MMandM Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 (edited) A 13-year-old girl went to a party with her older sister. At the party, the girl, was drugged and raped by a 21 year old man. The girl became pregnant and gave birth last December. Her mother is raising the child. In a plea deal, the rapist was convicted and ordered to serve 8 years and 4 months in prison, "which means he will most likely be released in five years", and ordered to pay child support supervised by his parole officer upon his release. The rapist's attorney is arguing his client should receive visitation privilege to his child upon his release. Every parent has a duty to support the children he/she creates. Even a rapist has a duty of support. Every parent has a right to establish a meaningful relationship with the children he/she creates. Every child has a right to establish a meaningful relationship with his/her parent. Accordingly, visitation with a non-custodial parent is PRESUMED to be in the best interests of the child. However, that presumption is not conclusive. It is rebuttal. If the rapist / father insists on visitation rights, compelling arguments can be made that it is NOT in the best interests of the child to establish a relationship with his/her mother's rapist. And that's what I come in, it will be a horrible week for the 13-year-old girl but it's my job to keep this man out of their lives forever. Edited June 5, 2007 by MarkInAlisoViejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Administrator Graeme Posted June 5, 2007 Site Administrator Share Posted June 5, 2007 Best wishes, Mark I agree that it is highly unlikely that it is in the child's best interest for this sperm donor (sorry -- I refuse to call him a father) to have access. Good luck and I hope you're successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaryKelly Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 Every parent has a right to establish a meaningful relationship with the children he/she creates. The rapist did not create that child, he satisfied his disgusting lust. Eight years ain't long enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morganx Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 Just don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lugh Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 hum... is the visitation court ordered as in: he gets the child from 6 -8 on wednesday and every other saturday (kinda hard to do in jail) or is it that the custodial parent must bring the infant to the jail to see the non-custodial parent? could it be argued that jail is not a 'healthy environment' for a child? could the visitations (if enforced) be handled by a third party? could she get some sort of court order to keep him away from her thus making it so that she (and the baby) have no contact with the criminal? I'm not so sure I understand this plea thing... this was rape and other things I would think... bad things. Eight years is not long enough, not for the rape of a child. Hopefully he will not survive his prison term, then the problem will be solved. Hugs and prayers for your um.. client. Lugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drewbie Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 Eh I don't think he should get visitation rights, probably never thought she would get pregnant, I do also have to say wtf was her sister thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 So he raped a 13 year-old child... doesn't that get him some sort of restraining order banning him from being within like 300 miles of any minor? (I realise that I've exaggerated the restraining order distance) It should. It is a 13 year old child for frikks sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Razor Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 That's insane. That's like beyond insane, and well into "Oh my god, only the judicial system can come up with something that f**ked up"-ness. That man should be tied down and raped by overly endowed men for his entire prison sentence, which should be forever. No lube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesSavik Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 Sex crime cases are always disturbing. Worse- we are hearing of more and more false accusations1 which makes the issue as clear as mud. 13 year old children must be protected and after such an incident doubtlessly needs much therapy and healing. That the perp is also so young at 21 (and probably intoxicated) makes the case epically difficult. In many states, such a crime would call for a life sentence. Visitation isn't the only or even the most difficult issue here. I am glad that I have nothing to do with the law because making such decisions on a regular basis would surely destroy me. Those of you that do- I would hope that you have someone to talk to regulary and take frequent vacations. The work that you do is nobel but it demands its pound of flesh. I urge you to take care of yourself. You have my admiration and gratitude for the service that you perform for society. It is one of those dirty jobs that someone has to do- preferably someone with a soul. -JS _____________________ 1- Kobe Bryant, Duke Lacross team, Divorce court "relevations".... the FBI is now warning prosecutors that as many as a quarter or more of sex crime accusations may be false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 Hmm, I know mom probably doesn't want her kid to see her rapist, but I wonder if the 13 year-old will ever want to. Every adopted kid i know has always said how much they wish they knew who their real parents were, and I'm wondering if it would work the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMandM Posted June 6, 2007 Author Share Posted