WMAZ-TV: GOP candidate’s 11-year-old son intervenes to block release of dad’s divorce papers

On the day before a court hearing on whether the 2001 divorce papers of Republican congressional candidate Austin Scott should be sealed, WMAZ-TV in Macon is reporting this sudden twist:

The attorney for a local Democrat seeking to unseal 8th congressional district candidate Austin Scott’s divorce records says a request was filed Monday on behalf of the Republican candidate’s 11-year-old son to delay the hearing and appear as a defendant in the case.

A Tift County judge is scheduled to hear arguments Tuesday to unseal the documents.
Macon attorney Carmel Sanders filed the motion to make the records public on behalf of her client Amy Morton.

Morton, a Democratic activist, says she isn’t looking for any specific information in the files but says the public has a right to know what’s in them.

Sanders says her office received a motion from 11-year-old Wells Scott today, asking to take part in the records hearing.

“Either the former Mrs. Scott or Mr. Scott have hired a lawyer on behalf of their son to intervene in this action,” Sanders says.

“It’s been Mr. Scott’s contention that the reason he didn’t want the files opened — the reason they wanted them sealed was to protect the son,” she says.

No comment was forthcoming from Scott, or from the campaign of Democratic incumbent Jim Marshall of Macon.

For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.

101 comments Add your comment

GAPolitico

October 25th, 2010
5:39 pm

There must really be something in there for Scott to put his 11 year old son in the political arena. I thought the goal was to keep family out of the candidate’s political life, not inject them in the middle of it.

Tommy Maddox

October 25th, 2010
5:40 pm

Oh, she’s not looking for anything particular. Neither was the Obama campaign when they surreptitiously unsealed John Ryan’s divorce file.

Just Saying

October 25th, 2010
5:49 pm

If you weren’t at the wedding, you shouldn’t care about the divorce.

Veteran Observer

October 25th, 2010
5:58 pm

We used to have some class in this country, but I guess Amy Morton is taking time off from her night job as a gossip and peeping tom to investigate this PRIVATE matter! No Ms Morton, the public does not have the right to know what is in a couple’s divorce papers! This is terrible and it must stop today and now! If we do not do something about these muckrakers and evil busy bodies, there will be no one of good character who will run for office!!!!

Tax paying citizen

October 25th, 2010
6:00 pm

People sure are hell bent on smearing Austin Scott and his family. I bet it’s nothing more than the usual divorce drama. Nothing to take Austin down but probably embarrassing for he and his wife to have their divorce fight spread all over the news and be the gossip of the town. It’s no one’s business. Yes he’s a public figure but that’s a personal matter and there were no criminal charges. That would be a different story. This is why people are so afraid to run for office. Everyone is human. Just because they don’t want everyone poking in their business doesn’t mean there’s some big smoking gun. Keep in mind, this affects his ex-wife and her family as well. No one seems to care about bothering innocent people. What if the things in there are worse for the son and ex-wife? How is that fair to them? Everyone needs to mind their own personal business.

DangerMouse

October 25th, 2010
6:05 pm

Austin Scott is using his 11 year old kid to keep his divorce records sealed. Disgusting.

Just Bob

October 25th, 2010
6:08 pm

If Mr. Scott wants to serve the public, he should open the divorce files. Personal life doesn’t exist any longer for public figures who are paid by the taxpayers.

No Longer Republican

October 25th, 2010
6:13 pm

If he doesn’t have anything to hide, why seal the papers? If it is a normal every day divorce it is no big deal. And now to pull his 11 year old son into the mess, goes to show he is definitely NOT worthy of being a US Congressman. Not a huge fan of Jim Marshall, but this guy…no way.

