Yes they may trip themselves up eventually but be prepared for other people to believe them. That part can be very upsetting when you are finally in front of someone who you are were looking to to sort the mess out.
I have had that experience and it is the most frustrating life has to offer.
ExH has been trying to convince a judge in post divorce motions that I am alienating the DCs from him. He has waged a long campaign, going back about 7 years. I have defended his various motions of contempt myself. Most recently, an incident while the DCs were at his house caused me to call police, and sure enough he responded with a motion for contempt of court against me alleging interference with his visitation rights, and also a motion for an order of protection against me, again alleging interference and seeking the protection afforded by such an order against me. I've been fighting both since September of last year.
Finally, at one of the hearings, the judge agreed to my suggestion that we go to family therapy. The therapist called the judge after our one all-family session to say this was a case she was not prepared to handle. The judge had been lambasting me all along since September for the fact that my family was in such a shambles, nobody talked to anyone else, etc., and the hearing when he referred to the therapist's remarks was no different. However, he also on his own initiative at that hearing appointed a Guardian ad Litem to represent the DCs.
The GaL's interim report was presented verbally (and perhaps in writing, though if it was I did not see a copy) to the court this week, and he started by stating that usually in his long experience of seeing families where nobody wants anything to do with one parent, and nobody has a relationship with that parent even after age 18, it is a clearcut case of alienation by the other parent. He then stated that having talked with all the children who were reachable by phone that this is emphatically not what has been going on in our case. I could have hugged him. The judge apologised to me. exH asked to speak, and in open court stated his cock-eyed version of our family life and the cause of the breakdown of our marriage, throwing in the fact that he was hospitalised for mental health issues and that I was to blame for them. The GaL listened intently. The judge listened and appeared to squirm a little in his seat. I suspect exH's contribution was a massive shooting of himself in the foot.
Bringing up in open court his MH issues is hugely significant. I was told by my own divorce lawyer during our divorce proceedings that I could not refer to that because it is unfair to stigmatise someone who had or has MH issues, or use the fact that he sought treatment against him -- and I can see the case for holding back, in general. However, I could not convince my lawyer that in exH's case, his MH issues directly affected his capacity to participate in normal relationships, caused his explosive rage (mentioned by the GaL) that all the DCs find terrifying, prevented him from accepting that he has an effect on other people (he sees no problem screaming in a child's face for fifteen minutes and then a few months later objecting to family therapy for that child on the basis that she is a very sensitive individual), and caused his fixation with his narrative in which I am to blame for every single one of his problems and all the problems in our relationship, etc, etc. He takes no responsibility whatsoever for his role.
So now we are all heading to 'family reunification therapy' at the suggestion of the GaL, but we will all have initial individual sessions with the therapist (who will be chosen by the GaL). I have a theory that the GaL is trying to dot all Is and cross all Ts in case exH decides to appeal a judgement on renewal of overnight visitation that exH is also fighting for. However, he may also be hoping that the therapy could prove useful for the one DD who is left having to engage in visitation (at the moment she goes to dinner with him two weekend nights).
The battle continues. But it felt so good to hear that apology from the judge and to hear the GaL speak so unequivocably. Finally, someone cut through the bullshit.