Then you don't have a problem giving a link to that, do you?
Already did.
When I get all of the necessary information from you I will. You're making the assertion so you need back it up.
I didn't make the assertion. The Cuyahoga County District Attorney did. What motive would he have to make this up?
The text of his letter you mentioned would be a good start.
Interesting, since I posted that comment
after my original questions. Didn't think that you would bother answering. Makes us wonder what
your agenda is.
"
My ex wife is very vindictive. I divorced her in 2003 and has kept the children from me for 4 years after I had a steady girlfriend, beginning in 2007. There is case law that under these circumstances I do am absolved from child support. The case is Hartman v. Hartman in Fairfax County Family Court in Virginia where we were divorced. The children live in a house I paid for and I have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in real estate and other benefits to her since the divorce. It is a matter of principal for me not to pay child support when I cannot see my children. She is remarried and lives in a house in Cleveland I paid for. The case you mention is a low level crime, not punishable with jail. They want me to pay the support and I will not on principal. I would rather go to trial, because I have a good defense and still cannot see or even talk with my children. I will win this on principal. I do not roll over, as you don’t."
Some morons just don't realize that the child support is for the children and not their ex-spouse. He can afford places in Beverly Hills, Miami and Washington, D.C., but refuses to support his children?
Accordingly, we dismiss this action sua sponte. Relator to pay costs. Seems that the GAL does not want him around those children.
Larry Klayman has already admitted in writing that he hasn't been paying his court ordered child support "as a matter of principle".Then you don't have a problem giving a link to that, do you?
Already did.No, you didn't. You gave a link with @
two snippets from the same paragraph and a website about indictments for child support.
I didn't make the assertion.
The assertion you're making is that @he's a deadbeat dad.
The text of his letter you mentioned would be a good start.
Interesting, since I posted that comment after my original questions.
As seen by your reply sequence you didn't. None of your links go to any such text.
Ah, still no link as to where you got the text. I had to go looking @The case is Hartman v. Hartman in Fairfax County
Is this where you got the text from? @http://turningthescale.net/?p=666
So it's purported to be an e-mail from Klayman to Miller. Do you know if it actually is? I can't seem to find the actual e-mail anywhere. Got link?
Accordingly, we dismiss this action sua sponte. Relator to pay costs.
Geez, how pathetic!
He requests that this court issue a writ of mandamus “to require enforcement of the visitation provisions of the marital agreement and divorce decree ***.” Complaint, Ad Damnum Clause.
He was ordered to pay court costs! His case got thrown out under procedural matters. You've got to do better than that.
Seems that the GAL does not want him around those children.
Sounds like she doesn't want to follow the court order and allow him to see his children.
It sounds to me like you're straight out of turningthescale.net and are trying to besmirch the man.
If he is in his legal rights then I'm not going to hold it against him. If you don't like it get the laws changed.
There's the answer to your question.