Lady

October 25th, 2010
6:25 pm

So the kid isn’t allowed to stand up for his parents? The Democrats are insisting upon attacking his parents so why is it not fair for him to try and stop them? Good job kid. Use him to stop it til the cows come home. What’s disgusting is trying to dig and win with personal attacks. Desperation isn’t an appealing attribute. Let’s focus on fixing our country Mr. Marshall, something you’ve neglected to do for 8 years. Talk about a waste of $ for his do-nothing salary. The only reason he’s running again is to try and lock down that federal retirement. The voters are alive and kicking this year and we won’t be taken advantage of this time.

Last Man Standing

October 25th, 2010
6:27 pm

Never Was Republican:

“If he doesn’t have anything to hide, why seal the papers?”

Because it is none of your business? The couple know what is in the record, and they know that they don’t wish their son to know. That is all YOU need to know. Even politicians have a right to a private life.

This whole episode is the reason it is so difficult to get good and well qualified people to seek any office. A potential candidate has to decide whether he/she is willing to place his/her life and the lives of family members under the microscope of what a more genteel society once called “busybodies”.

td

October 25th, 2010
6:36 pm

Just Bob

October 25th, 2010
6:08 pm
If Mr. Scott wants to serve the public, he should open the divorce files. Personal life doesn’t exist any longer for public figures who are paid by the taxpayers.

I can remember libs and the media screaming, crying and angry when a certain President wanted to keep his personal life private. One would have thought conservatives had shot your favorite pet. I guess you all did not mean what you were saying then?

If you have ever been through a divorce then you would know that in the anger and emotions of the moment both parties will say and accuse the other person of a great deal of things that are just not true. If both parents want the records sealed for the reason to protect the child then so be it and it should be sealed.

Also, are not the liberals the party that keep talking about staying out of the bedroom? Another double standard here.

td

October 25th, 2010
6:40 pm

LMS, The Democrats have been all over the place this election cycle trying to find anything. I have a friend that is running for office and he told me that his Dem opponent has went to every job he has ever held and asked for his personnel files. I guess knowing they are about to lose any and all power of the state has caused a scorched earth campaign.

yuzeyurbrain

October 25th, 2010
6:42 pm

As other bloggers may have noticed, I am not a big fan of Jim Marshall but for Scott to hide behind his 11 year old son says something about his character.

Bill

October 25th, 2010
6:42 pm

If the purpose of keeping it sealed is to protect his son, won’t making his son a party to the legal action ensure that his son will learn the contents of the file?

Bill

October 25th, 2010
6:44 pm

These muckraking democrats are disgusting. If they keep wallowing in the mud like this people will mistake them for republicans.

dorothy stapen

October 25th, 2010
6:49 pm

Carmen…you go, girl!!!

Mike McGill

October 25th, 2010
7:03 pm

two words – Glenn Richardson – we could of saved a bundle if he hadn’t had his records sealed – it’s a public office – should you NOT want you laundry aired in public — simple DON’T RUN — Public means PUBLIC – he could just withdraw — it would be okay with me —

Inquire this...

October 25th, 2010
7:07 pm

For all of you who think it’s ok to try and force Scott’s divorce records out in public simply because you are nosey and curious…by those standards can we make Jim Marshall take a lie detector test to see if he’s gay or not cause that’s been the word on the street for years. Oh and why doesn’t Marshall wear a wedding ring? Just curious as to why Austin Scott is being beaten up for no reason when there’s plenty to inquire about in Jim Marshall’s personal life. Show’s the true difference in priorities and character amongst the two campaigns.

Fred

October 25th, 2010
7:09 pm

I find it amusing that all you nut case left wingers just jump to the conclusion that the right wing nut case that is running for office had his son file the case. Maybe you should read or watch My Sister’s Keeper. The reporting of this case CLEARLY states that no one in the media knows who is paying for this boy’s lawyer. It may be that the mother doesn’t want things disclosed and the father is protecting his ex-wife. It may be the opposite, but who cares?

Just how sick are you people to muckrake the most painful emotional experience people go through like a divorce? If mommy had a problem with sealing the records, it would be documented. You voyeurs need to back off. you do NOT have the right to know every bodies personal pains.

