Talk:H. Beatty Chadwick

Untitled

This seems to pretty clearly be a puff piece written by his attorneys. Rustinf (talk) 07:23, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not so sure -- try spending fourteen years in the slammer. If you still feel the same way, I'll agree with you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.170.248.36 (talk) 16:00, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Puff piece? Man, fuck you. The dude spent FOURTEEN YEARS in jail on a civil contempt charge - the longest anyone has ever served in the history of the world. So piss off! That cost the taxpayers a minumum of apx. $500,000 - not including his FREE healthcare and cancer treatments. I wish my mom had free cancer treatments. We spent almost a million dollars and she still died anyways. If the dude was hiding his money, you'd think that the judge would realize that he wasn't going to give it up after a year or so. So what was the point in keeping him locked up, other then to waste our tax dollars?

I suggest that your mother murder you in a violent and (apparently) gratuitous manner. Then she can enjoy the complimentary free cancer treatments she will receive with her life sentence. And in case she actually gets the death penalty, the joke is still on the judge, as she is dying anyway!

Oh, wait. I see that you mention that your mother is already dead. Nevermind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.243.104.82 (talk) 01:51, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I do agree that it seems to be biased. It seems notable, so it should be included. Needs a rewrite. The line "Although never charged with a crime, H. Beatty Chadwick spent fourteen years of his life in prison." is a particularly bad example. Not a puff piece, but it is written like one. 99.6.157.136 (talk) 05:04, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

BIO1E

This guy is the apotheosis of one-event-hood. At minimum, the article should be renamed to Chadwick v. Janecka (focus on the event, not the person). Better yet, delete this article and merge a couple sentences into Contempt of court. -- Frankie1969 (talk) 14:17, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

There is more to it =

See this article about the guy:

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=8101209&page=1 (archive: http://archive.is/Rse2k just in case) Zezen (talk) 07:43, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Follow-up

I was wondering whether any enterprising journalists had followed up on Chadwick to find out whether his post-release lifestyle was commensurate with someone who'd lost all his money in uncharacteristically foolhardy investments, or more commensurate with someone who had over $2 million stashed away. Just I thought the trail was cold (after a page of 2009 reports and inane Reddit threads), I did actually find this article in The Philadelphia Enquirer, thanks to a pointer from pennlawreview.com: Beatty Chadwick, trolling Match.com, still defying truth:

TL:DR: Chadwick had an online dating profile in 2010 where he claimed to have expensive tastes including opera and wine tours (and to be 20 years younger than he actually was). Whether he actually had the money to fund such tastes, or was in reality penniless and spinning a yarn to potential dates, is unclear.

At the time, his ex-wife's lawyer was still pursuing him for the money. The story seems to end there, however. Perhaps the lawyers gave up the chase or they came to a private settlement.

There might not be enough there to add to the article but at least I've saved any other curious people a bit of Googling.

--195.206.172.158 (talk) 16:53, 13 December 2021 (UTC)