Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
11. But he didn't make up the 'arrears.' He made up the amount originally asked for in April of last
Wed Jan 22, 2014, 01:43 PM
Jan 2014

year. Now he owes more. His docket is pretty clear....he defied the August ruling to pay.

This has been debunked. Snopes says it's false. Arkansas Granny Jan 2014 #1
I love snoops! Perfect when my BS detector goes off! nt Logical Jan 2014 #2
It has not been debunked. That suggests that this case doesn't exist. The facts are in dispute. stevenleser Jan 2014 #4
It's pretty simple, steve...he owed back child support, and a contempt motion msanthrope Jan 2014 #6
the crucial elements of it have been debunked. this is MRA propaganda. geek tragedy Jan 2014 #7
Can you reply with a link or PM me with backup for that please. nt stevenleser Jan 2014 #9
it's from the Snopes article. geek tragedy Jan 2014 #12
Msanthrope sent me the case details below. I'm pretty curious now. I want to see if stevenleser Jan 2014 #14
if you click on tab "services/notices" at the link msanthrope posted geek tragedy Jan 2014 #15
Thanks, yes, will read all of that. Sometimes the full story isn't in court docs though. stevenleser Jan 2014 #16
All that Snopes debunked was that he was jailed for over paying his child support... 1monster Jan 2014 #8
But he didn't make up the 'arrears.' He made up the amount originally asked for in April of last msanthrope Jan 2014 #11
The prior thread on DU debunked this charlatan. He deserved his contempt charge, msanthrope Jan 2014 #3
Can you PM me the info. The Snopes link above is pretty convoluted. nt stevenleser Jan 2014 #5
Here's the docket.... msanthrope Jan 2014 #10
Got it. Thanks. Looks like there is a Guardian Ad Litem in this case. I would like to talk to that stevenleser Jan 2014 #13
The GAL shouldn't talk to you. I will tell you my opinion of the case, after seeing Mr. Hall msanthrope Jan 2014 #17
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Clerical Error In Child S...»Reply #11