Rape victim ordered to pay her abuser child support

[Derec]

I would prefer that kids be allowed to grow up and become adults before adults think they are fair game. The fact that you do not says everything about you.

I prefer to err on the side of not locking people up when it comes to consensual sex.
Do you think we should raise aoc to 18 everywhere? Or maybe 21? Or even 25, because that's when brains supposedly mature?
And how would you deal with young people lying about their age and even having fake ids?

If a young man meets a young woman at a party and she tells him she is 18 or 19 but turns out to be 16, do you really think he should go to prison for a felony charge and have to register as a "sex offender"? I definitely do not.

 

[Derec]

Her age when the kid was born. What more do you need?

That's only evidence that there was sex. Not that it was forcible or non-consensual like she alleges.

 

[Arctish]

You didn’t read the article either.

I did. As badly written and biased and horribly written as it is.

She filed charges years ago. Police have done nothing.

She filed the charges in 2015, 10 years after the sex, and four years after the dad found about the kid.

I realize that you don’t agree with statuatory rape laws but that’s your problem. There has been no ‘proof’ of forcible rape because there has never been an investigation. This is not at all unusual. It’s disgusting but not unusual.

What proof of forcible or otherwise non-consensual contact do you think could be found 10 years later?
And yes, I do not agree with these laws. Louisiana's is not as bad as some, but it still does not allow lack of knowledge of the girl's age as a defense. I do not think men should be held criminally or otherwise liable for having sex with somebody who lied about her age.

What proof have you found that she lied about her age?

 

[Derec]

What proof have you found that she lied bout her age?

I did not say she in particular did (although she might have - no way to know 16 years later one way or the other).
I was talking generally that this is an aspect of these laws that I find particularly egregious - they do not allow the other party lying about her age as a defense.

 

[ZiprHead]

Her age when the kid was born. What more do you need?

That's only evidence that there was sex. Not that it was forcible or non-consensual like she alleges.

She was under the age of consent at the time.

 

[Derec]

She was under the age of consent at the time.

That does not mean the sex was non-consensual. Even the LA law acknowledges there can be consent even below that arbitrary cutoff.

A person who is seventeen years of age or older has sexual intercourse, with consent, with a person who is thirteen years of age or older but less than seventeen years of age, when the victim is not the spouse of the offender and when the difference between the age of the victim and the age of the offender is four years or greater;

The woman is alleging actual rape. Not merely carnal knowledge of a juvenile. My question was, what evidence is there of that? Your reply was irrelevant to my question.

 

[Toni]

Her age when the kid was born. What more do you need?

That's only evidence that there was sex. Not that it was forcible or non-consensual like she alleges.

The law says it cannot have been consensual.

 

[Toni]

She was under the age of consent at the time.

That does not mean the sex was non-consensual. Even the LA law acknowledges there can be consent even below that arbitrary cutoff.

A person who is seventeen years of age or older has sexual intercourse, with consent, with a person who is thirteen years of age or older but less than seventeen years of age, when the victim is not the spouse of the offender and when the difference between the age of the victim and the age of the offender is four years or greater;

The woman is alleging actual rape. Not merely carnal knowledge of a juvenile. My question was, what evidence is there of that? Your reply was irrelevant to my question.

Louisiana allows child marriage, and the exception refers to spouses. Even you can understand the difference between two kids who get married and a 30 year old man who offers a 16 year old a ride home and instead takes her to his own home and rapes her.

 

[Rhea]

Note to self:
- if you are a 16 yo woman, we must allow for the assumption that you are lying.
- if you are a 30 yo man, we must allow for the assumption that you are not lying.

 

[Rhea]

I don't think we need to look any further.

A sixteen year old kid wants to live with their dad.
Mom files rape charges.

You don't think we need to look any further.

That's so Woke it makes me ill.
Tom

So this “responsible” dad, he gave a ride home to a 16yo and had sex with her, and then responsibly never noticed that she was pregnant? Never went to see her again, never looked after her welfare, never thought to wonder where his sperm went?

What a responsible fellow who desrves the benefit of the doubt!

While the 16yo, who had the baby, raised the baby, fed the baby for years, what an irresponsible wokester.

