CA. Courts Can't Make Precedent, On Injustice At Men

( This one also came from alt.support.divorce )

Funny how the California judges scrupulously follow the law in cases of
paternity fraud - but seem to ignore the law with respect to enforcing a
prohibition against gay marriage.

Why do you think that is?

http://www.nbc4.tv/news/2891653/detail.html

------------------------

Torrance Man Vows To Change Child Support Laws
Man Ordered To Support Child He Says Isn't His

POSTED: 5:16 pm PST March 2, 2004

LOS ANGELES -- A Torrance man ordered to pay support for a child he
maintains is not his son said Tuesday he is a victim of paternity fraud
and will not give up the fight to change the law.

Taron James, 34, says he has already given about $25,000 in child support
to a woman for her 11-year-old son, a son he claims is not his.

The woman, whose name has not been made public, identified James as the
baby's father in 1992, but the Gulf War veteran denied paternity.

The U.S. Navy vet admitted "a two-week fling" with the woman, but said it
came a year before the child's birth.

"I don't know of any woman with that long a pregnancy," he said in a phone
interview.

James tried to stop garnishment of his unemployment in a hearing before
the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, but administrative
Judge Michael Kurz said he could not overturn a decision by the Child
Support Services Department.

No one at the CSSD who was familiar with James' case could be reached.

Although Kurz denied James' request, the judge in his decision wrote, "the
evidence is overwhelming that (James) is a victim of fraud instigated by
the woman ... This is one of the most unjust results a judge could render,
but based on the laws on the books in California, there is no discretion
to hold otherwise."

Even after producing a DNA test and notarized testimony from the woman
clearing him, courts refused to set aside judgments obtained against him
by the Los Angeles County District Attorney and the Child Support Services
Department.

James said that unless there was a legislative change, he could end up
paying support until the boy is 23.

"I'm so knocked down, it's not funny," James said, but added that he is
helping lead the charge for an Assembly bill that could help reduce
paternity fraud by making it easier for men to use DNA evidence to clear
up cases against them.

"I will get the laws changed somehow," he said.

James said his name was placed on the child's birth certificate without
his consent while he was on his tour of duty, and said he thinks the
woman's motivation was his military benefits.

"Her father was in the Navy years ago, and she knew about the benefits,"
he said. "Here I am in the Gulf War, and if I was killed, she could make a
claim on a $200,000 life insurance policy on the child's behalf."

He said the judgments have left him with almost nothing and that they have
cost him $50,000, including his $24,000 military college stipend, which he
said expired because he has spent the last three years fighting the
paternity suit.

Copyright 2004 by NBC4.tv. All rights reserved.
------------------------------------------------------------------







--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Here's a suggested explanation. Try it on for size.

The law used to be a set of rules adopted by legislatures to promote the
common good. Laws were administered by judges, who were different animals
from politicians, and who decided how general laws would be applied in
individual cases. They relied heavily on precedent, and kept in mind the
need to build up a body of consistent decisions that would clarify the law
and enable everyone to know what was and was not permitted.

That's all gone by the board in the U.S. Judges have become one of the
largest categories of scofflaws. They take advantage of the fact that it is
often very difficult to undo their decisions, and they have steadily
encroached on the powers of democratically elected legislatures. Judges
have not only become politicians, they have become the worst kind of
politician, pandering to special interest groups at the expense of all
categories of person who are not organized into special interest groups.

Those who are victimized by paternity fraud are heterosexual men, who
have no special interest group to protect their interests. By contrast,
those who want gay "marriage" are homosexuals, who -- despite their small
numbers -- are one of the most well-funded and energetic special interest
groups in the U.S. Judges pay attention to homosexual groups. They don't
pay attention to fathers. What's written in laws and constitutions doesn't
matter.

Do you think that could be the explanation?


