Allusonz
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2010
- Messages
- 4,679
- Reaction score
- 17
I'm not seeing the logic in that article. So let's break it down once again.
According to what I have worked out, EB's 1st 2 marriages were legal.
JW 85-86 (legal, annulled)
DP 87-92 (legal)
(so far, this agrees with article)
Her marriage to AH 91-95 would not have been legal, because she was still married to DP in 91.
(So far, still in agreement with article)
However, the article states her marriage to WP was not legal. I disagree. The marriage to WP was 94-99. Since she was never legally married to AH, that puts us back to the marriage with WP. That marriage was legally terminated in 92, so, as far as I can see, her marriage to Putnam in 94 would have been legal and binding.
That would mean the marriages to Allred ( 97-00 ) and Young ( 98-09 ) were both invalid, since she was still legally married to Putnam until 1999.
The article states that EB's marriage to Baker was invalid. I see no reason that it wouldn't be valid. She legally divorced Proctor in 99, and she was never legally married to Allred or Young, so her marriage to Baker in 2008 would have been perfectly legal.
JMO
as tlcox stated clear as mud lol
technically on paper as we write it this may well be the case i think the grey areas come in as we dont know exactly when they divorced
gggggggggrrrrrrrrrrrr sill as unclear as mud lol