I am bipolar and I was mad at my husband for being a complete jerk.My neighbor called the cops when she heard a loud tumble on my staircase and when the police officer showed up I told them that I was pregnant and that my husband had pushed me down the stairs and that i was pregnant.None of that was true so I had made a false statement. The false statement went to the superior court and I am supposed to testify that this stuff had happend to me tomorrow.I have a 2 year old son and my husband and I are currently seperated.Whats going to happen to me and am I going to loose my son?I made a false statement and it went to court..I have a 2 yr old son..am I going to loose him?
no, the two incidents are not related. Just like out right lying has nothing to do with bipolar.I made a false statement and it went to court..I have a 2 yr old son..am I going to loose him?
you could TRY to drop the charges, but if the state picked them up, you may have trouble doing that. if you weren't subpoenaed to be in court, you could try just not showing up, but they may just reschedule and THEN subpoena you for a later date.
Your best bet is to call the prosecuting attorney aside prior to getting into court so he/she won't be blindsided when you get on the stand...
depending upon the pros's case load, they may just say to heck with it and give you a lecture. if you've got one of those anal-pros's, then yeah, they could charge you with false statement, but that alone would not cause you to lose your child. besides, they would then have to PROVE you ';knowingly'; made a false statement while you were in your right mind....and that's IF the state atty's office wanted to spend the bucks to prosecute you.
Most likely, they'll just lecture you. most state atty's offices are overburdened with cases and don't bother doing anything. you'd be surprised to find out how often the pros finds out the vic lied b/c they were mad at the time of the incident and wanted some ';get back'; at the other party. so it's not like what you did is out of the norm--make sense?
just make sure you get to that atty BEFORE the trial begins. and that's IF you decide to go. b/c they can't prosecute the defendant without the witness/vic.
While you are gong ro loose your husband for sure, because you cant recant that kind of stuff. Courts got all tired of women having second thoughts about prosecuting husbands who DID beat them.
So your Husband IS GOING TO PRISON because you were upset.If you will screw up his life like that Why should the State allow you to raise another life ? Would you let YOU even babysit your kids?
I do not know if you are a believer or not but what do you think it means that you shall not bear false witness?
You know, I have been in jail a few times and guys sit around and talk about why they are there. I've heard the ';My wife said i hit her but i never did'; line and never bought it before.
You even tried to hide behind that bi-polar crap in your post. yes I think you are too sick to care for children.
That's really at the discretion of the judge. If he doesn't think you're mentally sound and fit to parent, then he might grant custody to your husband
You give a true abused woman a bad name since some cops will start to not believe a woman when she is truly abused.
you had better contact a lawyer..You know when you sign that statement you are under perjury,..Your best option would be to tell you judge you lied and why you lied.. And take the sentence you get.. If you go to jail ..your husband wont if he didnt do anything bad to you..So he will be able to watch the kid. Most likley if you fess up you will get a sentence of probation or somthing..BUT your BEST option is to just drop the charges.... I forgot that just untill know.. Just drop the charges
Friday, February 12, 2010
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Even Higher Courts do not take serious view of false affidavits submitted to affect judgements, Why?
In some writ petitions ,the respondents submit false statements even with affidavits under oath to distort the facts trying to mislead the courts to attempt miscarriage of justice to petitioners. Inspite of pointing out the falsehood of the statements made and that too under affidavit, the High Court does not take the matter as serious. What sort of justice can be expected from the court?Even Higher Courts do not take serious view of false affidavits submitted to affect judgements, Why?
I have faced this same problem. In my matter, I filed an Application u/S.340CrPC asking the Court to take action against my opponent for Perjury. I have cited Supreme Court judgments : Suo moto vs Karuppan and Arivandandam vs Satyapal, which specifically direct the lower courts to deal with perjury in a severe manner. Another good judgment to cite along with perjury applications is Chengalvaraya Naidu vs Jagannath - fraud on court. As mine is a Civil matter being a suit filed against me, I have also made an Application u/O.7 R.11 CPC for rejection of the plaint on these grounds. My applications are still pending; the previous judge was inclined to view it very seriously but then she got transferred and the present judge does not seem very interested but because he has to dispose of my Application, he grudgingly said he will hear it simultaneously with the main matter. Then he gave a very long date, probably to avoid having to apply his mind ! However, I will not let go and will take this up to the next level if I have to. I am sure that the Bombay High Court will take it seriously. I appear in person. Lawyers will never encourage clients to file perjury applications because most of them make false and misleading statements in affidavits prepared for their clients, as a matter of routine.Even Higher Courts do not take serious view of false affidavits submitted to affect judgements, Why?
