Dang, did he ever marry the wrong chick. Ouch.

Can you imagine the depths of hatred that would cause someone to leave an ex-spouse sitting in jail for a decade? Dang.

Another person might say:
"Can you imagine how awful he must've been that she wouldn't care if he sat in jail for 10 years. Boy she must've picked one horrible awful husband."
;) haha.
There's 2 sides to every divorce.

And I bet there's more to this story than sensational news would be interested in providing.

He may well be the World's Worst Asshole. The problem I have is that if he can get ten years for contempt, so can anyone. I think there should be a limit.

I have contempt for such an outrageous sentence -- not even a sentence, just languishing there indefinitely, an outright violation of due process. Yes, we certainly need a limit.

I'd say his choice of women is just as bad as his choice of attorneys.

Being lawyer himself, couldn't he have figured out a better plan of action during all that time? Or at least, found a better lawyer?

Oh...we know all about what Mr.Chadwick is going through. How we know? We live next door to his ex-wife Barbara Chadwick. My husband and I have lived in the town of Thomaston for twenty-four years and Barbara Chadwick/aka Applegate had all kinds of suits against us(FALSE ALLIGATIONS) She and her new hubby thought they could come into a small town and brag about their wealth, dig for more money and rule us. Well, what they didn't know is that we are a tight knit little town and she thinks she can fool us like she is with the PA Judge. Our Lawyer saw right through her just as many in our town. The Judge on Chadwick/Applegate vs. Chadwick is so wrapped tight around Barbara's finger that it shows how weak the Judicial system can be. People think Mainers are backwards and stupid...Oh Ms.Applegate now knows she can't move our mountains. She sure plays quite a tune with Pennsylvania that must be a real stupid place to live! If they can't see through her negative ways and check on her legal history of taken people to Court...Wow! POOR Mr.Chadwick is stuck in the spiders web! We hope and pray for Mr.Chadwicks release. It is such a terrible thing to think that any sane decent human being can think that she/he can have so much power over someone to keep them squirming like a worm on a hook...it must be a personal thing with the individuals who have consumed such false power.

LESA KITCHING
THOMASTON MAINE

Wouldn't you know it! Alito's in this Stew Also:

Beatty Chadwick has been in jail in for over TEN YEARS on a divorce case. Where? In China, Iran, or a secret gulag in Siberia? No, he's in a Pennsylvania County Jail.

He was never charged with any crime. Judge Alito wrote the 3rd Circuit decision affirming his civil incarceration. Chadwick's ex-wife said he hid marital assets off-shore. A county court judge ordered Chadwick jailed until he returns his life's earnings to the court as community property funds. Chadwick maintains he can't comply with the court's order. His ex says he can. Since no trial was ever conducted on the facts of this case, this man is being held on a combination of "he says/she says affidavits," local gossip, and a whole lot of otherwise legally inadmissible hearsay. Bottom line: he's been railroaded by the local judges in the town of Media, Pennsylvania.

Chadwick's attorneys have argued that 10 years in a county jail, absent criminal charges and a jury verdict is excessive and that he should be released because he's already given his "pound of flesh."

After seven years, the case went to a US district court judge (Norma Shapiro, Eastern District, PA) on a writ of habeas corpus. Shapiro ordered Chadwick released. A stay was granted to Jean Crowther Chadwick so she could appeal to the Third Circuit.

Judge Alito wrote the decision overturning Judge Shapiro's findings. Alito wrote an opinion upholding the right of the state to keep a debtor in jail for an "indefinite period of time..." even for life. It was obvious that if after all those years Chadwick didn't comply, then he wouldn't or couldn't. It was also likely under that ruling that Chadwick might do life "for divorce," and at the age of 68 (battling leukemia) he could well die in jail.

Bypassing all the due process violations Chadwick raised, Alito based the court's decision on a footnote to an obscure labor union case and decided to keep Chadwick imprisoned. In effect, Alito ruled against the fundamental rights our Constitution mandates: basics like a trial, jury, and a punishment that fits the "crime." Instead, Alito chose to hold a dying debtor another three plus years and still running.

Our Constitution is a what we as Americans live by and under. Although judges sometimes stretch and mold its words to fit the case and the times, from a fair reading of the document it seems debtor's prisons were abolished at the First Constitutional Convention. That too is the law, as much as the order in the Chadwick divorce case. The draconian punishment inflicted on this civil detainee in the guise of "strict constructionism" creates the likelihood of a never-ending nightmare for any arrestee whether under the Patriot Act or a divorce decree.

