Imagine yourself driving through a traffic stop and being pulled over and a law enforcement officer telling you that you’re a deadbeat dad and you are now under arrest. How would you feel completely confused knowing this is happening to you and you have no kids? This same situation happen to a man named Carnell Alexander.
Carnell had been made a dad by default when his ex-applied for welfare benefits and listed him as a father. Who in the right mind would claim a father knowing the facts that they are not.
According to the documents that were filed with the court, it was declared by a process server that Carnell Alexander was given in person a notice of hearing from a previous location in which he lived at. However, Carnell was not present at this home on the date that this was claimed to have happen. This was something that was impossible. How is it possible for a man to be incarcerated for a crime that began with a lie?
Carnell had gone to the Third Judicial Circuit Court expecting that a judge could assist him in fixing this dilemma. However, the results were not as planned. It was stated by the court that Mr. Alexander had waited two and half decades before addressing this matter. The judge was appalled because Mr. Alexander had been to court over a dozen times and never filed a motion to set aside the acknowledgement of parentage.
If you are involved in a case in which someone falsely accuses you to be a father of a child it is mandatory to file within three years of the child’s birth, which Carnell failed to do.
Because this case is more than two and a half decades old, the judge stated that Mr. Alexander must pay this $30k. Carnell Alexander states that there is valid reason for him not filing this motion sooner. First, he claims when he originally heard he was the alleged father, he had recently been released from prison, causing him to have no income and no savings and the education of an 8th grader. This made is extremely difficult for him to find a lawyer to assist him in this situation. Carnell also said that even though he may not have filed a motion that is required by the bureaucratic court system, he did guarantee than Friend of the Court workers and judges were aware that he was not the father of this child, had never been in this child’s life and did not want to be liable.
It has now been brought to attention that the real father of the child has been in the life of the child, which is now an adult. However, Carnell is still obligated to pay the $30,000 in child support, even though the warrant for his arrest was dropped.
Carnell states that according to the fine print of the law he may owe money, but how is this appropriate for an innocent man to be treated as if he were guilty? The law will never fit perfectly into an individual’s situation, why can’t the courts use common sense in order to treat each case properly.