The BBC also interviewed Mark Rimmer, the superintendent registrar for the London Borough of Brent, regarding sham marriages. He said that if the parties have the right paperwork then he has to marry them. However, whilst filming a Pakistani man and a Lithuanian woman come in. She can't speak English and he can't speak Lithuanian. Unsurprisingly, this raises suspicion and, sure enough, the 'groom' heads for the exit alone, rather than face questioning:
We don't call them 'alimony arrearages' over here, we call them 'maintenance arrears'. Whatever, eighty year-old Joe Iannicelli from Georgia, USA, refused to pay them on principle. Joe was actually divorced no less than thirty-eight years ago, and the arrears now amount to some $68,000. He claims that his ex-wife voided the contract for alimony when she "abandoned" their two sons, then 15 and 16, in the 1970s. Unsurprisingly, this argument did not cut any ice with the judge, who committed Joe to prison for contempt.
Social networking in general, and Facebook in particular, has been blamed for an increasing number of marital breakdowns. However, there is another issue here, one that has been picked up by Daniel Clement at the New York Divorce Report. As he says, the advent of social networking has made breaking up harder to do - now, couples routinely exchange passwords to email or online accounts (both social and financial) which can obviously lead to serious problems upon relationship breakdown. Clearly, at the very least, lawyers should now advise their clients to change all passwords.
Finally, congratulations to Maryland divorce lawyer James J Gross for getting the word 'pettifogger' into one of his letters, something I sadly never achieved in my career. I'm not sure whether James is aware of the alternative definition of "a petty small rate lawyer" (see above). Whatever, he is now looking for the chance to use the word 'flibbertigibbet'...


1 comments:
Thank you for taking the time to comment on this post. Constructive comments are always welcome, even if they do not coincide with my views! Please note, however, that comments will be removed or not published if I consider that:
* They are not relevant to the subject of this post; or
* They are (or are possibly) defamatory; or
* They breach court reporting rules; or
* They contain abusive or threatening language; or
* They contain 'spam' advertisements (including links to any commercial websites).