Man gets 6 months of jail time for overpaying child support and over-visiting his son - Polidicks

He was clearly a threat to society, caring for his child, the one he helped raise and give birth to. Think about all the people he could've injured or killed in doing this. Wait...

[QUOTE=Corey_Faure;43500699]Oh god, this is like the only comment for the video in the OP. [IMG]http://gyazo.com/aad7950422408c9988a8fb3fdda19eb3.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] I'm not entirely sure how this could be considered a race issue. I mean if the woman was white and then got preferential treatment then maybe it would hold a bit more water but as it stands I'm not seeing it.

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;43501685]I'm not entirely sure how this could be considered a race issue. I mean if the woman was white and then got preferential treatment then maybe it would hold a bit more water but as it stands I'm not seeing it.[/QUOTE] I've been inquiring him about his comment ever since I posted that. He's just a quack that thinks "the white devil is out to get me". [IMG]http://gyazo.com/9ae994ce80b77485593be1952526f4f0.png[/IMG]

American court systems at their finest

My dad owes my mother over 20,000$ in child support, and has [I]never[/I] made an effort to see my sister and I. I haven't spoken to the man since I was 17, telling him that I've prospered in life without him in it, and that [stepfather] is a better parent than he could ever hope to be. And that if he threatened my family again or saw him on our property again, I would kill him. [editline]11th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Corey_Faure;43500699]Oh god, this is like the only comment for the video in the OP. [IMG]http://gyazo.com/aad7950422408c9988a8fb3fdda19eb3.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] ..So black and blk are two separate things? k.

[QUOTE=geogzm;43500636][t]http://puu.sh/6ht8m.png[/t][/QUOTE] Is it wrong that I feel there may have been a slight bias issue?

behold, the american justice system

Someone actually paid for child support, and wanted to see his son? Holy shit, lock him up, we can't have a nice and caring father in this society at all!

making sure people follow bureaucracy to the letter is far more important than what's best for the child yes good job judge give this judge a medal

[QUOTE=Zeke129;43503089]making sure people follow bureaucracy to the letter is far more important than what's best for the child yes good job judge give this judge a medal[/QUOTE] [video=youtube;CgVcSrXXU1s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgVcSrXXU1s[/video] [editline]11th January 2014[/editline] seriously though this is legitimately A+ grade messed up this shouldn't have even been a thought. It's a pretty pathetic disgrace that this is a thing PERIOD.

Its sad how this is, but the chances of him getting off prison Is unlikely.

So his ex took him to court because he wasn't paying child support and was behind by three thousand dollars, quite a bit of money. He [I]then[/I] went and paid it back in full, claiming that he didn't know. If he'd been following the legal agreement in the first place and didn't have to be taken to court to pay up, then they never would have gone to court and she wouldn't have had to pay legal fees. Hence the judge ruled that he be responsible for those fees. Pretty cut and dry there. And the visitation time is set through a legal agreement. If you're divorced you can't just show up and take your child away from the other parent whenever you feel like it. By Texas law, it's considered [URL="http://www.lrcf.org/node/137"]parental abduction[/URL] and that's not how visitation works. It's not a 'father time' quota that has to be met, it's a strict agreement to make sure who is responsible for the child at any given time. Hence the judge ruled for jail time, which is the set legal consequence for failure to abide by visitation agreements. This would be more likely to be waived if he could demonstrate to the judge that he honestly didn't know, but walking out of the courtroom is not a good way to get sympathy from a judge. I suspect, given the ruling, that the judge had reason to suspect that his claims that he had no idea about the child support or visitation expectations were untrue, and so held him in contempt of his legal agreements. Questions that should be asked in the article but aren't are why his child support was being handled by his employer rather than by him personally, whether or not his ex made any statement to the effect of 'where's my money?' before taking him to court, why the ex was allowing him to pick up the kid outside of the regularly scheduled times, and how the terms of the separation agreement could have changed without his knowledge. Those are pretty big questions that aren't being addressed. There's not enough in this article to say, too many variables that could have drastically affected the decision, and leaping to 'wow it must be sexism against male parents!!!1' is the lazy analysis.

i hope the judge gets fired

This article exploded all over the internet (mostly in mens rights circles), so much so that [url=http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/childsupport.asp]Snopes had to jump on it[/url]. Basically, at no point was this man sent to jail for "overpaying child support"

A terrible blow to the patriarchy for sure.

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;43501041]I still want a secondary source. I don't understand why that's a bad thing. [editline]11th January 2014[/editline] I even said to myself "Maybe I should post 'Hey I know that this is a local channel so don't give me shit for it,'" but I decided to give you guys the benefit of the doubt and I have nobody to blame but myself.[/QUOTE] Please, you're not backpedaling hard enough.

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/vnhT39Fl.jpg[/IMG] Help I'm gonna die

