• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

You're still legally dead, judge tells Fostoria man

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Donald Eugene Miller Jr. walked out of Hancock County Probate Court on Monday as legally dead as ever.

In 1994, the court ruled that Miller was legally dead, eight years after he disappeared from his Arcadia rental home.

The same judge, Allan Davis, ruled Monday that Miller is still dead, in the eyes of the law. Miller's request for a reversal came well after the three-year legal limit for changing a death ruling, Davis said.

OK, a guy that everybody thought was dead showed up in court to prove that he actually existed. He lost. He is now legally "undead", and the Zombie Apocalypse has begun. LMAO.

Article is here.
 
Easy solution Mr. Miller, shoot the judge.
 
OK, a guy that everybody thought was dead showed up in court to prove that he actually existed. He lost. He is now legally "undead", and the Zombie Apocalypse has begun. LMAO.

Article is here.
And people want the government running healthcare? Yikes!
 
And people want the government running healthcare? Yikes!

It appears that this is the legally correct decision based on what little information is available. For example this means that he successfully upped and disappeared and lived off the grid for a number of years. I'm assuming he doesn't actually have any I.D. He could be a foreign spy or some other individual claiming to be another person.

Instead of chomping at the bit to blame everything on the government, look at the practical reason for why the judge decided that he should remain dead. If this man wanted to be considered "alive" then he had nearly a decade to do so and chose not to claim all the benefits associated with being a living breathing citizen of the United States.
 
It appears that this is the legally correct decision based on what little information is available. For example this means that he successfully upped and disappeared and lived off the grid for a number of years. I'm assuming he doesn't actually have any I.D. He could be a foreign spy or some other individual claiming to be another person.

Instead of chomping at the bit to blame everything on the government, look at the practical reason for why the judge decided that he should remain dead. If this man wanted to be considered "alive" then he had nearly a decade to do so and chose not to claim all the benefits associated with being a living breathing citizen of the United States.

You're suggesting that government should be completely inflexible and never reverse their decisions. They have obvious evidence that they were wrong, they should reverse the decision. Otherwise you can't legally charge this man with any crime.
 
You're suggesting that government should be completely inflexible and never reverse their decisions. They have obvious evidence that they were wrong, they should reverse the decision. Otherwise you can't legally charge this man with any crime.
There appear to be some extenuating circumstances - he was declared dead so his wife could collect social security benefits, and now if he becomes alive she would have to repay, but has not the funds:

Robin Miller declined to testify on Monday.

She said after the court hearing that Donald Miller left the state with hefty child support bills. He was scared of a jail term, she said.

He owed about $26,000 in overdue child support by 1994, she has said.

Robin Miller opposed his request for a change in the death ruling, because she does not want to repay the Social Security benefits. She does not have the money, she said.

Robin Miller said it would be fine if his Social Security number was reinstated. She said she sympathizes with him, but points to his decisions.
 
It appears that this is the legally correct decision based on what little information is available. For example this means that he successfully upped and disappeared and lived off the grid for a number of years. I'm assuming he doesn't actually have any I.D. He could be a foreign spy or some other individual claiming to be another person.

Instead of chomping at the bit to blame everything on the government, look at the practical reason for why the judge decided that he should remain dead. If this man wanted to be considered "alive" then he had nearly a decade to do so and chose not to claim all the benefits associated with being a living breathing citizen of the United States.
If the guy is standing in front of you, there is no excuse for declairing him still-dead. Thats pure bull****.
 
I guess a dead person doesn't have rights, so that could backfire on him.

The point is, the ruling is ridiculous. The government knows he isn't dead, so he shouldn't be. What would be the legal situation if he now went out and murdered somebody? By every definition of the law, a dead man can't murder.
 
There appear to be some extenuating circumstances - he was declared dead so his wife could collect social security benefits, and now if he becomes alive she would have to repay, but has not the funds:
I hate to say it, but this is what should happen, imo. Perhaps the judge could rule that the man is responsible for the fraud and not the ex-wife and therefore responsible for repayment. Either way, the truth is, he is not dead, hasn't been dead, and benefits were paid out that ultimately shouldn't have been.
 
You're suggesting that government should be completely inflexible and never reverse their decisions. They have obvious evidence that they were wrong, they should reverse the decision. Otherwise you can't legally charge this man with any crime.
I'm not even talking about charging him with a crime or not a crime. He's an illegal immigrant as far as I'm concerned and he needs to GTFO of this country. If he can work odd jobs in bum**** FL and Georgia, he can do it again. And if his SS# was cancelled in 1994 then why was he not getting things corrected then?. This clown didn't want his citizenship and so, in a way he doesn't have it. Much like that family that tried to take a boat to Chile, the people who don't want to be here should be free to leave.
 
