matt_garth
Well-Known Member
There didn’t seem to be an applicable thread for this story.
INVESTIGATIVE UNIT: Rape victim ordered to pay her abuser child support
INVESTIGATIVE UNIT: Rape victim ordered to pay her abuser child support
That's ****ed up.There didn’t seem to be an applicable thread for this story.
INVESTIGATIVE UNIT: Rape victim ordered to pay her abuser child support
SEC Values.That's ****ed up.
But ... welcome to the Bible Belt.
Sure.Get used to **** like this. They are actively subjugating women.
Says the penisSure.
A single, ambiguous story is not indicative of any larger socio-political trend.Says the penis
I guess the US government has never actively attacked your reproductive health. Lucky.A single, ambiguous story is not indicative of any larger socio-political trend.
There didn’t seem to be an applicable thread for this story.
INVESTIGATIVE UNIT: Rape victim ordered to pay her abuser child support
In the comments of that story (don't recommend reading, btw, unless you want to read a bunch of men explaining how a teenager is responsible for a grown man raping her), its noted that they probably had a custody agreement that requires both parents to agree to the kid having a cell phone. That's kind of common in co-parenting agreements with courts. Of course, the fact that it has gotten to this point - that the judge values upholding the custody agreement more than the investigation of, at best, statutory rape, but more likely a sexual assault - is ****ing gross.Everything about this is ****ed up, but something caught my attention on my second read of the story. How the hell the woman giving a 15-year-old a cell phone grounds for taking custody away from her? Hell, my daughter was a lot younger than that when we got her one. Most 15-year-olds have a phone by that age now.
I believe your belief about her age is irrelevant. Your risk.There has got to be a story here that we are not getting.
In any case, this guy hasn't been charged with anything, let alone convicted, which is the problem that judge was probably staring at.
I am genuinely curious. I know that saying you thought the victim was older wouldn't be a defense in a statutory rape case, but let's say she showed him a fake ID or mispresented her age in other ways, does that usually preclude being charged or does it work as a defense?
There has got to be a story here that we are not getting.
In any case, this guy hasn't been charged with anything, let alone convicted, which is the problem that judge was probably staring at.
I am genuinely curious. I know that saying you thought the victim was older wouldn't be a defense in a statutory rape case, but let's say she showed him a fake ID or mispresented her age in other ways, does that usually preclude being charged or does it work as a defense?
Agreed.There has got to be a story here that we are not getting.