Meh. Guy already fucked over his family once by disappearing long enough to be declared dead. Since declaring him alive now would just fuck over his family again, I can see why the judge declined. Dude made his own bed. Hope it's comfy.
Alternatively, the judge could have offered the guy a chance to buy his life back by repaying the Social Security payments himself. This way the sumbitch is gonna end up being a burden on the taxpayer one way or another.
He can try to go back to doing odd jobs off the books, but he's a lot more visible now. Couple that with employers' being more likely to check IDs to screen for illegals, and he'll find that harder to do. Add his age and the likelihood anyone's going to hire him for manual labor, plus his history of alcoholism, and he's likely to end up homeless and, at the very least, costing LEO time in picking him up and transporting him to rehab or a homeless shelter.
Are you kidding? The guy is dead! He's got a get-out-of-jail-free card. Arrested? "Sorry, I'm dead. Can't file charges against a dead person." Taxes? Dead folks are done paying taxes. If he gets hungry he just needs to walk thru a supermarket and graze. When the cops try to book him they'll find out he's deceased and the system won't be able to process him.
So, as I say, one way or another he'll be on the taxpayer's dime until his liver gives out. Even then, someone else will foot the bill for his final days in the hospital.
Did you ever watch the 80's version of the Twilight Zone? There was one episode where a guy gets sentenced to "a year of invisibility" for the crime of "coldness". They stuck a mark on his forehead, and everyone he interacted with could "see" him, but they paid him not attention whatsoever. Naturally, he used this to his advantage at first. Since everyone was legally obligated to act like he wasn't there, he went around causing mischief. Of course, that wasn't a blessing for long. But anyway, you're scenario reminded me of that.
What's wrong with the 80's Twilight Zone? It was uneven, but when it hit its stride it had some FANTASTIC stories.
I'm thinking there shouldn't be a statute of limitations on fighting a wrongful death decree...having one just creates embarrassing stupidities in the law like this one.
Or at the very least, there shouldn't be such a limitation for the person who has been decreed dead. If there is incontrovertible proof that a "dead" person is alive, the law should be allowed to recognize that.
That's what I had in mind when I said it, but I guess it could create problems if it isn't spelled out explicitly.
A deadbeat abandons his family, then tries to not only steal money from his underage children, but saddle them with tons of debt? Justice served. I hope the judge threw his gavel at him.
Not in the deadbeat's interest, but this decision is bound to have all kind of strange and awkward consequences down the line. Couldn't the judge just have settled the man with the debt for the social services his family had received?
