Nothing can Protect You From Divorce Rape

[Shami-Amourae]

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/04/n-y-prenup-battle-winner-destroyed-family-with-affair-cousin-says/
Watch video on this link

8Chan Thread:
https://8ch.net/pol/res/2895215.html#2895215

Woman marries millionaire husband after he insists on prenup, she cheats on him, gets divorced, gets the judge to throw out the prenup.



This woman meets a successful millionaire who's built his own fortune through his life's own hard work and investments in real estate.


She wants to marry, being a smart guy he naturally is wary that she could be after his money. She doesn't want to sign a prenup, but he says there is no way they are getting married with out one, so she reluctantly agrees.


Well, come several kids later, she hits the wall and wants a divorce. She claims the prenup is the reason for their marriage falling apart, even though she never was forced into it. She could have always refused the marriage and refused the prenup. But those were his conditions and she accepted it.


Well it turns out she was full of shit. She was cheating on her husband with her cousin's husband. When her cousin comes out against her with this, she has no option but to admit to it. But she still insists her affair wasn't the reason for the marriage falling apart, oh no, she still insists it was the pre-nup.


Here's the real kicker:


She tells the judge that her husband had promised her he would get rid of the prenup after they had children. That's what she says, that he made an oral agreement with her. She has no proof of this promise or this oral agreement, its just his word against hers.


Well the judge believes her, and throws out the prenup, and now she is entitled to half his money, even after she cheated on him, even after he thought he was safe by signing a prenup.
Remember guys, not even a prenuptial agreement can protect you. Marriage can and will destroy you, there is absolutely no point.


Be careful in even entering a de facto marriage before you live. In some countries, being in a LTR with someone where you move in together and live together for some time as de factos can still grant the ex-partner your assets should you break up.

[Ares]

He could dump all of his liquid assets into Bitcoin, then tell the judge as well as his ex wife to go fuck themselves.

[madfranks]

He could dump all of his liquid assets into Bitcoin, then tell the judge as well as his ex wife to go fuck themselves.

That would be insane if he did that.

Here's the homewrecker:

http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/pol_elizabeth_petrakis_mi_130402_wblog.jpg

Maybe the millionaire husband never heard the saying, "get yourself an ugly wife, if you want to live a happy life."

[BrewTech]

That would be insane if he did that.

Here's the homewrecker:

http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/pol_elizabeth_petrakis_mi_130402_wblog.jpg

Maybe the millionaire husband never heard the saying, "get yourself an ugly wife, if you want to live a happy life."


I dunno about that, but I did hear some one give the advice that your partner should be "just attractive enough to turn you on". I thought that was good advice.

[Ares]

That would be insane if he did that.

Here's the homewrecker:

http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/pol_elizabeth_petrakis_mi_130402_wblog.jpg

Maybe the millionaire husband never heard the saying, "get yourself an ugly wife, if you want to live a happy life."

Yeah, it would definitely be insane. But imagine the amount of frustration from the ex wife as well as the judge. He can't even confiscate it. If he dumped his liquid assets into Bitcoin, he would most likely be held in contempt of court. But if it were me, I would dump it into Bitcoin while filing an appeal.

The wife saying there was an oral agreement is hearsay. He said / she said bullshit. The default goes back to the prenuptial agreement that was agreed to BEFORE the marriage contract was signed.

[Twisted Titan]

Doesnt make a diiference

She has 4 kids and when they become adults they will know the truth that their mama was a 2bit streetwalker that didnt it all for money rather they making her own way.

She will be scorned in the elder years by her own seed.

You cant do evil in this world and not pay the penalty.

[chud]

A prenup doesn't mean shit. Anyone can sue anyone.
I have seen it personally.

[madfranks]

A prenup doesn't mean shit. Anyone can sue anyone.
I have seen it personally.

And when it's his word versus her word, her word always wins.

[Heisenberg]

I dunno about that, but I did hear some one give the advice that your partner should be "just attractive enough to turn you on". I thought that was good advice.
I don't believe that. Ugly chicks have even more character flaws than the pretty ones.go for the best

[Shami-Amourae]

Pastor Steven 14/88 Gas the Kikes Now Anderson did something right...

https://8ch.net/pol/src/1439304713194.jpg

[Glass]

yes pre nups only work for some people. hollywood types I think. Otherwise. marriage is a 3 party contract. It 2 parties determine something different and one of those parties is the Gov then it's clear what decision they will make.