Because prejury is generally a misdemeanor offense. If the court is satisfied that even with some false testimony they have enough truthful information to render a verdict they will do so.
Hope this helps.
None can check all, none can hear all. To error is human. All want short cut. Many times, I answer without reading question in detail.
Heavy work load on courts .
No doubt Perjury is a punishable offence but in order to prove of perjury not only sufficient evidence to prove it false is required by the prosecution but the evidence regarding that the false statement given on oath was known to the person giving it that the fact it was false. Since the giving of statement on oath in the form of Affidavits come under the category of perjury there should be such evidence that shows that the same person had given a different affidavit or had stated on oath statement just the opposite to what he stated in the present affidavit for which a offence of perjury is being prayed against him. When such evidence is brought before any court whether lower court or High Court the court will definitely move for the prosecution of such an offender. The Courts even issue notice to the person who is found prima facie of purposely making false statement. A recent example is the Jessica Lal Murder case where High Court of Delhi issued notices for perjury to the various witnesses who retracted from there original statements made during the investigation stage. As far taking no notice of any falsehood of the statements made on oath in the form of affidavit is concerned either bring before the concerned High court sufficient evidence of the falsehood as I explained above, or file a formal complaint to the High court showing them that a prima facie case of perjury exist in the pending matter before it, merely pointing this at the time of arguments will not solve your problem, because after all whenever a matter is contested both the parties file affidavits in support of their case one of which is correct %26amp; other not, if the High courts start taking action against each %26amp; every affidavit made in a case or all cases those failed before them then it will amount to unlimited number of such cases of perjury that will not only increase the number of litigations but also a never ending process of litigation. High courts take notice of all application made to them hence its best advised to move a formal application complaining of perjury. If the attitude of the Court is lukewarm its so because a formal application/complaint regarding the prima facie case of perjury is not made to it, simply relying on few documents won't solve your problem, doesn't this thing strike the mind of your learned advocate that he is supposed to make a formal application under section 195, 340 of the criminal procedure code,1973 to the concerned court, that they should file a formal complaint under section 193 Indian Penal Code for perjury against the person who filed false affidavit, M I supposed to tell all this to you that also free of cost where as you are paying your advocate in thousands.
High courts first only consider the evidence most favorable to the non-moving party (respondents), and second to not rehash any of the trial, they only decide if the lower court made a reversible error of law. Affidavits that are distorted in the facts would be a factual issue for the jury to decide, so it would be an error of fact, not of law.Ltd
I have faced this same problem. In my matter, I filed an Application u/S.340CrPC asking the Court to take action against my opponent for Perjury. I have cited Supreme Court judgments : Suo moto vs Karuppan and Arivandandam vs Satyapal, which specifically direct the lower courts to deal with perjury in a severe manner. Another good judgment to cite along with perjury applications is Chengalvaraya Naidu vs Jagannath - fraud on court. As mine is a Civil matter being a suit filed against me, I have also made an Application u/O.7 R.11 CPC for rejection of the plaint on these grounds. My applications are still pending; the previous judge was inclined to view it very seriously but then she got transferred and the present judge does not seem very interested but because he has to dispose of my Application, he grudgingly said he will hear it simultaneously with the main matter. Then he gave a very long date, probably to avoid having to apply his mind ! However, I will not let go and will take this up to the next level if I have to. I am sure that the Bombay High Court will take it seriously. I appear in person. Lawyers will never encourage clients to file perjury applications because most of them make false and misleading statements in affidavits prepared for their clients, as a matter of routine.Even Higher Courts do not take serious view of false affidavits submitted to affect judgements, Why?
Because prejury is generally a misdemeanor offense. If the court is satisfied that even with some false testimony they have enough truthful information to render a verdict they will do so.
Hope this helps.
None can check all, none can hear all. To error is human. All want short cut. Many times, I answer without reading question in detail.
Heavy work load on courts .
