 First, how did I come in contact with the issue? Like so many men and boys, I was lied to. I was duped. I was snookered. I was flugabooved. I was played by an ex-girlfriend who she said these words that I will model after Chris Rock the actor. She said, that's your baby. And it turned out, 11 years later I found out it was a huge lie. That lie was so big, man, you couldn't fit it in this room. But if you've heard anything about intimate partner relationships, often men and boys are taken advantage of in this way because we don't know that the child's mother has one or more intimate partners during the window of conception that she said he did it. And the family court operates in such a way that if she said you did it, you did it. You are presumed guilty and then it is on you to prove to the contrary. And there's some problems with that. So what's the problem? To have any kind of conversation, we got to have some kind of common defining of terms. I think that would be reasonably fair. Paternity fraud is when the mother or legal guardian of a child, they file a lawsuit claiming or alleging that the male is the biological father of the child. Look, key words here, without advising him, without advising the government officials in the courts that someone else could be the father. This is not an accident. And out of all of the people who were involved, there's only one person in that scenario who knows there are other potential paternity candidate that exists. And who is she? The child's mother. And she knowingly and willingly conceals the existence of that other guy or other man from the guy who she might want really hard to be the father. That's the guy she's in love with. And he's already into the relationship with her. And she wants to bring him back into the relationship using a bait baby. If you've ever heard of fishing, you can't catch fish without bait, right? Well, how do you get access to the guy's resources and get the full weight and enforcement of the court system all the way up to the Attorney General's office in a state? If you can get that guy to believe that he's the father and you can get him to put his name on a document based on that belief, it'll get you access that is enforceable under pay or go to jail. That doesn't sound like a real good deal when presented that way. And some women groups have hated me for saying it like that. But you know, a lie dressed up like a pig with lipstick on, it's still a pig, right? You can't blame me about the presentation when the facts don't always agree with your feelings. And what I say to the rad feminists, the facts don't care about your feelings. The facts are, there is no current law that requires a full and truthful disclosure of all material facts to who? To the alleged father, key word, alleged, presumed, was told he was. Now, my father was come from a generation where they had this little very famous song that says, smile and faces sometimes don't tell the truth, which is amazing to me because when I got to court, they insisted, I mean, all but demanded that I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. See if I had kind of like played shady with my financial affidavit and say, you know what? I didn't really make six figures, Your Honor. No, I didn't. No, I didn't. I did not make that much money, Your Honor. I only made $1,000 the whole year and therefore you should base my child support on that $1,000 for the whole year. Now, as asinine as that sounds, you're like, man, there's no way you could pitch that idea and get away with it. But yet a child's mother who has to submit no proof that a husband, boyfriend, fiance, one nightstand, she is not required to submit any proof that that guy is a father. That says to me there's potential for fraud. Listen to what some of appellate court judges have said. And this is the United States Supreme Court of the United States. In the field of contested paternity, the truth is so often obscured because social pressures create a conspiracy of silence or worse, deliberate falsity, a.k.a. lying on purpose. You say, well, how does this apply? The courts don't ask the mothers the relevant question. The relevant question is, did you have intimate relations with anyone else beside the accused during your window of conception? They don't want to ask that question. Why? That would narrow the field of people who she can point at. What else the judge said? The person that alleged to be the father has a legitimate interest, a legitimate interest in not being declared the father of a child. He had no hand in bringing into the world. It is important to him that he not be required to provide support and direct financial assistance to one not his child. I think that's a right decision. And since it's coming from the United States Supreme Court, or better yet we refer to SCOTUS as Supreme Court of the United States, that is a 1987 decision. When I was doing legal research to try to help my case in my own state, the appellate court in Georgia said, not only has the putative father been cock-holded, the law adds injury to insult by requiring him to pay child support even after he established he is not the biological father. He has been framed for a pregnancy that he did not commit and he has proof that he did not commit. He has legally admissible