I have heard people here in Aus talk about pre nups as if they think that they are a real thing and that they work. Down here it's been determined by courts/gov that they hold no legal value or effect. Always makes me chuckle because the only place they would get the idea is American TV and movies. So fiction basically.

Of course if all three parties privately agreed that the pre-nup is valid then it would probably stand. This likelihood would be too small to measure.

[Santa]

Any judge that makes a determination on nothing more than hearsay aught to be booted off the bench.

[Glass]

in criminal cases yes, but civil cases are negotiable. Money talks.

[Cebu_4_2]

The way it goes, mother of child/ren home raising them while husband generates more money. Judge see the woman raising kids, she deserves payment for her work and suffering, the man can continue to work and pay. I also heard a judge say that he never saw a male cow raise a calf, the kids stay with the mother.

This is how the courts think and make money. They literally destroy mens lives thinking this way.

I went through a bit of a challenge with my 1st ex. She got half the equity of the house and I got to buy my business again but this time had to pay her. Plus child support/alimony/full health coverage. It bled me dry and when the money ran out guess what? She had the kid move in with me and also went to court to stop the court from prosecuting me because "he's the father of my kid, I don't want him to go to jail, he needs to raise the kid" They dropped everything.

Try typing this much without fucking up on this forum lol.

[Heisenberg]

The way it goes, mother of child/ren home raising them while husband generates more money. Judge see the woman raising kids, she deserves payment for her work and suffering, the man can continue to work and pay. I also heard a judge say that he never saw a male cow raise a calf, the kids stay with the mother.

This is how the courts think and make money. They literally destroy mens lives thinking this way.

I went through a bit of a challenge with my 1st ex. She got half the equity of the house and I got to buy my business again but this time had to pay her. Plus child support/alimony/full health coverage. It bled me dry and when the money ran out guess what? She had the kid move in with me and also went to court to stop the court from prosecuting me because "he's the father of my kid, I don't want him to go to jail, he needs to raise the kid" They dropped everything.

Try typing this much without fucking up on this forum lol.
Hitler would never allow that

[7th trump]

The way it goes, mother of child/ren home raising them while husband generates more money. Judge see the woman raising kids, she deserves payment for her work and suffering, the man can continue to work and pay. I also heard a judge say that he never saw a male cow raise a calf, the kids stay with the mother.

This is how the courts think and make money. They literally destroy mens lives thinking this way.

I went through a bit of a challenge with my 1st ex. She got half the equity of the house and I got to buy my business again but this time had to pay her. Plus child support/alimony/full health coverage. It bled me dry and when the money ran out guess what? She had the kid move in with me and also went to court to stop the court from prosecuting me because "he's the father of my kid, I don't want him to go to jail, he needs to raise the kid" They dropped everything.

Try typing this much without fucking up on this forum lol.

This is not how the courts see it to make money. The first thing the courts look at is to see if there are any children involved. I prenup is pretty much void when kids are now involved. The courts will see that the father will raise them one way or the other...............I know....I've been divorced with two kids.
The courts want to see the father in the lives of the children as much as possible. The judge I had knew that single parent women are the worst kind....and my judge was a women!
My divorce is what they call 50/50 "physical" custody where I have them 50% of the time and I only pay 320.00 a month for child support for two kids compared to 1400.00 it would have cost me a month if I didnt fight for my kids. And if you supply the insurance you get more money taken off the child support. They go by your income and both sides are calculated as if you each received full custody and find a happy medium and deduct for the one providing insurance for the children.
This is also a federal level custody agreement so anyone in any state can go for 50/50 "physical" custody. If you get raped over the coals its because you didnt do what was necessary to prove you're a FATHER or the courts seen you as a possible threat to the kids health and will grant custody to the mother. So a dead beat street thug loser who sits in a bar after work will not likely get custody or a 50/50 shot at the kids. Because hes proven himself as unfit....and pay he shall do.
Be a responsible father by being in your kids lives or pay....you cant have it both ways! Saddle up buckaroo!