"Andre Lieven" wrote in message
...
( This one also came from alt.support.divorce )

Funny how the California judges scrupulously follow the law in cases of
paternity fraud - but seem to ignore the law with respect to enforcing a
prohibition against gay marriage.

Why do you think that is?

http://www.nbc4.tv/news/2891653/detail.html

------------------------

Torrance Man Vows To Change Child Support Laws
Man Ordered To Support Child He Says Isn't His

POSTED: 5:16 pm PST March 2, 2004

LOS ANGELES -- A Torrance man ordered to pay support for a child he
maintains is not his son said Tuesday he is a victim of paternity fraud
and will not give up the fight to change the law.

Taron James, 34, says he has already given about $25,000 in child support
to a woman for her 11-year-old son, a son he claims is not his.

The woman, whose name has not been made public, identified James as the
baby's father in 1992, but the Gulf War veteran denied paternity.

The U.S. Navy vet admitted "a two-week fling" with the woman, but said it
came a year before the child's birth.

"I don't know of any woman with that long a pregnancy," he said in a phone
interview.

James tried to stop garnishment of his unemployment in a hearing before
the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, but administrative
Judge Michael Kurz said he could not overturn a decision by the Child
Support Services Department.

No one at the CSSD who was familiar with James' case could be reached.

Although Kurz denied James' request, the judge in his decision wrote, "the
evidence is overwhelming that (James) is a victim of fraud instigated by
the woman ... This is one of the most unjust results a judge could render,
but based on the laws on the books in California, there is no discretion
to hold otherwise."

Even after producing a DNA test and notarized testimony from the woman
clearing him, courts refused to set aside judgments obtained against him
by the Los Angeles County District Attorney and the Child Support Services
Department.

James said that unless there was a legislative change, he could end up
paying support until the boy is 23.

"I'm so knocked down, it's not funny," James said, but added that he is
helping lead the charge for an Assembly bill that could help reduce
paternity fraud by making it easier for men to use DNA evidence to clear
up cases against them.

"I will get the laws changed somehow," he said.

James said his name was placed on the child's birth certificate without
his consent while he was on his tour of duty, and said he thinks the
woman's motivation was his military benefits.

"Her father was in the Navy years ago, and she knew about the benefits,"
he said. "Here I am in the Gulf War, and if I was killed, she could make a
claim on a $200,000 life insurance policy on the child's behalf."

He said the judgments have left him with almost nothing and that they have
cost him $50,000, including his $24,000 military college stipend, which he
said expired because he has spent the last three years fighting the
paternity suit.

Copyright 2004 by NBC4.tv. All rights reserved.
------------------------------------------------------------------







--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Here's a suggested explanation. Try it on for size.

The law used to be a set of rules adopted by legislatures to promote the
common good. Laws were administered by judges, who were different animals
from politicians, and who decided how general laws would be applied in
individual cases. They relied heavily on precedent, and kept in mind the
need to build up a body of consistent decisions that would clarify the law
and enable everyone to know what was and was not permitted.

That's all gone by the board in the U.S. Judges have become one of the
largest categories of scofflaws. They take advantage of the fact that it is
often very difficult to undo their decisions, and they have steadily
encroached on the powers of democratically elected legislatures. Judges
have not only become politicians, they have become the worst kind of
politician, pandering to special interest groups at the expense of all
categories of person who are not organized into special interest groups.

Those who are victimized by paternity fraud are heterosexual men, who
have no special interest group to protect their interests. By contrast,
those who want gay "marriage" are homosexuals, who -- despite their small
numbers -- are one of the most well-funded and energetic special interest
groups in the U.S. Judges pay attention to homosexual groups. They don't
pay attention to fathers. What's written in laws and constitutions doesn't
matter.

Do you think that could be the explanation?


"Andre Lieven" wrote in message
...
( This one also came from alt.support.divorce )

Funny how the California judges scrupulously follow the law in cases of
paternity fraud - but seem to ignore the law with respect to enforcing a
prohibition against gay marriage.