A different take on this- possibly some news stations misinterpreting this. [url]http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/childsupport.asp[/url] [quote]Origins: A January 2014 news story about a Houston man named Clifford Hall, who was sentenced to a county jail for 180 days in a child support issue despite his not owing any child support, has been widely reported as case of a man who was "sentenced for paying too much child support": [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAsboktJuGY[/url] The details of the issue are still somewhat unclear, but the claim that Hall was punished for "paying too much child support" appears to be a misinterpretation of the facts of the case. The crux of the matter seems to be that (as maintained by Hall) a court agreement specifying child support and visitation terms was modified without his knowledge, resulting in his underpaying child support and taking custody of his son outside of the court-approved visitation schedule. When Hall found out about the modified terms, in order to avoid jail time he quickly paid nearly $3,000 in back child support (despite, he claims, having been told during a court appearance several weeks earlier that he was all paid up) and agreed to pay the child's mother $3,000 in attorney's fees (which she presumably incurred in bringing the issue of his non-compliance with the agreement to court). So, based on Hall's side of the story, he was unaware that the amount of child support he was required to pay had been increased, he had recently been told in court that he didn't owe any back child support, and when he found out he did indeed owe outstanding child support he hastened to pay it in full. Nonetheless, Judge Lisa Millard found Hall in contempt of court and sentenced him to 180 days in county jail for some combination of his failure to pay required child support on time, his failure to follow the court's scheduled visitation times with his son, and/or his walking out of the courtroom in the middle of a hearing. (News accounts are still murky about which of these factors was the basis for the sentence, but a court document briefly glimpsed in the Houston television news report about the case shown above displays a header indicating Hall was held in contempt for "for failure to pay child support.") However, nothing presented in the original KRIV-TV news account about this case actually stated that Hall "overpaid" child support; it quite clearly said that he paid nearly $3,000 in "back child support," indicating that he was paying an amount already past due (even if he was previously unaware he owed it), not overpaying an amount he didn't yet owe. And it seems that the basis of the contempt charge was Hall's failure to pay the required amount of child support on time, not his "overpaying" the specified amount. Clifford Hall may have suffered an injustice (it's not possible to make that determination without more information on the case, since news accounts have so far presented only his side of the story), but nothing in the limited information presented about this case so far — other than catchy headlines and sensationalized re-reporting of the original story — supports the interpretation that Clifford Hall was "sentenced for paying too much child support." Last updated: 11 January 2014 [/quote]

[QUOTE=Corey_Faure;43507155][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/vnhT39Fl.jpg[/IMG] Help I'm gonna die[/QUOTE] this bitch is real ignorant and knows zero of anything about anything regarding racism she is a huge embarrassment to anyone with a brain who is black and seriously needs that channel removed. also lol pretty funny how by being so biased towards how "great" blacks are, and about white racism she in turn is in fact, herself racist.

[QUOTE=Corey_Faure;43507155][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/vnhT39Fl.jpg[/IMG] Help I'm gonna die[/QUOTE] Reply how that's the most racist thing you've ever heard and in a truly equal society blacks could be racist if they wanted to...

[QUOTE=Corey_Faure;43501702]I've been inquiring him about his comment ever since I posted that. He's just a quack that thinks "the white devil is out to get me". [IMG]http://gyazo.com/9ae994ce80b77485593be1952526f4f0.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]I like how his first post is seemingly not racist at all and then his first reply is basically "black man only speak when spoken too"

[QUOTE=Corey_Faure;43507155][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/vnhT39Fl.jpg[/IMG] Help I'm gonna die[/QUOTE] I have always wondered, whenever I see people calling other people racist, they always seem to be either black or white.

So who always says that men are privileged and there is no bias against fathers in custody battles?

Can someone with magical powers find a way to punch the judge in the face without consequences? PLEASE?

[QUOTE=SuddenImpact;43508754]So who always says that men are privileged and there is no bias against fathers in custody battles?[/QUOTE] erm noone says there is no bias against fathers in custody battles. just because men aren't privileged there doesn't mean they're not privileged everywhere else.

People like this deserve a straight up headbutt

[QUOTE=Zeke129;43505610]This article exploded all over the internet (mostly in mens rights circles), so much so that [url=http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/childsupport.asp]Snopes had to jump on it[/url]. Basically, at no point was this man sent to jail for "overpaying child support"[/QUOTE] Thank you. I got so much shit for suggesting that maybe the OP wasn't representing the facts right and that another source was needed. [editline]12th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Del91;43506665]Please, you're not backpedaling hard enough.[/QUOTE] I'm not backpedaling shit. I stand by what I said 100% and I won't take it back. Evidentially, I made the right call if the posts made by catbarf and Zeke are anything to go by. [editline]12th January 2014[/editline] Besides, it would be stupid of me to backpedal now that my suspicions have been confirmed.

So, a woman can request her attorney fee's be paid by her ex husband and everyone's okay with it, is it the same the other way around? Can a man request his ex-wife pay his attorney fee's without the court laughing in his face

[QUOTE=Arc Nova;43509855]So, a woman can request her attorney fee's be paid by her ex husband and everyone's okay with it, is it the same the other way around? Can a man request his ex-wife pay his attorney fee's without the court laughing in his face[/QUOTE] Well, Child Support and Alimony can go either way, so it probably goes both ways for legal fees. It might also depend. If the man came from some rich family and asked his relatively poor ex-wife to pay the legal fees I'm sure it might not be taken very seriously. If the woman was comparatively rich then maybe she could be told to pay the legal fees. [quote]Request that your spouse pay your legal fees: If your spouse has more money than you, you can request that your spouse pay some or all of your legal fees and costs. If your spouse does not voluntarily agree to this request, you can ask the judge who is hearing your divorce case to order your spouse to pay some of your legal expenses. [url]http://www.attorneys.com/divorce/how-to-pay-for-a-lawyer/[/url][/quote] So legally you can, at least. I don't know about any real-world cases, though. I got wicked déjà vu writing this post.

[QUOTE=SuddenImpact;43508754]So who always says that men are privileged and there is no bias against fathers in custody battles?[/QUOTE] If there's bias against fathers in custody battles, a case where the father failed to pay child support and legally abducted his child amidst a whole lot of murky circumstances is not the case to prove it. [QUOTE=Arc Nova;43509855]So, a woman can request her attorney fee's be paid by her ex husband and everyone's okay with it, is it the same the other way around?[/QUOTE] If the woman is in contempt of the legal agreement governing the divorce, is three thousand dollars short on her child support payments, and has to be taken to court to pay up, then absolutely. Did you even read the article, or just read the title and get outraged like everyone else? You know a story is sensationalist when even Snopes has to get involved.