The courts get money huh.....hahahaha.....thats a bold face lie....its the lawyers who gets the most money. You only pay court costs and fees....a few 100 hundred dollars for one time...big deal!

[Cebu_4_2]

This is not how the courts see it to make money. The first thing the courts look at is to see if there are any children involved. I prenup is pretty much void when kids are now involved. The courts will see that the father will raise them one way or the other...............I know....I've been divorced with two kids.
The courts want to see the father in the lives of the children as much as possible. The judge I had knew that single parent women are the worst kind....and my judge was a women!
My divorce is what they call 50/50 "physical" custody where I have them 50% of the time and I only pay 320.00 a month for child support for two kids compared to 1400.00 it would have cost me a month if I didnt fight for my kids. And if you supply the insurance you get more money taken off the child support. They go by your income and both sides are calculated as if you each received full custody and find a happy medium and deduct for the one providing insurance for the children.
This is also a federal level custody agreement so anyone in any state can go for 50/50 "physical" custody. If you get raped over the coals its because you didnt do what was necessary to prove you're a FATHER or the courts seen you as a possible threat to the kids health and will grant custody to the mother. So a dead beat street thug loser who sits in a bar after work will not likely get custody or a 50/50 shot at the kids. Because hes proven himself as unfit....and pay he shall do.
Be a responsible father by being in your kids lives or pay....you cant have it both ways! Saddle up buckaroo!

The courts get money huh.....hahahaha.....thats a bold face lie....its the lawyers who gets the most money. You only pay court costs and fees....a few 100 hundred dollars for one time...big deal!

It must be nice to live in Utopia like you do. I spent 40K fighting for custody, the FOC, 1st Ex did not want me to have any time with the kid. The judge was a cunt but not as bad. I had to bring it up to her, in court that I want to talk to my kid every single day. The 1st Exs atty blew a gasket and was almost held in contemt. I was granted that and did get 50/50. Her atty took the judgement in back to copy for all parties and changed 1 page which ended up costing me an extra 15k. My atty (the 3rd one) was fired as soon as I saw what just happened and he said there was nothing we could do about it.

So what about being in my kids life? Think I fought for nothing? 1st ex had mental issues and was abusive. I had her arrested for beating me and breaking into my house. I didn't want my kid alone with that psycho for anything in the world.

[Jerrylynnb]

Marriage is a lifetime commitment - without it, kiss your nation, and your culture, GOODBYE.

No-fault divorce - a "gift" to the US from Russia with *love*.

[madfranks]

Marriage is a lifetime commitment - without it, kiss your nation, and your culture, GOODBYE.

No-fault divorce - a "gift" to the US from Russia with *love*.

Too bad most people nowadays think that "until death do us part" means "whenever I feel like it."

[expat4ever]

I've been down that road twice. Rarely are you ever blindsided by it and usually you know its over long before its actually over. Many ways to protect yourself. When you know its over, first and foremost hide as much income as possible. If that means going to your employer and having a sit down to take a pay cut (get it back in bonuses after the divorce) If self employed, slow way down on the work you do or even quit taking on new projects until it is over. Show little to no income and make her pay the support when you get 50/50 custody.
If you have cash by the time you get to divorce court your a dumbass. Never ever tall your attorney how much your worth. Doesnt matter if its 5 k or 500k, you will be broke by the time he/she is done with you.

When divorce happens, you realize that marraige is nothing more than a business proposition and when it ends it sa division of assets.Its best to make sure you dont have any.
Look into your state laws and move to a state that says whats yous before the marraige is your after the marraige.

Both my exes swore they were going to take me to the cleaners. They were both shocked with what they walked away with. I even offered the 2nd wife (No kids with her) 50k cash to walk away clean. No way she was gonna take me to the cleaners. She walked with 4700 instead minus whatever she paid for lawyers.

[Dogman]

Homework is a wonderful thing in many cases.

;)

[Shami-Amourae]

Homework is a wonderful thing in many cases.

;)

Prenups mean nothing, especially when kids are involved.

[Hitch]

Why do men love drama and misery?