Lady

October 25th, 2010
7:11 pm

Will that same Democratic activist join with those of us who believe we have a right to see Obama’s birth certificate and Harvard transcript? If constituents have a right to see Austin Scott’s divorce record, surely we have a right to see the community organizer’s records.

Last Man Standing

October 25th, 2010
7:17 pm

td:

The democrats have been unusually dirty in this election cycle. They have been working overtime to find ANYTHING that can even be ’spun’ as questionable. They need to remember that what they sow, they shall also surely reap.

Gordon

October 25th, 2010
7:19 pm

“If he doesn’t have anything to hide, why seal the papers?”

Same could be said for Obama’s passport records, college transcripts, etc. etc. etc.
But, he’s a Democrat and they have no standards.

What sleazy people the Democrats always turn out to be when trying to retain power.

Leslie

October 25th, 2010
7:20 pm

I’m still waiting for Obama’s school transcripts. If those are off limits then his divorcepapers should be too. Amy Morton you ought to be ashamed of yourself, but then again, you are a democrat and democrats know no shame.

Ole Roy

October 25th, 2010
7:21 pm

Vote for me. I can out promise everyone. After I am GOVERNOR, I will unseal Scott’s divorce records, double teachers’ pay, cut taxes and make sure the Dawgs never lose another game.

dagnabit

October 25th, 2010
7:29 pm

Last man standing: If Scott wants my vote, he has no private life. I want to know if the divorce papers says he is a homo.

Nikki

October 25th, 2010
7:29 pm

So did everyone just completely ignore the line that said, “Either the former Mrs. Scott or Mr. Scott have hired a lawyer on behalf of their son to intervene in this action,”
No one knows who hired the attorney for the 11 year old. It may not have been Scott himself, it could have been his ex-wife, who is not a public figure.
The way I feel is, if you don’t pay for the wedding, you don’t accompany me on my honeymoon, you don’t join us for the happy times or the bad times, and if you did not pay for my divorce; What right is it for you to know why my ex and I are no longer together.
This notion that the public has the right the know is nonsense. The public has the right to know if I have committed a major crime, like embezzlement, dui, fraud, or murder, not whether my spouse and I had an unsatisfactory sex life.

Bob

October 25th, 2010
7:32 pm

Bob

October 25th, 2010
7:33 pm

Michelle Mal's Kin

October 25th, 2010
7:34 pm

You’ve seen Obama’s birth certificate. You just refuse to believe your lying eyes……..

Tommy Maddox

October 25th, 2010
7:35 pm

It’s the Left’s desperate act of voyeurism with a deviant purpose. Shame shame on you the peeping public.

Bob

October 25th, 2010
7:35 pm

Last Man Standing

October 25th, 2010
7:46 pm

dagnabit:

I’m sure that he would appreciate your vote, but would forego it rather than cede to your voyeurism.

Ralph

October 25th, 2010
7:49 pm

AJC and other media outlets trying to use this for political purposes – you are bottom feeding, disgusting creeps with absolutely no redeeming value.

Just Bob

October 25th, 2010
8:05 pm

td-

Clinton was, what, 10-12 years ago minimum? That’s time for things to change (although you still prob still live in the Clinton years).

2010 = Public paycheck = no personal hideaways

The Real Bill

October 25th, 2010
8:05 pm

Who knew Bill is a common name? Divorce records are public in GA. Scott had his sealed before the Republican primary (scared of what a fellow Republican might dig up). Now he’s using his son as a human shield.

Satisfaction

October 25th, 2010
8:31 pm

Carmel Sanders…….what a scuz ball. She is probably the most hated and unethical divorce attorney in Macon…..maybe in GA. One of her most recent cases included the majority of Carmel’s attorney fees to be included in her client’s bankruptcy ($ 45,000)…..case went to a Monroe County jury……. Still laughing at the outcome. Believe that the jury hated Carmel more than her client. Good luck Carmel finding another sucker with a higher retainer.