Why do you think that is?

http://www.nbc4.tv/news/2891653/detail.html

------------------------

Torrance Man Vows To Change Child Support Laws
Man Ordered To Support Child He Says Isn't His

POSTED: 5:16 pm PST March 2, 2004

LOS ANGELES -- A Torrance man ordered to pay support for a child he
maintains is not his son said Tuesday he is a victim of paternity fraud
and will not give up the fight to change the law.

Taron James, 34, says he has already given about $25,000 in child support
to a woman for her 11-year-old son, a son he claims is not his.

The woman, whose name has not been made public, identified James as the
baby's father in 1992, but the Gulf War veteran denied paternity.

The U.S. Navy vet admitted "a two-week fling" with the woman, but said it
came a year before the child's birth.

"I don't know of any woman with that long a pregnancy," he said in a phone
interview.

James tried to stop garnishment of his unemployment in a hearing before
the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, but administrative
Judge Michael Kurz said he could not overturn a decision by the Child
Support Services Department.

No one at the CSSD who was familiar with James' case could be reached.

Although Kurz denied James' request, the judge in his decision wrote, "the
evidence is overwhelming that (James) is a victim of fraud instigated by
the woman ... This is one of the most unjust results a judge could render,
but based on the laws on the books in California, there is no discretion
to hold otherwise."

Even after producing a DNA test and notarized testimony from the woman
clearing him, courts refused to set aside judgments obtained against him
by the Los Angeles County District Attorney and the Child Support Services
Department.

James said that unless there was a legislative change, he could end up
paying support until the boy is 23.

"I'm so knocked down, it's not funny," James said, but added that he is
helping lead the charge for an Assembly bill that could help reduce
paternity fraud by making it easier for men to use DNA evidence to clear
up cases against them.

"I will get the laws changed somehow," he said.

James said his name was placed on the child's birth certificate without
his consent while he was on his tour of duty, and said he thinks the
woman's motivation was his military benefits.

"Her father was in the Navy years ago, and she knew about the benefits,"
he said. "Here I am in the Gulf War, and if I was killed, she could make a
claim on a $200,000 life insurance policy on the child's behalf."

He said the judgments have left him with almost nothing and that they have
cost him $50,000, including his $24,000 military college stipend, which he
said expired because he has spent the last three years fighting the
paternity suit.

Copyright 2004 by NBC4.tv. All rights reserved.
------------------------------------------------------------------







--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Here's a suggested explanation. Try it on for size.

The law used to be a set of rules adopted by legislatures to promote the
common good. Laws were administered by judges, who were different animals
from politicians, and who decided how general laws would be applied in
individual cases. They relied heavily on precedent, and kept in mind the
need to build up a body of consistent decisions that would clarify the law
and enable everyone to know what was and was not permitted.

That's all gone by the board in the U.S. Judges have become one of the
largest categories of scofflaws. They take advantage of the fact that it is
often very difficult to undo their decisions, and they have steadily
encroached on the powers of democratically elected legislatures. Judges
have not only become politicians, they have become the worst kind of
politician, pandering to special interest groups at the expense of all
categories of person who are not organized into special interest groups.

Those who are victimized by paternity fraud are heterosexual men, who
have no special interest group to protect their interests. By contrast,
those who want gay "marriage" are homosexuals, who -- despite their small
numbers -- are one of the most well-funded and energetic special interest
groups in the U.S. Judges pay attention to homosexual groups. They don't
pay attention to fathers. What's written in laws and constitutions doesn't
matter.

Do you think that could be the explanation?


"Andre Lieven" wrote in message
...
( This one also came from alt.support.divorce )

Funny how the California judges scrupulously follow the law in cases of
paternity fraud - but seem to ignore the law with respect to enforcing a
prohibition against gay marriage.

Why do you think that is?

http://www.nbc4.tv/news/2891653/detail.html

------------------------

Torrance Man Vows To Change Child Support Laws
Man Ordered To Support Child He Says Isn't His

POSTED: 5:16 pm PST March 2, 2004

LOS ANGELES -- A Torrance man ordered to pay support for a child he
maintains is not his son said Tuesday he is a victim of paternity fraud
and will not give up the fight to change the law.

Taron James, 34, says he has already given about $25,000 in child support
to a woman for her 11-year-old son, a son he claims is not his.

The woman, whose name has not been made public, identified James as the
baby's father in 1992, but the Gulf War veteran denied paternity.

The U.S. Navy vet admitted "a two-week fling" with the woman, but said it
came a year before the child's birth.

"I don't know of any woman with that long a pregnancy," he said in a phone
interview.

James tried to stop garnishment of his unemployment in a hearing before
the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, but administrative
Judge Michael Kurz said he could not overturn a decision by the Child
Support Services Department.

No one at the CSSD who was familiar with James' case could be reached.

Although Kurz denied James' request, the judge in his decision wrote, "the
evidence is overwhelming that (James) is a victim of fraud instigated by
the woman ... This is one of the most unjust results a judge could render,
but based on the laws on the books in California, there is no discretion
to hold otherwise."

Even after producing a DNA test and notarized testimony from the woman
clearing him, courts refused to set aside judgments obtained against him
by the Los Angeles County District Attorney and the Child Support Services
Department.

James said that unless there was a legislative change, he could end up
paying support until the boy is 23.

"I'm so knocked down, it's not funny," James said, but added that he is
helping lead the charge for an Assembly bill that could help reduce
paternity fraud by making it easier for men to use DNA evidence to clear
up cases against them.

"I will get the laws changed somehow," he said.

James said his name was placed on the child's birth certificate without
his consent while he was on his tour of duty, and said he thinks the
woman's motivation was his military benefits.

"Her father was in the Navy years ago, and she knew about the benefits,"
he said. "Here I am in the Gulf War, and if I was killed, she could make a
claim on a $200,000 life insurance policy on the child's behalf."

He said the judgments have left him with almost nothing and that they have
cost him $50,000, including his $24,000 military college stipend, which he
said expired because he has spent the last three years fighting the
paternity suit.

Copyright 2004 by NBC4.tv. All rights reserved.
------------------------------------------------------------------







--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Andre Lieven wrote:
( This one also came from alt.support.divorce )

Funny how the California judges scrupulously follow the law in cases of
paternity fraud - but seem to ignore the law with respect to enforcing a
prohibition against gay marriage.


They have a lot of faggot judges in Kaliefonia.

Bob



--

When did we divide into sides?

"As president, I will put American government and our legal system back
on the side of women." John Kerry, leading Democratic candidate for
President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/


























[Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All
posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.]

Andre Lieven wrote:
( This one also came from alt.support.divorce )

Funny how the California judges scrupulously follow the law in cases of
paternity fraud - but seem to ignore the law with respect to enforcing a
prohibition against gay marriage.


They have a lot of faggot judges in Kaliefonia.

Bob



--

When did we divide into sides?

"As president, I will put American government and our legal system back
on the side of women." John Kerry, leading Democratic candidate for
President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/


























[Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All
posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.]

Andre Lieven wrote:
( This one also came from alt.support.divorce )

Funny how the California judges scrupulously follow the law in cases of
paternity fraud - but seem to ignore the law with respect to enforcing a
prohibition against gay marriage.


They have a lot of faggot judges in Kaliefonia.

Bob



--

When did we divide into sides?

"As president, I will put American government and our legal system back
on the side of women." John Kerry, leading Democratic candidate for
President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/


























[Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All
posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.]

"Andre Lieven" wrote in message
...
( This one also came from alt.support.divorce )

Funny how the California judges scrupulously follow the law in cases of
paternity fraud - but seem to ignore the law with respect to enforcing a
prohibition against gay marriage.

Can you say "judicialegislative"?


