PDA

View Full Version : Randy in the Papers this morning



Davios
03-28-06, 11:29 AM
I suppose this belongs here. I just had to bring up how much the media in New York genuinely disgusts me. Apparantly Randy had a kid prior to being married, and is now having a dispute with the child's mother in regards to financial support.

Where does all of this end up? Front page of the Post and the Daily News. The fact that the city's papers can get away with prying into someone's private life to that extenet simply baffles me. That a writer might want to blast Randy for a specific performance is fine by me, journalists are entitled to do that. The fact, however, that this guy's family can just be made a mockery of on the front page, not back, of two of the biggest papers in the country is ridiculous.

goin for 27
03-28-06, 11:37 AM
Agreed. With all that is going on in the world, something like this belongs in the sports section somewhere. That's it.

I am a little sensitive to it, as my father bolted when I was fairly young, and took all his cash with him. I prefer to see someone who fathered a child step up and do the right thing. I don't know all the particulars here, but $60k per year with the money that RJ makes is well beyond peanuts.

You can read the particulars here.... www.thesmokinggun.com (http://www.thesmokinggun.com)

Maynerd
03-28-06, 11:49 AM
He's been paying $81,000 a year for 16 years, and now the Mom wants more??! Sure, RJ can afford it, but what has the Mom been doing with all that money? I'm usually the first one to bitch about the media, but on this one, I blame the Mother. She was all but blackmailing RJ. "Pay me more or I'll take this to the papers." Randy just beat her to the punch.

The big loser in this whole thing will be the girl. It's really pretty sad. And, I agree completely that this doesn't belong splashed all over page 1. It's a non-story from 16 years ago.

Davios
03-28-06, 11:54 AM
The thing is, none of us know the actual situation. Judging by Randy's complaint it seems as though he feels the money is not being given back to the daughter. He might have some reasons to feel that way, which quite frankly we do not know about. That's why the fact that this is being thrown out on the cover of the Post and the News is absurd, because they know nothing about the situation other than the fact that Randy is involved.

MaineSoxFan
03-28-06, 12:02 PM
He's been paying $81,000 a year for 16 years, and now the Mom wants more??! Sure, RJ can afford it, but what has the Mom been doing with all that money? I'm usually the first one to bitch about the media, but on this one, I blame the Mother. She was all but blackmailing RJ. "Pay me more or I'll take this to the papers." Randy just beat her to the punch.

The big loser in this whole thing will be the girl. It's really pretty sad. And, I agree completely that this doesn't belong splashed all over page 1. It's a non-story from 16 years ago.

I wouldn't put it on the front page either, though I was under the impression that both those NY papers were more tabloids than anything else, though I don't read NY papers other than the Times so I don't know.

As for blaming the mother in this, how do you even get there? She was getting 69k a year from RJ, $5,750 a month not 81k. And I didn't see any evidence that she was "blackmailing" him or saying she would take it to the paper. He brought the lawsuit to recover money already paid, $71k plus interest.

I don't know whether he is right or wrong, but I don't see how you can blame this on the mother somehow.

Yankees1962
03-28-06, 12:04 PM
I wouldn't put it on the front page either, though I was under the impression that both those NY papers were more tabloids than anything else, though I don't read NY papers other than the Times so I don't know.

As for blaming the mother in this, how do you even get there? She was getting 69k a year from RJ, $5,750 a month not 81k. And I didn't see any evidence that she was "blackmailing" him or saying she would take it to the paper. He brought the lawsuit to recover money already paid, $71k plus interest.

I don't know whether he is right or wrong, but I don't see how you can blame this on the mother somehow.
None of us know enough about this situation to blame any of the parties involved, except the newspapers for being the blood-sucking pissants we know they are.

iodon
03-28-06, 12:12 PM
This issue did not belong in the paper. Many people have child support disputes and Randy is no different. You can make the argument that $69k per year is nothing to RJ, but if he felt that he was being taken for a ride, he has every right to fight the amount. 16 year old kids are not in day care. Especially when the mother is staying home. The funds that Randy is contributing towards the child's welfare should not be the mother's source of income. (I'm reading between the lines here as the mother is not working.) It's child support, not allimony. $5k per month should be plenty to support the child. The mother is just getting upset because it might not be enough to support her as well.

