Lawyer: Client Shot Once

ctnow.com ^ | August 16, 2002 | TINA A. BROWN

[RogerFGay]

In the dead of the night on June 20, 2001, Hartford's SWAT team circled a parking lot and an elementary school rooftop, trying to spot Catalino Morales and his fugitive partner from Pennsylvania.

When the fugitives were spotted between two cars on Plainfield Street, officers yelled, "Police, get down. Police, get down to the ground."

[Joe Hadenuf]

Why not, there are a lot of people with Hispanic surnames

And thousands more by the day....

[Kevin Curry]

The unconstitutionality of the child support laws is not hypothetical. It is something that is known with absolute certainty.

Yes, and in Ohio last week it was "the unconstitutionality of the traffic laws are not hypothetical."

Nuts are falling from the trees by the bushelfull.

[RogerFGay]

I believe that we have developed a new government industry or money laundering system under the name of child welfare or family services. We just don't know how big it is but we need to understand how destructive it is to our culture.

Those of us who have been studying it for years have some idea how big it is. This is a story with everything; organized crime, government corruption, destruction of many, many lives, and lots and lots and lots of money involved.

[RogerFGay]

Another good point. Regardless of why a home is broken, both parents have to made responsible for their children. That some women railroad some men is not an excuse to claim that child support laws are unconstitutional.

That's not the argument I've presented.

[RogerFGay]

Personally, I'm not a weak-kneed bogus politician. I don't accept leaving guys on the battlefield. The interferring problem is the same one I have every time I hear about a particular case. I don't know these particular guys. I don't know the circumstances. I can't make judgments in individual cases just from hearing a little about them. I've always refused opportunities to argue about individual cases. But the article is saying that the ultimate cause of this whole thing was that a guy was behind in child support payments. I don't have to reach a conclusion just from this case. I know what's going on generally, and it's wrong. The government is culpable because of their overall behavior toward fathers who owe child support. I'm not extracting that conclusion from the article alone. I already knew that the government's behavior was wrong before I read about this particular incident. My position is that the government is no less culpable when shots are fired. I think at least we can apply the logical fact that two wrongs do not make a right. The government's bad behavior generally is not in any case cancelled by this guy's response.

[RogerFGay]

Ever since actual marriage in this country was replaced by legalized trial marriage, a great many people have had the idea that there are no permanent connections with your spouse, that if you have problems, or see something else that appeals to you, you are free to 'discover yourself' and get divorced, 'screw the kids'. This is one of the primary causes of the moral collapse in our society.

What's made it worse is that it's been turned into an organized criminal industry that's funding a huge enterprise in government corruption. The constitution no longer matters, just the amount of money people can shove into bags and toss into their vans.

[RogerFGay]

Regardless of why a home is broken, both parents have to made responsible for their children.

You're presuming something from facts not in evidence. The facts contridict your presumption; have to be made responsible

Divorced Dads: Shattering the Myths

A Champion of Fatherhood

[RogerFGay]

It seems like there'd be a better way to handle the child support problem ---like have his wages garnered (or is it garnished?). Even if the police are in the right, there should be a way they don't back people into a tight corner especially people who had no history of violence ---it seems pretty unnecessary.

They didn't just do it to this one guy. That's why we can talk about this as an issue without concerning ourselves so much with this one guy's story. They pushed millions of men beyond the breaking point and then focused their efforts on harassing and degrading them endlessly, making it a point to assure them that there is no escape from the life-destroying corruption. It doesn't take Albert Einstein to figure out that some portion of the population under attack is going to resist, and by various means. There response it to send police officers out to "do their duty." Since the judiciary is no longer functional, perhaps we need to hold police responsible for carrying out illegal orders. One day a high-ranking officer will sit in court and say "You want the truth? You can't handle the truth!" and be prosecuted. Then we'll have a police system that decides what the law is and the destruction of America will be complete. What do you think it will take to get people to turn their brains on? It's like they want to be blind to the overwhelmingly destructive character of the corruption related to the child support system. I'm giving it to them as straight as I can, and getting nothing more than twisted straw-man nonsense from some.

[RogerFGay]

I live in the United States, a country with a judicial branch that applies the law to the facts and determines what is legal and illegal.

That system is no longer in use in the area of domestic relations. The current system is arbitrary, dictatorial, and extremely bureacratic. Facts and conclusions are now presumed in the law, and anything goes because higher courts approve of state authority to order child support and enforce child support orders. No state that I know of currently has a proper definition of the term "child support" in their statutes -- most states have no statement of definition nor do they have a set of principles upon which the amount of child support is based. They have simple arbitrary formulae that have been determined politically by a central committee. Without sufficient definition and principles upon which to make a decision independent of the formulae, there is no statutory basis for challenging the presumption. The many facts presumed into the making of the formulae are not stated and cannot be checked against real case circumstances. The formulae are not based on any rational theory of child support. They are simply dictatorial and arbitrary en masse decisions made by a central committee. The object of using the formulae is to increase the amount of child support owed / paid, which increases the amount of federal funding received by the states and the amount of profits for private child support collection agencies. This isn't theory. This isn't a wild guess about what's going on. This is what's been going on for more than a decade, and it's been looked into carefully. This is the basic story about child support reform.

What about custody? Custody is not determined based on facts. Sole custody is "awared" to a mother even if she's strung out on heroine and can't make it to the hearing because she's in jail for murder. Fathers sometimes get custody under unusual circumstances or after a very expensive legal battle, but some of them don't get it even when mom is putting his children up for adoption.