Well, we don’t need to look any further. Do we.

 

[Rhea]

He committed a crime.
He committed a crime.
He committed a crime.
He committed a crime.
He committed a crime.
The police, his customer, never investigated.
He committed a crime.
The police, his customer, never investigated.
He committed a crime.
The police, his customer, never investigated.
He committed a crime.
He committed a crime.

 

[laughing dog]

She was under the age of consent at the time.

That does not mean the sex was non-consensual. Even the LA law acknowledges there can be consent even below that arbitrary cutoff.

A person who is seventeen years of age or older has sexual intercourse, with consent, with a person who is thirteen years of age or older but less than seventeen years of age, when the victim is not the spouse of the offender and when the difference between the age of the victim and the age of the offender is four years or greater;

The woman is alleging actual rape. Not merely carnal knowledge of a juvenile. My question was, what evidence is there of that? Your reply was irrelevant to my question.

Louisiana allows child marriage, and the exception refers to spouses. Even you can understand the difference between two kids who get married and a 30 year old man who offers a 16 year old a ride home and instead takes her to his own home and rapes her.

You overestimate the effects of ideology and misogyny on rational thinking.

 

[laughing dog]

Clearly there are multiple injustices in this case. But if this woman now owes child support doesn't this guy owe lots of back child support?

 

[Toni]

What proof have you found that she lied bout her age?

I did not say she in particular did (although she might have - no way to know 16 years later one way or the other).
I was talking generally that this is an aspect of these laws that I find particularly egregious - they do not allow the other party lying about her age as a defense.

I have it on good authority that while young men may not be able to tell if a girl is under age by looking at her, they are pretty easily able to tell if they talk to her.

 

[Rhea]

Clearly there are multiple injustices in this case. But if this woman now owes child support doesn't this guy owe lots of back child support?

He owes jail time.

 

[laughing dog]

Clearly there are multiple injustices in this case. But if this woman now owes child support doesn't this guy owe lots of back child support?

He owes jail time.

That too. But since he hasn't been charged or convicted, I doubt it is going to occur.

But he ought to pay for back child support, especially if he is demanding current child support.

 

[Jarhyn]

She was under the age of consent at the time.

That does not mean the sex was non-consensual. Even the LA law acknowledges there can be consent even below that arbitrary cutoff.

A person who is seventeen years of age or older has sexual intercourse, with consent, with a person who is thirteen years of age or older but less than seventeen years of age, when the victim is not the spouse of the offender and when the difference between the age of the victim and the age of the offender is four years or greater;

The woman is alleging actual rape. Not merely carnal knowledge of a juvenile. My question was, what evidence is there of that? Your reply was irrelevant to my question.

Louisiana allows child marriage, and the exception refers to spouses. Even you can understand the difference between two kids who get married and a 30 year old man who offers a 16 year old a ride home and instead takes her to his own home and rapes her.

You overestimate the effects of ideology and misogyny on rational thinking.

I mean how else is a is a fucking gross rapist (like the subject of OP) supposed to achieve "the dream" of getting their very own experience of raping a 16 year old, taking their teen child, and raping them too, too?

I expect that this is a very common outlook among evil rapists aspiring to power.

 

[Derec]

I mean how else is a is a fucking gross rapist (like the subject of OP)

There is no evidence he raped her.

supposed to achieve "the dream" of getting their very own experience of raping a 16 year old, taking their teen child, and raping them too, too?

There is also zero evidence of that disgusting suggestion.
Do you think a man can't be a good father just because he had sex with a 16 year old at one point?

 

[Derec]

I have it on good authority that while young men may not be able to tell if a girl is under age by looking at her, they are pretty easily able to tell if they talk to her.

There is a Turing-type test to distinguish between 16 and 11 months (for example) and 17 and a month (as another example)? They are on different sides of the arbitrary line, but there is not much difference between the two.

 

[Derec]

Note to self:
- if you are a 16 yo woman, we must allow for the assumption that you are lying.
- if you are a 30 yo man, we must allow for the assumption that you are not lying.

Obviously, either of them may be lying.
We should not blindly believe the woman. Especially since in this case she has a vested interest in lying - she wants to prevent the father from having shared custody.