Former NJ Governor James McGreevey Files for Divorce
Former New Jersey Governor James McGreevey filed for divorce today, 26 months after his wife, Dina Matos McGreevey (seen here in a 2002 inauguration photo) stood by as he declared "I am a gay American." The couple has been living apart since that date.
McGreevey told the Associated Press: "It's a sad day for everyone. It is something that had to be done. We are blessed with a wonderful daughter who remains our focus."
Matos McGreevey, who has 35 days to respond to the divorce filing, is expected to break her silence regarding their marriage in a tell-all book entitled Silent Partner, due for release on May 1st.
Posted Feb. 2,2007 at 4:08 PM EST by Andy Towle in James McGreevey, New Jersey, News | Permalink
Once a slimeball, always a slimeball. This man is a liar from start to finish. He reinforces every negative stereotype we gay men fight in this country.
Posted by: Brad | Feb 2, 2007 4:15:21 PM
Shizz...I don't want to read her book any more than I want to see his mug all over the place anymore. Two more disaster areas to profit from being public clowns and anti-role models. I pity their daughter the most.
Posted by: FizziekruntNT | Feb 2, 2007 4:19:12 PM
Christmas must be a blast at their place.
Their poor daughter. How old is she? Old enough to move far away and have a normal life, I hope.
Posted by: Brian | Feb 2, 2007 4:31:33 PM
Wow, only 26 months later?
Why the rush?
Posted by: Zeke | Feb 2, 2007 4:32:31 PM
I guess they waited this long so that she could get half his book money. It's the least he could do. Yuck.
Posted by: hoya86 | Feb 2, 2007 4:38:25 PM
just what we need, another dumb book by and about these bozos. I wonder when the israeli guy is going to write his. please, buy a novel instead!
Posted by: Martin | Feb 2, 2007 4:43:36 PM
It's funny that this is the story at the top of the page, while at the bottom (when I viewed it) there was a blog ad for togetherchristian.com showing a happy heterosexual couple. The togetherchristian couple looks like they'll be heading down the McGreevey path soon.
Posted by: Rob | Feb 2, 2007 4:46:43 PM
He really should have filed for divorce before buying his new mansion with his "husband" of 2 days.
Posted by: sam | Feb 2, 2007 5:00:50 PM
Hes a douche bag. First there is no way in hell he did not know he was gay , Their is no excuse know she cant get married again. He should not be allowed to see his child. I dont really believe in divorce. People now a days marry like its dating. He divorced his first wife because i guess he felt confident enough to be out. He should of not married her in the first place either, You should not gett mariied until after 22 ( college) and you should figure out who you like by college or 2 years tops after that. He did not have to get married for votes. He could of remained single, if he really wanted to lie. This is like people who have STD's and knowingly sleep with others without telling them. Im not saying being gay is an STD its just ruining someones life. I dont believe in alimony other than if said persoon stayed home with kids without nanny or put them through school.( if you want the lifestyle stay in the marriage) SHe should sue him for every dime he has , had or ever hopes to make.
Posted by: sasha | Feb 2, 2007 5:01:58 PM
I believe their application for an annulment from the Catholic Church was denied, which explains the delay. They've lived apart since he made his announcement. Hopefully his new bf can deal with his habitual lying.
Posted by: anon | Feb 2, 2007 5:07:41 PM
it's amazing how judgemental people are. is this the same group who thinks the right wingnuts should not judge them? the world we live, "judge unless you are judging me", i guess that's the motto.
Posted by: johnosahon | Feb 2, 2007 6:29:52 PM
I am a moron and don't bother reading any of my posts. I have no clue what I'm talking about.
Posted by: sasha | Feb 2, 2007 9:44:10 PM
I don't know why he would be asking for an annulment from the Catholic Church considering the fact that he's converted to Episcopalian.
Besides, it's hard to ask for an annulment from a seven year "marriage" that produced a child. Isn't there some sort of rule that a "marriage" that's been consumated can't be annulled? Not being Catholic, I don't know all the rules but I thought that was the case.
Posted by: Zeke | Feb 2, 2007 10:44:53 PM
He converted after they applied for an annulment (which was done for her sake, not his). As to the odds of getting one, they were long, but politicians have a lot of pull within the church, so maybe they thought there was a chance. Then again, one could always ask him...
Posted by: anon | Feb 3, 2007 12:10:59 AM
I can't wait to read Dina McGreevey's book about her marriage to former NJ governor Jim McGreevy. His book should have been called "The Deception" because it is obvious that he chose to further his political ambitions by getting married to Dina, even if this meant trapping her in a lonely and loveless marriage (his first wife left him for similar reasons his book says). It's unclear to me why some people in the gay community and media consider the former governor a hero. McGreevey did what Mark Foley could not do and that is get out in front of the story. In August 2004, McGreevey didn't come out because of a sudden epiphany about his sexuality; rather, he and staff convened an urgent self-serving press conference to get his story out before the news media could report on the story about his adulterous relationship with state employee Golan Cipel. Conveniently, due to his being gay, McGreevey's story gets fuzzy whenever he's confronted with potential political and personal wrongdoings. I hope that Dina's book will add some much-needed clarity to this story.
Posted by: Maracas | Feb 3, 2007 11:13:29 AM
McGreevey's administration was also one of the most corrupt in NJ ever. Google Mcgreevey, Eminent Domain, and the codeword "Machiavelli" and read for yourself. So the hero worship is kind of over the top, he used it to dodge his real problems of corruption.
Posted by: al | Feb 3, 2007 5:28:08 PM
There is no safe harbor (in time) for an annulment. An annulment recognizes that the marriage never took place because there was an impediment at attempted inception. Similarly, children are not an absolute bar in seeking an annulment, although children negate one of the basis for an annulment, which is infertility. The granting of annulments is highly suspect because of the historical ability of wealthy petitioners to receieve annulments fairly readily while poor petitioners have had difficulty. Although the rules in Canon law are quite clear, there has been much abuse in application. All this is moot however, because McCreepy is not Catholic. Were he Catholic he would have a strong case for annulment of the second marriage because the Church does not recognize divorce, therefore, in the eyes of the Church, McCreepy would still be married to his first wife. This intellectual hoop-jumping is a very clear example of why the civil and spiritual aspects of marriage should be divided, as is the law in most European countries. The Catholic Church considers marriage one of the seven sacraments, whereby grace is conferred (see, also, Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Orders, Extreme Unction, etc.) As a gay man I am willing to forgo any grace that might result from marriage to a woman but I am definitely not willing to tolerate state-sanctioned discrimination against my marriage to my partner (albeit not yet in name, but otherwise the equivalent to a straight marriage). Too long a post containing more information that is irrelevant to our lives but that can be said, unfortunately, of a great deal of what we lawyers know and do.
Posted by: rudy | Feb 3, 2007 5:55:09 PM
My parents were granted an annulment from the Catholic Church, and they had been married for nine years and had a child. But this was back in the 1970s when I guess the Church was passing annulments out like candy.
Posted by: LaShawna | Feb 5, 2007 5:49:39 AM
Condolences Lashawna. One of the most despicable effects of being granted an annulment BY the Church is that the children are thereby rendered illegitimate since the marriage was never valid. The declaration of annulment decrees that the putative marriage is invalid ab inicio, that is, the marriage never occurred. Canon law is the most legalistic of the jurisprudential coda of which I am aware and inevitably results in perversions such as this result.
Posted by: rudy | Feb 5, 2007 7:22:26 AM
who the hell posted i dont read my own post. At least be consistent and bash everyone with the same views as me. Stop being a bitch and using my name to post.I fyou have a problem meessage me
www.myspace.com/sashambrosia
Posted by: sasha | Feb 5, 2007 6:24:30 PM
Well kids, let's face it, when you get yourself into trouble all you have to do is scream gay or pick rehab of your choice. Doing both will be over the top but what the hell, queens have been doing that for years and yes get away with it.
Posted by: Dr. Pat | Feb 5, 2007 7:32:07 PM
Sasha, you didn't post that last comment?
I should have known. It's the first thing under your name that I actually agreed with.
Now I know your record is still perfect.
Posted by: Zeke | Feb 5, 2007 11:37:20 PM