No doubt Perjury is a punishable offence but in order to prove of perjury not only sufficient evidence to prove it false is required by the prosecution but the evidence regarding that the false statement given on oath was known to the person giving it that the fact it was false. Since the giving of statement on oath in the form of Affidavits come under the category of perjury there should be such evidence that shows that the same person had given a different affidavit or had stated on oath statement just the opposite to what he stated in the present affidavit for which a offence of perjury is being prayed against him. When such evidence is brought before any court whether lower court or High Court the court will definitely move for the prosecution of such an offender. The Courts even issue notice to the person who is found prima facie of purposely making false statement. A recent example is the Jessica Lal Murder case where High Court of Delhi issued notices for perjury to the various witnesses who retracted from there original statements made during the investigation stage. As far taking no notice of any falsehood of the statements made on oath in the form of affidavit is concerned either bring before the concerned High court sufficient evidence of the falsehood as I explained above, or file a formal complaint to the High court showing them that a prima facie case of perjury exist in the pending matter before it, merely pointing this at the time of arguments will not solve your problem, because after all whenever a matter is contested both the parties file affidavits in support of their case one of which is correct %26amp; other not, if the High courts start taking action against each %26amp; every affidavit made in a case or all cases those failed before them then it will amount to unlimited number of such cases of perjury that will not only increase the number of litigations but also a never ending process of litigation. High courts take notice of all application made to them hence its best advised to move a formal application complaining of perjury. If the attitude of the Court is lukewarm its so because a formal application/complaint regarding the prima facie case of perjury is not made to it, simply relying on few documents won't solve your problem, doesn't this thing strike the mind of your learned advocate that he is supposed to make a formal application under section 195, 340 of the criminal procedure code,1973 to the concerned court, that they should file a formal complaint under section 193 Indian Penal Code for perjury against the person who filed false affidavit, M I supposed to tell all this to you that also free of cost where as you are paying your advocate in thousands.
High courts first only consider the evidence most favorable to the non-moving party (respondents), and second to not rehash any of the trial, they only decide if the lower court made a reversible error of law. Affidavits that are distorted in the facts would be a factual issue for the jury to decide, so it would be an error of fact, not of law.
Courts have a political nature?? true/false?
TRUECourts have a political nature?? true/false?
On a theoretical level, the judiciary is supposed to be independent. Until very recently, judges could not declare a political party in elections, and candidates were not supposed to give opinions on questions of law that they might encounter in their courts. That's being liberalized. Judges are supposed to interpret statutory and administrative law and apply it to questions of fact. As a practical matter, though, conservative administrations tend to skew court decisions by appointing liberal or conservative judges to vacancies on the bench.Courts have a political nature?? true/false?
That depends on the judges. Local courts reflect the local attutude, some liberal, some conservative. The Supreme Court justices are nominated by the President, their membership depends on who won the last election. Judges are supposed to swing based on the last elections, they are to reflect the will of the people.
On a theoretical level, the judiciary is supposed to be independent. Until very recently, judges could not declare a political party in elections, and candidates were not supposed to give opinions on questions of law that they might encounter in their courts. That's being liberalized. Judges are supposed to interpret statutory and administrative law and apply it to questions of fact. As a practical matter, though, conservative administrations tend to skew court decisions by appointing liberal or conservative judges to vacancies on the bench.Courts have a political nature?? true/false?
That depends on the judges. Local courts reflect the local attutude, some liberal, some conservative. The Supreme Court justices are nominated by the President, their membership depends on who won the last election. Judges are supposed to swing based on the last elections, they are to reflect the will of the people.
If you got arrested and you got false inprisonment because you paid your find would you sue the courts.?
please answer in ahurry anyone i need help i had to pay 4 a bonds man to get me out and the judge just said i owe you asoory help, but i cant get you money back.If you got arrested and you got false inprisonment because you paid your find would you sue the courts.?
Yes ,but you can try ,high chance you wont be sucessfulIf you got arrested and you got false inprisonment because you paid your find would you sue the courts.?
first off you have to wonder is it worth it, a lawyer is going to charge you by the hour and unless harm to your person was done while in jail you may not be able to recoup anything other than lawyer fees and an official apology, the way it sounds though was you had a warrant for a fine took care of it after a FTA was issued before the record came through got arrested for it if that was the case remember the jury of your peers are probably your grandparents and may see the case as a waste of their time and then you recoup nothing and you have a lawyer bill to pay to boot. All in all whose fault was it that you got arrested was it you the arresting officer or the system
Hell yea.
you can win that, I hear of them on the news occasionally
yes
and
yes
you will not win
You need money to get justice in America. Sad but true. Can you afford a top notch attorney? If not, don't waste your time.
