Posted on 09/22/2005 7:03:41 PM PDT by Rodney King
FRESNO, California (AP) -- The former mistress of convicted murderer Scott Peterson is back in the spotlight after a DNA test showed that her first child was not fathered by the man who was paying child support.
Anthony Flores, 29, has been paying Frey $175 a month for nearly four years, his attorney, Glenn Wilson, said Wednesday. The father of the 4-year-old girl is actually Fresno restaurant owner Christopher Funch, Wilson said....Excerpted
No one answered the telephone at Porky's Rib House on Wednesday, and Funch did not have a listed home number.
....excerpted
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Slutty is as Slutty does
according to the liberal translation of the law, who SIRED the baby makes no difference - it's who the MASTER decided and that decision will not be questioned by the sheeple-slaves.
wow, that's one fast ho.
And a money grubber.
That was one very expensive roll in the hay.
That was just an ugly comment, just for the sake of being mean. If he didn't want to pay, he should have had a DNA test 4 years ago.
$175 a month is chicken feed. This guy must be a real success story to only have to pay that much.
Her AND her lawyer...
Oh Sorry. Let me rephrase it: She is a great lady who had sex with multiple men within the same small time frame when she was pregant. It's not her fault. Nor is it her fault that she didn't consider the fact that really she had no way of knowing who the Dad was, but didn't bother to tell the guy. She's just lovely! Maybe they should make a childrens book about her and have her speak to 12 year old girls about how to be a responsible and moral woman.
Arrrgghh.!..Humans are truely walking/ talking apes.
Wow..good thing we no longer judge people...
She isn't the pillar of morality, but at lest she put the scum Peterson where he belongs!
Not her fault she didnt know. When you get cut with a buzz saw, how do you know what tooth did it.
Do you have some sort of problem with the truth? Some man piss you off by not giving you whatever your heart desires?
What if the defrauded man had no reason to believe that he wasn't the father four years ago? What if he has just now learned that there is a good chance that he is not the father? I don't think that the mistaken belief that this woman wasn't the type to sleep with different men in such proximity so as to make paternity a mystery, is a good reason to make a man pay for some other man's child.
I know the welfare of the child usually takes priority, but being forced to pay for a child he did not father strikes a man at his very core. Its outrageous.
Bump
Oh, so Peterson's paying? I didn't get that from the article. Please advise.
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.