Cuckolded men to sue deceitful wives

[alien]

Court to test cuckolds' rights

By Vanda Carson


____________________________________________________________

April 20, 2006

A LOOMING battle that could allow cuckolded men to sue deceitful wives for the cost of raising children conceived outside their marriage has been described by High Court judge Michael Kirby as opening a "Pandora's box".
If the full bench of the High Court rules in favour of Victorian father Liam Magill, the court will set the ball rolling for dozens of new compensation cases, including those brought by men who learn they are not genetically related to their children and who want to recover child-support payments and other damages.

Mr Magill has alleged he was tricked into paying tens of thousands of dollars to his unfaithful former wife in support of two children that were not his own.

However, Justice Kirby said the court would have to take care in deciding the case.

"This is the Pandora's box we open ... every case where the male, hurt and having to pay child support, is unhappy about it, they are going to sue and claim minutiae of time they spent with the child who turns out not to be their genetic child," he said.

"We all know that in the family law situation, it is not just an ordinary case about money, it is often a case that involves a lot of emotion."

While the Liam Magill case could pave the way for dozens of new compensation cases, the same principle could also be used by an embittered "ex" who claims to have been duped into marriage because their partner said they were a millionaire, or they "owned a country castle".

Claims for damages could even arise if a partner committed bigamy as a result of their spouse lying about a previous marriage.

Justice Kirby, one of six judges hearing the case, told a hearing in Canberra this month that the law of deceit could be used vindictively by emotionally wounded couples.

Historically, the law of deceit, which is related to fraud, has only applied to commercial relationships, not those on a personal nature.

Justice Kirby said three important social changes appeared to be pushing the need for legal reform in this area: availability of quick and discreet tests to establish paternity, the rising rate of marriage breakdown and the end of laws allowing spousal legal immunity.

A decision in favour of Mr Magill would mean family issues involving the tort of deceit would be heard in the civil courts and not the Family Court.

Lawyers for Mr Magill's ex-wife Meredith argued it would be wrong to apply the law of deceit to family relationships, and warned that a finding for her husband would cause a rush of litigation against women.

Mr Magill learned he had not fathered two of his supposed children after he applied to the Family Court in 2001 for a DNA test to be carried out.

He married Meredith in 1988, but 18 months into the marriage she began a long-term affair.

The marriage ended in 1992 after Ms Magill had given birth to three children, only one of whom was Mr Magill's. He continued to give 32 per cent of his income as child support for all three children until 1999, believing they were all his.

The court heard that the US has allowed such civil suits for years, dubbing them "heart-balm" actions. But judge Ken Hayne pointed out that some US states were considering halting all spousal claims for deceit.

[The Gonzman]

Let me speak plainly - a woman always knows full good and well whether there is a possibility a child isn't a man's child, and to represent it as anything less is fraud.

One other thing - this statement:

Lawyers for Mr Magill's ex-wife Meredith argued it would be wrong to apply the law of deceit to family relationships, and warned that a finding for her husband would cause a rush of litigation against women.

Really, counselors?  Are you stipulating that the whole of femininity is so base and deceitful as to be subject to them?

[Sir Percy]

Mr Justice Kirby is well known in Oz for his blatent homosexuality. He is totally unsympthetic to fatherhood. It is a 'condition' he deliberately chooses not to experience, prefering to use the services of rent-boys in King's Cross, if the rumours are to be believed.

"This is the Pandora's box we open ... every case where the male, hurt and having to pay child support, is unhappy about it, they are going to sue and claim minutiae of time they spent with the child who turns out not to be their genetic child," he said.

And quite rightly too. As an Officer of the Court, he should be encouraging it.

Justice Kirby, one of six judges hearing the case, told a hearing in Canberra this month that the law of deceit could be used vindictively by emotionally wounded couples.

Can you imagine a Judge saying this in an insurance fraud case? Or a dodgy car sale issue? Vindication is the issue not vindictiveness. And restitution.

Justice Kirby said three important social changes appeared to be pushing the need for legal reform in this area: availability of quick and discreet tests to establish paternity, the rising rate of marriage breakdown and the end of laws allowing spousal legal immunity.

