Chrome Barracuda Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 TACKLED LOSES $$ AND KIDS By SUSAN EDELMAN and JEANE MacINTOSH BLOWOUT: Sharon Shenocca, with ex Vincent, must leave their Jersey home, and can't move their kids to the Brooklyn home of NFL coach Bill Belichick (above). July 4, 2007 -- The reputed Jersey girlfriend of New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick not only lost her bid to move her kids into his tony Brooklyn townhouse - she now has to pay child support to her ex. Sharon Shenocca must even fork over $67,500 to pay for ex-hubby Vincent Shenocca's legal fees resulting from their bitter custody fight, a judge ruled. In a stunning blow to the blond, 41-year-old housewife, New Jersey Family Court Judge Stephan Hansbury awarded primary custody of the couple's two children to Vincent - and then ordered Sharon to pay him $121 a week in support. The judge also is making her pay more than half of her ex's legal bills for the divorce fight sparked by her alleged adultery with Belichick. That's in addition to her own $100,000 bill for lawyers. Sharon Shenocca now has to move out of the Morris Township home where she lived while married and has continued to stay with the kids. She has already sold her stake in the home to Vincent for $125,000. "I don't think he's going to put her out at the curb - but obviously, they have to make arrangements," a family friend told The Post. Sharon had asked the court to let her move her son, 8, and daughter, 6, to Park Slope, where Belichick bought a $2.2 million town house for her use. But Hansbury nixed her request, noting that her ex-hubby, a $55,000- a-year stucco contractor, "offers a dependable home and an income to support the children" - while Sharon, a former Giants receptionist, "offers neither." Citing Sharon's "ease of lying to the court" - she initially claimed Belichick never gave her a dime, then confessed that he was bankrolling her lavish lifestyle - Hansbury gave her the kids every other weekend, an occasional midweek dinner and some holidays. [email protected] The only thing that would make this story great is if the giants can give the patriots their first loss ever at a superbowl!!!! indefinitely! lol. Link to post Share on other sites
whichwayisup Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 The only thing that would make this story great is if the giants can give the patriots their first loss ever at a superbowl!!!! indefinitely! lol I doubt this is going to affect the team's ability to take the superbowl. My money is still on the Pats. I feel for those kids though. Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 It makes me all warn and fuzzy inside when I hear of a man winning in divorce court. I am seeing it happen more and more and it is great. Maybe the days of women using the courts to bully a man and drain him dry are over? Link to post Share on other sites
Author Chrome Barracuda Posted February 2, 2008 Author Share Posted February 2, 2008 Soon to be woggle, but more men gotta fight for it. Fight hard and get good lawyers, they make all the difference. Oh and the patriots will lose, giants will pull a great miracle outta that hat of tricks. Link to post Share on other sites
bigmanpayne Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 thanks for sharing that. that makes me feel a little bit better. Link to post Share on other sites
JosieMcCoy Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 Well, the Patriots first superbowl loss ever was against the Bears I think Link to post Share on other sites
whichwayisup Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 Oh and the patriots will lose, giants will pull a great miracle outta that hat of tricks. Nope. They're going to win. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Chrome Barracuda Posted February 3, 2008 Author Share Posted February 3, 2008 Nope. They're going to win. We will definitely see tonight! lol. Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 Soon to be woggle, but more men gotta fight for it. Fight hard and get good lawyers, they make all the difference. Oh and the patriots will lose, giants will pull a great miracle outta that hat of tricks. That is why I support every man that wins in family court no matter who they are. From K-Fed to this guy every case is another blow to the feminist grip on our courts. I really don't care much about the super bowl but I am from both NY and NJ so I am rooting for The Giants. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Chrome Barracuda Posted February 3, 2008 Author Share Posted February 3, 2008 That is why I support every man that wins in family court no matter who they are. From K-Fed to this guy every case is another blow to the feminist grip on our courts. I really don't care much about the super bowl but I am from both NY and NJ so I am rooting for The Giants. I know right, the media and courts try to villify the man but when it's the woman with the problem and she caused it? Then what? Make excuses? It's not right, but lawyers and judges need to realize with the infidelity and divorce rates climbing and it's women who's doing it , they have to rethink their positions on best care for the children. Real parents would not place their happiness before their childrens. And I'm talking about good marriages when it's non abusive, non cheating, non acholic. Those marriages could be imporved upon and made better. but the WA spouse cares about no one except themselves. Like you I support men rights. Especially when the kids need their fathers. Fathers are more than sperm donors and paychecks!!!! Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 I know right, the media and courts try to villify the man but when it's the woman with the problem and she caused it? Then what? Make excuses? It's not right, but lawyers and judges need to realize with the infidelity and divorce rates climbing and it's women who's doing it , they have to rethink their positions on best care for the children. Real parents would not place their happiness before their childrens. And I'm talking about good marriages when it's non abusive, non cheating, non acholic. Those marriages could be imporved upon and made better. but the WA spouse cares about no one except themselves. Like you I support men rights. Especially when the kids need their fathers. Fathers are more than sperm donors and paychecks!!!! I predict a major backlash in the courts against the tactics that some women use because judges are getting used to it. I am not saying that courts should be unfair to women but they should look at all the facts and then make their decision instead of just presuming the man guilty. It hurts women who really do have a case. False abuse allegations are common in family courts and it makes it much harder for women that really are abused. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Chrome Barracuda Posted February 3, 2008 Author Share Posted February 3, 2008 I predict a major backlash in the courts against the tactics that some women use because judges are getting used to it. I am not saying that courts should be unfair to women but they should look at all the facts and then make their decision instead of just presuming the man guilty. It hurts women who really do have a case. False abuse allegations are common in family courts and it makes it much harder for women that really are abused. Women who use mudslinging tactics to get they kids when they get to court such as filing a false abuse claim, fake restraining orders using other people's time. Just to get their way should be prosecuted under filing a false report and the judges need to seriously consider the kids when putting them with a mother who's willingly set to lie to the law!!!! about things. Who does that, I mean how can you lie to the police and when you get to court think, it's okay I didnt mean to lie to tell the truth, I just wanted to get my husband out of the house so I could have my way?! WTF???? Link to post Share on other sites
bigmanpayne Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 Women who use mudslinging tactics to get they kids when they get to court such as filing a false abuse claim, fake restraining orders using other people's time. Just to get their way should be prosecuted under filing a false report and the judges need to seriously consider the kids when putting them with a mother who's willingly set to lie to the law!!!! about things. Who does that, I mean how can you lie to the police and when you get to court think, it's okay I didnt mean to lie to tell the truth, I just wanted to get my husband out of the house so I could have my way?! WTF???? i have been screaming this very same thing for years. women get away with murder and to me it seems like nobody cares. the court system is riddled with it. the child support system is a necessary evil but money isnt the only thing that children need. if child support isnt paid there is jail as punishment (if it gets that far), but the courts arent nearly as tough about parenting time and visitation - and both parents being in their kids lives is what is really important. i get some of it, no judge or court wants to be the one who ignored a domestic violence claim, but maybe courts should investigate more and not just assume that everything a person says is true. i am lucky to have never been in that situation, but i know people who have. Link to post Share on other sites
mental_traveller Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Sounds like a competent judge doing his job well. The only problem I have is why is she not in jail for several years for perjury? Link to post Share on other sites
whichwayisup Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 We will definitely see tonight! lol. I guess we saw...And I"m eating my words now.. Link to post Share on other sites
sandflea Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 I guess we saw...And I"m eating my words now.. 75% of this country is eating thier words - and pulling out their wallets! I love it! Incredible game. Link to post Share on other sites