Divorce itself? What facts are involved in getting a divorce? She wants it. That's typically the fact of the matter. She gets it and all the prizes that go with it. What the father gets is a life controled by organized crime, corrupt politicians, and psychotic political extremists. All the while they also get the opportunity to discuss the situation with people who believe that the courts operate according to the constitution. They don't.

[RogerFGay]

If they won't compensate, they shouldn't copulate.

We're taking all the money from YOUR bank account and will withhold half your wages which we no longer consider to be yours. If you're not out of your home within 24 hours, we'll send police to throw you out. If you resist you'll go to jail if you're not shot first. This is a default judgment. We'll tell you later why we're doing it, maybe, if a letter of explanation is programmed into our automated system. We've made life better for you by making a successful appeal impossible. We feel you should appreciate our efforts to simplify the process. You don't even have to go to court. We assure you that going to court would not be in your best interest. You can thank us later for that after you've been through one of our attitude adjustment programs. Children? Forget it. You'll never see them again. We're sure that we've decided what is in their best interest. As a good father, I'm sure you won't have any objection to our taking your children from you. If you do, just remember, we have the power to shoot you.

[RogerFGay]

Am I the only one that notices that another individual with a spanish type name (Catalino Morales) is a suspect in, guilty of, another brutal rape, murder, and or attempted murder. Is this Racism to bring this up? Do we dare consider this? Article after article seems to have suspects with spanish names as the perpetrators.....Do we dare talk about this?

I've noticed that a lot of the people involved in running the child support system have Italian names. Arthur Andersen was involved in setting up the scam, and it happened again. The president of Arthur Andersen had an Italian name.

[RogerFGay]

This being said, like everyone I knew in those organizations, many of whom are in conservative and GOP leadership positions, I have no use for nutcase anarchists who support cop-killing. They belong either in jail, or in the cemetary, according to their actions.

Just makin' it up as you go along, eh? There are no cop-killing anarchists in this story. The anarchy is already here, brought to you by the bi-partisan cooperation of Republicans and Democrats. The constitution is gone. The US as we knew it no longer exists. What you're seeing now is a reaction to anarchy.

[RogerFGay]

I don't know the law -- but I believe when your circumstances change - that the court's order can be appealed.

Orders have been routinely made for more than the person who is ordered to pay can pay. They have often been made for an amount greater than the payer's net income. And the opportunity to get an adjustment due to circumstances has been abandoned. When someone's income drops, courts "impute" income -- i.e. pretend they still have the highest income in their lives that the court has a record of. I'm not makin' this up.

[Flyer]

accusations of failing to pay child support

This is why we have our SS# on our drivers licenses, hunting licenses, etc. All done in the name of tracking deadbeat dads. I don't think it is the State's job to make a father support his children. It is a family matter.

---

[RogerFGay]

This is why we have our SS# on our drivers licenses, hunting licenses, etc. All done in the name of tracking deadbeat dads. I don't think it is the State's job to make a father support his children. It is a family matter.

They were lying. They were lying about everything.

Too Late To Stop National ID

[RogerFGay]

There are several people in this discussion claiming to be "conservatives" who support the N.O.W. agenda on family issues. I suspect they haven't been thoughtful enough about family politics to have figured that out. Here's a little something extra, that some of those people will ignore while continuing to help push the country so far left that it would embarrass Joe Stalin. There's a little Nazi in feminazi for good reason. This is probably the way Hitler would have done it.

Two Strikes for Child Support Collection Company

[Flyer]

They were lying.

Yep. I have tried relaying the fact that I don't have any children, but they still want my number. . . JUST IN CASE I may father a child in the future and JUST IN CASE I may not support that child.

I suppose they could also ask for my number JUST IN CASE I rob a bank in the future. Makes just as much sense.

---

[Orangedog]

This is how governments use their "useful idiots" to do a lot of the dirty work for them. For over a decade the country has had the term "deadbeat dad" beat into them, over and over by the media and polititions. Anyone who questions the methods, tactics, or intentions of demonizing their victums is rediculed and told that they "just don't get it" or the old chestnut "It's for the children." If you don't shut up and go away after being told that it's all "for the children" then you are treated like you were a guard at a Nazi death camp. "How dare you!" they exclaim. "You're greedy, heartless and hateful if you won't do this for the children!" They way they use kids is little different from putting a knife to a kids throat and threatening to cut them open if you don't meet their demands. And if the kid gets hurt, it's all your fault because you made it happen by not caving in. Children are tools to these monsters...and nothing more than that.

[RogerFGay]

Speaking of "for the children."

The Special Interest Issue in 2002

About California NOW's Family Court Report

The Child Support Agenda

[RogerFGay]

Yep. I have tried relaying the fact that I don't have any children, but they still want my number. . . JUST IN CASE I may father a child in the future and JUST IN CASE I may not support that child.

I suppose they could also ask for my number JUST IN CASE I rob a bank in the future. Makes just as much sense.

These "conservatives" who are all for it, don't realize that a multitude of bureacrats now have access to as much personal financial information -- about them -- as they desire. They think it's only for those other guys; you know, "them," the "deadbeats." They've never had the experience of living in an actual socialist country as I have -- so they don't recognize that the US has within the past decade made the transition. This is exactly what they do, and one of the practical differences that are not allowed under the US Constitution. But they did it anyway.