There is no doubt that Alito, the judge, is a craftsman with the law. But the Chadwick decision gives us an opportunity to peek into the soul of Alito, the man. It appears that when it comes to civil rights, individual freedom, and constitutional intent he just doesn't see the forest for the trees... Alito could be the swing vote on our highest court for a good part of this century. There will be no appeals and there the buck will stop. Can we afford to squander our hard-earned freedom by putting our trust in a judge who uses one standard to measure his own compliance with the law and another for the rest us? Ask Beatty.

T. Hazelton
Media, PA

Comments: How contemptuous is contempt?

Wouldn't you know it! Alito's in this Stew Also:

Beatty Chadwick has been in jail in for over TEN YEARS on a divorce case. Where? In China, Iran, or a secret gulag in Siberia? No, he's in a Pennsylvania County Jail.

He was never charged with any crime. Judge Alito wrote the 3rd Circuit decision affirming his civil incarceration. Chadwick's ex-wife said he hid marital assets off-shore. A county court judge ordered Chadwick jailed until he returns his life's earnings to the court as community property funds. Chadwick maintains he can't comply with the court's order. His ex says he can. Since no trial was ever conducted on the facts of this case, this man is being held on a combination of "he says/she says affidavits," local gossip, and a whole lot of otherwise legally inadmissible hearsay. Bottom line: he's been railroaded by the local judges in the town of Media, Pennsylvania.

Chadwick's attorneys have argued that 10 years in a county jail, absent criminal charges and a jury verdict is excessive and that he should be released because he's already given his "pound of flesh."

After seven years, the case went to a US district court judge (Norma Shapiro, Eastern District, PA) on a writ of habeas corpus. Shapiro ordered Chadwick released. A stay was granted to Jean Crowther Chadwick so she could appeal to the Third Circuit.

Judge Alito wrote the decision overturning Judge Shapiro's findings. Alito wrote an opinion upholding the right of the state to keep a debtor in jail for an "indefinite period of time..." even for life. It was obvious that if after all those years Chadwick didn't comply, then he wouldn't or couldn't. It was also likely under that ruling that Chadwick might do life "for divorce," and at the age of 68 (battling leukemia) he could well die in jail.

Bypassing all the due process violations Chadwick raised, Alito based the court's decision on a footnote to an obscure labor union case and decided to keep Chadwick imprisoned. In effect, Alito ruled against the fundamental rights our Constitution mandates: basics like a trial, jury, and a punishment that fits the "crime." Instead, Alito chose to hold a dying debtor another three plus years and still running.

Our Constitution is a what we as Americans live by and under. Although judges sometimes stretch and mold its words to fit the case and the times, from a fair reading of the document it seems debtor's prisons were abolished at the First Constitutional Convention. That too is the law, as much as the order in the Chadwick divorce case. The draconian punishment inflicted on this civil detainee in the guise of "strict constructionism" creates the likelihood of a never-ending nightmare for any arrestee whether under the Patriot Act or a divorce decree.

There is no doubt that Alito, the judge, is a craftsman with the law. But the Chadwick decision gives us an opportunity to peek into the soul of Alito, the man. It appears that when it comes to civil rights, individual freedom, and constitutional intent he just doesn't see the forest for the trees... Alito could be the swing vote on our highest court for a good part of this century. There will be no appeals and there the buck will stop. Can we afford to squander our hard-earned freedom by putting our trust in a judge who uses one standard to measure his own compliance with the law and another for the rest us? Ask Beatty.

T. Hazelton
Media, PA

Comments: How contemptuous is contempt?
posted by Eric at 02:47 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Wouldn't you know it! Alito's in this Stew Also:

Beatty Chadwick has been in jail in for over TEN YEARS on a divorce case. Where? In China, Iran, or a secret gulag in Siberia? No, he's in a Pennsylvania County Jail.

He was never charged with any crime. Judge Alito wrote the 3rd Circuit decision affirming his civil incarceration. Chadwick's ex-wife said he hid marital assets off-shore. A county court judge ordered Chadwick jailed until he returns his life's earnings to the court as community property funds. Chadwick maintains he can't comply with the court's order. His ex says he can. Since no trial was ever conducted on the facts of this case, this man is being held on a combination of "he says/she says affidavits," local gossip, and a whole lot of otherwise legally inadmissible hearsay. Bottom line: he's been railroaded by the local judges in the town of Media, Pennsylvania.

Chadwick's attorneys have argued that 10 years in a county jail, absent criminal charges and a jury verdict is excessive and that he should be released because he's already given his "pound of flesh."

After seven years, the case went to a US district court judge (Norma Shapiro, Eastern District, PA) on a writ of habeas corpus. Shapiro ordered Chadwick released. A stay was granted to Jean Crowther Chadwick so she could appeal to the Third Circuit.

