Friday, September 23, 2005

A month or so ago, I wrote an entry demanding a revision to Roe V. Wade, demanding some rights to fathers of infants. The basis of my article was a story on Yahoo! News (long since gone) saying that one father in 25 was supporting a child that wasn't his.

The other day, I found a perfect illustration of the story. First, the setup: Amber Frey is the former mistress of Scott Peterson, and her testimony put that scumbag in prison. (Sorry, I just channeled John Walsh.) Now, the story (the setup was to explain why this was even in the news at all): CNN reports that the person paying child support for Frey's child for the last four years isn't the father of said child. Frey just told him he was the father, and demanded child support. Since a woman is incapable of lying or being mistaken in these matters, the guy has been paying court ordered child support. And get this: He only found out when he was preparing his case for visitation rights, which Frey had been fighting!

This poor guy, Anthony Flores, has been funneling money to Frey for support of "his" child and not allowed visitation. No mention is made whether the real father, restauranteur Christopher Funch, has been visiting the child.

In her defense, Frey's spokesman says she honestly believed Flores was the father. She was sleeping with so many men that she was mistaken, I guess.

Flores has paid $8400 in child support on the word of Amber Frey. Flores likely never attempted to prove or disprove his paternity and just cowboyed up and did what a father should do, paid child support.

The questions are: Does Frey have to pay him back? I doubt the court would do that to her. She's a Mom, after all. Will Funch have to pay Flores back? Probably not until the courts change the name of the father on the documents, and that could take years, while Flores has to continue to pay or risk being arrested for being a deadbeat "dad." Now that he's emotionally (not to mention financially) invested in the child, will Flores get visitation rights? Nope. He's not the father. And finally, will he sue Frey for the money and emotional damage? After all, for the last four years, he's believed he is the father of the child, and wanted some contact with "his" daughter.

I certainly hope so.

3 Comments:

Anonymous Adam said...

The way some of these courts are, he'll be forced to pay double child support to cover the time it takes to change the names on all those documents.

10:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Christopher will not be held responsible for any of ambers fuck ups and he has visted the little girl and has more than accepted her and will cowboy up, he had no part in the lies of amber...hes a really good guy who is pissed hes lost 4 years of aiyannas life, people like you who blog and try and say hes responcible for any of it make me sick, chris is a very good guy who made a bad judgement call in amber, but he is already in love with his daughter...she should have to pay anthony back and she should be held accountable

2:53 AM  
Blogger Jeffrey said...

As I said in the entry, there was no mention of Fuch visiting his daughter. I wondered only who would pay Flores back. I simply suggested the Flores will have to pay child support until the court in its "wisdom." changes the ruling, and that could take a long time. I never once said Fuchs was responsible for anything, except the child. The real criminal, if I may use the word, is Amber Frey, who has screwed over two men because she just said Flores was the father, and the court beleived her.

I'm glad to hear that Fuchs has been visiting and supporting the child. At least he's getting more access that the man who beleived he was the child's father for four years. Your right that a grave injustice was done against your friend. The whole point of the entry is that a mother is always right in the eyes of the law.

Frey should have to pay Flores back, but will the court demand that Fuchs reimburse Frey, because it will be considered "back child support?" Will Fuchs be considered a "deadbeat dad" by the court if Frey gives that $8400 back? That's the real question.

I'm sorry I pissed you off, but I never implied that Fuchs was involved. I simply said, "No mention is made whether the real father, restauranteur Christopher Funch, has been visiting the child." Nor did the story mention if Amber and Fuchs were currently in a relationship. From your post, I'm glad they're not.

And if Fuchs is pissed to learn he lost 4 years of his daughter's life, imagine how Flores feels losing a 4 year old daughter.

7:02 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home