Mistress Sues 9/11 Widow For More Child Benefits

WNBC Television ^ | 5/27/2004 | Puppage

[anglophile]

What other conclusion is there to draw?

The woman is a whore who slept with a married man, and is now looking for a payday.

Ya know.. this society used to name a spade a spade.

[alisasny]

this society used to name a spade a spade.

And at one time every freeper would have too....

[TankerKC]

And I am the illogical one.....

Correct.

[ValerieUSA]

I'm sure she knew she was carrying on with a married man who had 4 children.
Her child is extremely lucky to get an equal amount as the other kids.
The widow should sue for custody of her husband's child.

[FITZ]

She might --- there's a woman here who had an affair with a married man, got pregnant and sued for child support and won. The man's wife actually stayed with him --- even though a considerable part of his income for 18 years was taken by the ex-lover. Obviously these women didn't really intend to work themselves to support the children they have through adulterous affairs.

I'm sure in this case the bigger sum of money is inspiring a good bit of greed in the "other" woman --- she's suing the wife --- going after her money but I guess that's par for the course.

[FITZ]

Mz. Diaz affair was not for monetary gain

Very possibly it was --- she sounds like she's not too used to the idea of actually working to support herself --- maybe she was his prostitute. She sounds like she's pretty in it for the money.

[FITZ]

In fairness to the widow

Yes --- we don't know her motives. Chances are she had pity on the new baby and figured he could get a nice amount, maybe even love for her husband made he want to provide something for his child. Maybe she's just a big chump, a door mat. We don't know but it sure looks like she's being taken for a ride now by the adulterer woman --- sometimes kindness or pity can get you problems.

[SuziQ]

But Diaz, 36, contends her son should get more.

Why should this chick's kid get more than the four children of the marriage?

[2banana]

Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (SGLI) provides GIs with up to $250,000, depending upon what they select. Most folks I know have the full 250K.

Anyone in America can pay for life insurance (it is cheap to get term life insurance if you are young and healthy).

But these 9/11 families think millions in free government money just ain't good enough.

[shhrubbery!]

You're right, there is an older son whom Diaz claimed was fathered by Callahan too. The above article doesn't mention him for some reason -- could it be that DNA tests showed Callahan was not his father?

Previous article, written before DNA tests were complete:

Paternity Suit Darkens Sept. 11 For One Mom

Woman Claims Slain Port Authority Officer Fathered Her Kids

POSTED: 7:38 p.m. EDT September 10, 2002

UPDATED: 7:38 p.m. EDT September 10, 2002

On the eve of Sept. 11, Kim Diaz still has no idea what to do Sept. 11 with 2-year-old Kieran and 4-month-old Liam.

"Obviously we weren't invited to anything because the results aren't back, and that's not fair to them, the first anniversary of their father passing and we don't know what we're doing with them," Diaz said.

For 10 months, she has been trying to prove that their father was 44-year-old Liam Callahan, with whom she was having an affair. Diaz believes the boys deserve financial compensation.

But the officer also has a widow, Joan, and four children who agreed last month to DNA testing to be compared with Diaz's children. The results were supposed to be back last week.

"I almost kind of figured that the results weren't going to come back and it'll be Thursday right after everything's over with," Diaz said.

Joan Callahan's attorney Ed Hayes insists DNA results are not intentionally being held up.

"If they are his children, she's going to do whatever she can do to help the mother of those children and if they're not, than that's the end of the issue," Hayes said.

[TankerKC]

SGLI is for military only...it is insanely cheap. Still, I get you point.

[justshutupandtakeit]

A "whore" has already been paid. You must mean "slut."

None of that has anything to do with providing for a child as the law requires.

And if you think the money can offset all the costs of raising a child I don't think you have a firm grasp of reality.

[sandbar]

>Y'all surprise me. There's no culpability on the part of >the deceased father? We're conservatives. We're all about >taking responsibility, and responsibility for this falls >on both parents, including the father and his assets.

Of course there is culpability on the part of the father! But when the father dies before you even know you are pregnant... At what point is the woman responsible? I am not saying she shouldn't be entitled to any money available from his death, but the insurance money is a bonus that comes from being in a stable marraige or relationship with someone who is interested in taking care of you in the event of his death. At the very least, pick a scumbag that cares enough about you to purchase a life insurance with you as a beneficiary in case he dies. Don't belittle the value of a family. In this day and age women want to be seen as equals, treated as equals and treated with the same respect a man does, untill they get themselves into a victimization position. Then they become helpless. I'm sorry, there is plenty of birth control readily available, free even in most areas. If you don't want to be in the position to possibly be raising a child on your own, delay children untill marraige. And even it's no guarantee (my ex pays NO child support to me), but at least you have a better chance then by sleeping unprotected with a MARRIED man.