I’m not a news watcher or reader. The only reason I occasionally catch the news on TV is because I want “noise” during dinner. When I’m in a waiting room or at other people’s houses, I might peruse their newspapers. At work, when I need a brain break, I’ll jump on msn.com and scan the online news.
Last night, I caught the tail end of the local news and listened to a story that has refused to leave my mind.
Title of said story is “Man Disputes Alimony for Dying Wife”. Sounds innocuous enough. The man and his wife owned a successful restaurant business pulling in about $2 million a year.
Now, it turns out this guy owes his wife $94,839 because he agreed to pay her $1000 a week. Reasoning? His wife was diagnosed with cancer shortly before the divorce and “he signed the settlement because his lawyers told him she would die soon, and he wouldn’t have to pay very long.”
His wife is surviving and continuing to fight her cancer, he’s sold off his business and all his assets, and now he’s saying the pressure of having to pay her $1000/week is making him mentally and physically unable to work or hold a job for very long.
He thinks he shouldn’t have to pay her anymore because he’s broke and that jail is his only option. His own words: “3 hots in the cot. Good food. Good books to read. Good card game every day. I’m pretty comfortable.”
And he’s hoping his story on TV will find someone who will “sympathize and give him the money he owes”.
Why did this story stick in my mind?
I’m chagrined he’s expecting someone to just fork over $90,000 because they feel sorry for him and his sad sack situation. It also bothers me that he was banking on his wife dying really soon and that the taxpayers are footing the bill for his “comfortable stay” in jail so he can eat, read, and play cards.
I came to work and “water coolered” this story. One of my co-workers responded she thought the guy was foolish in signing the settlement and he should have gone back and made another arrangement when he saw his wife was going to live longer than his lawyers predicted (what? Are they doctors now?). She also said, sort of jokingly, he should have killed her. Another co-worker said she heard on Talk Radio that the wife is doing fine and working and making more money than the alimony. Her thoughts were that the husband should be responsible for his settlement because he signed it, but his wife who’s self-sufficient at this point should just “suck it up that her ex is an ass and move on”, meaning have a new settlement arranged. “Right now, we the taxpayers are paying for him to not pay her, at least put him on a work detail!”
What are your thoughts? You can find the story on www.wcsh6.com/news/local/article.aspx?storyid=56797
Last night, I caught the tail end of the local news and listened to a story that has refused to leave my mind.
Title of said story is “Man Disputes Alimony for Dying Wife”. Sounds innocuous enough. The man and his wife owned a successful restaurant business pulling in about $2 million a year.
Now, it turns out this guy owes his wife $94,839 because he agreed to pay her $1000 a week. Reasoning? His wife was diagnosed with cancer shortly before the divorce and “he signed the settlement because his lawyers told him she would die soon, and he wouldn’t have to pay very long.”
His wife is surviving and continuing to fight her cancer, he’s sold off his business and all his assets, and now he’s saying the pressure of having to pay her $1000/week is making him mentally and physically unable to work or hold a job for very long.
He thinks he shouldn’t have to pay her anymore because he’s broke and that jail is his only option. His own words: “3 hots in the cot. Good food. Good books to read. Good card game every day. I’m pretty comfortable.”
And he’s hoping his story on TV will find someone who will “sympathize and give him the money he owes”.
Why did this story stick in my mind?
I’m chagrined he’s expecting someone to just fork over $90,000 because they feel sorry for him and his sad sack situation. It also bothers me that he was banking on his wife dying really soon and that the taxpayers are footing the bill for his “comfortable stay” in jail so he can eat, read, and play cards.
I came to work and “water coolered” this story. One of my co-workers responded she thought the guy was foolish in signing the settlement and he should have gone back and made another arrangement when he saw his wife was going to live longer than his lawyers predicted (what? Are they doctors now?). She also said, sort of jokingly, he should have killed her. Another co-worker said she heard on Talk Radio that the wife is doing fine and working and making more money than the alimony. Her thoughts were that the husband should be responsible for his settlement because he signed it, but his wife who’s self-sufficient at this point should just “suck it up that her ex is an ass and move on”, meaning have a new settlement arranged. “Right now, we the taxpayers are paying for him to not pay her, at least put him on a work detail!”
What are your thoughts? You can find the story on www.wcsh6.com/news/local/article.aspx?storyid=56797
1 comment:
I am always amazed at how truly awful humans can be.
Here's a guy who was betting on his wife dying. And a lawyer helping him. I don't care if the wife is earning a million a year--this guy should be on a chain gang earning 25 cents an hour-- for life. No card games and his cell mate should be into rough sex.
Post a Comment