Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ChadGore
I agree he has a right to "monetary" redress for the fraud the MOTHER exacted on him, but I don't agree the child should have to be made to suffer monetarilly or emotionally from the actions of either him or her mother.
21 posted on 11/02/2002 5:04:45 AM PST by Pippin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: Pippin
Re: "All I'm saying is why should the child be made to pay for what his/her parents do wrong?"

He's not asking the little girl to write him a check for 10k.

That's just it. All the man is asking for is for the woman who defrauded him $10,000 to return the money to him. As far as the story reads, that's all. In my eyes the man not only has the right to be refunded every cent from the person with the responsibility for the childs welfare, but I think he has the right to punitive damages through a civil case.

After all, what other form of fraud is so low, so dispicable, so agreegious as to impune the progress of a mans life?

When telemarketers trying to "guilt people up" in order to defraud, it's fraud. When a stock broker pushes and pushes and pushes in order to defraud, it's fraud, but all of these are recoverable, just money, loss of capitol that, while shocking, can be recovered.

Conversly, what we're talking about here alters the course of a mans life, precludes him from engaging in more grounded and satisfying relationships, and (worst of all) generates a bond between the 'father' and child where no such relationship exists.

Mom should be thankfull that punative civil damages aren't being sought.

41 posted on 11/02/2002 5:31:20 AM PST by ChadGore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson