messages, including one in which he allegedly told Robertson to "Quit threatening me with that spiritual bull s---," Urlacher's attorney, Anita Ventrelli, objected and said it was not relevant.

Out of dozens of nasty messages they decide to highlight this specific one in court? It's the media trying to sell papers. If people could get passed the bashing headline of the article they would realize who's really at fault.

1. Urlacher is taking the mother of the child to court. Not the other way around.
2. She's repeatedly failed to show up to visits designated by the court.
3. The headline is an easy way to sell papers in Chicago because one of its biggest stars is in court over custody issues.
4. He has everything documented. Good for him, he should.
5. She apparently has nothing documented that would support her defense besides a few "nasty messages" in which the worst one was, "Quit threatening me with that spiritual bull s---,."

If these messages were so nasty she could document the situation, present the evidence and put an order on Urlacher. If they were that threatening she has the ammunition to press charges on him, get a restraining order and ask the courts for full custody of the child with no visitation rights.

People are way to quick to pull out the noose and yell "HANG 'EM!!!" Read the actual context of the story and you might realize what's happening here.

Who knows, maybe news is slow today in Chicago.

she sounds like an insane person , possibly a cult member

hopefully she doesn't kidnap the child or suicide/murder him before the law steps in.

i'm betting this will be another case of a mother gone psycho

[Nick]

Lolly Bowean, of the Chicago Tribune, reports Chicago Bears LB Brian Urlacher and the mother of his 2-year old son have been ordered by a Will County judge to attend a parenting class. Also, when it is Urlacher's time with the child, both parents will have to drive halfway so Urlacher can pick up his child. The next court date in this case will be in September.

[Kapaibro]

Judge orders Urlacher to take parenting class

Bears star, ex-girlfriend must learn how to cope with each other

Updated: 4:20 p.m. ET July 12, 2007
JOLIET, Ill. - A judge has ordered Chicago Bears linebacker Brian Urlacher and the mother of his toddler to take a three-hour parenting class.

Urlacher and his ex-girlfriend, Tyna Robertson, are in a legal battle over Urlacher’s parental visits with his 2-year-old son, Kennedy.

The boy lives in Joliet with Robertson but visits the NFL star at his Lake Forest home, 62 miles away.

Urlacher has accused Robertson of violating a court order to drive their son to a tollway rest stop roughly halfway between their homes so he can pick the boy up for visits. The linebacker’s attorneys say he has missed at least four overnight visits with his child.

Robertson’s attorney, Heather Nosko, said Urlacher just wants to have his son driven to him when it’s convenient. She said her client never purposely missed visits.

Will County Circuit Judge Dinah Archambeault on Wednesday ordered both parents to take the parenting class before they return to court Sept. 10, saying the class should help the pair learn how to deal with each other. They do not have to take the class at the same time.

“I’m glad she ordered parenting classes because Brian needs it,” Robertson said. “Based on his actions, he’s not a good role model, and I pray that he changes.”

Neither Urlacher nor his attorney, Anita Ventrelli, commented on the hearing.

In 2003, Robertson filed a $33 million civil sexual assault lawsuit against former “Riverdance” star Michael Flatley, but it was later dismissed. Flatley countered with a still-pending lawsuit claiming extortion, fraud and defamation.

MSNBC link

[Giveemlove]

Judge orders Urlacher to take parenting class

Bears star, ex-girlfriend must learn how to cope with each other

Updated: 4:20 p.m. ET July 12, 2007
JOLIET, Ill. - A judge has ordered Chicago Bears linebacker Brian Urlacher and the mother of his toddler to take a three-hour parenting class.

Urlacher and his ex-girlfriend, Tyna Robertson, are in a legal battle over Urlacher’s parental visits with his 2-year-old son, Kennedy.

The boy lives in Joliet with Robertson but visits the NFL star at his Lake Forest home, 62 miles away.

Urlacher has accused Robertson of violating a court order to drive their son to a tollway rest stop roughly halfway between their homes so he can pick the boy up for visits. The linebacker’s attorneys say he has missed at least four overnight visits with his child.

Robertson’s attorney, Heather Nosko, said Urlacher just wants to have his son driven to him when it’s convenient. She said her client never purposely missed visits.

Will County Circuit Judge Dinah Archambeault on Wednesday ordered both parents to take the parenting class before they return to court Sept. 10, saying the class should help the pair learn how to deal with each other. They do not have to take the class at the same time.

“I’m glad she ordered parenting classes because Brian needs it,” Robertson said. “Based on his actions, he’s not a good role model, and I pray that he changes.”

Neither Urlacher nor his attorney, Anita Ventrelli, commented on the hearing.

In 2003, Robertson filed a $33 million civil sexual assault lawsuit against former “Riverdance” star Michael Flatley, but it was later dismissed. Flatley countered with a still-pending lawsuit claiming extortion, fraud and defamation.

MSNBC link

After further review of the facts in this case....I have come to the conclusion.....that this lady is a gold digging fruit loop. You can usually see who is better suited as the parents by the mud they sling. Notice he kept quiet after the hearing....and she had to throw her :2cents: in afterwards.

[Kapaibro]

After further review of the facts in this case....I have come to the conclusion.....that this lady is a gold digging fruit loop. You can usually see who is better suited as the parents by the mud they sling. Notice he kept quiet after the hearing....and she had to throw her :2cents: in afterwards.

The fact that she is being sued for extortion and fraud doesn't really say 'Mom of the Year' to me.