Jayne M. Barker

October 25th, 2010
8:31 pm

Folks, what is legal and what is ethical can be as far as the East is from the West!!! On another issue, a high ranking man of great standing
said he watched the current WR DA during his earlier years, and that he was far from a saint!!!. You all, “the ole chickens are fixing to come home to roost”. Watch out Marshall, Deal, Cagle, Rabb, Barnes your day is coming…Ever heard of a richochet or a boomerang???

know the truth

October 25th, 2010
8:36 pm

YOU PEOPLE ARE SICK AND DISGUSTING,WHAT DID YOU DO WITH YOUR TIME BEFORE INTERNET?YOU HIDE BEHIND SOME SILLY NAME AND THROW STONES FROM YOUR OWN GLASS HOUSE.AND JIM GALLOWAY LAUGHS HIS HAPPY FAT BUTT OFF ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK.

Jayne M. Barker

October 25th, 2010
8:36 pm

P. S. Add Barry Soetoro aka BHO to the list.

Gimmeabreak

October 25th, 2010
8:39 pm

Does the wife not have a right to privacy? The child? They’re not running for office. The libs love to look for something to distract voters from their incompetence.

td

October 25th, 2010
8:43 pm

Just Bob

October 25th, 2010
8:05 pm
td-

Clinton was, what, 10-12 years ago minimum? That’s time for things to change (although you still prob still live in the Clinton years).

2010 = Public paycheck = no personal hideaways

Only when it is liberals calling for conservatives to come forward and put everything on the table. Let us test your theory.

Should Obama release his college records and birth certificate? Are you as outraged or will not vote for him due to the fact? I will be waiting a while for that response.

Gimmeabreak

October 25th, 2010
8:45 pm

Right on Jayne, I’m with you.

Shady Deal

October 25th, 2010
8:51 pm

If divorce records are public in Georgia, then they are public record for everyone. Taxpayer money pays the clerks, assistants and judges that preside over and grant marriages and divorces in the courts. If you want your business private, then keep it private and out of the courts. Government shouldn’t be in the business of sanctioning ANY civil unions and separations anyway.

Fair is Fair

October 25th, 2010
8:52 pm

Public (Democrates) want to see the Divorse records of Mr Scott, BUT the entire country wants to see the birth certificate and college records of one said PRESIDENT OBAMA. Those records somehow remain unsealed. How ironic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Inquire this...

October 25th, 2010
8:53 pm

Austin Scott and his ex-wife had these records sealed yeeeears ago. Far before he started running for Congress. Stop spreading lies based on your speculation. It must suck being such a miserable person hating on strangers.

Bob

October 25th, 2010
8:55 pm

td

October 25th, 2010
8:59 pm

Shady Deal

October 25th, 2010
8:51 pm
If divorce records are public in Georgia, then they are public record for everyone. Taxpayer money pays the clerks, assistants and judges that preside over and grant marriages and divorces in the courts. If you want your business private, then keep it private and out of the courts. Government shouldn’t be in the business of sanctioning ANY civil unions and separations anyway

Transcripts are paid for by the parties in the case. If they pay for them, to ensure a record in case of appeal, then they are permanently part of the record. Since they paid for them should they be public record?

Interested

October 25th, 2010
9:22 pm

We have a president that won’t let the public see his birth certificate and yet this Dem candidate thinks divorce papers are her business? I say what’s good for the born-outside-of-the-USA president should be good for every candidate.

Ramguy

October 25th, 2010
9:32 pm

If you are actively seeking power then this comes with the territory. Don’t hide behind your kid.

SWDekalb4

October 25th, 2010
9:52 pm

Jim Marshall is obviously behind this nonsense – cause he’s desperate about abuot to LOSE!…. Austin Scott has been a state legislator for what? 14 years and NOW the libtards want to unseal his divorce records. Hummmm, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that Jim Marshall is resorting to personal attacks in the 11th hour. Marshall is a puppet and Pelosi is his puppetteer! CYA MARSHALL!