Hmmm....I don't think you can sue. But I would think a refund and your record cleared is due by them. If not...contact an attorney to find out. Depends on the situation.
Yes, if a court makes a mistake and falsly imprisons you, they must 1-reimburse your loss and 2-compensate for more. This is a very serious crime and there are few records in which a victim is falsley accused.
No because you'll lose anyway. As long as the officer did it in good faith he's pretty much covered. So ... who would you sue? The county? That is great, cost the tax payers more money. Mistakes happen. If you seriously had already paid your fines, they'll give your money back that you overpaid. There should be a record of that.
Yes ,but you can try ,high chance you wont be sucessfulIf you got arrested and you got false inprisonment because you paid your find would you sue the courts.?
first off you have to wonder is it worth it, a lawyer is going to charge you by the hour and unless harm to your person was done while in jail you may not be able to recoup anything other than lawyer fees and an official apology, the way it sounds though was you had a warrant for a fine took care of it after a FTA was issued before the record came through got arrested for it if that was the case remember the jury of your peers are probably your grandparents and may see the case as a waste of their time and then you recoup nothing and you have a lawyer bill to pay to boot. All in all whose fault was it that you got arrested was it you the arresting officer or the system
Hell yea.
you can win that, I hear of them on the news occasionally
yes
and
yes
you will not win
You need money to get justice in America. Sad but true. Can you afford a top notch attorney? If not, don't waste your time.
Hmmm....I don't think you can sue. But I would think a refund and your record cleared is due by them. If not...contact an attorney to find out. Depends on the situation.
Yes, if a court makes a mistake and falsly imprisons you, they must 1-reimburse your loss and 2-compensate for more. This is a very serious crime and there are few records in which a victim is falsley accused.
No because you'll lose anyway. As long as the officer did it in good faith he's pretty much covered. So ... who would you sue? The county? That is great, cost the tax payers more money. Mistakes happen. If you seriously had already paid your fines, they'll give your money back that you overpaid. There should be a record of that.
How should the courts go about stopping false accusations of rape and DV?
Many claim that if you jail false accusers that it will stop actaul victims from coming forward but does that justify putting men in prison who have committed are innocent of the false claims against them?How should the courts go about stopping false accusations of rape and DV?
I understand where the difficulty is in this--the only way they can jail a false accuser is if he or she admits they falsely accused the person. They can't jail a person if the case was found unsubstantiated or simply don't have enough information. The problem that happens, then, is that if one falsely accuses another, if jail time is the punishment for the crime, the person is less likely to admit that they falsely accused the person. So its a catch-22.
However, that said, I do think there should be a heavy punishment for false accusations. I do think that once people realize a jail sentence goes with throwing around accusations, people will be less likely to throw them around. I just worry for, when people who do persist, for the victims of the false accusations who have to endure more as the accuser would be less inclined to admit they lied.
EDIT--You have a good point except I would argue with the ';many times'; part. Often its VERY hard to prove or disprove rape. That's why a HUGE percentage of rape cases end up being unsubstantiated. Now if there was some kind of video evidence that the man was somewhere else, or a mass group of ppl who saw him at a place that would put him away from the woman (or man, rape can go both ways) at the time of the crime, then that's different. And I fully agree the false accuser should get jail time and be punished for attempting to ruin another persons life and wasting police time and resources.
But, truth be told, such evidence is usually very lacking. Often police find that the accuser is making a false statement because he or she says so after extensive interviewing or when they're caught in a lie and they confess. Thats the problem then. Since MOST false accusations are cleared after the accuser admits its a lie, it becomes difficult to say what would happen if the false accuser know jail was at the end when they admit the lied.
I think some people fail to realize how often rape cases are found unsubstantiated. In in a case where it is found unsubstantiated, the accuser should NEVER be punished as there isn't enough evidence to say he or she is lying.How should the courts go about stopping false accusations of rape and DV?
