Letters

Letters 08-31-2015

Inalienable Rights This is a response to the “No More State Theatre” in your August 24th edition. I think I will not be the only response to this pathetic and narrow-minded letter that seems rather out of place in the northern Michigan that I know. To think we will not be getting your 25 cents for the movie you refused to see, but more importantly we will be without your “two cents” on your thoughts of a marriage at the State Theatre...

Enthusiastically Democratic Since I was one of the approximately 160 people present at when Senator Debbie Stabenow spoke on August 14 in Charlevoix, I was surprised to read in a letter to Northern Express that there was a “rather muted” response to Debbie’s announcement that she has endorsed Hillary Clinton for president...

Not Hurting I surely think the State Theatre will survive not having the homophobic presence of Colleen Smith and her family attend any matinees. I think “Ms.” Smith might also want to make sure that any medical personnel, bank staff, grocery store staff, waiters and/or waitress, etc. are not homosexual before accepting any service or product from them...

Stay Home I did not know whether to laugh or cry when I read the letter of the extremely homophobic, “disgusted” writer. She now refuses to patronize the State Theatre because she evidently feels that its confines have been poisoned by the gay wedding ceremony held there...

Keep Away In response to Colleen Smith of Cadillac who refused to bring her family to the State Theatre because there was a gay wedding there: Keep your 25 cents and your family out of Traverse City...

Celebrating Moore And A Theatre I was 10 years old when I had the privilege to see my first film at the State Theatre. I will never forget that experience. The screen was almost the size of my bedroom I shared with my older sister. The bursting sounds made me believe I was part of the film...

Outdated Thinking This letter is in response to Colleen Smith. She made public her choice to no longer go to the State Theater due to the fact that “some homosexuals” got married there. I’m not outraged by her choice; we don’t need any more hateful, self-righteous bigots in our town. She can keep her 25 cents...

Mackinac Pipeline Must Be Shut Down Crude oil flowing through Enbridge’s 60-yearold pipeline beneath the Mackinac Straits and the largest collection of fresh water on the planet should be a serious concern for every resident of the USA and Canada. Enbridge has a very “accident” prone track record...

Your Rights To Colleen, who wrote about the State Theatre: Let me thank you for sharing your views; I think most of us are well in support of the first amendment, because as you know- it gives everyone the opportunity to express their opinions. I also wanted to thank Northern Express for not shutting down these types of letters right at the source but rather giving the community a platform for education...

No Role Model [Fascinating Person from last week’s issue] Jada quoted: “I want to be a role model for girls who are interested in being in the outdoors.” I enjoy being in the outdoors, but I don’t want to kill animals for trophy...

Home · Articles · News · Region Watch · Vet must share disablility...
. . . .

Vet must share disablility with ex-wife

Anne Stanton - June 9th, 2008
A Manistee County judge ruled recently that a portion of a Vietnam veteran’s disability benefits can be considered when determining the amount of alimony paid to an ex-spouse.
Veteran Calvin Murphy had argued in court that his disability benefits should be off limits to his ex-wife, but 19th Circuit Judge James Batzer disagreed.
Murphy, 61, testified in the trial that he served a harrowing 5 1/2 months in Vietnam and mistakenly believed for decades that he had killed a fellow soldier during a North Vietnamese attack. He was wracked by guilt that his entire squadron had been ambushed, shot in the head, and found with cards in their mouths that said “Yankee go home.” He was not with his squadron at the time of the ambush.
Murphy said he was torn up emotionally from the experience—during his 24-year marriage to Karen Murphy, he sometimes slept with a gun, was tormented by nightmares, and used drugs and alcohol. In the early 1990s, he stopped drinking and sought treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder.
Calvin’s attorney, Wendy Divozzo of Cadillac, argued that federal law says that a veteran’s benefits belong solely to the person disabled, and should never be diverted to a third party under any circumstances.
Karen Murphy’s attorney, Connie Krusniak of Ludington, said that other state and federal laws across the country say that disability pay is for the benefit of the veteran and the family, and that those laws are backed by rulings in previous cases. Judge Batzer agreed with her interpretation.
Krusniak argued that an ex-spouse of a military veteran deserves something after supporting her spouse through years of emotional upheaval arising from the disability of post traumatic stress disorder, which is expressed in nightmares, depression, drug and alcohol abuse. A spouse also deserves something for supporting the partner through doctor appointments, rehab and physical handicaps.
Judge Batzer based his judgment, in part, on family law and the income of Calvin and Karen, and the amount of money each needed to survive.
Calvin Murphy, who is unemployed, collects a total of $3886 each month, including $2,400 for military disability, $1,186 in Social Security disability, and $300 in disability income through the National Park Service where he used to work, according to court records. That amount will go down significantly after the divorce.
Karen Murphy, who is also unemployed, collects about $700 per month in disability.
Judge Batzer awarded Karen $800 a month indefinitely until her death or until she remarries. That judgment leaves Calvin $3,195 a month on which to live.
Judge Batzer was clear in his ruling that military disability benefits should be used as a basis for alimony, or what’s now called spousal support.
Part of the problem, attorney Divozzo said, is that state and federal law are contradictory and unclear, and that rulings have varied around the country.
“I am telling Calvin and the other vets that if they want to help the young veterans coming back from Iraq or Afgahnistan, to tell them not to get married unless they have a prenuptial that specifically excludes future VA benefits or service connected benefits. That’s their best shot at having some certainty absent a change in law or a clear ruling that a spouse may not claim those,” Divozzo said.
Krusniak declined comment on the ruling.
Calvin, who has already spent jail time for refusing to pay spousal benefits awarded in the first go-round of the case two years ago, said he will appeal the decision. He has has vowed to give up all his disability benefits if he loses on appeal and “take the homeless life.”
If he is ordered to jail, he said that he’ll request service in the Middle East.
“This whole matter has destroyed my life. I have my home up for sale, and the stress is starting to take its toll on me, but I will keep fighting. I want to go as far as I can and try my best to turn this law around where it is the same everywhere for all vets around the country,” he said
“When a soldier hangs up his or her uniform, things change. You are treated like an old pair of shoes.”


 
  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
 

 

 
 
 
Close
Close
Close