Identical Twins Both Forced to Pay Child Support
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 10:24 pm    Post subject:

Btw, it made me wonder how they do paternity tests in West Virginia, when all the DNA is nearly identical.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Huey Lewis & The News
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Posts: 5234
Location: So what's the uh...topic of discussion?

PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 10:46 pm    Post subject:

the state fair just saves the burlap from the yearly father daughter potato sack race
_________________
"All wars are civil wars, because all men are brothers."
http://forums.lakersground.net/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=13018
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964

PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 11:44 pm    Post subject:

Huey Lewis & The News wrote:
the state fair just saves the burlap from the yearly father daughter potato sack race


I think you underestimate the value of a burlap sack in West Virginia. Far too valuable to be wasting away in a lab with those Science folks.

Nah. In West Virginia, paternity is determined by a man's declaration. If a man says, "Just look at em.. Clearly that's not my boy. Those strong shoulders. That square jaw line. Those powerful legs. Clearly one night momma had too much moonshine and the next mornin the Billygoat was hyper". And a Birth Certificate will be Amended to read official father as "B.G.". West Virginia efficiency...
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
danzag
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Apr 2013
Posts: 22244
Location: Brazil

PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 5:27 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
Ethically it’s absolutely the correct ‘punishment’ for the twins behavior of tricking women

Legally, maybe Brazil is not an innocent til proven guilty system so the burden of proof is not on the prosecutor but on the accused?


Here in Brazil it is an "innocent until proven guilty" system.

But the burden of proof can be changed (we call it the "dynamic burden of proof theory") based on the intricacies of the case.

In this particular case, it is impossible for the woman to prove who is the father of the child.
But it is not impossible for one of the 2 men (or both) to prove it. So it is up to THEM to say who is the father. Until they stop covering one another's ass, they will both pay child support.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24996

PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 5:43 am    Post subject:

danzag wrote:
governator wrote:
Ethically it’s absolutely the correct ‘punishment’ for the twins behavior of tricking women

Legally, maybe Brazil is not an innocent til proven guilty system so the burden of proof is not on the prosecutor but on the accused?


Here in Brazil it is an "innocent until proven guilty" system.

But the burden of proof can be changed (we call it the "dynamic burden of proof theory") based on the intricacies of the case.

In this particular case, it is impossible for the woman to prove who is the father of the child.
But it is not impossible for one of the 2 men (or both) to prove it. So it is up to THEM to say who is the father. Until they stop covering one another's ass, they will both pay child support.


I see, thx
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 4:53 pm    Post subject:

danzag wrote:
governator wrote:
Ethically it’s absolutely the correct ‘punishment’ for the twins behavior of tricking women

Legally, maybe Brazil is not an innocent til proven guilty system so the burden of proof is not on the prosecutor but on the accused?


Here in Brazil it is an "innocent until proven guilty" system.

But the burden of proof can be changed (we call it the "dynamic burden of proof theory") based on the intricacies of the case.

In this particular case, it is impossible for the woman to prove who is the father of the child.
But it is not impossible for one of the 2 men (or both) to prove it. So it is up to THEM to say who is the father. Until they stop covering one another's ass, they will both pay child support.


That’s why I have an issue with it though. The burden of proof is not on the brothers IMO, it’s on the authority levying the penalty.

Same thing if a person was drunk, and attacked by one of four possible people who were there, you don’t throw all four in jail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
JerryMagicKobe
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 15100

PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 5:00 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
danzag wrote:
governator wrote:
Ethically it’s absolutely the correct ‘punishment’ for the twins behavior of tricking women

Legally, maybe Brazil is not an innocent til proven guilty system so the burden of proof is not on the prosecutor but on the accused?


Here in Brazil it is an "innocent until proven guilty" system.

But the burden of proof can be changed (we call it the "dynamic burden of proof theory") based on the intricacies of the case.

In this particular case, it is impossible for the woman to prove who is the father of the child.
But it is not impossible for one of the 2 men (or both) to prove it. So it is up to THEM to say who is the father. Until they stop covering one another's ass, they will both pay child support.


That’s why I have an issue with it though. The burden of proof is not on the brothers IMO, it’s on the authority levying the penalty.

Same thing if a person was drunk, and attacked by one of four possible people who were there, you don’t throw all four in jail.