';I don't see how it'd stop real victims from coming forward, sounds like BS to me.';
I can, if you follow Fex's reasoning. A ';not guilty'; verdict does NOT mean a rape didn't occur, it means that they couldn't prove it. Maybe there wasn't enough evidence or maybe the guy had a really good lawyer. If women were faced with possible jail time if their case resulted in a ';not guilty'; verdict, some women may not press charges. I can see that occurring especially in date rape situations.
I do believe that when it is obvious that a false claim has been made, the accuser should get some type of punishment. Jail time is a good idea. But there has to be evidence that it was a completely false claim and not that there wasn't enough evidence to prove rape.
Nothing justifies jailing the innocent. But then, it's impossible to ALWAYS avoid jailing the wrong person. Charges of crime should be investigated, and the evidence weighed; that's all one can do.
How often does this happen, really?
That a woman mis-identified her rapist is NOT just cause to jail her.
And, yes, if a woman is raped, and knows that, if the prosecution loses the case, SHE'LL be imprisoned, that would prevent nearly every rape victim from ever reporting.
You'd need to explain better what you're talking about. Especially how big a problem this really is.
given that rape victims are still often not believed, and that they're often blamed for the brutal crime committed against them, and how often rapists go free, I'm not at all sure that false accusations are the larger problem than rapists being free to continue to rape.
Ditto DV.
Certainly, whenever anyone wrongly convicted of any crime is found to not have done it, they should be immediately released.
But one shouldn't automatically imprison whoever charged them, without equally good evidence that they committed a wrong (such as making the whole thing up).
BTW, doing that IS a crime.
I don't see how it'd stop real victims from coming forward, sounds like BS to me.
There should be some sort of punishment for those who falsely accuse.
If there's a way to prove the accuser made false allegations knowingly, then definitely, punish.
There will be the dippy part though where then people use whatever loophole is available and get out of it, just like they do now. Slimy ******* always do their best to find them, or roll the dice and hope it works.
If there were ways to be sure they were prosecuted anyhow, and they couldn't just pull, ';Yeah, but I thought this WAS assault!'; -- then we're golden and can punish the ones who tarnish it for all the legit cases.
Jail time would be a novel idea.
';A woman who made eight separate false claims of rape or sexual assault has been spared jail.
Gemma Gregory, 28, accused seven different men over a six-year period.
Former boyfriends were subjected to police questioning and DNA testing to clear their names.
Her fantasy stories also wasted huge amounts of police time.
I understand that some very stupid people actually believe that a not guilty verdict proves that the accused is innocent. Not so. A woman automatically going to jail just because a defendant is found not guilty would mean a lot of women would be going to jail, and the rapist, who was found not guilty merely due to lack of evidence, would be going free. Not an acceptable solution. However, if it was proven to be a false accusation, the accuser should indeed go to jail.
In cases where it's been proven that a woman has made a false accusation, then I think she should receive a jail sentence -- after all, that's what the man would've got if his accuser had succeeded.
Tougher sentences for women who lie about rape would act as a deterrent, which would actually help genuine rape victims. They might feel more able to come forward if they were confident that they'd be believed, and the things that stop them being believed are loose definitions of rape and false accusers.
There is only one way.
Upon the rendering of a ';not guilty'; verdict for a charge of rape, domestic violence, sexual harassment, or child abuse in a custody hearing, whatever the minimum sentence that could have been conferred upon the accused must be immediately conferred upon the accuser.
The crime needs to be taken seriously and punished accordingly. Right now it is hardly punished. It will not stop the practice, just like punishment will not stop any crime, but it will discourage the practice and make it less frequent.
Proper punishment would result in less false accusation.
The courts are a little soft on this subject.
I understand where the difficulty is in this--the only way they can jail a false accuser is if he or she admits they falsely accused the person. They can't jail a person if the case was found unsubstantiated or simply don't have enough information. The problem that happens, then, is that if one falsely accuses another, if jail time is the punishment for the crime, the person is less likely to admit that they falsely accused the person. So its a catch-22.
However, that said, I do think there should be a heavy punishment for false accusations. I do think that once people realize a jail sentence goes with throwing around accusations, people will be less likely to throw them around. I just worry for, when people who do persist, for the victims of the false accusations who have to endure more as the accuser would be less inclined to admit they lied.
