If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Man wrongly convicted now owes $38,000 in back child support
(Newaygo County, February 2, 2006, 7:32 p.m.) A man set free after
spending 13 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit is facing more trouble. Court documents show 53-year-old Larry Souter owes about $38,000 in back child support after interest and penalties. The amount grew because he failed to have his payments suspended when he went to prison in 1992. Souter was convicted for the 1979 murder of 19-year-old Kristi Ringler near White Cloud. But years later, a woman came forward saying Ringler was actually hit by a motor home. http://www.woodtv.com/Global/story.a...49531&nav=0Rce |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Man wrongly convicted now owes $38,000 in back child support
wrote in message oups.com... (Newaygo County, February 2, 2006, 7:32 p.m.) A man set free after spending 13 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit is facing more trouble. Court documents show 53-year-old Larry Souter owes about $38,000 in back child support after interest and penalties. The amount grew because he failed to have his payments suspended when he went to prison in 1992. Souter was convicted for the 1979 murder of 19-year-old Kristi Ringler near White Cloud. But years later, a woman came forward saying Ringler was actually hit by a motor home. And the beat goes on............. http://www.woodtv.com/Global/story.a...49531&nav=0Rce |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Man wrongly convicted now owes $38,000 in back child support
wrote in message
oups.com... (Newaygo County, February 2, 2006, 7:32 p.m.) A man set free after spending 13 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit is facing more trouble. Court documents show 53-year-old Larry Souter owes about $38,000 in back child support after interest and penalties. The amount grew because he failed to have his payments suspended when he went to prison in 1992. Souter was convicted for the 1979 murder of 19-year-old Kristi Ringler near White Cloud. But years later, a woman came forward saying Ringler was actually hit by a motor home. http://www.woodtv.com/Global/story.a...49531&nav=0Rce I love this line: "..he failed to have his payments suspended when he went to prison in 1992.." Here's the thing though, unless the accused is aware that _he_ has to petition the court to suspend the C$ _on his own_, then the state will take no action to stop the amount from going through the roof. But will, upon his release, come a-knockin' for the cash as surely as the sun will rise tomorrow. And if he doesn't have it - they'll take him right back to jail. Pretty neat system of "justice" we have, ain't it? Unless he writes a book or cuts a movie deal, the chances are pretty good that he'll never be able to pay it off. Look at it like this.. he's 53, has no place to live (at the moment), has no job or job prospects and even though he was exonerated for a crime he didn't commit, the stigma of it will haunt him for the rest of his life (and most likely kill any decent job prospects, too). He's doomed. No matter what he does, no matter where he goes, he'll never get his life back. And the state is the one responsible for doing this to him. Are they gonna set him up with a nice, comfy government job? No. Are they gonna dog him for the money they say he owes and continue to make his life a living hell? As sure as the Pope's catholic, you can bet your ass th ey will. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Man wrongly convicted now owes $38,000 in back child support
Dusty wrote: wrote in message oups.com... (Newaygo County, February 2, 2006, 7:32 p.m.) A man set free after spending 13 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit is facing more trouble. Court documents show 53-year-old Larry Souter owes about $38,000 in back child support after interest and penalties. The amount grew because he failed to have his payments suspended when he went to prison in 1992. Souter was convicted for the 1979 murder of 19-year-old Kristi Ringler near White Cloud. But years later, a woman came forward saying Ringler was actually hit by a motor home. http://www.woodtv.com/Global/story.a...49531&nav=0Rce I love this line: "..he failed to have his payments suspended when he went to prison in 1992.." Here's the thing though, unless the accused is aware that _he_ has to petition the court to suspend the C$ _on his own_, then the state will take no action to stop the amount from going through the roof. But will, upon his release, come a-knockin' for the cash as surely as the sun will rise tomorrow. And if he doesn't have it - they'll take him right back to jail. Pretty neat system of "justice" we have, ain't it? Unless he writes a book or cuts a movie deal, the chances are pretty good that he'll never be able to pay it off. Look at it like this.. he's 53, has no place to live (at the moment), has no job or job prospects and even though he was exonerated for a crime he didn't commit, the stigma of it will haunt him for the rest of his life (and most likely kill any decent job prospects, too). He's doomed. No matter what he does, no matter where he goes, he'll never get his life back. And the state is the one responsible for doing this to him. Are they gonna set him up with a nice, comfy government job? No. Are they gonna dog him for the money they say he owes and continue to make his life a living hell? As sure as the Pope's catholic, you can bet your ass th ey will. And Wikipedia on the Bradley Amendment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Amendment |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Man wrongly convicted now owes $38,000 in back child support
