Nadya Suleman: New Welfare Fraud Charge for Octomom
Nadya Suleman–a.k.a. the Octomom–was charged with a fourth count of welfare fraud on Wednesday stemming from her collection of an additional $10,000 in benefits from the state of California.
Suleman–a single mom of 14–was charged in January with three counts of welfare fraud that stemmed from not disclosing approximately $30,000 in personal appearance and video (porn tape) income when she applied for state benefits. She could serve up to six years in jail if convicted for these crimes.
Suleman pleaded not guilty to last month’s charges as seen in the video clip above. Her lawyer has yet to issue a statement regarding Wednesday’s additional charge.
Nadya Suleman became known as the Octomom when she had eight babies via in vitro fertilization back in January of 2009. She was already the mother of six children. Suleman apparently believed she would strike gold having that many babies at once–expecting offers for book deals and a reality TV show. Very little of that ever materialized and now the Octomom finds herself a mother of fourteen who can barely keep food on the table and a roof over her children’s heads. She has stooped to a number of lows–claiming they were her attempts to make money for her family–like creating a porn video and dancing in a Florida strip club. It appears far more likely, however, that she has done these things as the result of a sick drive to put herself into the public eye.
Suleman is indeed in the public eye once again, and this week it’s for one more count of welfare fraud. Deputy District Attorney William Clark says it’s even unlikely that she’ll serve jail time because of her situation at home.
“She’s got 14 children. We’ll try and work out a deal for her,” he said after Nadya Suleman was charged the first time.
It’s truly a wonder that no one has stepped in and removed Nadya Suleman’s 14 children from her custody. They have lived in squalor and behavioral issues have cropped up–especially in her oldest son. Hopefully this won’t wind up as a case where the state should have looked a bit closer into the children’s situations–and deemed their welfare far more important than the welfare fraud.
Image via YouTube