51BWilliams
03-28-06, 12:36 PM
When I saw this i literally spat on the ground in disgust. I could care less about his child support, or his kids. I only care about that left arm. I understand that sports figures are also public figures, but something like this should be left out of the paper. It holds no bearing on the Yankees at all, and it is not front page or back page news. It is private and his own business

Also making him look bad because he makes 16,000,000 and he is suing her for < 100K is asinine. If that writer was getting ripped off for 100 bucks, he would bitch about it and stop getting ripped off, $ is $, and you don't just hand it out for free.

effdamets
03-28-06, 12:40 PM
I think some of the details were that the mother quit her job to spend more time with the teenager and Randy wanted the "day care" money back. I can't say I blame him if that is true. Supposedly, the mother wanted Randy to buy the teenager a car too.

Anyway, I came out of the subway this morning and saw Randy's picture on the front page with the headlines "Little Unit"... I was like "oh no! What happened now!" When I got up closer and saw the smaller print which said "Love child -something-something-something-" I said "please no". I had no idea that Randy had a child with someone other than his wife. So, initially I thought Randy got caught cheating on his wife... Until I read the article.

That is why the story is on the front page! Because people who do not know all the facts and have a waning interest in New York's public figures will buy the paper. We can only hope that once people read the story, it will deter them from buying the paper in the future.

The bloodsucking, piece of worm ridden filth that put this on the front page should have his personal life smeared across all the tabloids in New York City.... See how he likes it!

stephsamps
03-28-06, 12:45 PM
Anyway, I came out of the subway this morning and saw Randy's picture on the front page with the headlines "Little Unit"... I was like "oh no! What happened now!" When I got up closer and saw the smaller print which said "Love child -something-something-something-" I said "please no". I had no idea that Randy had a child with someone other than his wife. So, initially I thought Randy got caught cheating on his wife... Until I read the article.

I thought the exact same thing, which is what makes me mad. If you are going to report on a child support dispute, report on a child support dispute, don't make the headlines sound like he just had a love child (little unit = little kid in my eyes).

IronCaballo4
03-28-06, 12:48 PM
the papers should be more concerned about blasting those deadbeats who don't give a crap about paying child support at all. Props to Randy for sticking up for himself (and child) if he believes he is being taken for a ride

silverdsl
03-28-06, 01:09 PM
Randy hasn't seen his daughter since she was a baby. IMO, that's the most unfortunate thing of all.

JfromJersey
03-28-06, 01:36 PM
..and you wonder why RJ feels like clobbering every reporter he sees? Welcome to the Big Apple media circus Randy.

yanksconstantino24
03-28-06, 01:39 PM
It does stink that this has to be blown up into some big story, but that's the price one has to pay for being famous. (I'm not saying it should be, but it is.)

Like the rest of us, I don't know Randy's exact situation. But, in my eyes, it shouldn't make a difference whether the father (Randy or anyone else) is a professional athlete, teaching school, or working in a McDonalds. As long as he's providing enough financially for his child to survive. (Spending actual time with the child is ideal, but that has alot to do with the particular situation, which we don't know about).

Bub
03-28-06, 03:31 PM
Randy hasn't seen his daughter since she was a baby. IMO, that's the most unfortunate thing of all.I had the same thoughts reading the story. Sounds like she'd like to know her father on a personal level but he won't do it for some reason. Something's not right there.

DontHateOnNumber2
03-28-06, 04:02 PM
The mother obviously wants more money to live her kick back lifestyle. Hopefully Unit can fight this crap if it becomes a court thing. Either way the money he's been sending should be enough to support the child, not a woman whom he is no longer with.

goin for 27
03-28-06, 04:09 PM
The mother obviously wants more money to live her kick back lifestyle. Hopefully Unit can fight this crap if it becomes a court thing. Either way the money he's been sending should be enough to support the child, not a woman whom he is no longer with.

No one here knows if it is crap or not. If she is living a "kick back" lifestyle, she must have money coming in from elsewhere as well......

