Man Sentenced to Prison After He Paid Child Support
Man says that even after he paid his child support a judge sentenced him to six months in prison
A Houston man by the name of Clifford Hall says that even after he paid the owed amount of child support, a judge still sentenced him to six months in prison.
Mr. Hall admits to being the father of his 11-yer-old son and said that he didn’t have a problem paying child support for his son. He is reported as saying, “I’m his father; it’s my responsibility to take care of him.” So he did what any honest and respectable father would do and had the child support payments set up to be taken out of his check by his employer.
Later Hall discovered that his employer was withholding a large amount some weeks, a small amount some weeks, and nothing on some weeks.
Hall was not notified that at some point during the payments his child support was modified and Hall was never notified. So he paid the almost $3,000 he owed in back child support
In a recent court hearing last November it was confirmed that Hall didn’t owe anything and the opposing counsel testified twice that Hall was all paid up.
Mr. Hall’s ex-wife’s attorney requested that he pay her legal bill of $3,000 and the judge agreed.
Mr. Hall said that he was never informed of modified court documents that modified the dates of his scheduled court visitation to see his son or the attorney’s request that he pay his ex- wife’s $3,000 legal bill.
In the end the judge sentenced Mr. Hall six months in jail.
The attorney representing Mr. Hall was surprised at the verdict. He was so surprised he said his client could have gone to court with a monkey ad gotten a better result. What did I do that my client has over-paid, over-visited and is now paying $3,000 in attorney fees and is going to jail for six months?
I was always under the impression that child support court cases were supposed to pass judgment in the best interest of the child. But this is clearly a court case in which the system failed to properly pass judgment and someone needs to investigate. In this situation, the court failed the child and Mr. Hall. It is obvious that the court did not rule in favor of the child who now has not means of monetary support from his father, who by the way is not a “dead beat dad.” This child will be deprived of seeing his dad for the duration of the sentence. The question to ask here is who is benefiting from this judgment?