User Controls
Random Thoughts
-
2020-04-14 at 3:46 PM UTC
-
2020-04-14 at 3:49 PM UTC
-
2020-04-14 at 3:49 PM UTC
-
2020-04-14 at 3:51 PM UTC
Originally posted by Archer513 Courts are not for men.
That is definitely one area you want to avoid if you have a penis.
Courts are for "Courts."
no doubt, that in the past-- courts leaned towards the mothers in custody cases. That is NOT the societal or systematic norm now days. I have to be honest and say it, ultimately, depends on the level of representation one has. Whom ever brings the more convincing argument to the bench is who, typically, prevails... regardless of the clients gender. -
2020-04-14 at 3:52 PM UTC
Originally posted by Bill Krozby I don't believe in condoms and I didn't think out of all the hundreds of thousands of women I've been with would lie to me to get a child from me.
Nothing was proven in court.. except my dna..
you don't live in texas so you dont know how it is or my case, nice try tho.
weeel yeah its my personal problem, never said it wasn't.
again you don't know my case and you don't know the jedidicial legal system here in texas so you're talking out of your ass again.
again you don't know my case or texas law, I had an attorney handle it for me.
you seem really frothy and stuck on stupid, I literally have mail from texas saying I just owe 200 dollars or so and them I'm good. And again if you didn't get it thru your thick skull you don't know the law and having an attorney works here in texas.
Nice try tho, stay mad. -
2020-04-14 at 3:52 PM UTCtell the retard bill. its funny how this retard will never get it and continue saying lies here like anyone will beleive her.
-
2020-04-14 at 3:56 PM UTC
Originally posted by Netflxchillr Courts are for "Courts."
no doubt, that in the past– courts leaned towards the mothers in custody cases. That is NOT the societal or systematic norm now days. I have to be honest and say it, ultimately, depends on the level of representation one has. Whom ever brings the more convincing argument to the bench is who, typically, prevails… regardless of the clients gender.
You must live on Saturn if you really believe that. Women are jailed far less than men and face lesser sentences than menThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-04-14 at 3:58 PM UTCi have a case where if you google porn arrest on google news some woman got like 15 yrs for manufavturing it whil many men get life or 30 yrs in the usa or some get as much as her for just looking at it in usa. thats just one example. google it.
-
2020-04-14 at 3:59 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL Not here in radical leftist, virtue-signalling, Canada. Evidence doesn't mean shit. The only thing that matters is feelings.
you are in Canada...??
& you are trying to argue knowledge of federal USA law/guidelines? do you think apples are oranges, too? by all means, do present your argument based on facts; however, don't argue your personal "feelings" into factual parameters- and think you are correct. -
2020-04-14 at 4:02 PM UTC
Originally posted by Netflxchillr you are in Canada…??
& you are trying to argue knowledge of federal USA law/guidelines? do you think apples are oranges, too? by all means, do present your argument based on facts; however, don't argue your personal "feelings" into factual parameters- and think you are correct.
You live here in the US, right? And he knows a lot more than you do. You're just talking out of your ass. -
2020-04-14 at 4:02 PM UTC
Originally posted by tr1pl3_thr3@t So let me first say a couple/few things before I get to the extortion part
I was/am a single mom. Though my children are adults now.
I was on welfare for part of their lives.
I received a total of 450 dollars a month for child support (for the first part of their lives [another story completely])
As a single person with no kids I could rent a one room apartment and not have to live paycheck to pay check. Having kids, and them growing up I had to move from a one bedroom to a two bedroom to a three bedroom. That cost increase was not calculated in my monthly support payments. That cost increase is not calculated in TANF benefit eligibility. That cost increase came out of my pocket. Electricity bills go up for bigger places. Water bills go up as children grow. Food bills, school needs, entertainment costs … none of these increases get calculated into child support obligations or state funded benefits, they come out of the custodial parents pocket (because there are far more disgruntled noncustodials than there are understanding ones). And as I climbed the ladder at my place of employment my eligibility for TANF decreased. Its fine, I was proud of myself for no longer needing state aid, but it certainly wasn't easy.
I am sorry you got a bad deal for custody arrangements concerning your own child(ren), but you can always fight for more. You can also have child support adjusted every two years.
As for extortion … there are only two ways the State will come after you to repay what they gave in benefits.