Davios
03-28-06, 04:59 PM
No one here knows if it is crap or not. If she is living a "kick back" lifestyle, she must have money coming in from elsewhere as well......


I don't know about that. Many families live off a hell of alot less than 61 grand a year working full time jobs.

gold23
03-28-06, 05:29 PM
Well...it shouldn't be public information, but that's the world we live in. RJ makes the money he makes because of a very similar dynamic- people pay money to see him perform. Papers print things to sell papers.

That being said....RJ looks pretty bad here. Even if the mother is milking him a bit, why should it be a big deal? Almost every decent father would want the best for his child. It looks like he dislikes the mother so much that he sees the daughter as an extension of that mother. The girl is being used as a sword in both directions, which is terrible parenting all around.

For the amount of money that this means to RJ on a personal level, he should absolutely bite the bullet and write the checks. He made what he obviously considers a mistake (since he has never seen her since she was a baby), but at least show a little compassion for your own flesh and blood. If your daughter gets to live a lifestyle slightly better than she "should be living" based on her mother's situation, it shoudl be a positive and not something he attacks. By going after the mother financially, he's hurting his daughter the most. Sickening, actually.

Rich
03-28-06, 05:32 PM
The woman is likely attempting to perpetrate a fraud.

KLJ
03-28-06, 05:43 PM
This issue did not belong in the paper.

or a message board

goin for 27
03-29-06, 12:05 AM
I don't know about that. Many families live off a hell of alot less than 61 grand a year working full time jobs.

I hear you, but those are not "kick back" lifestyles....

NYYBombshell
03-29-06, 12:20 AM
This is gossip. Why it was even reported on is beyond me. Don't reporters have some measure of standards?

hellonewman
03-29-06, 01:02 AM
Why it was even reported on is beyond me. Don't reporters have some measure of standards?Depends on the newspaper. The New York tabloids, not so much.

silverdsl
03-29-06, 09:33 AM
In this day and age when many people are more interested in gossip about celebrities personal lives moreso than what those celebrities do professionally I'd say that it's almost impossible for papers like the Post and the News to ignore a story like this. It sells newspapers. That doesn't make it right that so much attention is given to someone's personal life but I think the issue is a larger one than the media choosing to report it.

Workhorse
03-29-06, 11:41 AM
Reminds me a lot of stories that came out in the late 80s abot Larry Bird and his daughter. It's all very sad to see played out in public like this.

gdn
03-29-06, 12:04 PM
This stuff happens all the time. Just goes to show you that it's news only when it happens to someone famous.

shortone
03-29-06, 12:12 PM
The Press' attempt to "out" Randy Johnson has resulted in the outing of a 16 year old girl. Very sad. My heart goes out to the child.

JJazz
03-29-06, 12:37 PM
RJ's a public figure. There's no way in hell he could sue his ex to get back this money without it making the papers. That's a shame, but RJ knew that (or at least should have known it) going in.

And while I love RJ's left arm, not seeing your daughter for 16 years is a f*cking scumbag move. Sending checks does not complete the parental obligation.

No sympathy for RJ here.

CyYoung4Vazquez
03-29-06, 12:46 PM
Anyone catch the "Son of a Pitch" headline today? Unbelievable. I also thought it was interesting that they keep referring Randy as a "born again Christian."

iodon
03-29-06, 02:39 PM
And while I love RJ's left arm, not seeing your daughter for 16 years is a f*cking scumbag move. Sending checks does not complete the parental obligation.

No sympathy for RJ here.

By that logic, giving your child up for addoption is a "scumbag move"? Many people are estranged from their children for a variety of reasons. At the bare minimum, RJ is spending $5,000 a month to make sure she's ok. I'm not sure how many people on this board spend that much per month on just their child. 60 grand a year is enough to put nice clothes on a kids back, healthy food in their mouth and send them to a great private school. There are a lot of kids with "scumbag" parents they live with that don't get anywhere near the support. In addition, he had to set aside money for college, not included in the $60k per year.

I'm not trying to stick up for him here, but let's look at the facts. A 16 year old kid does not go to daycare. Why should he have to keep paying for it? Just because he's wealthy does not mean he should be scammed into paying for something. I also contend that the mother could find the daughter a suitable car and a computer as part of the $60k (x 16 years= $960,000 paid to date not including the $200,000 set aside for college that has gained interest), without going to RJ for additional funds.

gdn
03-29-06, 02:43 PM
By that logic, giving your child up for addoption is a "scumbag move"? Many people are estranged from their children for a variety of reasons. At the bare minimum, RJ is spending $5,000 a month to make sure she's ok. I'm not sure how many people on this board spend that much per month on just their child. 60 grand a year is enough to put nice clothes on a kids back, healthy food in their mouth and send them to a great private school. There are a lot of kids with "scumbag" parents they live with that don't get anywhere near the support. In addition, he had to set aside money for college, not included in the $60k per year.

I'm not trying to stick up for him here, but let's look at the facts. A 16 year old kid does not go to daycare. Why should he have to keep paying for it? Just because he's wealthy does not mean he should be scammed into paying for something. I also contend that the mother could find the daughter a suitable car and a computer as part of the $60k (x 16 years= $960,000 paid to date not including the $200,000 set aside for college that has gained interest), without going to RJ for additional funds.Not only that, but she better be working too.

somejerk
03-29-06, 03:13 PM
First off, the guy is a scumbag it can't be argued. Anyone who doesn't take care of their kid is a scumbag. It took 9 years after she was born for him to even begin child support payment. She could have sued him for back child support, but did not. If you read the smoking gun you'll get a little more information.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0327063bigunit1.html

Here is a snippet of it.

"In an interview today, Roszell denied Johnson's claims, saying that she has provided all required quarterly reports. And she added that, at the point she stopped working full-time at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and was able to spend more hours caring for her daughter, she asked Johnson's agent whether she could continue to receive the $750 payment. That request, she said, was approved. Roszell told TSG that last year she contacted Johnson's agent and asked for the athlete to pay for a car for their daughter as well as classes that the high school student was taking at a community college. After being told that her request was excessive, Roszell pushed back, arguing that it was reasonable. A Johnson representative, she said, then told her to "put on your boxing gloves.""

RJ doesn't even deal with her directly, his agent handles all of it. He's man enough to father a child with the woman but he's not man enough to even talk with her directly ABOUT the child. The agent also apparently agreed she could keep the $750 a month.

She asked for a car for her child and the agent said no way and it would appear from the comment that RJ was the one to initiate the lawsuit, but who knows what she said to instigate him, she probably wasn't being very nice.

Regardless, 5000 a month in child support, 750 for "day care", and 3000 a year for a college trust fund comes to $72000 a year that RJ contributes to his daughter, that is 0.45% of his total yearly income that goes to support his daughter. I don't know if any of you know anyone paying child support, but it is it's closer to 45% than to .45% of their salary.

Whether he should or shouldn't pay that much is up to debate. But if I were him, I'd wouldn't worry about the $100,000 he's suing her for, or .6% of my salary, if not for the sole reason of keeping my face off the front page of the paper. However, I also wouldn't ignore my daughter for 16 years either.

Snatch Catch
03-29-06, 03:20 PM
Is there any mention about her stopping work? How can you stop working, but then get bent out of shape when you are not be able to provide a car of any kind to your child?

I really hope that there is a valid reason behind her decision to stop.

iodon
03-29-06, 03:32 PM
First off, the guy is a scumbag it can't be argued. Anyone who doesn't take care of their kid is a scumbag. It took 9 years after she was born for him to even begin child support payment. She could have sued him for back child support, but did not. If you read the smoking gun you'll get a little more information.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0327063bigunit1.html

Here is a snippet of it.

"In an interview today, Roszell denied Johnson's claims, saying that she has provided all required quarterly reports. And she added that, at the point she stopped working full-time at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and was able to spend more hours caring for her daughter, she asked Johnson's agent whether she could continue to receive the $750 payment. That request, she said, was approved. Roszell told TSG that last year she contacted Johnson's agent and asked for the athlete to pay for a car for their daughter as well as classes that the high school student was taking at a community college. After being told that her request was excessive, Roszell pushed back, arguing that it was reasonable. A Johnson representative, she said, then told her to "put on your boxing gloves.""

RJ doesn't even deal with her directly, his agent handles all of it. He's man enough to father a child with the woman but he's not man enough to even talk with her directly ABOUT the child. The agent also apparently agreed she could keep the $750 a month.

She asked for a car for her child and the agent said no way and it would appear from the comment that RJ was the one to initiate the lawsuit, but who knows what she said to instigate him, she probably wasn't being very nice.

Regardless, 5000 a month in child support, 750 for "day care", and 3000 a year for a college trust fund comes to $72000 a year that RJ contributes to his daughter, that is 0.45% of his total yearly income that goes to support his daughter. I don't know if any of you know anyone paying child support, but it is it's closer to 45% than to .45% of their salary.

Whether he should or shouldn't pay that much is up to debate. But if I were him, I'd wouldn't worry about the $100,000 he's suing her for, or .6% of my salary, if not for the sole reason of keeping my face off the front page of the paper. However, I also wouldn't ignore my daughter for 16 years either.


I'm guessing that you didn't read the document very carefully. The MOTHER has to supply $3k per year to the education, then Randy has to contribute the rest to equal the $50k paid annually for college. In addition on page 8, it states that Randy had to pay back child support. I also don't think it's a valid point to mention the percentage of Randy's income that goes to the child. That ignores the real dollar amounts involved and implies that because it costs you 45% of you salary, Randy should pay $7.2 mil, which is clearly absurd.

MaineSoxFan
03-29-06, 03:41 PM
In addition on page 8, it states that Randy had to pay back child support.

I think the "back child support" was only 6 months worth and was based on a previous order by the court based on the wording of the pleading.

somejerk
03-29-06, 05:11 PM
I'm guessing that you didn't read the document very carefully. The MOTHER has to supply $3k per year to the education, then Randy has to contribute the rest to equal the $50k paid annually for college. In addition on page 8, it states that Randy had to pay back child support. I also don't think it's a valid point to mention the percentage of Randy's income that goes to the child. That ignores the real dollar amounts involved and implies that because it costs you 45% of you salary, Randy should pay $7.2 mil, which is clearly absurd.

I'm not saying he should pay $7.2 million, I did say:

"Whether he should or shouldn't pay that much is up to debate".

It's not up to me how much he should or shouldn't pay and I guess you didn't read what I wrote very carefully.

What I am saying, is I wouldn't stir up a big storm of negative publicity for myself over .45% of my Salary. I would gladly pay $1150 a year, or roughly .45 of my salary last year, to not have my face on the front page of every paper in my city letting everyone know what a scumbag I really am. And I am a pretty big scumbag ;) . Especially if that money was going to someone or something that is my responsibility.

Snatch Catch
03-29-06, 05:16 PM
I'm not saying he should pay $7.2 million, I did say:

"Whether he should or shouldn't pay that much is up to debate".

It's not up to me how much he should or shouldn't pay and I guess you didn't read what I wrote very carefully.

What I am saying, is I wouldn't stir up a big storm of negative publicity for myself over .45% of my Salary. I would gladly pay $1150 a year, or roughly .45 of my salary last year, to not have my face on the front page of every paper in my city letting everyone know what a scumbag I really am. And I am a pretty big scumbag ;) . Especially if that money was going to someone or something that is my responsibility.

I see your point, but you're essentially saying that extortion and/or fraud is alright, so long as the person can afford it.

I can't agree to that.

somejerk
03-29-06, 05:43 PM
I see your point, but you're essentially saying that extortion and/or fraud is alright, so long as the person can afford it.

I can't agree to that.

I'm not saying extortion is ok, and I see nothing in any article that claims she was doing anything of the sort. This story didn't leak because the mom or the daughter went running to the press, it was leaked because he filed suit against her. There is a lot of he-said she-said going on about who provided the documention and who was going to pay for the car. The truth is somewhere in between, most likely.