Just don't get married. Don't do it. It could be great, but the stats show, it will end in hell. There is no point in getting married anymore, it's done and gone. You can make a commitment, without marriage.

Otherwise, stay single, if you want to screw around, get a vasectomy.

They won. The courts, the feminists, society, is and will make you as a man a slave. The only way to be free, is to just say "fuck it", and let them have their misery.

[expat4ever]

yep, get a throw away cell phone. When your dating your name is Joe Schmoe. Here's my number. I'm married so we have to keep this on the down low and go to your place.
When your done with her throw the phone away. If she gets pregnant, throw the phone away.

[Jerrylynnb]

The US constitution has a prohibition against ex post facto legislation - that is where you get prosecuted for having committed an act by a law (covering that act) that was passed AFTER you committed the act. So if they have a $10 fine for jay walking, and you jay walk, and then they pass a new law where the fine for jaywalking is $100, it is a violation of the US constitution's ex post facto prohibition to prosecute you for the $100, instead of the $10 fine in effect when you jaywalked.

When it comes to divorce, the act that makes you liable to any "family law" is to commit the act of marraige, and, the act that makes you liable for child support is the act of procreation. For millions of american men in the 60's, who committed the act of marraige AND/OR procreation, the law that was in effect at the time was called "show cause", which required that the party seeking a divorce to show cause, and there was specific list of causes for which a divorce would be granted. This law, under which ALL american men had married and/or procreated, was the ONLY law, valid under american jurisprudence and compliance with the US constitution, that these men could have been prosecuted by, which would have meant that near ZERO percent of the no-fault divorces would have been even entertained by the courts. The ONLY way the new "no-fault" laws could have been enforced would have been to wait until newly married persons, who married AFTER the enactment of those laws, would have sought a divorce. That prospect was simply not profitable enough, and, by going ahead and prosecuting all the existing men with the new law, EX POST FACTO (the US constitution notwithstanding), a massive growth industry for the legal profession (if you want to call it that - more like organized crime, to me) came to pass.

So, this *gift* (from Russia, who enacted no-fault divorce immediately after the Bolshevik defeat of the white russians) became the club with which to beat down the arrogant, resourceful, and dynamic american man (just as it had done to the Russian men of the 1920's). For men (such as myself), it was like jumping into a swimming pool, and, then, after you are out in the middle of the pool enjoying your swim, you find out that someone was letting loose a whole bunch of sharks into the pool - we were left trying our best to swim to the edge and OUT OF THE POOL before getting bit by a shark. Most american men were IMMUNE to any divorce, under the terms of the laws under which they willingly married, because they had not given their wives "just cause" - american men were overwhelmingly good to thier wives.

But all that is old hat by now, since we've had the no-fault divorce laws for over 50 years now. But, since it was showered down upon us illegally in the first place, it is worthwhile to question whether or not the no-fault divorce laws are valid for other reasons.

For one, how can one man be punished so much more than another man, for having committed the VERY SAME ACT which put both of them in jeopardy? If a walmart clerk, who makes $8/hour is assessed only $100/month for child support, while a real estate tycoon, who makes $1 million per year gets assessed $100k per month in child support, how does that square with equal punishment under the law? They both committed the very same act - procreation. Yet one gets off with a tiny portion of what the other's punishment is. That is like saying, if you rob a store, no matter how much you stole, if you are rich, then your fine, and imprisonment, will be many times greater than if you are a pauper. Or if you commit murder, then your punishment will be many times greater if you are wealthy than if you are poor. What about "let the punishment fit the CRIME (not the culprit)". This analysis highlights the REAL REASON for this no-fault divorce law - to PRY into the private holdings and earning power of individuals, thus violating their constitutional right that thier papers be secure from unwarranted search and seizure.

Like some suggestions about "hiding" your assets - that is very unamerican and it is unamerican to have to even think that way because your assets should have NOTHING to do with your punishment for having committed the act of marraige and/or procreation. If men are going to be held liable for procreating, then, that liability must be THE VERY SAME FOR ALL MEN, regardless of how much money they earn or not.

There are other insane aspects to no-fault divorce, which will RUIN any nation, but, most of you young squirts grew up with it and may not realize what a splendid nation we had before we got served up this "gift" from Russia back in the 1960's.