Gunny376 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Why is it that women automatically get full custody ~ even given that she's got problems ~ issues? Why is it that a woman has sex with an under-age child she gets probation or a couple of months in jail ~ a man gets 20? Why is it alright for a woman to discover (even cool) she's gay ~ but not a man? Why is it when a man cheats on his wife? Its his fault ~ and when a woman cheats on her husband? Its still his fault? Why are women enititled to alimony? But, men aren't? Women have just about "screwed the pooch" when it comes to marriage and relationships! More and more men are saying ~ "Forget that" when it comes to marriage? I know I pretty much have! You see my picture in the Sunday papers with some gal, talking about getting married again? You can bet the ranch and all that goes with it that she and I have been together for quite sometime, there's been an extensive background check, and pre-marriage couseling, negotiations, and there's probally a pre-nup involved? If that all sounds un-romantic? Too sad? Too bad! Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Just have a woman sign a bullet-proof prenup. If she is truly trustworthy she should have no problem with it and make sure to marry a woman that has her own money. It might sounds nice to marry a woman that wants to stay home but a woman that supports herself actually makes a better wife. Link to post Share on other sites
Mustang Sally Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Why is it that women automatically get full custody ~ even given that she's got problems ~ issues? Why is it that a woman has sex with an under-age child she gets probation or a couple of months in jail ~ a man gets 20? Why is it alright for a woman to discover (even cool) she's gay ~ but not a man? Why is it when a man cheats on his wife? Its his fault ~ and when a woman cheats on her husband? Its still his fault? Why are women enititled to alimony? But, men aren't? This is certainly a sad state of affairs when that is what our legal system is reduced to. I agree with all (men AND women) who say that this has to change. These types of judgements need to be based on fact and what is truly appropriate and deserved for all parties involved. Not just on what gender the parties are. It's obscene, in my opinion, when one person has an advantage over another based on something such as gender (or race or sexual orientation for that matter) and not the personal/character qualities that are most befitting of whatever outcome is being determined. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Chrome Barracuda Posted February 4, 2008 Author Share Posted February 4, 2008 I guess we saw...And I"m eating my words now.. Yeah, Good for you!!! Link to post Share on other sites
twice_shy Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 TACKLED LOSES $$ AND KIDS By SUSAN EDELMAN and JEANE MacINTOSH BLOWOUT: Sharon Shenocca, with ex Vincent, must leave their Jersey home, and can't move their kids to the Brooklyn home of NFL coach Bill Belichick (above). July 4, 2007 -- The reputed Jersey girlfriend of New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick not only lost her bid to move her kids into his tony Brooklyn townhouse - she now has to pay child support to her ex. Sharon Shenocca must even fork over $67,500 to pay for ex-hubby Vincent Shenocca's legal fees resulting from their bitter custody fight, a judge ruled. In a stunning blow to the blond, 41-year-old housewife, New Jersey Family Court Judge Stephan Hansbury awarded primary custody of the couple's two children to Vincent - and then ordered Sharon to pay him $121 a week in support. The judge also is making her pay more than half of her ex's legal bills for the divorce fight sparked by her alleged adultery with Belichick. That's in addition to her own $100,000 bill for lawyers. Sharon Shenocca now has to move out of the Morris Township home where she lived while married and has continued to stay with the kids. She has already sold her stake in the home to Vincent for $125,000. "I don't think he's going to put her out at the curb - but obviously, they have to make arrangements," a family friend told The Post. Sharon had asked the court to let her move her son, 8, and daughter, 6, to Park Slope, where Belichick bought a $2.2 million town house for her use. But Hansbury nixed her request, noting that her ex-hubby, a $55,000- a-year stucco contractor, "offers a dependable home and an income to support the children" - while Sharon, a former Giants receptionist, "offers neither." Citing Sharon's "ease of lying to the court" - she initially claimed Belichick never gave her a dime, then confessed that he was bankrolling her lavish lifestyle - Hansbury gave her the kids every other weekend, an occasional midweek dinner and some holidays. [email protected] The only thing that would make this story great is if the giants can give the patriots their first loss ever at a superbowl!!!! indefinitely! lol. Great story!! I love it!! Too bad this isn't the kind of consequences all cheating spouses get. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts