Wednesday, December 30, 2009
WRONGLY CONVICTED TEXAS MAN SUES OVER LEGAL FEES
Patrick Waller, a Texas man whose conviction was recently overturned is now suing his attorney seeking a reduction in attorneys fees, claiming that his lawyer is overcharging him. The attorney in question both successfully lobbied the Texas Legislature to increase the fund to compensate victims of wrongful convictions and obtained the settlement without having to file suit. Additionally, Waller executed a contract approving the arrangement. Even so, Waller contends that he "hired a lawyer, not a lobbyist" and, therefore, the fee of one half of the recovery is too high.
Open season on lawyers is spreading.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
INTERESTING ARTICLE IN NEW YORK TIMES ON PATERNITY FRAUD
Click here to read an interesting article in The New York Times on the issue of fraternity fraud.
Our position on the issues remains unchanged. Putative fathers should be allowed to utilize the results of DNA Tests as a basis to terminate their child support obligations.
Labels: DNA, Paternity Fraud
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
ANOTHER PUTATIVE "DEADBEAT DAD" PRO ATHLETE
According to The Toronto Star, “Chris Bosh, the face of Toronto's struggling NBA franchise, is being cast in U.S. court documents as a deadbeat father who broke up with his girlfriend when she was seven months pregnant, leaving her destitute and without medical care even as she fell ill.” Additionally, the paper reports, “The complaint, which contains allegations that have not been proven in court, says Bosh contested his paternity before genetic testing determined a 99.97 per cent probability that he is [the child’s] father” and “according to the documents, [the child] has laid eyes on her father but twice, both times in his hotel room when the Raptors were in town to face the Wizards.”
What is it with these pro athletes and their refusal to support their children? And how hard can it be to find these guys and initiate wage-withholding?
Labels: "Deadbeat Dads", DNA
Monday, March 16, 2009
BARRERAS CASE AND WIKIPEDIA ENTRY ON "PATERNITY FRAUD"
The Wikipedia entry on "Paternity Fraud" has some very good information. And while we cannot vouch for its accuracy, the article discusses the Barreras case in New Mexico which involved a man who was forced to pay a total of $20,000 for a daughter that never existed.
At a time when the most jurisdictions allow the introduction of DNA evidence to prove innocence in criminal cases, there are still pockets of resistance in the United States against allowing the use of DNA to "prove innocence" in paternity cases. In our viewpoint, this is not only illogical and unjust, but a practice that invites fraud and deception.
Labels: DNA, Misconduct, Paternity Fraud
Sunday, December 07, 2008
MAN FORCED TO SUPPORT SOMEONE ELSE'S CHILD
The Associated Press reports Man forced to support someone else's child. According to the article, the man was jailed for nonsupport even though the child was living with her similarly-named biological father and the "real father" claimed that he had always supported the child. Additionally, it was reported that "Petitions [the man] filed for DNA testing were opposed by the court's domestic relations officials and denied by the judge."
The Associated Press reports Man forced to support someone else's child. According to the article, the man was jailed for nonsupport even though the child was living with her similarly-named biological father and the "real father" claimed that he had always supported the child. Additionally, it was reported that "Petitions [the man] filed for DNA testing were opposed by the court's domestic relations officials and denied by the judge."
Unfortunately, this kind of thing can happen, and probably has happened, in South Carolina.
Labels: Child Support Collection, Civil Contempt, DNA
Friday, August 15, 2008
GREENVILLE MINISTER ARRESTED FOR BACK CHILD SUPPORT
GREENVILLE, S.C. (AP) -- A Greenville church music minister has been sentenced to six months in prison for failing to pay more than $394,000 in back child support for his 13 children. WYFF-TV in Greenville says a judge ordered Lyman Rea on Thursday to pay $37,000 before he's released. He was arrested Wednesday while preparing for an evening service at Second Baptist Church in Greenville.
It's unclear if Rea had an attorney. Calls to his home and the church were not immediately returned Thursday. A spokesman for the sheriff's department said he wasn't sure if the man had a lawyer.
Thirteen children? $394,000 in back child support owed? We have to wonder whether this man was filing Income Tax Returns and whether his employer filed the requisite New Hire Reporting Form.
Labels: "Deadbeat Dads", Child Support, DNA, Responsibility
Thursday, July 03, 2008
SC GOVERNOR SANFORD VETOES DNA BILL
The Post and Courier reported:
Read the entire article at Sanford vetoes DNA measure.Gov. Mark Sanford on Wednesday vetoed a bill that would have expanded the use of genetic information in criminal cases, saying collecting DNA samples when suspected felons are arrested is an invasion of privacy.
"We see this legislation as a reach past that very foundation upon which this country was founded," Sanford told legislators in his veto. He called the bill a "further encroachment on our civil liberties and privacy rights."
Labels: DNA
Tuesday, July 01, 2008
DNA SAMPLING BILL NOW IN SC GOVERNOR'S HANDS
We thought this was a bad idea then and we think it is a bad idea now. After all, who is going to oversee the destruction of DNA once people are acquitted? And note:
Graham Boyd, interim executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union South Carolina Office, said the provision to take samples upon arrest is a poison pill for a bill that could otherwise do a lot of good.
"The privacy concerns that troubled the governor before have not been cured and in some cases, I think, are even worse," Boyd said.
Boyd said that the bill could mean the state could have thousands of DNA samples on record for innocent people. In 2005, he said, more than 100,000 arrests were made in South Carolina and only 42 percent resulted in convictions.
"The reality of this bill would be that the majority of the people who are arrested shouldn't have their DNA tested," Boyd said.
Labels: DNA
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
COMMENTS ON PROPOSED DNA LEGISLATION
One of our readers posted the following comments to this post.
And what if you are incarcerated for a shortage in a child support payment? If you are fingerprinted and photographed why shouldn't they be able to take a DNA sample as well. Fathers will build the FBI database just as quickly as real criminal suspects.
That's not right. It should be as easy as having your record expunged if you have written a bad check. Just like if you are held in civil contempt and pay up. If it's the first time, you should be able to trot right into the Clerk's office, pick up a form order, pay a fee, file the Order and have your record expunged. But can you? NO. You're always a deadbeat. This is nothing more than creating a database and there should be safeguards if you are exonerated.
One of our readers posted the following comments to this post.
And what if you are incarcerated for a shortage in a child support payment? If you are fingerprinted and photographed why shouldn't they be able to take a DNA sample as well. Fathers will build the FBI database just as quickly as real criminal suspects.
That's not right. It should be as easy as having your record expunged if you have written a bad check. Just like if you are held in civil contempt and pay up. If it's the first time, you should be able to trot right into the Clerk's office, pick up a form order, pay a fee, file the Order and have your record expunged. But can you? NO. You're always a deadbeat. This is nothing more than creating a database and there should be safeguards if you are exonerated.
Labels: DNA
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
COURTS FAVOR ANCIENT PATERNITY RULE OVER DNA TESTS
We are not yet convinced that paternity fraud is as widespread a problem as some people seem to think. However, we do think that all paternity fraud is both deplorable and preventable. One reason that paternity fraud persists is that, as Margaret Jacobs writes in the Wall Street Journal, Courts Favor Ancient Paternity Rule Over DNA Tests. However, some states are now enacting legislation that allows litigants to utilize scientific evidence to overcome legal fictions based on public policy. For example, an Ohio Law now allows men who can disprove paternity with a DNA test to terminate their child support obligation. And in California, Innocence Is Now a Defense to a Paternity Action.
Labels: DNA, Paternity Fraud