Don't mention the breakdown of fairness and justice in all matters of male - female law. Don't mention the cost of raising children that aren't yours. Don't mention the explosion of cheating, lying women infecting society.

Kirby is a fucking disgrace who is only on the Bench because of his left wing mates who put him there. The same ones who brought in no-fault divorce.

[The Gonzman]

I'm imagining a man who comes into a marriage wanting children, of him and his wife having two children; of him going and getting a vasectomy at her urging, and of finding out later neither of the two boys aren't his - then getting stiffed with the bill, while she plays the martyr, runs off with the kid's real father, and doesn't let him see them... And now he can't have the kids of his own flesh and blood he wants because the reversal was unsuccessful.

Wait - I don't have to imagine this man - I know him.

And I hope the bitch burns in Hell.  Killing a lifelong dream and making a man pay for it is a damnable offense in my book.

[Thomas]

The men's movement will succeed in many ways because of this: Lawyers are starting to smell the money.

[SIAM]

The good news is the battles are now being played out in the public arena.  Stealth feminism was camouflaged behind chivalry and women playing the victim.  Now its name is being dragged through the mud, with clumsy High Court judges inadvertently spilling the truth that many, many women commit paternity fraud. Whoops! Bit of a clanger there mate - I can see the feminists being flummoxed when reading that over their breakfast - on the one hand the judge is trying to protect women from being sued, on the other, he's protecting them by telling the truth about women.  

The truth will out.

And the truth is coming out.  As it must.  

This is a good story because here we have a High Court judge is exposing women's lies in order to protect them.  You will see more of this.

[gwallan]

This is the Pandora's box we open ...

No your honour. Pandora opened her own box.

[gwallan]

Sneering feminist Louise Evans has her say in The Australian.
Of course while Liam was out "seeding the universe" and "sowing his wild oats" poor selfless Meredith was home alone "nest building and child rearing". Poor, poor suffering Meredith.

Wicked witches take on the masters of the universe
Louise Evans
April 25, 2006

WOMEN can be so deceitful. It starts when little girls work out they can twirl daddy around their Barbie hairbrush by pouting their little cupid lips and going all misty-eyed when he dares suggest they go to bed before the end of Neighbours.

It continues at school when they realise they can boss the boys around and get them to share their play lunch treats by simply remembering the dumb boy's name. And so it continues as sly little girls grow up to be deceitful women who can manipulate men in five seconds and at five paces.

Once women become fertile the stakes rise considerably. They play their devious games to lure hapless men on the pretext of endless sex when what they really want is marriage, a nest and children. What men want is to seed the universe.

Is it any wonder that men get confused? They have sex with a woman and then forget to call her - ever. They move on to the next one because they can. They choose not to wear a condom because it's too embarrassing or against their religion of self-love.

They don't ask the woman if she's using contraception because they don't care. What if they accidentally leave something behind like a pregnant woman? "Got any kids?" one man asks another. "Two that I know of," jokes father of the year. And everyone laughs.

Having shared his seed with a deceitful woman, a man likes to move on quickly because there's always another one batting her eyelids around the corner. But eventually he gets caught, he stays too long and before he knows it he's married, maintaining a large nest, and supporting a wife and children.

But one day he wakes up and in a flash of deja vu ponders that something may not be right. What if that cleverly deceptive wife is still playing her games with other men. What if those kids aren't his? All of a sudden no one is laughing and the lawyer is on speed dial.

Melbourne father Liam Magill found he was supporting two children who were not his and has gone to the High Court in his fight for compensation. In a masterful use of the language, High Court judge Michael Kirby described the case as a Pandora's box. Nice one, Michael.

Magill alleges he was tricked into paying tens of thousands of dollars in child support to his unfaithful former wife Meredith. Their marriage ended in 1992 after Meredith had three children, only one of whom, it turns out, is Magill's.

He continued to give 32 per cent of his income as child support for all three children until 1999. He is suing her for deceit. The dispossessed kids must be thrilled. Changing nappies: $1000. Getting out of bed in the middle of the night: $2000. Saturday sport: $10,000. Plus, plus, plus. Deceit is an expensive business.