For a criminal prosecution, yes.
To make sure an infant is being provided for, no.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 9:05 pm    Post subject:

JerryMagicKobe wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
danzag wrote:
governator wrote:
Ethically it’s absolutely the correct ‘punishment’ for the twins behavior of tricking women

Legally, maybe Brazil is not an innocent til proven guilty system so the burden of proof is not on the prosecutor but on the accused?


Here in Brazil it is an "innocent until proven guilty" system.

But the burden of proof can be changed (we call it the "dynamic burden of proof theory") based on the intricacies of the case.

In this particular case, it is impossible for the woman to prove who is the father of the child.
But it is not impossible for one of the 2 men (or both) to prove it. So it is up to THEM to say who is the father. Until they stop covering one another's ass, they will both pay child support.


That’s why I have an issue with it though. The burden of proof is not on the brothers IMO, it’s on the authority levying the penalty.

Same thing if a person was drunk, and attacked by one of four possible people who were there, you don’t throw all four in jail.

For a criminal prosecution, yes.
To make sure an infant is being provided for, no.


Still doesn’t make sense to me to force anyone to pay for child support if they didn’t create the child.

Not being able to figure it out doesn’t seem like a good reason to me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
danzag
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Apr 2013
Posts: 22244
Location: Brazil

PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2019 5:02 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
JerryMagicKobe wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
danzag wrote:
governator wrote:
Ethically it’s absolutely the correct ‘punishment’ for the twins behavior of tricking women

Legally, maybe Brazil is not an innocent til proven guilty system so the burden of proof is not on the prosecutor but on the accused?


Here in Brazil it is an "innocent until proven guilty" system.

But the burden of proof can be changed (we call it the "dynamic burden of proof theory") based on the intricacies of the case.

In this particular case, it is impossible for the woman to prove who is the father of the child.
But it is not impossible for one of the 2 men (or both) to prove it. So it is up to THEM to say who is the father. Until they stop covering one another's ass, they will both pay child support.


That’s why I have an issue with it though. The burden of proof is not on the brothers IMO, it’s on the authority levying the penalty.

Same thing if a person was drunk, and attacked by one of four possible people who were there, you don’t throw all four in jail.

For a criminal prosecution, yes.
To make sure an infant is being provided for, no.


Still doesn’t make sense to me to force anyone to pay for child support if they didn’t create the child.

Not being able to figure it out doesn’t seem like a good reason to me.


Well, they BOTH tricked the woman. This is a one in a million case.
And Brazil being a civil law country, this is not forming a legal precedent or anything
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:35 am    Post subject:

danzag wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
JerryMagicKobe wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
danzag wrote:
governator wrote:
Ethically it’s absolutely the correct ‘punishment’ for the twins behavior of tricking women

Legally, maybe Brazil is not an innocent til proven guilty system so the burden of proof is not on the prosecutor but on the accused?


Here in Brazil it is an "innocent until proven guilty" system.

But the burden of proof can be changed (we call it the "dynamic burden of proof theory") based on the intricacies of the case.

In this particular case, it is impossible for the woman to prove who is the father of the child.
But it is not impossible for one of the 2 men (or both) to prove it. So it is up to THEM to say who is the father. Until they stop covering one another's ass, they will both pay child support.


That’s why I have an issue with it though. The burden of proof is not on the brothers IMO, it’s on the authority levying the penalty.

Same thing if a person was drunk, and attacked by one of four possible people who were there, you don’t throw all four in jail.

For a criminal prosecution, yes.
To make sure an infant is being provided for, no.


Still doesn’t make sense to me to force anyone to pay for child support if they didn’t create the child.

Not being able to figure it out doesn’t seem like a good reason to me.


Well, they BOTH tricked the woman. This is a one in a million case.
And Brazil being a civil law country, this is not forming a legal precedent or anything


Agreed. So if you want to talk about some kind of civil lawsuit centered around fraud or something like that, I'd have no issues if they awarded her damages.

But that is different than child support, which, IMO, should only ever be a payment made from one parent or the other, and not, from multiple people who could be parents, to the other.

The outcome, whether it feels right or not, is less important to me than how we arrived there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
JerryMagicKobe
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 15100

PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2019 7:22 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
danzag wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
JerryMagicKobe wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
danzag wrote:
governator wrote:
Ethically it’s absolutely the correct ‘punishment’ for the twins behavior of tricking women

Legally, maybe Brazil is not an innocent til proven guilty system so the burden of proof is not on the prosecutor but on the accused?


Here in Brazil it is an "innocent until proven guilty" system.

But the burden of proof can be changed (we call it the "dynamic burden of proof theory") based on the intricacies of the case.