"Werebat" wrote in message news:TjaFf.158396$oG.37265@dukeread02... Here is a more detailed account of the case: http://www.lsj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...602040317/1001 /news Sadly, the focus in cases like this one are on the NCP father and his "failure" to seek a CS change. The deputy DA in the story above takes it a step further and talks about how the CP mother was forced to support her children over the years without any financial support. So what's wrong with this picture? Well, for openers, the states selectively apply the CS statutes ignoring statutory requirements when they don't work to their advantage. In this case where were the 2-3 year interval CS order reviews to determine if the ordered amount was still appropriate? The original CS order was from 1987. The man went to prison in 1992. Why was no CS review completed during that 5 year period or the subsequent 13 year period he was in prison? And secondly, why isn't the deputy DA being held accountable for failing to do his job to review CS orders like this one that have good cause reasons for reductions? The public officials never admit their failures to follow the statutory requirements in the law. It's pretty obvious the state knew this guy was in prison, they knew if they did a CS review they would be forced to reduce or stop the CS order, so they did nothing. The reported facts indicate the state failed to do it's job over an 18 year period. And third, why does the mother get a free pass for what is most likely a violation of a court decree to notify the court or the state of any changes in address, employment, or insurance coverage? Those types of parental requirements are broiler plate language in all decrees. Why is she allowed to profit from her inaction? Why isn't the mother being charged with contempt of court for her failure to follow a court order? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Man wrongly convicted now owes $38,000 in back child support
"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message ink.net... "Werebat" wrote in message news:TjaFf.158396$oG.37265@dukeread02... Here is a more detailed account of the case: http://www.lsj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...602040317/1001 /news Sadly, the focus in cases like this one are on the NCP father and his "failure" to seek a CS change. The deputy DA in the story above takes it a step further and talks about how the CP mother was forced to support her children over the years without any financial support. So what's wrong with this picture? Well, for openers, the states selectively apply the CS statutes ignoring statutory requirements when they don't work to their advantage. In this case where were the 2-3 year interval CS order reviews to determine if the ordered amount was still appropriate? The original CS order was from 1987. The man went to prison in 1992. Why was no CS review completed during that 5 year period or the subsequent 13 year period he was in prison? Because the review isn't automatic. They send a letter to the recipient of the child support, who can elect to have the review done, or ignore it, in which case the review isn't done. And secondly, why isn't the deputy DA being held accountable for failing to do his job to review CS orders like this one that have good cause reasons for reductions? And precisely how was anyone supposed to know that a review should have been done? Or are you suggesting that they review every single CS case? The public officials never admit their failures to follow the statutory requirements in the law. As far as I'm aware, having been the recipient of the letter offering to do a review - there IS no statutory requirement to review a care periodically - at least, not in my state. It's pretty obvious the state knew this guy was in prison, they knew if they did a CS review they would be forced to reduce or stop the CS order, so they did nothing. Perhaps they did no review because none was requested? The reported facts indicate the state failed to do it's job over an 18 year period. The facts indicate that the recipient of the CS didn't request a review. And third, why does the mother get a free pass for what is most likely a violation of a court decree to notify the court or the state of any changes in address, employment, or insurance coverage? Those types of parental requirements are broiler plate language in all decrees. Why is she allowed to profit from her inaction? Why isn't the mother being charged with contempt of court for her failure to follow a court order? Perhaps she didn't have any changes? She is required to notify any changes in HER employment, employment and insurance coverage. In reading the articles from both cites, there is no indication that she had any changes - at least, nothing was mentioned. So now, let's turn it around. Why didn't the obligor notify the courts of any changes in address, employment or insurance coverage? Why should he be allowed to profit from his inaction? Why shouldn't he be charged with contempt of court for his failure to follow a court order? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Man wrongly convicted now owes $38,000 in back child support
"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
