Rapist - 'demands paternal visitation rights to the child he fathered with victim'

davet82

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2209258/Familys-outrage-girls-rapist-seeks-paternal-visitation-rights-child.html

A man who raped a 14-year-old girl and got her pregnant is now allegedly demanding visitation rights for the child.

The man, then 20, met his victim at church when she was in the eighth grade, and had sex with her

Should he be allowed access to the child?

He was convicted of statutroy rape

brummytom

Of course he shouldn't

Jason Todd

Not at all.

Seaneh

misleading title is misleading.

tmc86

F*ck that, think how traumatic it would be for the mother.

He's lucky not to be in jail and he definitely doesn't deserve to see the child.

ejmaztec

No feckin way, and if he thinks that he should be allowed, he should be locked up in a secure mental facility for the chronically deluded.

kneemos

Was it statutory rape?

davet82

kneemos wrote: »

Was it statutory rape?

Yes

Ellis Dee

davet82 wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2209258/Familys-outrage-girls-rapist-seeks-paternal-visitation-rights-child.html



Should he be allowed access to the child?

Maybe in about 25 years' time when he gets out of jail.:mad:

HeyThereDeliah

davet82 wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2209258/Familys-outrage-girls-rapist-seeks-paternal-visitation-rights-child.html



Should he be allowed access to the child?

Was it rape or consensual sex?

davet82

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

Was it rape or consensual sex?

He was covicted of statutory rape so i presume it was consensual

DarkJager

davet82 wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2209258/Familys-outrage-girls-rapist-seeks-paternal-visitation-rights-child.html

A man who raped a 14-year-old girl and got her pregnant is now allegedly demanding visitation rights for the child.

The man, then 20, met his victim at church when she was in the eighth grade, and had sex with her

Should he be allowed access to the child?

Her father should have visitation rights to him, with a good length of lead pipe.

HeyThereDeliah

davet82 wrote: »

He was covicted of statutory rape so i presume it was consensual

Your thread title is misleading.

Brussels Sprout

When I saw the thread title, I knew this was going to be a Daily mail article.

kneemos

A possibly mature fourteen year old and twenty year old,there may be more than meets the eye.

Darkglasses

Statutory rape, so this could be a very very different story to the one it appears to be. In fact it could be anything.

davet82

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

Your thread title is misleading.

How so? A rapist is a rapist same way a murder is a murder no matter what degree it is, no?

i could add statutory rapist but the title was long enough, all the details about the case are provided in the link. Quote is from the first few lines of the story

HeyThereDeliah

brummytom wrote: »

Of course he shouldn't

He did not rape her it was consensual, he is not a rapist as the thread tile suggests. In these circumstances I think he should be allowed see the child.

davet82

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

He did not rape her it was consensual, he is not a rapist as the thread tile suggests. In these circumstances I think he should be allowed see the child.

If he was 40 and and the girl was 12, would you feel the same?


idk the story has me conflicted in alot of ways

HeyThereDeliah

davet82 wrote: »

How so? A rapist is a rapist same way a murder is a murder no matter what degree it is, no?

i could add statutory rapist but the title was long enough, all the details about the case are provided in the link. Quote is from the first few lines of the story

A rapist forces someone to have sex, consensual sex means both people wanted sex.

Mickeroo

davet82 wrote: »

How so? A rapist is a rapist same way a murder is a murder no matter what degree it is, no?

i could add statutory rapist but the title was long enough, all the details about the case are provided in the link. Quote is from the first few lines of the story

Rape and statutory rape are entirely different. Statutory rape is still consensual sex, the word rape on it's own implies it was against the girls will and violence was involved.

I think he should get visitation rights.

Capt'n Midnight

Is he paying child support ?

Gauss

davet82 wrote: »

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

Your thread title is misleading.

