Man jailed for child support, child not his

[Alyeska]

Link

A South Georgia man who had been jailed for more than a year for not paying child support — even though he was not the biological father — was released from custody on Wednesday.
Related Metro stories »

“I thank God for this day,” Frank Hatley, 50, said in a telephone interview shortly after his release. “It feels good being free.”

Hatley had sat in a Cook County jail since June 25, 2008, even though a special assistant state attorney general and the judge knew Hatley was not the child’s biological father.

After showing a judge during a hearing Wednesday that he was indigent, Hatley was ordered released from confinement, his lawyer, Sarah Geraghty of the Southern Center for Human Rights, said.

The judge, however, postponed deciding whether Hatley must still repay the more than $10,000 in child support the state says he owes. But Hatley does not have to make any monthly payments until that issue is resolved, Geraghty said.

“I’m certainly glad Mr. Hatley has been released but the underlying issue has still yet to be resolved,” Geraghty said.

Two DNA tests — one conducted nine years ago and another earlier this month — proved that Hatley was not the father of Travon Morrison, who is now 21. Even after learning he was not the father, Hatley paid thousands of dollars the state said he owed for support. After losing his job and becoming homeless, he still made payments out of his unemployment benefits.

In the 1980s, Hatley had a relationship with Essie Lee Morrison, who became pregnant. Morrison had a baby boy in 1987 and told Hatley the child was his, according to court records. The couple never married and split up shortly after Travon was born.

In 1989, Morrison applied for public assistance through the state Department of Human Resources. The state moved to get Hatley to reimburse the cost of Travon’s support, and Hatley agreed because he believed Travon was his son.

But in 2000, DNA samples from Hatley and Travon showed the two were not related, according to court records.

With the help of a Georgia Legal Services lawyer, Hatley went to court and was relieved of his responsibility to pay future child support. But he still had to deal with being a deadbeat dad when it was assumed that he was really the dad.

Homerville lawyer Charles Reddick, working as a special assistant state attorney general, prepared an order requiring Hatley to pay the $16,398 he still owed the state for child support.

The Aug. 21, 2001, order, signed by Cook County Superior Court Judge Dane Perkins, acknowledges that Hatley was not Travon’s father.

After that, Hatley paid almost $6,000. But last year he was laid off from his job unloading charcoal grills from shipping containers. He became homeless and lived in his car. Still, Hatley made some child support payments using his unemployment benefits.

By May 2008, he apparently had not paid enough. In another order prepared by Reddick and signed by Perkins, Hatley was found in contempt and jailed.

On Wednesday, after being freed, Hatley said he wanted to be relieved from his financial obligations.

“Out of it all, I just feel like justice should be served for me in this case,” he said. “I shouldn’t have to keep being punished for a child that is not mine.”

The kid isn't his. He still has to pay back child support. The man is broke, has no job, and his homeless. How does Child Service handle it? They send the guy to jail for not paying with money he doesn't have. Its fucking incredible how asinine Child Services handled this. Debtors Prison isn't legal in this country. He is indignant. He doesn't have any fucking money to pay outside of his welfare checks, and he actually tried paying child support with said checks. That wasn't good enough and so they arranged to get the poor guy locked away.

[Oscar Wilde]

Wow.
Just wow.

[Superboy]

I'm not sure how exactly child support works, maybe someone can explain it. Aren't payments usually made directly to the mother and child? Why was he making payments to the state? It sounds like he was reimbursing them for money they gave to the mother. Is this a normal arrangement?

[Alyeska]

I'm not sure how exactly child support works, maybe someone can explain it. Aren't payments usually made directly to the mother and child? Why was he making payments to the state? It sounds like he was reimbursing them for money they gave to the mother. Is this a normal arrangement?

Payments can be arranged in multiple ways. Some times garnished wages by the Government. In the case of a guy who doesn't necessarily know where the mother is, its easier just to pass the money to the State. And in the case of back owed money, the state is an interested party and they can determine exactly how much is paid if it doesn't just go straight to the recipient.

[Superboy]

Was it the case that the state was making payments to the mother without recieving payments from the guy? It sounds like they're less worried about getting money to the mother and more worried about getting it to the state, which leads me to believe the state is "owed" money for what they've already given the mother. Am I way off?

[Psychic_Sandwich]

Was it the case that the state was making payments to the mother without recieving payments from the guy? It sounds like they're less worried about getting money to the mother and more worried about getting it to the state, which leads me to believe the state is "owed" money for what they've already given the mother. Am I way off?

It appears that you're correct:

In 1989, Morrison applied for public assistance through the state Department of Human Resources.

This implies to me that he got the state to pay the child support, on the assumption that he would pay them back. I guess that's the reason they might still try to get him to pay what he owes.

[Stark]

I'm sure he's indignant, but the term you're looking for is 'indigent'.

Family courts all over do things like this. It's fascinating how a lack of oversight can cause this sort of thing, particularly when it just impersonally hurts everyone involved.

[Superboy]

If that is the case, it makes the state seem a little less evil and moronic. If he applied for a loan from a bank to make child support payments, the bank would certainly still expect to be paid back even after he found out he wasn't the father. I suppose it's a similar situation with the state wanting their money back.

I wonder if he'd have any legal grounds to sue mother.

[ArmorPierce]

Are you guys having brain farts today? Morrison is the mother, not the man. She applied for state assistance and the state sought to be reimbursed for the cost of her son from Mr. Hatley, the jailed guy. If anything, he is due a refund due to the fact that they gave her assistance and then gave him a bill. I'm betting that he won't get a refund though.

[jcow79]

The part I'm struggling with is how he was still being held accountable for ANY child support despite being proven to NOT be the biological father. From everything I've read about this case, the guy is on the hook for all the child support owed for all the time he THOUGHT he was the father. Which according to the time line appears to be about 10-11 years. Had this happened in reverse and the state accidentally paid someone monies they weren't entitled to you can bet your ass the money would have to be paid back.

Shouldn't the child's biological father now be accountable for the back child support?