[Glass]

I agree with your post 100% except, it is a not a gift from russia. it is a gift that russia also received, some time before the US and other countries did. It is a gift given to those countries by the same people. As you point out, the Bolshevics.

[7th trump]

I agree with your post 100% except, it is a not a gift from russia. it is a gift that russia also received, some time before the US and other countries did. It is a gift given to those countries by the same people. As you point out, the Bolshevics.

The boleshvics have their head quarters in Russia...its called the Kremlin.

[Awoke]

The bottom line is, Marriage is a Spiritual thing (Not necessarily Religious) and the State should have NOTHING to do with it in any way, shape or form.

IMO.

[Cebu_4_2]

Just pulled the notice of end of child support.

NOTICE OF TITLE IV-D CHILD SUPPORT AND FRIEND OF THE COURT CASE CLOSURE.

Your child support case under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act...

[7th trump]

Just pulled the notice of end of child support.

NOTICE OF TITLE IV-D CHILD SUPPORT AND FRIEND OF THE COURT CASE CLOSURE.

Your child support case under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act...

Nobody notices the elephant in the room with your post Cebu.............you pay child support because you participate in Social Security.
And the kicker is SS is completely voluntary to participate in. Probably wont stop your ex from taking you to court for some kind of support, but thats another discussion. Anyway the state couldnt take you to court because you dont pay....your ex would have to pay a lawyer to do so or she does it alone.

Theres one here who will dissagree with me but we all know he doesnt know much of anything but old acnient law that either doesnt apply to the US or is no longer in use.



Just one more reason why I wage war on Social Security...........

[Cebu_4_2]

Nobody notices the elephant in the room with your post Cebu.............you pay child support because you participate in Social Security.
And the kicker is SS is completely voluntary to participate in. Probably wont stop your ex from taking you to court for some kind of support, but thats another discussion. Anyway the state couldnt take you to court because you dont pay....your ex would have to pay a lawyer to do so or she does it alone.

Theres one here who will dissagree with me but we all know he doesnt know much of anything but old acnient law that either doesnt apply to the US or is no longer in use.



Just one more reason why I wage war on Social Security...........

I just remember you pushing the SS issue and had to pull that notice. Of the 17 years that support was payed back and forth this is the first time I saw ANYTHING referred to with the SS being involved.

Interesting point you bring with the State not being able to take me to court. The State sends notices to appear in front of a magistrate to determine your future. If he os she deems you are guilty for nat paying they will issue a warrant through the court and you will be thrown in jail until you pay.

I believe the State works on behalf of the Ex.

[7th trump]

I just remember you pushing the SS issue and had to pull that notice. Of the 17 years that support was payed back and forth this is the first time I saw ANYTHING referred to with the SS being involved.

Interesting point you bring with the State not being able to take me to court. The State sends notices to appear in front of a magistrate to determine your future. If he os she deems you are guilty for nat paying they will issue a warrant through the court and you will be thrown in jail until you pay.

I believe the State works on behalf of the Ex.

Go look up SS under Title 42. In there you'll find just how much the government has an arm in your business.

Because of SS you-

1. Pay federal and state income taxes from your pay check.

2. The state will enforce child support.

3. You lose most of your Constitutional protections that emanate from the Bill of Rights (no longer considered "We the People").

4. You are given Civil Rights (government privileges) in place of the Bill of Rights (viewed as US citizens).

5. You are deemed "federal personnel" (see 5usc 552a, which is a US citizen).

And the list goes on...........

[Cebu_4_2]

Go look up SS under Title 42. In there you'll find just how much the government has an arm in your business.

Because of SS you-

1. Pay federal and state income taxes from your pay check.

2. The state will enforce child support.

3. You lose most of your Constitutional protections that emanate from the Bill of Rights (no longer considered "We the People").

4. You are given Civil Rights (government privileges) in place of the Bill of Rights (viewed as US citizens).

5. You are deemed "federal personnel" (see 5usc 552a, which is a US citizen).

And the list goes on...........


Appreciate it.

[7th trump]

Appreciate it.

Not a problem...glad I could help!