How so? A rapist is a rapist same way a murder is a murder no matter what degree it is, no?

i could add statutory rapist but the title was long enough, all the details about the case are provided in the link. Quote is from the first few lines of the story

Statutory rape is not even close to being as evil as normal rape.

HeyThereDeliah

davet82 wrote: »

If he was 40 and and the girl was 12, would you feel the same?


idk the story has me conflicted in alot of ways

Let's stick to the thread you posted no point in going in another direction with it now.

Spunge

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Is he paying child support ?

the judge said he had to pay child support.

HeyThereDeliah

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Is he paying child support ?

I think he may well be which entitles him visitation rights, they are trying to change this now.

Boombastic

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

Was it rape or consensual sex?

From what It gather it was consensual sex. The child's mother found out and reported it as a crime. He pleaded guilty. He was sentenced to 16 years probation.

The man was charged with four counts of statutory rape of a child in 2009. Last year, he pleaded guilty to all the charges in Norfolk Superior Court. FOX Undercover isn't identifying the victim or the rapist to help protect her identity.

The Norfolk prosecutor asked for a three to five year prison sentence. But Superior Court Judge Thomas McGuire sentenced him to 16 years of probation with the condition he acknowledges he's the father of the baby and abide by the probate and family court.

The probate court ordered him to pay child support, opening the door for him to request visitation rights with the child.

"He hasn't cared up until now. Why should he now? She's three. She doesn't know who he is," the teen mother told FOX Undercover.

The attorney for the man who admitted raping the teenager would not comment on his client's fight for visitation rights. But he did claim the relationship was consensual, even though he acknowledged it was inappropriate, given the victim was only 14 and his client was 20.



Read more: http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/19628763/2012/09/24/rapist-wants-visitation-rights-teen-mom-fighting-back#ixzz27fYIl27s

If it was consensual, then yes I think he should have every right to see his child. Afterall the girl who ran away with her teacher to France was old enough

granturismo

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

He did not rape her it was consensual, he is not a rapist as the thread tile suggests. In these circumstances I think he should be allowed see the child.

HE RAPED HER.

The girl said her rapist had threatened her and promised to destroy her life: 'He told me that he could make my life upside down, and I wouldn’t have anybody and he would pin it all on me. So I was scared.'

But he is legally entitled to seek visitation rights;
Part of the probation arrangement demanded he acknowledge he is the baby’s father and follow probate and family court rules, according to My Fox News station.
The law requires him to pay child support — but also entitles him to seek visitation rights.


And this is what should happen;

DarkJager wrote: »

Her father should have visitation rights to him, with a good length of lead pipe.

She was only 14 so 'misleading title' and it was 'only statutory rape' comments are beyond comprehension.

Hmmmm it's Rape!!!!!
Kill him, cut off his balls, finger his ma!!!!

granturismo

Gauss wrote: »

Statutory rape is not even close to being as evil as normal rape.

Aggravated assault isnt as serious as murder but is still wrong.

Seaneh

Mickeroo wrote: »

Rape and statutory rape are entirely different. Statutory rape is still consensual sex, the word rape on it's own implies it was against the girls will and violence was involved.

I think he should get visitation rights.

Exactly.

Statutory rape is extremely different.

For example.

If a 16 year old girl and a 16 year old boy have sex in this country the boy can still be done for statutory rape.

Does that mean he is actually a rapist? **** no.

davet82

Seaneh wrote: »

Exactly.

Statutory rape is extremely different.

For example.

If a 16 year old girl and a 16 year old boy have sex in this country the boy can still be done for statutory rape.

Does that mean he is actually a rapist? **** no.

buy what about a 50 year old man and a 12 year old girl?

when does it become more ok?

Spunge

but if this happened in germany, he wouldnt be a rapist.

funny that.

kneemos

I don't think you can lay all the blame on the young man without knowing all the facts,she may have led him on for example or a hundred and one other variables.Without knowing the facts it's hard to say if he should see the child.