In this particular case, it is impossible for the woman to prove who is the father of the child.
But it is not impossible for one of the 2 men (or both) to prove it. So it is up to THEM to say who is the father. Until they stop covering one another's ass, they will both pay child support.


That’s why I have an issue with it though. The burden of proof is not on the brothers IMO, it’s on the authority levying the penalty.

Same thing if a person was drunk, and attacked by one of four possible people who were there, you don’t throw all four in jail.

For a criminal prosecution, yes.
To make sure an infant is being provided for, no.


Still doesn’t make sense to me to force anyone to pay for child support if they didn’t create the child.

Not being able to figure it out doesn’t seem like a good reason to me.


Well, they BOTH tricked the woman. This is a one in a million case.
And Brazil being a civil law country, this is not forming a legal precedent or anything


Agreed. So if you want to talk about some kind of civil lawsuit centered around fraud or something like that, I'd have no issues if they awarded her damages.

But that is different than child support, which, IMO, should only ever be a payment made from one parent or the other, and not, from multiple people who could be parents, to the other.

The outcome, whether it feels right or not, is less important to me than how we arrived there.
If that is the standard you wish to apply, I think you would take issue with a lot of Family Court rulings.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2019 7:46 am    Post subject:

JerryMagicKobe wrote:
If that is the standard you wish to apply, I think you would take issue with a lot of Family Court rulings.


Yeah, you're probably right. Those rulings can be particularly squishy.

But I do think it is decidedly different to make a judgment call on particular family matters, than it is to penalize someone through threat of force in a divorce proceeding that wasn't even married to the other just because you can't locate the actual spouse.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
JerryMagicKobe
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 15100

PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2019 10:17 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
JerryMagicKobe wrote:
If that is the standard you wish to apply, I think you would take issue with a lot of Family Court rulings.


Yeah, you're probably right. Those rulings can be particularly squishy.

But I do think it is decidedly different to make a judgment call on particular family matters, than it is to penalize someone through threat of force in a divorce proceeding that wasn't even married to the other just because you can't locate the actual spouse.
You have the luxury of debating this in the abstract, but the Family Court judge is assigned the additional burden of having to consider how to meet the needs of the child. Starting with that as the goal makes it much easier to understand the ruling.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2019 11:11 am    Post subject:

JerryMagicKobe wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
JerryMagicKobe wrote:
If that is the standard you wish to apply, I think you would take issue with a lot of Family Court rulings.


Yeah, you're probably right. Those rulings can be particularly squishy.

But I do think it is decidedly different to make a judgment call on particular family matters, than it is to penalize someone through threat of force in a divorce proceeding that wasn't even married to the other just because you can't locate the actual spouse.
You have the luxury of debating this in the abstract, but the Family Court judge is assigned the additional burden of having to consider how to meet the needs of the child. Starting with that as the goal makes it much easier to understand the ruling.


I understand the ruling. I just don't agree with how they got there, that's all.

There are a lot of the things that can be better for the needs of a particular child, but I still wouldn't necessarily agree with all of them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
JerryMagicKobe
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 15100

PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2019 11:22 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
I understand the ruling. I just don't agree with how they got there, that's all.

You are the judge tasked with establishing support.
Knowing what you know, how would you rule?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2019 11:36 am    Post subject:

JerryMagicKobe wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
I understand the ruling. I just don't agree with how they got there, that's all.

You are the judge tasked with establishing support.
Knowing what you know, how would you rule?


Well I’d have to look at all of the information available to me. If I don’t have enough to identify the person, I wouldn’t be able to rule just as I wouldn’t if the mother didn’t know who the father was.

So if all I know is that evidence revealed it was one of X people, I would not be able to rule.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67314
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2019 11:38 am    Post subject:

Does anyone know if DNA tests were performed? It's been studied there may be difference at the genetic level.

The Claim: Identical Twins Have Identical DNA

LINK
Quote:

“When we started this study, people were expecting that only epigenetics would differ greatly between twins,” said Jan Dumanski, a professor of genetics at the University of Alabama at Birmingham and an author of the study. “But what we found are changes on the genetic level, the DNA sequence itself.”


Quote:
The specific changes that Dr. Dumanski and his colleagues identified are known as copy number variations, in which a gene exists in multiple copies, or a set of coding letters in DNA is missing. Not known, however, is whether these changes in identical twins occur at the embryonic level, as the twins age or both.

_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB