Jackson Man Fights Order to Support Another Man's Child

KXTV ^

[chance33_98]

Jackson Man Fights Order to Support Another Man's Child

Rick Caspary of Jackson has struggled to make ends meet and pay his child support on time, but now he claims the child he's supporting isn't his, and he says he can prove it.

"It's ridiculous, you know," said Caspary. "I've never seen this child, yet they're going to take everything away because she said he's mine."

Caspary fought the child support payments for years in Butte County. He thinks he met the child's mother when he was 16, but he never dated her. Finally, he got the proof last September 6. DNA tests clearly showed Caspary is excluded as the biological father, but his problems weren't over.

When the mother moved south, San Joaquin County took over. First it attached his wages for $1,000 in back child support, then issued a new notice to withhold income for child support 10 months after his DNA test results. "They just started taking up to 50 percent of my paycheck. It was pretty rough. No warning, nothing: 'Here, we're just taking your money,'" said Caspary.

Even with the test results right there in his file and a trip to Stockton's Child Protective Services offices, Caspary couldn't win his fight. "They didn't have my file, couldn't find it," he said. "Then they told me to come back in a few days. Well, I can't. I work six days a week."

Once News10 brought it to their attention, CPS officials admitted Caspary should not have to pay child support. What they couldn't explain is why no one had ever found the DNA test results in his file before or why Caspary got the runaround.

Claiming these cases are confidential, the supervising child support attorney declined an interview, but she said procedures to dispute a claim are clearly posted.

Caspary says the reality is much different. "They won't respond to me at all. I can get them on the phone, they say they'll do something. Then they don't do it."

San Joaquin county officials promise to drop the order for child support and reimburse Caspary more than $1,000 he's already paid. It is unclear if any action will be taken against the child's mother.

[Zavien Doombringer]

ALL YOUR WAGES ARE BELONG TO US!!!

[TheSpottedOwl]

Just a damn shame...

[The Brush]

My thought is, on the day her child turns 18 or 21 (Decided upon by the court) Mom checks into prison for the next ten years... OR she can take out a loan at that time and repay (with interest) every unauthorized dime she took from this guy.
I think that would send a wonderful message to other mother's who are in the process of, or considering the same scheme.

[Gig]

"Just a damn shame..." But all too often the sad reality.

Child support enforcement is one of the most mis-used and abused government programs. They often ignore the truly bad fathers and instead jump on the "easy pickin's" with both feet.

A government totally out-of-control.

[Centurion2000]

Sounds like it's time for this guy to vanish

[walford]

some links:

http://www.childsupport.cc/
http://www.paternityfraud.com/
http://www.petitiononline.com/pfv1/petition.html
http://www.glennsacks.com/california_governor_davis.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-12-02-paternity-usat_x.htm

[chiefqc]

Little Tin God Alert.

"We do not answer to anyone, we are the tin gods".

[bedolido]

guess it's his turn to get Californicated. Even with proof he's losing. I'll bet he doesn't get his money back if he wins.

[tallhappy]

Why did he ever have to pay in the first place?

Was there reason to believe he may have been the father?

If so, poor baby. He's wronged but I have no sympathy for the loser fool if he was doing that.

If he wasn't it is totally crazy.

[tallhappy]

A government totally out-of-control.

Yeah, but so was he.

He got burnt all right.

Now he's crying about walking in to a furncae and getting burned.

Oh these poor victims.

Of course if he didn't do anything with the mother my comments are off base.

I'm assuming he did, but the gal got stcuk by a different thistle bush.

[EggsAckley]

I think you're right. There seems to be much missing from this story. For instance, "he knew her when he was sixteen but never dated her." WTH is THAT all about?

[nathanbedford]

I suspect her behavior was even more despicable.

It seems as though the state reimbursed the poor victim of her lies indicating that she was drawing welfare of some sort. She was probably required to name the father so the state could seek recompense and decided to pick on this poor smooh to protect her boy friend whom she knew to be the real father.

[bedolido]

Sounds like it's time for this guy to vanish

No way to vanish if they has his SSN. Calif will track him down. That state, along with most others, require child support to be paid thru the state. The person pays the state and the state passes it on to the recepient.

[mtbopfuyn]

About time a man started getting reimbursed for all this buloney. Of course if this gal, and other like her, had kept her knees together we wouldn't have this rampant problem. Yes, it takes two to tango and the guys should keep their little Clintons in their pants as well. Anyone else tired of the never ending Kobe saga?

[TontoKowalski]

You know, I've read of cases where the Court acknowledges that the payer isn't the father, and yet he is forced to pay child support anyway.

The case I recall is that the father was divorced, discovered and proved non-paternity, and yet the Court ordered him to pay anyway.

The logic is that the child has always looked to that man as the father, and if he doesn't support it, who will?

Personally, I think the bio father should be on the hook, but I can see how it would be for the child to be abandoned by the only father he/she has known.

There are no easy questions or answers when marital fidelity breaks down, are there?

[tallhappy]

Yeah. If he was just named out of the blue and the government did this to him, I'd say he was wronged big time.

It's probably hard for the government to pay any restitution.

[MatthewViti]

hehe!

[tallhappy]

You know, I've read of cases where the Court acknowledges that the payer isn't the father, and yet he is forced to pay child support anyway.

You mean not the biological father. Sometimes it is appropriate for a man to support a child that he did not sire but that was a son or daughter to him, that he took responsibilty for and and made committment to raise and support.

[Howlin]

Exactly! If they started prosecuting this crap, maybe, just maybe these false accusations would stop.