Judge tells man he's still legally dead.


Just_A_Guy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yep. He's legally dead.

This is prime example of how law has to deal with legalities and not realities. Therefore, when you have a Congress that is trying to put a law like... say... gun control or affordable healthcare on the table, you HAVE to think of how that would work LEGALLY and not just how it is in reality.

Because, in reality, it might be really, really nice to have 100% insurance coverage or have 0 assault weapons in the country... but trying to control that through LEGAL means is a complete other matter. I mean... first you have to define the words "affordable" and "assault" in the eyes of the law. That, in itself, is a challenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, correct me if I am wrong, but couldn't he rob a bank (or commit any crime) and escape punishment legally since he's dead?

Or, scarily, he cannot be murdered. How can anyone be charged with murdering a dead man?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vort, there's an old Cary Grant movie called People Will Talk that has a minor subplot involving a character who was framed for murder, did his prison time, was released, found the alleged victim still alive, killed him for real, and was convicted again. Great date flick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vort, there's an old Cary Grant movie called People Will Talk that has a minor subplot involving a character who was framed for murder, did his prison time, was released, found the alleged victim still alive, killed him for real, and was convicted again. Great date flick.

There's a better movie with Ashley Judd in it. She got charged with murdering her husband, spent time in jail, got released for good behavior, found out her husband was the one that set it up and he's actually still alive so she went and killed him. Well, since she already did the time for that murder, she's all set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incredible a judge would actually rule that way. It was interesting reading a lot of the comments on that article.

I hope this man can find a way to live with this fact (no pun intended) or appeal the decision and get things fixed.

Why is it incredible? The guy's SS was already claimed by his children. If he were to be alive again, he'll have to get back his SS and his children will have to pay the government back the money so this bozo can claim his SS.

If he wants an SS, he just has to go apply for another one as a "new man".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incredible a judge would actually rule that way. It was interesting reading a lot of the comments on that article.

Not so much. Like anatess said, this is reality vs legality . According to paperwork, the law considers him dead. Obviously, the judge recognizes the man is viable, but it seems reversing all that paperwork can't just be magically done.

I hope this man can find a way to live with this fact (no pun intended) or appeal the decision and get things fixed.

'Cept changing things would put a lot of monetary pressure on his ex-wife who, if I read the article right, went for the declared dead ruling because she desperately needed money to raise this low-life's children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the thing is he is alive and I would think (I guess erroneously) that a judge would be able to declare him alive and at the same time find a legal way to ensure the ex wife and children do not suffer financial difficulties because of it. If it means he has to pay back everything because he allowed everyone to believe he was dead then so be it. That would be part of the price of doing what he did and then showing up to ask that he be declared alive.

Just because he has done all these horrible things doesn't mean he can't and/or hasn't changed. I am not trying to sound like I am defending him but if he can't find a way to live even though he is legally dead then the situation needs to be corrected and in my minds eye it is not going to be as simple as showing up at social security and asking for a new social security number. Any document he shows them will point them to his old social security number and they would also have record of him being declared dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the thing is he is alive and I would think (I guess erroneously) that a judge would be able to declare him alive and at the same time find a legal way to ensure the ex wife and children do not suffer financial difficulties because of it. If it means he has to pay back everything because he allowed everyone to believe he was dead then so be it. That would be part of the price of doing what he did and then showing up to ask that he be declared alive.

Just because he has done all these horrible things doesn't mean he can't and/or hasn't changed. I am not trying to sound like I am defending him but if he can't find a way to live even though he is legally dead then the situation needs to be corrected and in my minds eye it is not going to be as simple as showing up at social security and asking for a new social security number. Any document he shows them will point them to his old social security number and they would also have record of him being declared dead.

This is a country ruled by law. A judge can't legislate from the bench. They try all the time, but they SHOULDN'T.

This case is not for the JUDGE to rule. This case is for State Congress to mull over and make a legislative solution for this particular case. He needs to go that route. State Congress will have to make sure that whatever law they put in the books to deal with this situation does not provide, in any way, a path for people who want to renege on their child support or other financial obligations a way to just "die" and "resurrect" because it is now legal.

And that, my friends, is how this country is set up. That's why you guys can't just vote Congress in like you're playing Fantasy Football. The legislative process is very very complicated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if the judge could have done more or not since I don't know a lot about the laws involved. But if you have a declaration that someone is legally dead in front of you and you also have verified that you have that person alive, standing in front of you, well it's pretty obvious the declaration that he is legally dead is wrong.

The judge doesn't need to seek out help for this man and the man didn't ask for the judge to seek help for him. The man asked that the same court that declared him legally dead reverse it's decision based on the fact that he happens to be alive. So it was the guy that was trying to correct the erroneous declaration (made possible through his own fault) that he was dead.

So the court that created the situation can't undo it? It seems logical that it could. And just where else would/could someone turn to get them selves declared legally alive after a court has declared them legally dead?

Just read the last post by anatess. The problem probably will have to be handled by the state legislators as it already shows people a way to get out of paying child support. I guess I am just too simple minded, but too me if the court can declare him legally dead, it should be able to declare him legally alive. I guess if there hadn't of been a time limit stipulated of 3 years then the judge could have.

Edited by ZionsRodeVos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just based on the article, it looks like if you're declared dead you have a three-year window (presumably from the time you should reasonably know that the declaration occurred) to get it undone. After that, you're stuck.

The trouble with the judge saying "yes, you're alive, but we're not going to change the Social Security payout situation", is that a legal declaration of death is generally a state law issue determined by a state court judge. But state judges don't typically have the legal authority to order a federal agency like the Social Security Administration to take a particular administrative action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anatess, I have to disagree with you here. If America put the same thought and effort into the electoral process that they do into fantasy football, I think things would be much better.

You know what, you're right!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share