Why do you think that is?

http://www.nbc4.tv/news/2891653/detail.html

------------------------

Torrance Man Vows To Change Child Support Laws
Man Ordered To Support Child He Says Isn't His

POSTED: 5:16 pm PST March 2, 2004

LOS ANGELES -- A Torrance man ordered to pay support for a child he
maintains is not his son said Tuesday he is a victim of paternity fraud
and will not give up the fight to change the law.

Taron James, 34, says he has already given about $25,000 in child support
to a woman for her 11-year-old son, a son he claims is not his.

The woman, whose name has not been made public, identified James as the
baby's father in 1992, but the Gulf War veteran denied paternity.

The U.S. Navy vet admitted "a two-week fling" with the woman, but said it
came a year before the child's birth.

"I don't know of any woman with that long a pregnancy," he said in a phone
interview.

James tried to stop garnishment of his unemployment in a hearing before
the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, but administrative
Judge Michael Kurz said he could not overturn a decision by the Child
Support Services Department.

No one at the CSSD who was familiar with James' case could be reached.

Although Kurz denied James' request, the judge in his decision wrote, "the
evidence is overwhelming that (James) is a victim of fraud instigated by
the woman ... This is one of the most unjust results a judge could render,
but based on the laws on the books in California, there is no discretion
to hold otherwise."

Even after producing a DNA test and notarized testimony from the woman
clearing him, courts refused to set aside judgments obtained against him
by the Los Angeles County District Attorney and the Child Support Services
Department.

James said that unless there was a legislative change, he could end up
paying support until the boy is 23.

"I'm so knocked down, it's not funny," James said, but added that he is
helping lead the charge for an Assembly bill that could help reduce
paternity fraud by making it easier for men to use DNA evidence to clear
up cases against them.

"I will get the laws changed somehow," he said.

James said his name was placed on the child's birth certificate without
his consent while he was on his tour of duty, and said he thinks the
woman's motivation was his military benefits.

"Her father was in the Navy years ago, and she knew about the benefits,"
he said. "Here I am in the Gulf War, and if I was killed, she could make a
claim on a $200,000 life insurance policy on the child's behalf."

He said the judgments have left him with almost nothing and that they have
cost him $50,000, including his $24,000 military college stipend, which he
said expired because he has spent the last three years fighting the
paternity suit.

Copyright 2004 by NBC4.tv. All rights reserved.
------------------------------------------------------------------







--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

"Andre Lieven" wrote in message
...
( This one also came from alt.support.divorce )

Funny how the California judges scrupulously follow the law in cases of
paternity fraud - but seem to ignore the law with respect to enforcing a
prohibition against gay marriage.

Can you say "judicialegislative"?


Why do you think that is?

http://www.nbc4.tv/news/2891653/detail.html

------------------------

Torrance Man Vows To Change Child Support Laws
Man Ordered To Support Child He Says Isn't His

POSTED: 5:16 pm PST March 2, 2004

LOS ANGELES -- A Torrance man ordered to pay support for a child he
maintains is not his son said Tuesday he is a victim of paternity fraud
and will not give up the fight to change the law.

Taron James, 34, says he has already given about $25,000 in child support
to a woman for her 11-year-old son, a son he claims is not his.

The woman, whose name has not been made public, identified James as the
baby's father in 1992, but the Gulf War veteran denied paternity.

The U.S. Navy vet admitted "a two-week fling" with the woman, but said it
came a year before the child's birth.

"I don't know of any woman with that long a pregnancy," he said in a phone
interview.

James tried to stop garnishment of his unemployment in a hearing before
the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, but administrative
Judge Michael Kurz said he could not overturn a decision by the Child
Support Services Department.

No one at the CSSD who was familiar with James' case could be reached.

Although Kurz denied James' request, the judge in his decision wrote, "the
evidence is overwhelming that (James) is a victim of fraud instigated by
the woman ... This is one of the most unjust results a judge could render,
but based on the laws on the books in California, there is no discretion
to hold otherwise."

