Outrage still intact.

After much encouragement I forwarded my last story on to several local news agencies and received one response.

The reporter asked if I had all of the paperwork and would I be willing to appear on camera.

Me? On camera? I don't know. What would I wear?

Of course I would!

The first thing I did was look at the paperwork we were given by the court, to make sure there was no mention of a $310 application fee.

Well, there was a fee and it was due that day. Oops! I am embarrassed, but not really. Here's what it says:

"The court may require you to pay a $20 Application Fee to determine whether you are eligible for a court-appointed attorney."

Okay. $20 sounds reasonable but it is not the same as $310.

"This fee is due even if your request for appointment of counsel is denied. Payment of this fee is due in full today. This fee may, in limited circumstances, be waived."

So why did no one tell us, when we were filing the application, to pay up? One would assume from this behavior that it had been waived. By their own admission the fee may not have even been required. I can assure you it was not!

I still maintain that the wording in the letter we received 2 days ago is too strong and meant as a strong-arm tactic to intimidate people into paying money they do not owe and cannot afford to spend.

Now I wait to find out if my story is still considered news-worthy with this new evidence. Your opinions are valued.