Comments on: Guest Opinion: Judicial Injustice

By: Concern

Concern — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 23:33:20 +0000

Thanks for your comment Pandora.

By: Pandora

Pandora — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 23:17:29 +0000

I disagree with you on that one, Concern. As the head of the agency that is charged with the oversight of child support, it is VERY relevant to all of us if the AG is not honoring his own paternal responsibilities. If he is, indeed, in arrears, how can he discharge those professional duties with any moral authority? Or does that not matter to us any more?

By: Concern

Concern — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 22:28:10 +0000

PS:

My biggest concern with the AG is WHY DID HE SIGN OFF ON A GOVERNMENT CONTRACT WITH THE GOVERNOR AND A CONVICTED CRIMINAL, WHO PREVIOUSLY DEFRAUDED THE VIRGIN ISLANDS GOVERNMENT. THIS CONTRACT AGREEMENT WITH THE GOVERNOR SPEAKS DIRECTLY TO THE MISUSE OF PUBLIC FUNDS.

I MUST NOTE THAT THE AG WAS DIRECTLY INVOLVED WITH THE FRAUD CASE AGAINST THIS CONVICTED CRIMINAL WILLIAM KOENIG IN 2004.

I believe this guest opinion writer is using this platform to get some sort of personal results that they should seek in family court.

In this matter, the key issue is: DID THE AG FAIL TO APPEAR IN COURT ON A CHILD SUPPORT MODIFICATION CASE.

By: Concern

Concern — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 21:45:22 +0000

I see I am not the only user at this site using the screen name “Concern”. I like how the “ed” was added at the end.

Myself and others responded to this post earlier this morning.

Johnny Says: July 19th, 2009 at 9:50 pm

This website is going to the dogs in a hurry. I like the idea of residents sharing thier sentiments about local politics, but this desire for posters to go into people’s personal life is very unattractive. I sure hope it stops real soon.

***
Busted Says: July 20th, 2009 at 8:06 am

Johnny, I saw a relatively quick response when I sent an email to the address under the contact us tab. Someone posted under my name on comment #50 and it has since been replaced by a note from the administrator. I suggest using the same procedure if you find offensive content.

***

People, we really need to ask our self’s “what is going too far”. I personally think that public officials business is our business especially when their conduct is directly related to misuse of public funds.

In this case, the AG situation does not impact upon his use of public funds.

Believe me, I will be out front with the rest of you waiving good bye to the de Jongh administration when the are finally led off to jail.

Let’s not go to the dogs in the process. I say this purely for all of us to take a step back and not get side tracked.

Our focus should remain on public officials that are using our monies for their own personal gain. The governor and Sen Hill clearly falls within this category. The AG child support issue deals directly with his own personal finances. I agree that he should be responsible like the rest of us. Again, let’s not go to the dogs on this one and turn user of this site away.

Just my input and food for thought. Have a nice evening.

By: VI in Maryland

VI in Maryland — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 16:19:01 +0000

Virgin Islanders, Permanent Citizens, and Citizens, DO YOU REALLY MEAN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, VINCENT FRAZER IS AN OFFENDER OF CHILD NEGLECT (not paying his child support). Isnt the AG the head of the Department of Justice? If so, why is he still there. The Federal Government need to know about this. If this is not so, then this article needs to be removed from the site. It is disgusting.

By: Pandora

Pandora — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:12:00 +0000

Even more than that – should the same person that is derelict in paying their own child support be charged with overseeing the agency that makes sure that ALL the children of the VI receive their child support?

I think not.

By: Concerned

Concerned — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 00:28:35 +0000

The key issue is that a child never asks to be born. If two people decide to have sex, the chance of conceiving a child is very present. It is not only up to the woman to procure protection, the man should be equally responsible, if not more, especially if he knows that he is not willing to provide for the child! We are losing our children to broken families. Needless to say, if your going to chance having a child, then do it with the willingness of taking on the responsibilities associated with raising that child, including providing for it!

By: Ten Again

Ten Again — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:41:21 +0000

Child Advocate,

Your response has been noted. You reasoned that I may not be seeing the big picture. Then, you suggested that I reread the article. So I did. I also examined carefully each question you presented and each statement made. I am taking the liberty to presume that you are a father based on the associations you made.

If the AG is obliged to pay child support, he should pay. But it’s not that simple. I’ll expound on this further below. However, if Ms. DeChabert, the Director of the Division of Paternity and Child Support, believes that the AG is guilty of not paying child support, she can simply turn the matter over to the judicial system and let them handle it. Or is she afraid to lose her job or face other embarrassment about the incompetence of the Division?

Here’s the big picture in a nutshell. Your premise that the Constitution has nothing to do with the matter is flawed. The local law governing child support (Title 16 of the V.I. Code) and the rules and regulations of the Division (16 Virgin Islands Rules and Regulations) have federal components based in large part on Title 5 the Social Security Act of 1935 which mandates compliance by states and territories of the United States under penalty of law. Federal laws are made by the Congress. And all Congressional law is subject to and must be in compliance with the U.S. Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land.

The questions you posed about children and the statistics of the crime rate, while they are salient, they are not relevant to the matter of the AG presumably not paying child support. However, your questions do further a point that I advanced. All the money in the world will not prevent a child from getting involved in criminal activity or other untoward behavior. But having a father around may just do that.

I would suggest that if you are paying child support that you thoroughly familiarize yourself with the relevant laws and case law locally and nationally that address not only child support, but, moreover domestic relations. Investigate what administrative agencies and the judicial system can and cannot do. Read judicial journals, opinions of the courts, and relevant attorney and court blogs on the matter. And most definitely, investigate what are your constitutional rights to be a parent.

By: Pissed in St Thomas

Pissed in St Thomas — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:38:34 +0000

This site is viewed by people all over the globe. Just yesterday I received a called from Colorado from a friend who knows about the AG’s and the child support issue. She said, “you mean after that man is a big shot he is not paying his child support”. We saw the result of the paternity test even though we knew the child was his. He was an attorny then and should not have allowed his good name reach the Department of Justice for child support.

To all the “Big Shot” out there who believed that certain things should not be mentioned on the site. Let it be known that sometimes this is the only way one gets a result. One of these days, if I know how to paste the Governors response to a correspondence to the mother of the child I will do so. If the governor cannot get his AG to pay his child support then……

Again Governor and AG burning shame

By: Child Advocate

Child Advocate — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:23:35 +0000

This is in response to Ten Again. I applaud you for most of what you have said, but I do not think you are looking at the big picture. You should reread the article. The AG knew what he did before he became a public figure. He was appointed his position when the present administration came into office. As an attorney the AG knows the guidelines of the P&CSD. Had he done what he should have done in the first place we would not have been here right now. The Constitution has nothing to do with this. According to the article, the petitioner has been trying to get a modification for two years. You asked how do the “needs” of a child change based on the income of a parent? I take it that you are a parent. I have a few questions for you. Do children remain the same age, size, etc.? How about the cost of living in the V. I. presently? Greed has nothing to do with it. If a child has two parents, one may be struggling, the other does not want to contribute; what will happen to that child? Have you noticed how many children we have out here where their fathers don’t even talk to them? Have you check the statistics of the crime rate. Most of the crimes are committed by young people who are looking for someone to blame for their unhappiness, so you should not say not to judge a man until you have walked in his shoes. I can assure you, myself and many other men have walked in the AG’s shoes. Unfortunately, we are not head of the agency, so we have to pay up while his employees are playing with a child’s future while he is soliciting the sympathy of the people. THINK ABOUT IT!!!!