I'm not even talking about charging him with a crime or not a crime. He's an illegal immigrant as far as I'm concerned and he needs to GTFO of this country. If he can work odd jobs in bum**** FL and Georgia, he can do it again. And if his SS# was cancelled in 1994 then why was he not getting things corrected then?. This clown didn't want his citizenship and so, in a way he doesn't have it. Much like that family that tried to take a boat to Chile, the people who don't want to be here should be free to leave.
What the court did is actualy illegal. The 3rd Geniva Convention bans Persona Non Grata and requires everyone to have legal status. "Dead" is not a recegnised status.

IMO a campromise is to issue him a new identity as with witnis protection.
 
It appears that this is the legally correct decision based on what little information is available. For example this means that he successfully upped and disappeared and lived off the grid for a number of years. I'm assuming he doesn't actually have any I.D. He could be a foreign spy or some other individual claiming to be another person.

Instead of chomping at the bit to blame everything on the government, look at the practical reason for why the judge decided that he should remain dead. If this man wanted to be considered "alive" then he had nearly a decade to do so and chose not to claim all the benefits associated with being a living breathing citizen of the United States.

So the government is like California DMV now. If you don't register the car for a few years the car ceases to exist?

Fingerprints will prove who he was and if he was living off the grid he had every right in the world to do that.

How can a court deny his existence in any way?
 
I hate to say it, but this is what should happen, imo. Perhaps the judge could rule that the man is responsible for the fraud and not the ex-wife and therefore responsible for repayment. Either way, the truth is, he is not dead, hasn't been dead, and benefits were paid out that ultimately shouldn't have been.

Is there any evidence this was a scheme for her to collect the money?

If he knew nothing about what she did, why does he have to pay the Price?

Did the wife know he was alive?

If not there was no fraud there.
 
OK, a guy that everybody thought was dead showed up in court to prove that he actually existed. He lost. He is now legally "undead", and the Zombie Apocalypse has begun. LMAO.

Article is here.


Well I wish somebody would make me legally dead. I could have some serious fun with that sort thing.:cool:
 
Is there any evidence this was a scheme for her to collect the money?

If he knew nothing about what she did, why does he have to pay the Price?

Did the wife know he was alive?

If not there was no fraud there.
The fraud is on the part of the husband, I already said that. Just because he didn't "plan" to defraud the government, though he must have to some extent since he was taking cash for employments under the table which contributed to his "disappearance." So yeah, fraud occurred, it occurred because a yellow belly didn't want to pay child support, and he should be held responsible.
I don't think the wife should be liable for the repayment, the man should be.
 
OK, a guy that everybody thought was dead showed up in court to prove that he actually existed. He lost. He is now legally "undead", and the Zombie Apocalypse has begun. LMAO.

Article is here.

Sounds like a technicality that the judge doesn't have authority over being that he's a judge, not someone who can write or create law on the whim.

Blame your legislature for writing stupid laws Not the guy who is entrusted with upholding them
 
The fraud is on the part of the husband, I already said that. Just because he didn't "plan" to defraud the government, though he must have to some extent since he was taking cash for employments under the table which contributed to his "disappearance." So yeah, fraud occurred, it occurred because a yellow belly didn't want to pay child support, and he should be held responsible.
I don't think the wife should be liable for the repayment, the man should be.

OK, I read the aritcle.

Here is what jumps out at me.

He left him home on 1994. He was drinking alot and probably not thinking of much just doing odd Jobs here and there. Who know if he gave his social security number for those Jobs.

His wife filed for a death certificate and the payments. He knew nothing about that until 2005 11 years after the wife got the ruling.

The wife said he left because of the child support payments, he did not. That was an assumption on her part. He probably did not think of or even know that his wife could have him declared him dead and collect the payments. She could have gotten a job like most people do.

The man left his house in 1986 anddidn't know what was going on back there.

Why should he pay back the SS administration for something he knew nothing about?

I don't see fraud on his part in this. He was living in a bottle for a long time and I doubt he thought of the legal aspects of what he had done.

He still waited another 8 years to ask to be alive again once he found out he was dead.
 
OK, I read the aritcle.

Here is what jumps out at me.

He left him home on 1994. He was drinking alot and probably not thinking of much just doing odd Jobs here and there. Who know if he gave his social security number for those Jobs.

His wife filed for a death certificate and the payments. He knew nothing about that until 2005 11 years after the wife got the ruling.

The wife said he left because of the child support payments, he did not. That was an assumption on her part. He probably did not think of or even know that his wife could have him declared him dead and collect the payments. She could have gotten a job like most people do.

The man left his house in 1986 anddidn't know what was going on back there.

Why should he pay back the SS administration for something he knew nothing about?

I don't see fraud on his part in this. He was living in a bottle for a long time and I doubt he thought of the legal aspects of what he had done.

He still waited another 8 years to ask to be alive again once he found out he was dead.
This whole thing would be resolved if he would step in front of a train.
 
Back
Top Bottom