Gill jailed for failing to pay $170K in child support

Radio talk show host Steve Gill is behind bars for failing to pay $170,000 in child support, The Tennessean’s Joel Ebert reports.

Gill was booked into the Williamson County jail on Tuesday night. He had been ordered in May to pay the child support to his ex-wife, Kathryn B. Gill, within 10 days. His bond was set at the same $170,000.

Gill’s former wife filed a petition in January for civil contempt. She sought $86,000 in child support, plus $4,400 in medical expenses, $133,000 in college expenses, $11,000 for a car she purchased for the children.

Steve Gill told the newspaper in May that he would seek to overturn the judge’s order  by going to “to court and present the facts and numbers.”

Gill runs a political consulting business and has spearheaded the conservative Tennessee Star website. He is also a former two-time congressional candidate.

33 Responses to Gill jailed for failing to pay $170K in child support

  • James White says:

    Is he still with the neo-con STAR ?

    • MARLE says:

      He IS the “sans-journalistic-standards” internet blog.

      • Stuart I. Anderson says:

        “Journalistic standards” in 2019 in the USA? How quaint. Wildly unrealistic, but quaint.

        • MARLE says:

          I watched the Tennessean and the Star’s coverage of the 18 Mayoral race to confirm the bias of the Tennessean. By comparison….well, there was no comparison. The Tennessean bothered to cover each candidate. The star posted near daily positive coverage of just one person. Even a metro, left-wing joke of a “news outlet” was more even handed than the star.

          • Stuart I. Anderson says:

            Ah that’s your problem. The Star isn’t, and has never purported to be, a publication in general circulation intended to give the public dispassionate information about the “NEWS.” On the contrary, the Star is published by Steve and Michael Patrick Leahy, two outspoken spoken conservatives and it is intended to discuss current events of interest to conservatives. Thus, you are holding the Tennessee Star to a standard that should be followed, but rarely is, by the mainstream media but not any journal like the Star, the New Republic, the National Review, etc.

          • MARLE says:

            “We feature articles reporting news, politics, and policy at the state level, primarily from Tennessee. We round out our daily coverage with national stories…”
            THIS is from their web site about who they are. REPORTING NEWS……Nothing there resembling what you said, STUART.

            You really have a knack for distortion even when the subjects of your distortion put the distortion right before your eyes.

          • Stuart I. Anderson says:

            OK, I agree, that introduction is misleading. Steve and Michael should have given me a pre-publication copy and I would have re-written it to better reflect what the Star is all about.

            What I said about the Star in my 9:59 AM post, however, is an accurate description of the intended function of the Star. If this is news to anyone, then I am happy to have provided it so we are all on the same page. I encourage everyone to read the Star, or at least glance at the headlines for stories of interest, so you can confirm that my description is accurate no matter what its own introductory article says.

          • MARLE says:

            Your offer to Re-Write is Missing The Point.

            First since they believe they are the smartest person in the room (tricky when they are both in the room at the same time as evidenced by their talk show where Steve constantly puts Michael in his place) and would think they need help from YOU of all people.

            Second is the fact that this MIS-statement is intentional. It is not a matter of not finding the right words or phrases.

          • James White says:

            Stuart aka Scott Golden, :the New Republic, the National Review…. Apparently he gets his NeoConservatism from the GodFather Bill Krystol and the NeoCons that Hate our republic an the National Review (neoconFather Buckley) and the New Republic. I see the association of Stuart and the Star more clearly now..

        • MARLE says:

          I don’t insist on journalistic standards. Any crackpot(s) can host a website or a blog.

          I don’t mind when any local or national publication, especially those biased by the monetary gain, political persuasion, or personal, grudge-holding, vindictive nature of its owner, goes about its daily messaging.

          I do mind when it purports to be a news outlet, but actually functions otherwise~ as you, Stuart, so aptly noted.

      • Donna Locke says:

        Marle, the Star is not there to do what a truly journalistic news outlet would do. We don’t have one of those in Nashville. The Star is there to provide facts, context, and opinion that readers don’t get from the lefty news media. The Star is just there as a balance. There was a vacuum, and they filled it. They are coming from a particular perspective and just provide a service in filling in the gaps, particularly on immigration issues.

        • MARLE says:

          The Tennessean covered the Nashville mayor’s race, especially the 18 race, with so much more balance than the star it is not even in the same league. The nutty leftist Nashville Scene at least made an attempt to speak with each of the candidates. I know for a fact that the star did not do even that much.

          It is the personal opinion blog of 2 people and only one of them is the alpha dog.