EDIT--You have a good point except I would argue with the ';many times'; part. Often its VERY hard to prove or disprove rape. That's why a HUGE percentage of rape cases end up being unsubstantiated. Now if there was some kind of video evidence that the man was somewhere else, or a mass group of ppl who saw him at a place that would put him away from the woman (or man, rape can go both ways) at the time of the crime, then that's different. And I fully agree the false accuser should get jail time and be punished for attempting to ruin another persons life and wasting police time and resources.
But, truth be told, such evidence is usually very lacking. Often police find that the accuser is making a false statement because he or she says so after extensive interviewing or when they're caught in a lie and they confess. Thats the problem then. Since MOST false accusations are cleared after the accuser admits its a lie, it becomes difficult to say what would happen if the false accuser know jail was at the end when they admit the lied.
I think some people fail to realize how often rape cases are found unsubstantiated. In in a case where it is found unsubstantiated, the accuser should NEVER be punished as there isn't enough evidence to say he or she is lying.How should the courts go about stopping false accusations of rape and DV?
';I don't see how it'd stop real victims from coming forward, sounds like BS to me.';
I can, if you follow Fex's reasoning. A ';not guilty'; verdict does NOT mean a rape didn't occur, it means that they couldn't prove it. Maybe there wasn't enough evidence or maybe the guy had a really good lawyer. If women were faced with possible jail time if their case resulted in a ';not guilty'; verdict, some women may not press charges. I can see that occurring especially in date rape situations.
I do believe that when it is obvious that a false claim has been made, the accuser should get some type of punishment. Jail time is a good idea. But there has to be evidence that it was a completely false claim and not that there wasn't enough evidence to prove rape.
Nothing justifies jailing the innocent. But then, it's impossible to ALWAYS avoid jailing the wrong person. Charges of crime should be investigated, and the evidence weighed; that's all one can do.
How often does this happen, really?
That a woman mis-identified her rapist is NOT just cause to jail her.
And, yes, if a woman is raped, and knows that, if the prosecution loses the case, SHE'LL be imprisoned, that would prevent nearly every rape victim from ever reporting.
You'd need to explain better what you're talking about. Especially how big a problem this really is.
given that rape victims are still often not believed, and that they're often blamed for the brutal crime committed against them, and how often rapists go free, I'm not at all sure that false accusations are the larger problem than rapists being free to continue to rape.
Ditto DV.
Certainly, whenever anyone wrongly convicted of any crime is found to not have done it, they should be immediately released.
But one shouldn't automatically imprison whoever charged them, without equally good evidence that they committed a wrong (such as making the whole thing up).
BTW, doing that IS a crime.
I don't see how it'd stop real victims from coming forward, sounds like BS to me.
There should be some sort of punishment for those who falsely accuse.
If there's a way to prove the accuser made false allegations knowingly, then definitely, punish.
There will be the dippy part though where then people use whatever loophole is available and get out of it, just like they do now. Slimy ******* always do their best to find them, or roll the dice and hope it works.
If there were ways to be sure they were prosecuted anyhow, and they couldn't just pull, ';Yeah, but I thought this WAS assault!'; -- then we're golden and can punish the ones who tarnish it for all the legit cases.
Jail time would be a novel idea.
';A woman who made eight separate false claims of rape or sexual assault has been spared jail.
Gemma Gregory, 28, accused seven different men over a six-year period.
Former boyfriends were subjected to police questioning and DNA testing to clear their names.
Her fantasy stories also wasted huge amounts of police time.
I understand that some very stupid people actually believe that a not guilty verdict proves that the accused is innocent. Not so. A woman automatically going to jail just because a defendant is found not guilty would mean a lot of women would be going to jail, and the rapist, who was found not guilty merely due to lack of evidence, would be going free. Not an acceptable solution. However, if it was proven to be a false accusation, the accuser should indeed go to jail.
In cases where it's been proven that a woman has made a false accusation, then I think she should receive a jail sentence -- after all, that's what the man would've got if his accuser had succeeded.
Tougher sentences for women who lie about rape would act as a deterrent, which would actually help genuine rape victims. They might feel more able to come forward if they were confident that they'd be believed, and the things that stop them being believed are loose definitions of rape and false accusers.
There is only one way.
Upon the rendering of a ';not guilty'; verdict for a charge of rape, domestic violence, sexual harassment, or child abuse in a custody hearing, whatever the minimum sentence that could have been conferred upon the accused must be immediately conferred upon the accuser.