... "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message ink.net... "Werebat" wrote in message news:TjaFf.158396$oG.37265@dukeread02... Here is a more detailed account of the case: http://www.lsj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...602040317/1001 /news Sadly, the focus in cases like this one are on the NCP father and his "failure" to seek a CS change. The deputy DA in the story above takes it a step further and talks about how the CP mother was forced to support her children over the years without any financial support. So what's wrong with this picture? Well, for openers, the states selectively apply the CS statutes ignoring statutory requirements when they don't work to their advantage. In this case where were the 2-3 year interval CS order reviews to determine if the ordered amount was still appropriate? The original CS order was from 1987. The man went to prison in 1992. Why was no CS review completed during that 5 year period or the subsequent 13 year period he was in prison? Because the review isn't automatic. They send a letter to the recipient of the child support, who can elect to have the review done, or ignore it, in which case the review isn't done. And secondly, why isn't the deputy DA being held accountable for failing to do his job to review CS orders like this one that have good cause reasons for reductions? And precisely how was anyone supposed to know that a review should have been done? Or are you suggesting that they review every single CS case? The public officials never admit their failures to follow the statutory requirements in the law. As far as I'm aware, having been the recipient of the letter offering to do a review - there IS no statutory requirement to review a care periodically - at least, not in my state. It's pretty obvious the state knew this guy was in prison, they knew if they did a CS review they would be forced to reduce or stop the CS order, so they did nothing. Perhaps they did no review because none was requested? The reported facts indicate the state failed to do it's job over an 18 year period. The facts indicate that the recipient of the CS didn't request a review. And third, why does the mother get a free pass for what is most likely a violation of a court decree to notify the court or the state of any changes in address, employment, or insurance coverage? Those types of parental requirements are broiler plate language in all decrees. Why is she allowed to profit from her inaction? Why isn't the mother being charged with contempt of court for her failure to follow a court order? Perhaps she didn't have any changes? She is required to notify any changes in HER employment, employment and insurance coverage. In reading the articles from both cites, there is no indication that she had any changes - at least, nothing was mentioned. So now, let's turn it around. Why didn't the obligor notify the courts of any changes in address, employment or insurance coverage? Why should he be allowed to profit from his inaction? Why shouldn't he be charged with contempt of court for his failure to follow a court order? Ummm, Moonie, there's one very important, and basic, fact that you've overlooked.. The state knew EXACTLY where he was the whole time!!! To say that they (the state) didn't know where he was, let alone how to get a hold of him at a moments notice, to have a review of his C$ payments is to claim that the world is flat and that the moon is made of green cheddar cheese! Come on, Moonie, wake up and read it again. He was INCARCERATED in a STATE PRISON. The state cannot, ever, make the claim that they couldn't find him. And for the state to IGNORE informing him of his rights (in this case, to reduce or stop his C$ while he was in their custody) is of such magnitude, that there should be a Federal inquiry. Your whole argument about his not receiving a notice from the state is utterly foolish. But don't let the FACTS get in the way.. Oh, no, we wouldn't want that to happen now would we..? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Man wrongly convicted now owes $38,000 in back child support
"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Dusty" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message ink.net... "Werebat" wrote in message news:TjaFf.158396$oG.37265@dukeread02... Here is a more detailed account of the case: http://www.lsj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...602040317/1001 /news Sadly, the focus in cases like this one are on the NCP father and his "failure" to seek a CS change. The deputy DA in the story above takes it a step further and talks about how the CP mother was forced to support her children over the years without any financial support. So what's wrong with this picture? Well, for openers, the states selectively apply the CS statutes ignoring statutory requirements when they don't work to their advantage. In this case where were the 2-3 year interval CS order reviews to determine if the ordered amount was still appropriate? The original CS order was from 1987. The man went to prison in 1992. Why was no CS review completed during that 5 year period or the subsequent 13 year period he was in prison? Because the review isn't automatic. They send a letter to the recipient of the child support, who can elect to have the review done, or ignore it, in which case the review isn't done. And secondly, why isn't the deputy DA being held accountable for failing to do his job to review CS orders like this one that have good cause reasons for reductions? And precisely how was anyone supposed to know that a review should have been done? Or are you suggesting that they review every single CS case? The public officials never admit their failures to follow the statutory requirements in the law. As far as I'm aware, having been the recipient of the letter offering to do a review - there IS no statutory requirement to review a care periodically - at least, not in my state. It's pretty obvious the state knew this guy was in prison, they knew if they did a CS review they would be forced to reduce or stop the CS order, so they did nothing. Perhaps they did no review because none was requested? The reported facts indicate the state failed to do it's job over an 18 year period. The facts indicate that the recipient of the CS didn't request a review. And third, why does the mother get a free pass for what is most likely a violation of a court decree to notify the court or the state of any changes in address, employment, or insurance coverage? Those types of parental requirements are broiler plate language in all decrees. Why is she allowed to profit from her inaction? Why isn't the mother being charged with contempt of court for her failure to follow a court order? Perhaps she didn't have any changes? She is required to notify any changes in HER employment, employment and insurance coverage. In reading the articles from both cites, there is no indication that she had any changes - at least, nothing was mentioned. So now, let's turn it around. Why didn't the obligor notify the courts of any changes in address, employment or insurance coverage? Why should he be allowed to profit from his inaction? Why shouldn't he be charged with contempt of court for his failure to follow a court order? Ummm, Moonie, there's one very important, and basic, fact that you've overlooked.. The state knew EXACTLY where he was the whole time!!! The criminal court system very well did - but family court, and child support, are separate divisions. And the beat goes on............. To say that they (the state) didn't know where he was, let alone how to get a hold of him at a moments notice, to have a review of his C$ payments is to claim that the world is flat and that the moon is made of green cheddar cheese! I'm sorry, perhaps I missed something here - where did you see anyone saying anything about the state knowing where he was? Come on, Moonie, wake up and read it again. He was INCARCERATED in a STATE PRISON. The state cannot, ever, make the claim that they couldn't find him. I don't believe that claim was made anywhere. And for the state to IGNORE informing him of his rights (in this case, to reduce or stop his C$ while he was in their custody) is of such magnitude, that there should be a Federal inquiry. As far as I'm aware, the state is required to tell him of his criminal rights, in criminal proceedings. Seems to me that the 2 are separate, and unrelated. Why is it so hard for you to accept that the guy not only screwed up in criminal proceedings, but then further screwed himself by not tending to his other obligations? Doesn't he have any personal responsibility in how he runs his own life? Your whole argument about his not receiving a notice from the state is utterly foolish. Why would he have received a notice from the state? But don't let the FACTS get in the way.. Oh, no, we wouldn't want that to happen now would we..? The fact is that he didn't inform the courts about his change in employment, address or health insurance, and he further didn't inform the child support agencies about his change in circumstances. Why don't you hold him responsible for his own inactions? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Man wrongly convicted now owes $38,000 in back child support
"Dusty" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com... (Newaygo County, February 2, 2006, 7:32 p.m.) A man set free after spending 13 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit is facing more trouble. Court documents show 53-year-old Larry Souter owes about $38,000 in back child support after interest and penalties. The amount grew because he failed to have his payments suspended when he went to prison in 1992. Souter was convicted for the 1979 murder of 19-year-old Kristi Ringler near White Cloud. But years later, a woman came forward saying Ringler was actually hit by a motor home. http://www.woodtv.com/Global/story.a...49531&nav=0Rce I love this line: "..he failed to have his payments suspended when he went to prison in 1992.." Here's the thing though, unless the accused is aware that _he_ has to petition the court to suspend the C$ _on his own_, then the state will take no action to stop the amount from going through the roof. But will, upon his release, come a-knockin' for the cash as surely as the sun will rise tomorrow. And if he doesn't have it - they'll take him right back to jail. Pretty neat system of "justice" we have, ain't it? Yup. And then when he goes back to jail, we ALL get to pay for his free room & board. Well not all; lazy "child support" moms are exempt being that they are welfare recipients themselves. Unless he writes a book or cuts a movie deal, the chances are pretty good that he'll never be able to pay it off. Look at it like this.. he's 53, has no place to live (at the moment), has no job or job prospects and even though he was exonerated for a crime he didn't commit, the stigma of it will haunt him for the rest of his life (and most likely kill any decent job prospects, too). He's doomed. No matter what he does, no matter where he goes, he'll never get his life back. And the state is the one responsible for doing this to him. Are they gonna set him up with a nice, comfy government job? No. Are they gonna dog him for the money they say he owes and continue to make his life a living hell? As sure as the Pope's catholic, you can bet your ass th ey will. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A dentist's child abuse crime (also: Pregnant citizens: URGENT) | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 1 | September 7th 05 11:00 PM |
Paternity Fraud - US Supreme Court | Wizardlaw | Child Support | 12 | June 4th 04 02:19 AM |
Sample Supreme Court Petition | Wizardlaw | Child Support | 0 | January 16th 04 03:47 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | Spanking | 12 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
Kids should work. | ChrisScaife | Spanking | 16 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |