You can call this a knockout blow for "Roy."
As the article states, "that's a pseudonym for a guy in New Jersey that was told in 1999 by his ex-wife "Bonnie" (also a pseudonym) that their youngest son was actually the child of "Patrick" (also a pseudonym) the boy's godfather with whom she'd been having an affair."
Sounds like a simple "he thought-she didn't tell the truth story"
However, the article also states... "the next year, "Roy" decided to sue "Patrick" for reimbursement of child support he had paid to take care of the child, "Darren." A lower court sided with "Roy" and ordered the biological father to pay the child support, a decision he appealed. The Appellate Court again sided with "Roy," and it was appealed to the Supreme Court."
As you probably guessed (if you didn't click on the link above), Roy lost on a technicality according to the article, "In its unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that "Roy" was not entitled to a child support reimbursement because under the state's Parentage Act claims must be filed before a child turns 23 years old."
Hence the manlaw: First, fellas read part 1 of this series. Second, find out if your state has a Parentage Act on the books, if yes, read every line of the law if you are involved in a paternity dispute. I believe the Parentage Act is different in every state that has one on the books.
Personally, I think Roy went about this the wrong way. He sued the wrong party. I would have sued "Bonnie" because it appeared to me that she 1) knew what the law stated and 2) she knew he wasn't the father all this time and 3) she f$cked up three people's lives (Roy, Patrick and Darren) in the process of revealing this information.
You think Roy will make the same mistake again? Well, I hope nobody is that f$cking stupid.
8 comments:
yep, pretty much another example of how women manage to not be worth a damn on a regular basis.
mtc03That "Bonnie" chica sounds like a real (female dog). I'm getting all of my future litter tested for sure. I'm bothered, man. Really bothered.
See Bonnie's ass needs the gas chamber (http://afroamazon.blogspot.com/2007
/04/miss-me-with-them-problems.html), that's my theory.
That's just crap...complete crap.
I may have called one of my female friends to bust some heads....
First, I need to say that I resent Chris's comment. If it wasn't for men feeling that it's ok to run with as many women that they can run with, all at the same time, their women wouldn't have to run around on them. Second, the fool should have had a paternity test taken when the baby was born, married or not. You know what they say, "Mama's baby, Daddy's maybe". Men, if you want to be 100% sure, get the test early. You can't blame no one but yourselves when you find out 23 years later that the child is not yours. And for those that say they don't want the mother to feel a lack of trust from them, who the hell cares. I'd rather my son get a paternity test when the baby is born, knowing with out a doubt that the child is his, than for him to find out years later that the child is not. The man should be able to decide, if the child is not his, whether he wants to invest his time, energy and money in a child that he did not have anything to do with bringing in this world. Men, wake up!
@chris...that was a bit harsh...but I can't fault you if you feel that way.
@tupac_da_dogg...I feel you.
@vdizzle...now that was VERY HARSH...but I can understand that point of view.
@amadeo...yeah...lowest common denomination stuff.
@epsilonicus...huh?
@atlantasfirstqueen...It takes two people to make a baby...so unless he raped her...which it doesn't appear he did...the man and woman share 50 percent of the responsibility. I agree with your second statement...he should have had a paternity test taken the second he found out she was pregnant. You want to trust people...but you never know.
@the mistress....that's a phrase I've never heard.
Post a Comment