The crime needs to be taken seriously and punished accordingly. Right now it is hardly punished. It will not stop the practice, just like punishment will not stop any crime, but it will discourage the practice and make it less frequent.
Proper punishment would result in less false accusation.
The courts are a little soft on this subject.
I have a child support order in which the mother wrote down false information to the courts.?
She falsely put down the wrong income that I make, as well as not providing the courts of the insurance I provide for our daugther as well. Is there anything I can do to show the courts how she maniuplated the system?I have a child support order in which the mother wrote down false information to the courts.?
You were served and had the opportunity to appear in court with your DOCUMENTATION. Why didn't you?I have a child support order in which the mother wrote down false information to the courts.?
It would be an easy matter to prove. Take some of your check stubs to the court and explain what happened, give them the phone number to whoever does your payroll. They can then file charges on her for falsification of court documents or something similar.
Bring in your own documentation of your pay, and give them a phone number direct to payroll. Women always try to take everything you have and everything you will ever get.
Most often, income is proved by income tax filing from the prior year. If your income has changed since then, you should provide the new income numbers to the courts to get this corrected.
Don't fight in court, it's just a win-win for the lawyers involved and in the long run isn't good for your daughter. The cost to prosecute her for perjury would probably exceed any support issues you're having.
Insurance is not the same as child support, and will probably not count towards the dollar amount you have to pay, a family policy typically costs the same if you have 1 child or 3 children. Is it written in your court order that you provide the insurance?
Your lawyer should be helping you with all this, if you don't have one, look online and find out what the child support percentage of pay is in your State for the number of children you have.
Good luck - I hope this all gets straightened out for you.
I resent the first answer you received to your question--women are money grubbing sluts and take advantage of ex-husbands for money, but his answer is correct. I can't believe that the judge accepted her version of how much your income is and insurance. Surely you have better records of this than she does. Take them to court, but be willing to pay your share for their care, and make sure you have visiting rights too.
Take the proof that you have concerning this matter and go to the courthouse that the case was heard in,go to the clerk and inform them
that you want to file a mottion for perjury against your ex-wife. But 1st
go to the prosecutors office because most likely the'll want to handle it themself and will take care of everything that needs to be filed in the courts.
You were served and had the opportunity to appear in court with your DOCUMENTATION. Why didn't you?I have a child support order in which the mother wrote down false information to the courts.?
It would be an easy matter to prove. Take some of your check stubs to the court and explain what happened, give them the phone number to whoever does your payroll. They can then file charges on her for falsification of court documents or something similar.
Bring in your own documentation of your pay, and give them a phone number direct to payroll. Women always try to take everything you have and everything you will ever get.
Most often, income is proved by income tax filing from the prior year. If your income has changed since then, you should provide the new income numbers to the courts to get this corrected.
Don't fight in court, it's just a win-win for the lawyers involved and in the long run isn't good for your daughter. The cost to prosecute her for perjury would probably exceed any support issues you're having.
Insurance is not the same as child support, and will probably not count towards the dollar amount you have to pay, a family policy typically costs the same if you have 1 child or 3 children. Is it written in your court order that you provide the insurance?
Your lawyer should be helping you with all this, if you don't have one, look online and find out what the child support percentage of pay is in your State for the number of children you have.
Good luck - I hope this all gets straightened out for you.
I resent the first answer you received to your question--women are money grubbing sluts and take advantage of ex-husbands for money, but his answer is correct. I can't believe that the judge accepted her version of how much your income is and insurance. Surely you have better records of this than she does. Take them to court, but be willing to pay your share for their care, and make sure you have visiting rights too.
Take the proof that you have concerning this matter and go to the courthouse that the case was heard in,go to the clerk and inform them
that you want to file a mottion for perjury against your ex-wife. But 1st
go to the prosecutors office because most likely the'll want to handle it themself and will take care of everything that needs to be filed in the courts.
True or False: Federal bankruptcy and tax courts have . . ???
True or False:
Question: Federal bankruptcy and tax courts have exclusive jurisdiction over such matters.True or False: Federal bankruptcy and tax courts have . . ???
true
Question: Federal bankruptcy and tax courts have exclusive jurisdiction over such matters.True or False: Federal bankruptcy and tax courts have . . ???
true
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)