          • Stuart I. Anderson says:

            It’s fascinating how you insist on comparing the content of The Tennessean and the Tennessee Star as if both are attempting to do the same thing and serve the same purpose which is simply not the case. You have rightly pointed out that the Star’s introductory article is misleading, and perhaps intentionally so in the publisher’s attempt to increase the periodical’s readership beyond the conservatives who are its natural consumer. Nevertheless, this does not change the nature of the Star which should be obvious to anyone who reads it for one or two days.

            The function of the Tennessee Star is to provide its readers with news of interest to conservatives, especially state and local news that they can’t get from the hopelessly and overwhelmingly leftward biased mainstream media. THAT’S IT! Yes, you are right, The Tennessean and the Star are “…not even in the same league” and intentionally so. For conservatives, and for those interested in getting the conservative take on Tennessee news, there’s the Star and long may it continue to publish. THE STAR IS NOT “BALANCED.” IT’S READERS DON’T WANT IT TO BE “BALANCED.” UNTIL THE THOUGHT COMMISSARS CHANGE OUR CONSTITUTION IT WILL NEVER BE “BALANCED.”

            (Speaking of which, I see Gannett shareholders, owners of your beloved “balanced” Tennessean have finally agreed to be put out of their misery by selling out to New Media Investment Group. Now what remains to be seen is whether the new owner of most of the major Tennessee newspapers will continue Gannett’s disastrous marketing strategy of trying to sell left leaning newspapers in an overwhelmingly conservative state.)

          • Donna Locke says:

            The “news” situation is such that we need as many sources as possible that we can get to on our own. The Star is just another source, incomplete and slanted as it is, as all the outlets are, and always we must consider the source when making our judgments, drawing conclusions, etc., all the while knowing we are missing some relevant information no matter how much we take in.

            The Star publishes other writers from other places. Chris Alto was doing the best immigration reporting there but is not doing that there now. I’m not into their Christian evangelism on abortion and other issues, so I ignore all that and just look for any possible facts of interest to me.

          • MARLE says:

            I don’t “love” the Tennessean, Stuart. And balance is not the issue.

            The Tennessean is left leaning; star, right. NOTHING is wrong about that.

  • Misty Pardner says:

    And all that money he made from loser candidates, Carr, McDow, Durham….should I continue?

  • Sidney Bennett says:

    The family values party doesn’t believe in feeding children, evidently. He is pro fetus not pro life. As a former child support prosecutor I can tell you that the n order to make this ruling Judge Martin found he has the present ability to pay, as the payments became due and/or now, in full. He has assets that can be liquidated or accounts that can be used. He has made a choice not to support his children in violation of a court order. This used to be a felony, I don’t know if there’s still a felony non support statute on the books or not, but he’s being held here on contempt. If there’s still a non support felony statute, I’d love to see him tried under that.

    • Stuart I. Anderson says:

      To extrapolate the “values” of a political party or movement from the difficulties being experienced by one man is certainly not “evident” nor even rational. Schadenfreude is an all too human reaction to the travails of some outspoken person with whose politics you don’t particularly agree, but its really embarrassing when practiced by liberals who behave as though they have all but cornered the market on compassion.

  • Linda Caldwell says:

    A family values kinda guy. Hmmmm.

  • Stuart I. Anderson says:

    I’m sure this is simply a misunderstanding – some regrettable communication problem that often happens between ex-spouses that Steve will clear up in the near future.

  • LeeAnn C. says:

    Idiot! Deadbeat dads have to pay up what the court orders. I feel for his kids! Apparently, Mr. Gill isn’t a very good lawyer. Glad he was unsuccessful as a congressman.

  • Reactions abound without all the “facts” to substantiate. I also KNOW FOR A FACT that Judge Martin in a different case omitted “material facts”… facts that matter… from his Opinion to justify his decision and to benefit long-time powerful alliances. Had these facts been included the outcome would have been different. Judge Martin also picks and chooses the TN Statutes, ignoring those that do not fit his narrative. In so doing and as an Officer-of-the-Court he “deceives the court” bringing FRAUD UPON THE COURT. More will be forthcoming.

  • Benton Temple says:

    Steve Gill is gutter trash. Tennessee Star is gutter trash. Could not happen to a better guy.

    • Stuart I. Anderson says:

      Oh, Benton forgot, “. . .and anyone else who disagrees with me is gutter trash too.” Sort of reminds me of a cheer we yell at the Predators’ games when the opposition coach is introduced dpesn’t it?

  • ernie bacon says:

    My compliments to Kathy for taking this action!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *