Agenda Uber Alles III: Aw Sh*t!

I was right! The truth comes out in USA Today:

Brittney Griner shockingly filed to annul her marriage with Glory Johnson just 28 days after the same-sex couple wed and one day after Johnson announced she was pregnant by using donated sperm. At the time, Griner cited “fraudulent statements” made by Johnson and pressure into marriage “under duress” in the original June 5 paperwork.

Griner and her representation filed a July 13 motion to amend the initial petition for annulment, revealing key details into Griner’s decision to end the marriage.

In the court documents, obtained by USA TODAY Sports on July 23, it is revealed that Griner omitted certain facts in the initial petition in order to protect the couple’s privacy. The amended documents reveal that Johnson was texting an ex-boyfriend while the two were engaged. The amended documents also detail Griner “recently discovering” Johnson’s “sexual relationship with a man” while the couple was dating.

You don’t say. Continued:

Further, just prior to Petitioner [Griner] filing her Petition for Annulment and Alternative for Dissolution, Petitioner learned that Respondent [Johnson] had been communicating with her former beau, which is documented by text messages on April 6, 2015. Petitioner was not aware that Respondent had continued admiration for her former male companion and would not have married Respondent if she had been made aware of Respondent’s continued affection for her beau.

Additionally, Petitioner just recently learned that Respondent was not completely faithful during their courtship leading up to the engagement. Respondent intentionally concealed her sexual relations with a man to whom she was simultaneously in a relationship with from 2013 to July 2014; said relationship between Respondent and this man was unbeknownst to Petitioner. Petitioner had no idea that Respondent was sexually and emotionally involved with another individual at the same time she was sexually and emotionally involved with Respondent. Had Petitioner been aware of Respondent’s relationship with another person, she would have never proposed, let alone marry Respondent. Upon information and belief, Respondent not only deceived Petitioner, but also the man to who Respondent was in a relationship with.

Well, color me…surprised. Here I was, thinking that gay marriages were just as stable as straight ones!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s