Another irrefutable example of female privilege, folks.

LJ_Reloaded

バクスター の
Joined
Apr 3, 2010
Posts
21,217
No woman has ever been, or ever will be compelled to pay for a kid that ain't her flesh and blood, and has never been in her custody.

All you have for this is personal attacks because you lost this fight before you even responded. You lost the moment this was posted. You actually lost long before that.

http://wwlp.com/2014/10/28/man-fights-30k-child-support-says-kid-isnt-his/

A bizarre child support case where the state is demanding a man to pay thousands of dollars or go to prison even though everyone agrees the kid is not his.

“I feel like I’m standing in front of a brick wall with nowhere to go,” said Carnell Alexander.

Carnell Alexander is forever haunted by the big news he got in 1991 during a traffic stop in Detroit. “You’re a deadbeat dad”, the cop said. “You’re a wanted man. You’re coming with me.”

“I knew I didn’t have a child, so I was kind of blown back,” said Carnell.

Carnell was arrested for failing to pay $60,000 in child support. The state said he fathered a child in 1978 and had ignored a court order to pay up. It was the first Carnell had heard of any of it. “That it was not my child, they told me it was too late to get a DNA test,” said Carnell.

However, he did anyway and the test proved Carnell was not the dad. Still, a judge was unmoved. “She told me that regardless of what the DNA says, because I didn’t contact her 24 years ago, it’s gonna stick. Case closed. I gotta pay for the baby,” said Carnell.

What the court focused on was this; records show Carnell ignored a court order of the paternity case in the late 1980s. Chains of events were pieced together. Here’s what was found: The state sent a process server to Carnell’s dad’s house in Highland Park. The process server was supposed to deliver to Carnell this summons. The process server then signed this summons saying that Carnell was delivered it, but refused to sign it.

“I wasn’t there so I couldn’t refuse to sign,” said Carnell.

Indeed, records show Carnell had been arrested as a teenager and was locked up when the process server came to the house. “I had no knowledge that I had a child support case pending against me,” said Alexander. However, there was a case because of this, someone had put Carnell’s name on an application for welfare benefits, an ex who was in a jam when her baby was born.

“I had to turn to welfare to get assistance to take care of them and had to put him down as the father. That was the only way I could get assistance,” said Carnell’s ex girlfriend.

While she doesn’t want to show her face, this woman is now fighting to help Carnell, “Everything is my fault that I put him through. He shouldn’t have to pay it at all. I want everything to go away for him so he can go on with his life”

“We know this is not my child so let’s do what we need to do. What’s right,” said Carnell.

A few months ago, a judge did erase the debt that Carnell owed that mom of the kid that’s not his, but not the debt owed to the state, $30,000 for welfare benefits paid over the years. He says he’s going to keep fighting until all of the debt is erased.
 
wow.
You just know that this will be the basis for a Lifetime Original Movie in the future.
 
While I hate ever agreeing with this tool... You're comparing a woman that didn't pay child support on HER kid with a guy not paying child support for one NOT his?

How could it be possible for a woman to be falsely accused of being the mother of a child? This is what LeJackass' entire argument hinges on.

I suppose a single man with a child could do exactly the same thing as the woman in his anecdote and would likely have the same results. Why wouldn't it?

He goes to collect public assistance and tells them the mother's name in order to get benefits and explains that she simply left them both.

She would be able to eventually prove that she wasn't the mother of the child just as the man did. It's likely that she would face the same legal hurdles that the man did.
 
How could it be possible for a woman to be falsely accused of being the mother of a child? This is what LeJackass' entire argument hinges on.

I suppose a single man with a child could do exactly the same thing as the woman in his anecdote and would likely have the same results. Why wouldn't it?

He goes to collect public assistance and tells them the mother's name in order to get benefits and explains that she simply left them both.

She would be able to eventually prove that she wasn't the mother of the child just as the man did. It's likely that she would face the same legal hurdles that the man did.

Well of course that would be really stupid and expected... Perhaps there is some context I missed, since I don't often read his posts, that's certainly possible.
 
While I hate ever agreeing with this tool... You're comparing a woman that didn't pay child support on HER kid with a guy not paying child support for one NOT his?
Indeed, she makes mistakes like this all the time.
 
Well of course that would be really stupid and expected... Perhaps there is some context I missed, since I don't often read his posts, that's certainly possible.
She would not face the same issues. And what he described could not happen.

It certainly never, ever has. I'd like to see someone... anyone... show where it has.
 
Back
Top