June 6, 2007 (edited) This is what I call a slam dump case; I honestly didn't expect it to last all week but also didn't expect it to conclude today. Cases like this one are rare, unless of course the rapist is the son of a wealthy California businessman who is rich enough to pay for the best legal team money can buy, but a fool and his money will soon be departed. The court concluded today that when a child is conceived and born as the result of an unlawful sexual intercourse as defined in the code, the biological father shall not be permitted visitation. This does not violate constitutional principles. No court has held that the mere fact of biological fatherhood that was the result of a conception during a criminal act "felony" and that is unaccompanied by a relationship with the child, creates an interest that the United States Constitution protects in the name of liberty. He will pay (and have any pay he earns garnished by) the state and the state will provide the girl and the child with a monthly stipend. Not only will the rapist pay child support he will also pay for therapy for this girl. Daddy set up a nice little trust fun for his rapist son, even bought him a 600K condo in Corona Del Mar, of course we can't touch the condo since it's in daddy's name. Parental duties and rights are independent of each other. The parent's duty of support can be enforced even if the parent is denied the right to establish a relationship with the child through visitation. In this situation, the parental rights will still exist, but the rights were denied because the best interests of the child would be harmed if the rights were enforced. Forcing this girl to have recurring contact with her rapist would just be cruel and there are other and easier methods of achieving the end goal. Edited June 6, 2007 by MarkInAlisoViejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_l Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 good to know would think any court that allowed a paedophile to see his child that was conceived during an act of child rape would be insane, of course the courts are often insane and do worse but glad this has worked out. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMandM Posted June 6, 2007 Author Share Posted June 6, 2007 good to know would think any court that allowed a paedophile to see his child that was conceived during an act of child rape would be insane, of course the courts are often insane and do worse but glad this has worked out. Mark Yes indeed Mark, most states have passed laws with respect to rapists and their parental rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 (edited) It's interesting that my comments closely tie into Mark's "good looks" thread as well. In the case of military members committing crimes off of military properties, the Judge Advocates General (the District Attorneys of the military) share concurrent jurisdiction with the county in which the crime occurred, essentially this means that the military and the county can both prosecute the person, but they generally won't both do it, so they have to work out between them who will prosecute the person. While I was interning with a Judge Advocate General (JAG) office, we had an instance where a woman was forcefully raped by her boyfriend. The county had done all the initial evidence gathering, so we agreed that they would prosecute the case. Weeks later, however, the District Attorney informed us that he would not prosecute the case because he believed that the woman was unattractive and her boyfriend was attractive, and he didn't think that a jury would believe that he would rape someone so unattractive. We took the case on, but basically he would've gotten completely away with it if not for the fact that he was in the military. One thing that has shocked me in my interactions with criminal law is the sheer depravity and volume of rapists and child molesters. In addition to this, I've been shocked by how certain cases were handled. Whether they should or not, looks do matter. A rape was ignored because the guy was way more attractive (at least in traditional views) than the person he raped. And I'll probably always be alone because I am unattractive and have no fashion sense. Such is life. Edited June 7, 2007 by Matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Administrator Graeme Posted June 7, 2007 Site Administrator Share Posted June 7, 2007 It seems that too many people still think that rape is a crime of passion. Occasionally it is, but most of the time it is a crime of violence and control. Attractiveness has little to do with it. I'm glad the guy was prosecuted, Matthew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMandM Posted June 9, 2007 Author Share Posted June 9, 2007 It seems that too many people still think that rape is a crime of passion. Occasionally it is, but most of the time it is a crime of violence and control. Attractiveness has little to do with it. I'm glad the guy was prosecuted, Matthew. You know Graeme, when I was held in contempt of court during a civil trail in which the victim was suing her rapist for punitive damages. The victim was a 46-year-old woman, the rapist was 24. The judge made a stupid comment in front of the jury and stated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eliotmoore Posted June 9, 2007 Share Posted June 9, 2007 I do also have to say wtf was her sister thinking. Yes, not to distract from the inane logic of our legal systems, or deflect the weight of responsibility, but the girl was not thinking about her sister here. A lawyer would understand the heart ache of this better than I, I guess in the overall search for justice for everyone some bad stuff will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now