https://www.rhart.com/blog/am-i-stil...wasnt-married/

Yep everything Crystal did today was so that they could calculate how much child support Tyreek will have to pay

Calls me on what? That I'm throwing thoughts out there? I've never said anything as fact.
I'm also not posting personal information from my own family who had an outside source handle child support due to a mother spending child support money on drugs , once completed the probation and turned her life around and got custody back she was still not given the option of being handed a check from the father.

https://www.divorcesource.com/ds/kan...ort-4596.shtml

Here's that link though.

See how easy it is when you aren't pulling something out of your ass

He does not have to pay alimony since they were never legally married

Yes, eventually one of them will get custody most likely her because the mother gets custody most of the time. She's trying to make sure by the time this is settled, the parenting and child support issues are settled to. It's smart. If you were her lawyer, wouldn't you be advising her to do this too? Or would you tell her to wait to file for custody and child support?

Most cases yes the mother gets custody. This isn't most cases. Many of the posts you and Sauto seem to have trouble getting is a lot of are posting with the thought that custody isnt a gimme for her if the extortion stuff is true and results in possibly jail time

Sorry, bruh. But that doesn't sound like someone throwing out an idea.

"In many cases...?"

"The court mandates...?"


And good job not posting that personal information.

Basically, you tried to take your own personal experience and turn it into case law/precedent. And you're STILL arguing as if you know these laws for fact, re: post 2586.

Yikes.

If it's hard to realize why context is important after all this than yes a lot of these posts seem off the wall. In context lots of them make perfect sense. Think outside the box a little, sure would have helped KK and KCTV5

And you seem to have trouble understanding that Marty is the only one who has brought up extortion at all and he isn't the most reliable source.



Can we just agree to go off info we all know to be true or to go off what Terez has reported because he's the only reliable reporter in all of this. Until he says anything about the FBI investigating Chrystal for extortion, can we all assume it's bullshit because it most likely is?

I am quoting this post to show my agreement with it.

Sincerely,

OTW15

Because he has been wrong on more than he has been right? ...

I’m sorry but it makes no sense for her to force a test about the children’s father if she didn’t know without a doubt he is when she is seeking child support from him.

Who?

What do I care?

All I know is that those photos/videos of Crystal/Tyreek entering court hand in hand did not age well.

She blinked.

Soren Petro mentioned the Espinals might be trying to frame Hill.

What do you suppose their motive is, genious?!

Tim Grunhard mentioned Tyreek as a potential victim.

How do you think he could be a victim, genious?

ROFL

You are all wilfully ignorant about this because Marty has become the Tyreek Hill of this forum.

You are all fake news.