TroyinEwa/Perv Posted July 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Not only should he not have to pay, he should recieve back from this woman what he already paid plus appropriate interest. He should then do what Americans do best and that is sue the guilty party for false imprisonment or whatever it's called when you are held against your will. Take it a step further and have a civil suit against the woman for not fessing up that there was more than one guy involved and there was a chance it wasn't his kid. This guy lost a year of his life, friends, most likely his job and a chance to get one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torneyboy Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Yes ..i agree.. he should go for it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Not only should he not have to pay, he should recieve back from this woman what he already paid plus appropriate interest. He should then do what Americans do best and that is sue the guilty party for false imprisonment or whatever it's called when you are held against your will. Take it a step further and have a civil suit against the woman for not fessing up that there was more than one guy involved and there was a chance it wasn't his kid. This guy lost a year of his life, friends, most likely his job and a chance to get one. He should sue the farking government that knew he was innocent but inprisoned him anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Hard to get back any money, since he admitted to her claim to being the daddy. But once it was proven he wasn't, it was absurb to ask him to pay however much he still "owed". Sort of like demanding a man proven innocent had to finish his prison sentence even though his conviction had been overturned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TroyinEwa/Perv Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Flash......I'm a bit surprised at your logic. Because he was dumb and didn't get a test initially and did what a good guy should do and paid up means he is not entitled to "his" money back? The woman and child were never entitled to his money no matter what words came out of his mouth. If he wanted to freely give it that is one thing but he was lead to believe the child was his and it obviously wasn't. I stand by what I said earlier. He is due what he paid plus interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 He'll have to tell that to a judge. No other way he can get it back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TroyinEwa/Perv Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Agreed but my opinion is he's entitled to it. I'm sure she isn't gonna just give it back after all these years. Too bad too, he did the right thing all those years ago, she should do the right thing now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Does she sound like the type? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khun_Kong Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 The lying-by-omission cunt should have to pay him back on the same terms that he had to pay her, including jail possibility, etc. Too bad he agreed to pay the money. A civil suit with criminal penalty backup if non-payment occurs sounds like the right way to go. Plus, the guy spent a FRIGGIN YEAR OF HIS LIFE in the can. She should have to serve that too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.