Judge Alito wrote the decision overturning Judge Shapiro's findings. Alito wrote an opinion upholding the right of the state to keep a debtor in jail for an "indefinite period of time..." even for life. It was obvious that if after all those years Chadwick didn't comply, then he wouldn't or couldn't. It was also likely under that ruling that Chadwick might do life "for divorce," and at the age of 68 (battling leukemia) he could well die in jail.

Bypassing all the due process violations Chadwick raised, Alito based the court's decision on a footnote to an obscure labor union case and decided to keep Chadwick imprisoned. In effect, Alito ruled against the fundamental rights our Constitution mandates: basics like a trial, jury, and a punishment that fits the "crime." Instead, Alito chose to hold a dying debtor another three plus years and still running.

Our Constitution is a what we as Americans live by and under. Although judges sometimes stretch and mold its words to fit the case and the times, from a fair reading of the document it seems debtor's prisons were abolished at the First Constitutional Convention. That too is the law, as much as the order in the Chadwick divorce case. The draconian punishment inflicted on this civil detainee in the guise of "strict constructionism" creates the likelihood of a never-ending nightmare for any arrestee whether under the Patriot Act or a divorce decree.

There is no doubt that Alito, the judge, is a craftsman with the law. But the Chadwick decision gives us an opportunity to peek into the soul of Alito, the man. It appears that when it comes to civil rights, individual freedom, and constitutional intent he just doesn't see the forest for the trees... Alito could be the swing vote on our highest court for a good part of this century. There will be no appeals and there the buck will stop. Can we afford to squander our hard-earned freedom by putting our trust in a judge who uses one standard to measure his own compliance with the law and another for the rest us? Ask Beatty.

T. Hazelton
Media, PA

Comments: How contemptuous is contempt?

Beatty Chadwick has been in jail in for over TEN YEARS on a divorce case. Where? In China, Iran, or a secret gulag in Siberia? No, he's in a Pennsylvania County Jail.

He was never charged with any crime. Judge Alito wrote the 3rd Circuit decision affirming his civil incarceration. Chadwick's ex-wife said he hid marital assets off-shore. A county court judge ordered Chadwick jailed until he returns his life's earnings to the court as community property funds. Chadwick maintains he can't comply with the court's order. His ex says he can. Since no trial was ever conducted on the facts of this case, this man is being held on a combination of "he says/she says affidavits," local gossip, and a whole lot of otherwise legally inadmissible hearsay. Bottom line: he's been railroaded by the local judges in the town of Media, Pennsylvania.

Chadwick's attorneys have argued that 10 years in a county jail, absent criminal charges and a jury verdict is excessive and that he should be released because he's already given his "pound of flesh."

After seven years, the case went to a US district court judge (Norma Shapiro, Eastern District, PA) on a writ of habeas corpus. Shapiro ordered Chadwick released. A stay was granted to Jean Crowther Chadwick so she could appeal to the Third Circuit.

Judge Alito wrote the decision overturning Judge Shapiro's findings. Alito wrote an opinion upholding the right of the state to keep a debtor in jail for an "indefinite period of time..." even for life. It was obvious that if after all those years Chadwick didn't comply, then he wouldn't or couldn't. It was also likely under that ruling that Chadwick might do life "for divorce," and at the age of 68 (battling leukemia) he could well die in jail.

Bypassing all the due process violations Chadwick raised, Alito based the court's decision on a footnote to an obscure labor union case and decided to keep Chadwick imprisoned. In effect, Alito ruled against the fundamental rights our Constitution mandates: basics like a trial, jury, and a punishment that fits the "crime." Instead, Alito chose to hold a dying debtor another three plus years and still running.

Our Constitution is a what we as Americans live by and under. Although judges sometimes stretch and mold its words to fit the case and the times, from a fair reading of the document it seems debtor's prisons were abolished at the First Constitutional Convention. That too is the law, as much as the order in the Chadwick divorce case. The draconian punishment inflicted on this civil detainee in the guise of "strict constructionism" creates the likelihood of a never-ending nightmare for any arrestee whether under the Patriot Act or a divorce decree.

There is no doubt that Alito, the judge, is a craftsman with the law. But the Chadwick decision gives us an opportunity to peek into the soul of Alito, the man. It appears that when it comes to civil rights, individual freedom, and constitutional intent he just doesn't see the forest for the trees... Alito could be the swing vote on our highest court for a good part of this century. There will be no appeals and there the buck will stop. Can we afford to squander our hard-earned freedom by putting our trust in a judge who uses one standard to measure his own compliance with the law and another for the rest us? Ask Beatty.

T. Hazelton
Media, PA