Magill is not alone in being duped. International analysis of 37,000 DNA paternity tests found 30 per cent of fathers were raising someone else's kids. Surely that's the role of single mothers, not fertile fathers?

So instead of celebrating the birth of their alleged offspring, some men (perhaps those intent on seeding the universe) are prone to prematurely race off to get a paternity test, with 5000 to 6000 done each year. With the results of their past dalliances in their sweaty palms, men finally have the ammunition they need to declare war on the deceitful women who lured them into marriage, nest building and child rearing. And to think they could have been out there all that time having fun.

It is acceptable, nigh expected, for men to seed the universe at their leisure and at their pleasure. But for women to do the same is deceitful. There must be revenge. They must pay unless it becomes the norm.

The response from those deceitful women has been particularly galling. Since the Magill case started making headlines, they have been on the phone to each other, meeting in less than secret covens for coffee and wine, clicking their tongues and cackling. In telling tones, the covens laugh and use a childish phrase once reserved for silly daddies and school dropkicks to describe this new turn of events: "Sucked in." And everyone laughs.

[email protected]

[Sir Percy]

Is it any wonder that men get confused? They have sex with a woman and then forget to call her - ever. They move on to the next one because they can. They choose not to wear a condom because it's too embarrassing or against their religion of self-love.

They don't ask the woman if she's using contraception because they don't care. What if they accidentally leave something behind like a pregnant woman? "Got any kids?" one man asks another. "Two that I know of," jokes father of the year. And everyone laughs.

Having shared his seed with a deceitful woman, a man likes to move on quickly because there's always another one batting her eyelids around the corner. But eventually he gets caught, he stays too long and before he knows it he's married, maintaining a large nest, and supporting a wife and children.

What a jaundiced view of men she has. I guess you can tell a person by the company they keep. She must have hung around a lot of creeps in her day. Probably suited her. Like finds like.

Yes, everyone laughs at that joke. Its a nervous laugh. But the smile has worn thin.

[zarby]

There is nothing deceptive at all about a man "seeding the universe."

There really is not any more honest. There is no deceit about the act or the potential consequences of the act.

A man having sex with a woman is not comparable to a woman claiming a man is the father when he isn't. That is deceitful. If she doesn't know, she should say so. If knows he is not, she should say so. Either way, deceit.

[LSBeene]

Although I have never been a victim of Paternity Fraud I have taken up it's cause because it is a vile betrayal of trust wherein the victim of the crime is made to pay while the perpetrator is awarded for the crime.

Steven

[zarby]

You call it a crime?

I bet you cannot identify a single instance of prosecution of this crime.

I bet you cannot identify any specfic statute making it a crime (I realize a general fraud statute might arguably apply -- but a specific statute?)

The consequences are certainly more severe than many crimes both in terms of economics and more intangible types of victimization.

Yet, I don't think it has ever been prosecuted in modern history in a western country. If it ever has been, I should would like to know about it.

[contrarymary]

Louise Evans will be out of the office until Monday May 8. Any queries
regarding news features please email Graeme Leech -
[email protected]. Thanks

Ah, what a pity.  I'll have to wait until May 8 for her thoughts on my email.  I hope they're a little  less hurtful than the comments I received from that Lizzie psychobitch at the Washington Times.

[Psyle]

It's true.. there's prolly nothing on the books that might actually make this act a crime.

But what are we left with? To say to EVERY woman even if you are in a relationship or married, to show us the DNA results or we're walking away?

It's truly a sad state of affairs, but what do you expect? Mothers often tell their sons with regards to contraception to assume the woman is lying 100% of the time and take your own precautions no matter how well you know her.

There can be no real relationship if men will always mistrust women because we have the feeling 50% of them will lie about such a serious thing. And then women will ALWAYS get offended at the thought of asking them to prove that they are being truthful.

[Factory]

I find the logical contortions neccessary to defend women's "right" to commit paternity fraud rediculous.  I have never...no, let me say that again, I have NEVER heard any kind of logical argument in support of making men pay for other men's children.  Ever.