Skip to comments.
Anna Nicole Dispute Shows System’s Flaws
Chicago Sun-Times ^
 | 3/10/07
 | By Jeffery M. Leving and Glenn Sacks
Posted on 03/14/2007 11:08:35 AM PDT by PercivalWalks
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
 first 1-20, 21-40, 41-53 next  last
    
To: PercivalWalks
    Paternity is the only thing that matters and yes, from what I gather, Stern's attorneys are heading down the psychological parent route. Swab the baby. Give her to her father and put Stern in prison - for something/anything.
 
2
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:13:16 AM PDT
by 
sageb1
(This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
 
To: PercivalWalks
    One problem with the article. The authors fail to take into account that Howard K. Stern has kept Anna Nicole drugged to the gills, and that he drew up that will of hers, which she signed under the influence. This isn't your ordinary "screw the rightful father" case. 
 
We won't get into possible homicide charges...yet.
 
3
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:15:58 AM PDT
by 
TheSpottedOwl
(Head Caterer for the FIRM)
 
To: PercivalWalks
    And Anna Nicole shows our society's problems.
First in succeeding as a 'star'... and now with months of 7x24 news coverage.
Look at the number of post on FR even.
 
4
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:16:27 AM PDT
by 
nctexan
(Top 10 Presidential Reqs. for 2008 - see my homepage)
 
To: sodpoodle; Howlin
    FYI...(can't remember who has the ANS ping list)
 
5
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:17:25 AM PDT
by 
TheSpottedOwl
(Head Caterer for the FIRM)
 
To: PercivalWalks
    "A father has the right to parent his own child. The Smith case demonstrates how easily mothers and their new partners are able to violate that right." 
 
Typical lawyerese. While I agree DNA testing needs to be mightily reinforced, asserting a father's right to parent his own child without recognizing the mother's exact same right is ludicrous and would be an embarrassment to anyone but a politician or a lawyer.
 
6
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:17:28 AM PDT
by 
gcruse
 
    There's an easy way to deal with this. It's called marriage. I don't think that men who father children out of wedlock should have the right to take the children out of a loving family environment, whether it's provided by the mother or adoptive parents.
 
7
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:18:44 AM PDT
by 
webboy45
 
To: TheSpottedOwl
    Hmm. If NASA is pronounced 'nassuh', how do you pronounce ANS?
 
8
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:19:56 AM PDT
by 
gcruse
 
To: gcruse
9
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:22:03 AM PDT
by 
steve8714
(If Algore is worried about Global Warming he should become a Vegan.)
 
To: PercivalWalks
    ...the cases key fact: photographer Larry Birkhead, Smiths ex-boyfriend, has a legitimate claim to paternity. 
 
 Why is it "legitimate"? Because he makes the claim that he is the father? Is that all it takes? Anyone can make a claim to be a child's father and the allegation is deemed to be legitimate?
 
The way to combat these machinations is for family courts to order mandatory DNA testing of all babies within 30 days of a putative fathers filing for paternity.
 
 So, all it takes is someone's allegation that he is the father of a child, and the government gets to obtain a sample of a baby's DNA? Shouldn't the taking of such a sample require, at the very minimum, probable cause, like it does in most criminal cases? Why should the privacy interests of a baby be less valued than the privacy interests of a criminal defendant?
To: sageb1
    Birkhead will get his baby. Stern, well, he'll get his.
 
11
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:23:38 AM PDT
by 
Hildy
(RINO=RUDY IS NUMBER ONE)
 
To: webboy45
    I believe Birkhead wanted to marry her, which is exactly why Stern spirited her away to the Bahamas. 
 
That, and the fact that the baby was obviously going to test positive for drugs.
 
12
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:23:56 AM PDT
by 
Howlin
(Honk if you like Fred Thompson!!!)
 
To: Hildy
    That's how this appears to be playing out.
 
13
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:24:46 AM PDT
by 
veronica
('My 80% ally is not my 20% enemy.' ........Rudy reminds us what  Ronald Reagan said.)
 
To: HaveHadEnough
    There's plenty of probable cause in this case, namely that she told him he's the father and took him to all the baby doctor visits. 
Why should the privacy interests of a baby be less valued than the privacy interests of a criminal defendant?
You'll have to ask Howard Stern that; he's the one leading this particular circus.
 
14
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:26:03 AM PDT
by 
Howlin
(Honk if you like Fred Thompson!!!)
 
To: webboy45
    You are being so judgmental! ;) 
 
I couldn't agree with you more.
 
To: Howlin
    There's plenty of probable cause in this case, namely that she told him he's the father and took him to all the baby doctor visits.
 
His statement that the deceased told him he was the father is a bit self-serving. I would think a stronger statement would be from her to third parties stating that he was the father.
To: HaveHadEnough
    Try to pay attention to the FACTS of the case; there is plenty of incidental evidence while she was alive that she had told him he was the father. 
 
Until he brought up the fact that the drugs she was using might hurt HIS baby, things were fine.
 
17
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:45:19 AM PDT
by 
Howlin
(Honk if you like Fred Thompson!!!)
 
To: PercivalWalks
    I believe the flaws revealed here are those of Anna Nicole Smith and her entourage. Can't wait for that DNA result. Just can't wait. Be ready!
 
18
posted on 
03/14/2007 11:56:19 AM PDT
by 
twonie
(RUDY FOR PRESIDENT '08.  THERE - A COMMITMENT OUT LOUD.)
 
To: HaveHadEnough
    "I would think a stronger statement would be from her to third parties stating that he was the father." 
 
That occurred. Forget who.
 
19
posted on 
03/14/2007 12:00:50 PM PDT
by 
sageb1
(This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
 
To: PercivalWalks
20
posted on 
03/14/2007 12:05:40 PM PDT
by 
kimmie7
(Liberals embrace the sin......Christians embrace the sinner.)
 
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
 first 1-20, 21-40, 41-53 next  last
    Disclaimer:
    Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
    posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
    management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
    exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson