there for failing to pay child support bills.

And at the minimum security Prison Farm, 30 of the 93 men were there for not complying with court ordered payments.

With incarceration and induction into the work release programme, many were supporting their children for the first time in years.

That was the reaction Friday from Family Court Magistrate Carlisle Greaves to comments by Prison Officers Association spokesman Russ Ford and recent letters to the Editor in The Royal Gazette .

Mr. Greaves struck back at the notion he had "filled up Westgate'' with low risk "civil'' offenders. Non payment of child support earns a default sentence of 90 days imprisonment, but there is a programme where men work during the day and sleep at the Prison Farm.

"How can eight out of 208 at Westgate qualify as filling up the prisons with civies?'' he asked.

"How is 30 of 93 at the Farm filling it up, when there are many cases who spend five out of seven days on the outside earning? "Westgate and Prison Farm are a last resort,'' he added. "Many measures have been put in place and in fact operating long before a person reaches the stage of imprisonment.'' Mr. Greaves allowed The Royal Gazette special access to Friday's annual amnesty session -- as is a Magistrate's discretion -- and responded to his critics, saying: "Sometimes the judiciary has to respond because public perception is important to the administration of justice.

"I think I'm a fair, feared and fearless judicial officer,'' he added. "That is my reputation, that is my policy and that is the way that I perform my duties.'' Mr. Greaves countered "the insinuation'' that there was arbitrary jailing of fathers for child support, reminding his critics millions of dollars were owed to children "by malingerers''.

He called delinquent child abuse payments a "serious abuse'' and noted he was hired to do something about it.

He was willing to stop jailing men for child support, he said, but only if there was a "change in law'' by Parliament.

"I'm saying there is a separation of powers. I have to do my job and the one thing I'm not going to be accused of is not doing it properly,'' he added.

"I'm not here to be popular.

"What do you do when a man comes in and says `I'm not going to pay' and he hasn't been doing it for years despite an attachment order (to his wages) after attachment order,'' Mr. Greaves asked.

"They know the system. They switch jobs often, only to avoid making payments.

They come in and say `lock me up'. If the courts are not respected then the Country is in jeopardy.'' Not included in those figures are men in prison on criminal offences who have had their release dates pushed back until they pay their child support arrears.

The law allows for a suspension of child support while a man is in custody, something which two men at Friday's amnesty hearing said they did not know.

They had accumulated $40,000 in debt between them during the 1990s.

Using figures obtained from court records, Mr. Greaves cited astronomical figures owed by some of the men.

The average was $22,600, with three men owing $64,800, $54,900 and $29,200 respectively.

"When you bring a child in the world, the time for malingering is over and the time for responsibility is ripe,'' Mr. Greaves said.

He added: "All this court is doing is ensuring that fathers and mothers live up to their responsibilities as parents.

"Oh, yes, mothers too! I have perused the files and I can't find one case before I came where an access order was enforced against a mother in favour of a father,'' he said. "Today every mother knows that she has to give access or it will be enforced against her,'' Mr. Greaves added. "Every child has a right to be financially maintained by mother and father.'' And he asked: "How can we give a father the luxury of saying he's not going to pay when the mother can't say that to the nursery or the supermarket or clothing store? "Those who are criticising ought to say to fathers they should live up to their responsibilities,'' he added.

Mr. Greaves likened not paying for one's children to stealing or possessing drugs because of its impact on others.

"Child support is not a civil matter, it is a crime! And the law provides a penalty,'' he explained. "The victim is the child. Which is worse?'' he asked. "A man who breaks into a house and steals a thousand dollars or a man who steals $64,000 from his children. I think it's very uncivil and it's indeed an offence. Ninety days in prison, that's the law...

"I'm paid to ensure they (children) get what they justly deserve,'' he concluded.