Germany allows this type of carry on?

saiint

he has a right to hang himself if he wants

Esoteric_

Statutory rape is rape. It's not attacking someone in a field forcibly, because consent is given, but it's still rape.

For it to be sex, INFORMED consent must be given. A 14 year old child has been deemed by legal legislation to not be able to give informed consent, hence it was a form of rape. You can't just say 'it's not rape.' It may not be rape in its typical form, but it is statutory rape.


That said, unless the teenager is suffering from trauma or other problems relating to the statutory rape, I don't believe that access should be denied. I believe it should be supervised, however.

Mickeroo

Bam Bam Mickey wrote: »

Germany allows this type of carry on?

14 is the age of consent there.

from wiki:

as long as a person over the age of 21 does not exploit a 14–15 year-old person's lack of capacity for sexual self-determination, in which case a conviction of an individual over the age of 21 requires a complaint from the younger individual; being over 21 and engaging in sexual relations with a minor of that age does not constitute an offense in and of itself. Otherwise the age of consent is 14, although provisions protecting minors against coercion apply until the age of 18 (under section Section 182(1) it is illegal to engage in sexual activity with a person under 18 "by taking advantage of an exploitative situation"

jaja321

kneemos wrote: »

I don't think you can lay all the blame on the young man without knowing all the facts,she may have led him on for example or a hundred and one other variables.Without knowing the facts it's hard to say if he should see the child.

Those damn sexy children, corrupting adults like that.

Mickeroo

Mickeroo wrote: »

14 is the age of consent there.

from wiki:

Scheisse!

Gauss

granturismo wrote: »

Gauss wrote: »

Statutory rape is not even close to being as evil as normal rape.

Aggravated assault isnt as serious as murder but is still wrong.

Who said statutory rape isn't wrong?

HeyThereDeliah

jaja321 wrote: »

Those damn sexy children, corrupting adults like that.

I never find that comment remotely funny.

tuxy

Age of consent in Spain is 13
So many rapists in Europe.....

tuxy

tuxy wrote: »

Age of consent in Spain is 13
So many rapists in Europe.....

Just because the age of consent is 13 , doesn't mean it's morally ok.
In fact any adult that has sex with a 13 year old is a scumbag.

jaja321

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

I never find that comment remotely funny.

Was more of a sarcastic response to the previous poster's comment that the child may have led him on :rolleyes:

davet82

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

He did not rape her it was consensual, he is not a rapist as the thread tile suggests.

Fair enough, he's a 'statutory rapist' then

msg11

davet82 wrote: »

buy what about a 50 year old man and a 12 year old girl?

when does it become more ok?

When you use some common sense and think to yourself, wait that's a bit odd and wrong/disgusting.

A 15 and a 16 year old at it are usually trying it as something new.

A 15 year old and a 50 year old man is a man getting his hole off a naive 15 year old and is morally wrong and anyone can see that.

Rape is rape, if he raped her in the forceful dirty way then no way should he be able to see the kid or mother.

Gran Hermano

Was he a maths teacher?

davet82

msg11 wrote: »

When you use so common sense and think to yourself, wait that's a bit odd.

A 15 and a 16 year old at it are usually trying it as something new.

A 15 year old and a 50 year old man is a man getting his hole off a naive 15 year old and is morally wrong and anyone can see that.

Rape is rape, if he raped her in the forceful dirty way then no way should he be able to see the kid or mother.

i do get what you're saying and i agree but when does it start being ok or not as bad, some people have more morals than others.

i'm not really arguing either side of it as i said before the story left me feeling conflicted

Feisar

Food for thought, if a twenty year old woman statuary rapes a fourteen year old boy, should she have visitation rights?

I don't mean this in the way people say if it was the other way around we'd all be clapping the lad on the back sort of crap.

HeyThereDeliah

davet82 wrote: »

Fair enough, he's a 'statutory rapist' then

And she is a willing accomplice.