Tuesday, November 15, 2011


This former Marine earns 125k a year working his ass of as a software consultant (not a common or easy job, and one I'm sure he's worked for years to qualify for) and the court ALLOWS HIM TO KEEP 26K or 1/5th OF HIS OWN MONEY.

He's "allowed" to keep 20% of what he makes after the IRS, ex-wife, and ex-wife's lawyer strip out what they claim to be "theirs." Keep it simple people. The IRS, ex-wife and ex-wife's lawyer DO NOT PERFORM HIS JOB. THEY DON'T EARN HIS MONEY - ITS NOT THEIRS. THEY DID NOT EARN IT. A 2ND GRADER WOULD KNOW THIS. WHY ARE THEY BEING ALLOWED TO TAKE (STEAL) WHAT IS NOT RIGHTFULLY THEIRS?

You will tell me that his money belongs to his poor, fragile ex-wife and her needs with the children - ah, but who decided to dissolve the marriage? And for what reason? Was it Mr. Case? Did he leave her? Did he savagely beat her? Did he give her GENUINE cause to leave him?

We don't know!

And in THE LAW TODAY, it doesn't even matter! Let me repeat that - a man can be stripped of 80% of his money and the reason why (the cause of the divorce) IS NOT RELEVANT IN OUR SYSTEM OF LAW. He could come home every night with flowers or he could do crack off a hooker's ass every night and the result would be the same - 80% poorer. And NO, the fact that she divorced him does not make him a bad husband or a monster or anything else - THERE IS NO DISCOVERY OF FAULT. The fact is YOU CAN NOT KNOW who or what dissolved this marriage and also CAN NOT MAKE ASSUMPTIONS AS TO THE REASON WHY THEY BROKE UP.

This man's wife can access his money all she wants - AS HIS WIFE. Being a wife is not easy but there is a big reward - A HUSBAND AND HIS MONEY! If you and your husband are no longer together, WHY WOULD YOU KEEP HIS MONEY?!?!?! A small, pathetic case can be made that she needs some portion of his money (until she gets another husband, that is), but to take half of it? $3,500/month? That leaves this man with ALL of the expenses of a family, BUT NO FAMILY! This is financial rape. He's stripped of what he's earned due to the decision OF ANOTHER PERSON. No cause, no justification, nothing. And this is done in a country that calls itself free?

If that doesn't stun you out of your coma, nothing will.

The Chris Gregory Case–an Outrageous but Common Injustice

Former Marine Chris Gregory, recipient of the Combat Action Ribbon, told the Committee, 'We need shared parenting.'

F & F’s Chris Gregory, the father of three girls who adore their dad, had a standard child custody order forced upon him—an order which granted his ex-wife “exclusive care, custody, and control of the parties’ minor children,” and allows Gregory’s girls only a few days a month with their father.

For the past three years, Gregory has fought in court to get more time with his girls, ages 11, 9, and 6. He has racked up large legal bills, as he was forced to pay for his ex-wife’s attorney—an attorney whose focus has been to minimize Gregory’s role in his children’s lives. He explains:

The court has denied all of my motions to modify custody or seek an equitable outcome.

Financial Plunder

Gregory, who was asked by Representative McCullough to share his experiences with the divorce system, is a good example of the way fathers are plundered financially.

The financial orders in Gregory’s case are more or less garden variety in a divorce, yet while Gregory earns $7,500 a month after taxes, by court orders he is to be left with merely $2,200 a month to live on. That’s correct–family court leaves Gregory less with less than 30% of his post-tax income. The breakdown is as follows:

Gregory’s monthly earnings after taxes: $7,518
Gregory’s child support: $2,568
Gregory’s alimony: $1,000
Gregory’s garnishment to pay his ex-wife’s attorneys’ fees: $1,726
Total left to Gregory post-family court and taxes: $2,224*

According to the family court, Gregory, a successful Senior Consultant at a major software company who earns a $125K a year salary, should be left with a mere $26,688 a year to support himself and his three girls.

After divorce-related garnishments and further obligations, Chris Gregory is left with less than 30% of his post-tax income. For details, click on the image above.

The child support and the attorneys’ fees are garnisheed directly from Gregory’s check. The $1,000 a month alimony is not, Gregory has not been paying it lately, and faces a contempt charge for it. As in many divorce cases, the attorneys’ fees Gregory owes grew out of his fight to be allowed to play a meaningful role in his children’s lives.

Gregory also got stuck with paying 90% of the $69,000 in marital debt. Gregory asked:

If this is a no fault divorce, why have I had to I assume all the fault?

As is the case with many divorced and separated fathers, Gregory’s daughters’ schools have been generally uncooperative, refusing to send him his daughters’ report cards and notices of parent-teacher conferences and other upcoming events, despite his repeated requests that they do so.

*In the original post we inadvertently omitted a few hundred dollars a month of expenses not related to family court. The figure has now been corrected.

No comments:

Post a Comment