proof. He's not the father. He never was the father. He will never be the biological father. And doesn't matter how much the child's mother cries and says, but I believed he was my baby's dad. I want him to be the baby's daddy. I've gotten used to getting that $330,000 a month check. And you think that number is imaginary. I'll show you later in the slide. There is a guy who actually ended up paying $330,000 per month for child support and the key had turned out to not be his and he was just as ticked about it as I was about being sued for $1,800 a month. Men do not like being taken advantage of. We don't like being manipulated. We don't like being threatened. We don't like having an ultimatum of you either pay it or you go to jail. And once the balance exceeds $2,501 you are facing a felony prison conviction for what they call child abandonment. Does that sound like a good deal to anybody? The state loves it. It is a rather revenue generating activity. So to create fiction in this matter does not make the male the biological father of the child. It simply makes him the victim of the law. While the courts may preach their false policy, they lose the respect of any citizen with common sense. The legislature should address this issue. Man, when I saw that statement from a appellate court judge, I said, hallelujah, somebody with some common sense. The judge got it right. So guess what I did? I took the issue before my state lawmakers and we got the law changed with the full legislative support of the House of Representatives 163 to 0. And in my House of Senate, 45 to 5, and the governor who I had brought the issue to a year prior, he told me a year prior to that he says there's nothing I can do about it. I understand what you're saying. However, unless legislation comes across my desk, even though I am the leader of terms of the executive branch of the state government, there's nothing I can do until a bill comes across my desk. I said, I got you. I'll be back. And in one year, thank God Almighty for his help and his favor. In one year, we came back while at the same time my own case was going up to the United States Supreme Court. And I watched the governor sign it in the law with the judge from my case there and the judge on my case apologized and said his previous ruling was wrong. How's that for some poetic justice? Now mind you, while we're having that conversation, I'm still facing that pay or go to jail order. And this judge can no longer rule on the case. But he wanted to get, I guess maybe some conscious matter, you know, and when my lawyers told me he wanted to talk to me, he was not on my list of people I ever wanted to talk to again. But I figured if he was big enough to come to the signing of the bill, I was going to be man enough to hear what he had to say. He stuck his hand out and apologized and said I was wrong and I'm glad that the law has changed. That further emboldened me. That emboldened me so much so that once the United States Supreme Court had two meetings on my case, they made me send them a copy of the Georgia law and then they sent me back a letter with one line and it said petition to grant certiori denied. I was not exactly the happiest fellow that you could believe right then. And according to most people, you can't do anything after you've appealed to the highest court in the land. Now, there are some radical people like myself who believe there is a court that's higher than the United States Supreme Court. There's a court that's so high that every judge is going to have to bow down to this court. And that's going to be the court where God is the king. And at that moment in time, I believe he reminded me of some things that I had written into the law and I remember what I wrote in. I was like, wait a minute, hold on, this case is not over. Using the things that I wrote into the Georgia law with my state lawmakers, I went back to court and on February 6, 2003, I won. I won my case as the first person using the law and walked out with two television cameras in the courtroom saying to myself, free at last, free at last. Thank God almighty, I'm free at last. My family's not going to risk me going to prison. My newborn baby and my wife at home are not going to become homeless. And with the stroke of a pen, it wiped out all of the payments that I had not paid. And it wiped out all of the future payments. Because I wasn't willing to agree to pay anything once I knew the truth. And it gave the mother 30 days to get my name removed off the birth certificate and provide me with a certified copy. But I did say this to her. I said, listen. My family and I, we love your daughter. We would love to continue to see her and we'll do things for her directly, but not put money in your hands. She said, if you're not willing to stay under the court order, you can't see her unless you pay for supervised visitation. I'm like, man, there's no reasoning here. And I declined that offer because I would have to pay for supervised visitation. So I haven't seen the child. She is now a college graduate. And somehow she is angry with me for exposing paternity fraud worldwide. Thanks to me being on the show, Dr. Phil's show called Parent Trap with one of my clients, a doctor whose wife lied to him, had an affair with her co-worker.