Even after producing a DNA test and notarized testimony from the woman
clearing him, courts refused to set aside judgments obtained against him
by the Los Angeles County District Attorney and the Child Support Services
Department.

James said that unless there was a legislative change, he could end up
paying support until the boy is 23.

"I'm so knocked down, it's not funny," James said, but added that he is
helping lead the charge for an Assembly bill that could help reduce
paternity fraud by making it easier for men to use DNA evidence to clear
up cases against them.

"I will get the laws changed somehow," he said.

James said his name was placed on the child's birth certificate without
his consent while he was on his tour of duty, and said he thinks the
woman's motivation was his military benefits.

"Her father was in the Navy years ago, and she knew about the benefits,"
he said. "Here I am in the Gulf War, and if I was killed, she could make a
claim on a $200,000 life insurance policy on the child's behalf."

He said the judgments have left him with almost nothing and that they have
cost him $50,000, including his $24,000 military college stipend, which he
said expired because he has spent the last three years fighting the
paternity suit.

Copyright 2004 by NBC4.tv. All rights reserved.
------------------------------------------------------------------







--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

"Andre Lieven" wrote in message
...
( This one also came from alt.support.divorce )

Funny how the California judges scrupulously follow the law in cases of
paternity fraud - but seem to ignore the law with respect to enforcing a
prohibition against gay marriage.

Can you say "judicialegislative"?


Why do you think that is?

http://www.nbc4.tv/news/2891653/detail.html

------------------------

Torrance Man Vows To Change Child Support Laws
Man Ordered To Support Child He Says Isn't His

POSTED: 5:16 pm PST March 2, 2004

LOS ANGELES -- A Torrance man ordered to pay support for a child he
maintains is not his son said Tuesday he is a victim of paternity fraud
and will not give up the fight to change the law.

Taron James, 34, says he has already given about $25,000 in child support
to a woman for her 11-year-old son, a son he claims is not his.

The woman, whose name has not been made public, identified James as the
baby's father in 1992, but the Gulf War veteran denied paternity.

The U.S. Navy vet admitted "a two-week fling" with the woman, but said it
came a year before the child's birth.

"I don't know of any woman with that long a pregnancy," he said in a phone
interview.

James tried to stop garnishment of his unemployment in a hearing before
the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, but administrative
Judge Michael Kurz said he could not overturn a decision by the Child
Support Services Department.

No one at the CSSD who was familiar with James' case could be reached.

Although Kurz denied James' request, the judge in his decision wrote, "the
evidence is overwhelming that (James) is a victim of fraud instigated by
the woman ... This is one of the most unjust results a judge could render,
but based on the laws on the books in California, there is no discretion
to hold otherwise."

Even after producing a DNA test and notarized testimony from the woman
clearing him, courts refused to set aside judgments obtained against him
by the Los Angeles County District Attorney and the Child Support Services
Department.

James said that unless there was a legislative change, he could end up
paying support until the boy is 23.

"I'm so knocked down, it's not funny," James said, but added that he is
helping lead the charge for an Assembly bill that could help reduce
paternity fraud by making it easier for men to use DNA evidence to clear
up cases against them.

"I will get the laws changed somehow," he said.

James said his name was placed on the child's birth certificate without
his consent while he was on his tour of duty, and said he thinks the
woman's motivation was his military benefits.

"Her father was in the Navy years ago, and she knew about the benefits,"
he said. "Here I am in the Gulf War, and if I was killed, she could make a
claim on a $200,000 life insurance policy on the child's behalf."

He said the judgments have left him with almost nothing and that they have
cost him $50,000, including his $24,000 military college stipend, which he
said expired because he has spent the last three years fighting the
paternity suit.

Copyright 2004 by NBC4.tv. All rights reserved.
------------------------------------------------------------------







--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.