1. You weren't paying child support
2. She wasn't claiming the child support you were paying
If you were giving her money, you should always keep records or go through support enforcement so that records are kept. Plainly put
what about suzanne kisting though? how could one keep a record of her not ripping more people off due to whwt she did to me? i mean how do you keep a record dealing with a maglomaniac who spends her days on free online dsting apps and trying to woo young men she thinks wre rovket scientists by buying expensive hand bags and not csring about the consequences of lying or ripping men off? -
2020-04-14 at 4:03 PM UTCeveryone is wrong except her shes the only one making such an argument and no one believes her but were all wrong, right krosby?
-
2020-04-14 at 4:06 PM UTC
Originally posted by Wariat i have a case where if you google porn arrest on google news some woman got like 15 yrs for manufavturing it whil many men get life or 30 yrs in the usa or some get as much as her for just looking at it in usa. thats just one example. google it.
bahahahah
ahhhh. okay, yes, Google is such a reliable source!! (moron)
1st rule of thumb of legal research 101? GOOGLE-DON'T bother... it will be THROWN OUT.
but you continue to do you... lil brohomo.š -
2020-04-14 at 4:08 PM UTC
Originally posted by Netflxchillr Courts are for "Courts."
no doubt, that in the past– courts leaned towards the mothers in custody cases. That is NOT the societal or systematic norm now days. I have to be honest and say it, ultimately, depends on the level of representation one has. Whom ever brings the more convincing argument to the bench is who, typically, prevails… regardless of the clients gender.
I havenāt seen that. Women still rule substantially in court. No matter the situation.
Every woman is presented with free consultations from advocacy groups whoās job is literally to fuck over the men. These āadvocatesā know the judges,they now the system,they know the prosecutors. They tell these women what to say,what paperwork to fill out,restraining orders. Iāve literally seen āadvocatesā tell women how to get a guy to threaten them.
Dudes are kinda left hanging.
āAcross a wide range of jurisdictions the estimates are that mothers receive primary custody 68-88% of the time, fathers receive primary custody 8-14%, and equal residential custody is awarded in only 2-6% of the cases.ā -
2020-04-14 at 4:09 PM UTC
Originally posted by Netflxchillr you are in Canada…??
& you are trying to argue knowledge of federal USA law/guidelines? do you think apples are oranges, too? by all means, do present your argument based on facts; however, don't argue your personal "feelings" into factual parameters- and think you are correct.
Try to keep up. I never said I was talking about any other country but Canada. -
2020-04-14 at 4:12 PM UTC
Originally posted by Netflxchillr bahahahah
ahhhh. okay, yes, Google is such a reliable source!! (moron)
1st rule of thumb of legal research 101? GOOGLE-DON'T bother… it will be THROWN OUT.
but you continue to do you… lil brohomo.š
look up the genius who twught himself the computer and internet of things named thomas reedy and how much time he got vs his wife then. google is just one example but i can name you literally millions. i know how it works and unlike you probably spend more time in courts than anyone in here. -
2020-04-14 at 4:13 PM UTCthomas reedy vs janice reedy how much time did they get for doing the same thing wnd being a martied couple again in texas?
-
2020-04-14 at 4:15 PM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-04-14 at 4:28 PM UTC
Originally posted by Archer513 I havenāt seen that. Women still rule substantially in court. No matter the situation.
Every woman is presented with free consultations from advocacy groups whoās job is literally to fuck over the men. These āadvocatesā know the judges,they now the system,they know the prosecutors. They tell these women what to say,what paperwork to fill out,restraining orders. Iāve literally seen āadvocatesā tell women how to get a guy to threaten them.
Dudes are kinda left hanging.
āAcross a wide range of jurisdictions the estimates are that mothers receive primary custody 68-88% of the time, fathers receive primary custody 8-14%, and equal residential custody is awarded in only 2-6% of the cases.ā
As we, both, know-- there is only š between you & I; however, If you re-read what i said. I expressed how cases are, essentially, won more by whomever the client has the "better" representation... no matter the gender. Men/single fathers have "access" to all/any the same organizations. (They cannot or, generally, will not- gender discriminate or lawsuits would ensue)
the legal arena is a BEAST filled with much deceit and truth that, no doubt, relies heavily on 100% strategy & 100% oral presentation. The attorney who, better, does both- WINS. period.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-04-14 at 4:28 PM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
