Man cleared of paternity, but not support (Appeals Court makes wrong father pay child support)

The Kansas City Star ^ | October 5, 2005 | By JOE LAMBE

[No Longer Free State]

Well, Just DAMN!!! The Missouri statute of limitations on Fraud charges for lying about the father of a woman's child is ONE YEAR.

Furthermore, we don't know how many times this has happened because they keep such procedings secret.

A caller to local talk radio compared this ruling to not letting a convicted murderer out after finding DNA evidence he's innocent because, "well, we've nailed someone to pay for the crime, so he has to stay."

[No Longer Free State]

ping

[k2blader]

Blame the folks who sleep around with people they aren't committed to and bring this kind of trouble first on their own children, then on themselves.

[gondramB]

Yep.

"In most states, a reputed father has a short time to contest court findings that he is a parent. That period is one year in Missouri and Kansas.

After one year, a reputed father must prove “extrinsic” fraud to get relief. That is impossible to do in most cases, lawyers said. "

It sounds like the law needs to be changed state by state.

[paradoxical]

This is WRONG!

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

"Like Carter, many men do not attend initial paternity hearings and do not get DNA tests or blood tests."

In other words, they do not contest paternity. 13 years is a wee bit late to start doing so.

[DoctorZIn]

This is common...

Nothing new here.

[Aetius]

What if the man incorrectly named as the father is not aware (for whatever reason) of his being named as such until after the initial time limit runs out? Must the guy be made aware of a claim of paternity, or can a woman name just about anyone?

[misterrob]

Scott Holste, a spokesman for Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon, said the state must act to continue collecting the money. Carter did not use his rights and lost out because of it, Holste said. “The state’s concern is that children be taken care of financially.” Sad times in America when the state needs to find a patsy to pay the tab for some hoe's behavior.

[sourcery]

Can you say "Fifth Ammendment Violation?" I knew you could.

[gondramB]

"Blame the folks who sleep around with people they aren't committed to and bring this kind of trouble first on their own children, then on themselves"

Good point. For every case there is a mother who was unfaithful or dishonest.

If I had raised a child as my own I would not abandon him no matter DNA tests might show but I don't think that should be compelled by law.

[BenLurkin]

Extrinsic fraud requires something beyond just lying about the facts, Missouri courts have said. So if a woman names the wrong father, that statement generally is considered another type of fraud with only a one-year statute of limitations.

Lying isn't fraud?

[No Longer Free State]

So because the guy is slow or careless is sufficient grounds to charge him and not the actual biological father for 18 years or more? That's just stupid.

[clee1]

This is a travesty; one that will one day come back to haunt the "system".

I tell you this much: Hell would freeze over before I paid another cent for support of a child that wasn't mine, and I give less than a damn what some so-called "judge" has to say about it.

[Tax-chick]

If you don't have sex with a woman, it's awfully hard for her to claim you're the father of her child/ren.

This kind of thing should put some ice on men who spread it around.

And yes, I think it's terribly unjust to the non-father. The law should be changed, AND men should see this as a very strong reason to turn their brains on.

[microgood]

Roberts said fathers who do not attend paternity hearings and wait too long to act should have to pay for the good of the child. That is partly because states have statutes of limitations — five years in Missouri — in which to establish paternity, she said.

That is one extremely sick sense of justice. Justice should be exacted when the truth is found out, not at the convenience of a court or a judge.

[Mears]

The one I feel sorry for in this whole mess is the boy.He was dealt a bad hand right from conception

[No Longer Free State]

If you don't have sex with a woman, it's awfully hard for her to claim you're the father of her child/ren.

Not according to this ruling. She can make the claim without your knowledge, work the system for a year, then she's home free because of the statute of limitations. Similar cases have happened.

[King Prout]

just DAMN!

[wyattearp]

This kind of thing should put some ice on men who spread it around.

It sounds to me like it was the woman who was spreading it around.