My fiancee used to work for a woman, who had a child out of wedlock with a guy who probably doesn't make a whole lot let less than RJ, and possibly makes more. The woman would have problems making house payments, and he'd pay, she'd need a car to drive their son to school and he'd buy her one. He wasn't entitled to do any of this, but it kept the peace between their problems and their son. He also made sure the house he as helping finance was down the street from his house so he could actually see his son.

I'm nobody to tell anyone to do with their money, I'm just saying, I'd rather have peace in my family than worry about my pocket money.

freebubba
03-30-06, 09:09 AM
Man, my Red Sox fans were all over me about this. I agree withe evrything here for the most part. We have no idea what the dirty little details are. If you read the smoking gun article and look at the original court documents, he also provide health care coverage, medical expenses, made large contributions to a college trust fund, etc. I also agree with the statement that it was child support, not alimony. All of a sudden, the mother doesn't want to work (no need for day care then, right?). Especially when the child is in school, what are the costs? I know what mine are, and it ain't anywhere close to $750 month.

The only thing I do not understand is his refusal to have anything to do with her personally. Then again, I do not know the deal with the mother. The report says she gave him the axe half way through the pregnancy. Who knows? Maybe she told him to keep his mullet wearing ass as far away from her and the kid as possible.

All I know is, there is a lot of she says, she says, she says, and very little of his side.

JJazz
03-30-06, 12:58 PM
By that logic, giving your child up for addoption is a "scumbag move"? Many people are estranged from their children for a variety of reasons. At the bare minimum, RJ is spending $5,000 a month to make sure she's ok. I'm not sure how many people on this board spend that much per month on just their child. 60 grand a year is enough to put nice clothes on a kids back, healthy food in their mouth and send them to a great private school. There are a lot of kids with "scumbag" parents they live with that don't get anywhere near the support. In addition, he had to set aside money for college, not included in the $60k per year.

I'm not trying to stick up for him here, but let's look at the facts. A 16 year old kid does not go to daycare. Why should he have to keep paying for it? Just because he's wealthy does not mean he should be scammed into paying for something. I also contend that the mother could find the daughter a suitable car and a computer as part of the $60k (x 16 years= $960,000 paid to date not including the $200,000 set aside for college that has gained interest), without going to RJ for additional funds.

Giving kids up for adoption is a completely separate situation, but for the record, that's often a pretty crappy thing to do to a kid too. It's true lots of parents are estranged from their kids, but it's also true that in almost every such instance, it's seriously hurtful to those kids. Parents have an obligation not to screw their kids with emotional neglect.

And I'm not making any arguments about how much he should have to pay. I don't know nearly enough about it to judge. I'm just saying that he's an ass if he thinks cutting checks is his only obligation as a man who fathered a child.

ChocolateGirl
04-04-06, 05:47 PM
Randy hasn't seen his daughter since she was a baby. IMO, that's the most unfortunate thing of all.

Agreed. What is his excuse for never meeting up with his daughter for all these years? Although the relationship between him and his baby's momma didn't work out, you don't treat your daughter as if she was a mistake. :o Even though you are giving your daughter money throughout the years, does she not deserve a to meet him? Damn, fly her out to visit you on the road for a weekend or something for goodness sakes. This doesn't look good on his part. :o

JJazz
04-04-06, 06:37 PM
Agreed. What is his excuse for never meeting up with his daughter for all these years? Although the relationship between him and his baby's momma didn't work out, you don't treat your daughter as if she was a mistake. :o Even though you are giving your daughter money throughout the years, does she not deserve a to meet him? Damn, fly her out to visit you on the road for a weekend or something for goodness sakes. This doesn't look good on his part. :o

Exactly. This more than anything else makes the guy seem like a heartless bastard.

When I found out RJ moved into my mom's building, I told her to stay away from the big guy with the violent temper (he'd just pushed the cameraman). Now that my mom found out how RJ treated his daughter, I think I better tell RJ to stay away from the little woman with the violent temper!

4bronxbombers
04-04-06, 07:24 PM
For once I agree with a Sox fan - Maine Sox fan. No one knows the whole story and it's none of our business. The Post is a more of a gossip rag than anything else. If I read anything about Randy Johnson, I prefer it to be about baseball.