When the Juice called Michael Dippolito in early December to ask about the 11-year-old son he fathered and abandoned, his response was simple:
"I don't even know what you're talking about," he said. "I can't talk to you, I apologize." Then he hung up.
But of course, Dippolito did know that a woman named Karen Tanne had filed a paternity suit against him last August, requesting child support for their son. It could not have been too much a shock, because Tanne had also filed two paternity suits in the late '90s, right after
her child was born in Broward County.
By December 11, 2009, a DNA test had confirmed that Dippolito is the child's father. Yet his lawyers still refused to comment on the situation for this week's New Times cover story about Dippolito and his wife, Dalia.
Now, apparently, Dippolito has developed a conscience -- although he still claims fatherhood came as a surprise. His lawyer, Jason Brodie, told the Sun-Sentinel on Monday:
"He had no idea and now all of a sudden he's in the limelight and the next thing he knows, he's being told he has a son," Brodie said. "First he learns his wife is trying to kill him and now he's learned he has a son. How much can one man take?"Wow, ignorance really is bliss, isn't it? How convenient that Dippolito chose to acknowledge his child just before the New Times story, outlining his criminal history and his relationship with Tanne, hit the streets.
Paternity tests have confirmed Dippolito is the boy's father and Dippolito plans to "do what's right and is looking to build a relationship with his son," Brodie said.
It's lucky too that the Sun-Sentinel didn't challenge his claims of surprise. If the daily papers wavered in their portrait of Michael Dippolito as an innocent victim of his wife's plot to have him killed, that would be too much for one man to take, wouldn't it?