Rape victim ordered to pay her abuser child support

[Jimmy Higgins]

Maybe you mean "Don't decide who is at fault or what the problem is until you've got ALL the information, not just claims that support your preconceived notions"?

Except you DO seem to have decided - you've decided in favor of Barnes.

TomC condemned both parties almost instantly in the thread, called them both "scum". Justification was because it was family court you can't trust either party.

Of course, one of the main issues with the thread is that even while the statutory rape issue doesn't bother TomC much, it should have bothered the Family Court.

 

[Gospel]

I am flummoxed on how you can think this is a viable hypothesis

I don't believe much of anything I read on the internet.
Do you believe stuff you read posted by Harvestdancer, Trausti, Metaphor, or TSwizzle?
I don't.
Tom

If you don't believe much of anything you read on the internet, it'd be prudent to say next to nothing about things you read on the internet. What is happening here is you believe there is more to the story (which I agree with) but also refuse to recognising that you must first acknowledge what the story is to begin with. Your opinion is such that maybe the mother was not innocent because of being at a bar at a young age. You haven't provided any facts in the case to proof that. Instead you seem to rely on anecdotal personal experience (which I'm guilty of doing many times). I must have missed it but you didn't seem to acknowledge that the father slept with a minor. Family courts somehow overlooking statutory rape & the local police not doing anything with a report doesn't seem to be cause to sing what's going on like Marvin Gaye either. It's difficult to watch someone I like get beat up so much TomC. Have mercy on my soul.

 

[Emily Lake]

I am flummoxed on how you can think this is a viable hypothesis

I don't believe much of anything I read on the internet.
Do you believe stuff you read posted by Harvestdancer, Trausti, Metaphor, or TSwizzle?
I don't.
Tom

You don't believe what you read on the internet... so you've decided to believe that Barnes was totally fine to have sex with a minor and commit statutory rape in the first place, and you've decided to complete dismiss the daughter's claims of abuse and assault, and rather you've decided - in the absence of any actual information - to side with Barnes?

 

[Emily Lake]

In January 2021, the child’s school counselor notified DCFS as a mandatory reporter that the child alleged Barnes physically and mentally abused her. Abelseth requested that Barnes custody be limited. Judge Cashe denied that motion.

By November, Barnes filed motions to have Abelseth held in contempt over a cell phone.

On Feb. 2, 2022, Cashe found Abelseth in contempt over the phone and ordered her to pay $500. Abelseth was instructed not to provide her daughter with a cell phone.

That same month— court records note for the first time that the child was conceived from a rape. It’s also alleged that Barnes drugged and sexually assaulted his daughter on Feb. 21, 2022 and Feb. 22, 2022.

I had thought the daughter telling the school counselor her father abused her is what led to the examination at the hospital, but I see now those two incidents happened more than a year apart.

Wtf is the Tangipahoa Sheriff's Dept. doing with these reports?

Nothing. That's what they are doing with these reports.

"Nothing" is a pretty standard response to allegations of sexual assault or rape, especially if the woman making the allegation is some "nobody" that the police don't give a fuck about, and the person being accused of rape is a man with ties to important people.

Wouldn't want some stupid little slut's accusation to hurt his reputation, right?

The justice system has a lot of problems. The repeated dismissal and failure to protect women is one of them.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Does anyone who doesn’t think the rapist was a good custodial choice have a strong opinion of what should have happened to the child?

Unless there is very strong evidence of neglect of abuse that hasn't been shared by the courts, I would be inclined to leave the 16 year old with her mother (where she's been her whole life), even if that includes regular visits from social services.

From what I can glean into the situation, it doesn't appear that Abelseth has claimed to be perfect or not have issues, and that her losing custody wasn't unnecessary. It seems like there were problems. The issue however, is that if she wasn't suitable, the Statutory Rape father probably shouldn't be the first choice (second or third either) of the Family Court.

Unless Abelseth said it was her home or nothing, then there had to be other options for the Family Court to select from.

 

[TomC]

If you don't believe much of anything you read on the internet, it'd be prudent to say next to nothing about things you read on the internet.

Dog smile.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yes.
She was in a bar, drink in hand, minimum age requirement 21, and she got laid.

Those are the facts.
Tom

This. I think the state should have to prove that the defendant either knew or should have known that the person he had consensual sex with was underage. Something like picking up somebody at a bar should be considered sufficient defense and lead to a judge to dismiss charges.

While I don't like it being a strict liability offense (I don't believe they should exist at all) I think you're going too far here. I believe the older person has a responsibility to determine that their prospective partner is of legal age, same as there are age requirements for bars. I do not expect the older partner to be an expert at spotting fake ID, though, and I think that their presence in an age-restricted space is a reasonable determination of their age. If he really picked her up in a bar (and it's a state that doesn't let minors in bars) that's good enough in my book--but I'm not convinced he picked her up in a bar. "Should have known" is too high a bar. If he had any reason to suspect she's underage he should find out!

As discussed earlier in the thread, he did have reasons to believe she was a minor. 1. Her immaturity, 2. Her friends' immaturity, 3. Only the oldest one had a car, 4. There is lots of underage drinking in Louisiana and it's part of the culture to do it for decades such that the man in question would have observed or participated in it himself many many times, 5. This even extends to bars letting minors drink as in the earlier documented example of a bartender saying "if you can count to 21, you get a drink."

Therefore, the inference "in a bar" ==> "of legal age" depends upon an unsound assumption of legal compliance that is known to be commonly wrong.

I have never been in an area that was lax like that about alcohol. If your description is right I would not consider being in a bar adequate evidence of being of age.

To add--not knowing the age of a victim is not a legal defense in Louisiana, which is also a factor the offender would take into consideration of risk of choices he makes.

I know--I'm objecting to the concept of strict liability. Someone seems young, you should take reasonable care to ensure they are of age (and document it if relevant), but I do not believe in imposing impossible standards.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

"Gee officer, that kid over there was in a bar when I saw her, and had a drink in her hand! I mean, I know now that she was only 14, and she looks like a kid and sounds like a kid... but how was I to know? I mean, she was in a bar, so obviously she was an adult right?"

It's nice to know that in your book, it's just fine if a full grown adult man exploits a minor, as long as you feel comfortable giving HIM the benefit of the doubt, and assuming that the girls was some evil temptress and he just couldn't help himself.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that men so very often have the backs of predatory men, and willing to excuse away the misbehavior of other men as long as it's only women and girls who get hurt by it.

I have never been in an age-restricted space without being required to prove I was of age. If enforcement is lax there then I do not feel it's adequate evidence.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't know, err on the side of caution maybe? Maybe get to know a person before diving into bed with them? Maybe, as a 30+ year old fucking man, he ought to have taken a minute and given some thought to whether or not he really ought to be hopping in the sack with someone who looked so young?

But hey, it's just a girl, no big deal. We've got to protect the reputation and feelings of the man here, gotta have our priorities straight, right?

I don't like hookup culture, but if that's what people want I don't believe the state should prohibit it.

And "looked so young" isn't an adequate threshold--some people simply look young. My wife has been assumed underage (not carded, just a you-need-to-leave, admittedly of 21+ spaces) well into her 40s. You go on ID, not looks.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Really the heart of the discussion is "corrupt judge gives corrupt asshole custody of his rape baby from a grown woman as that girl becomes the same age as her mother was when she was raped.

There's no excuse giving a sick fuck who fucks kids access to a kid the age of the kids he fucked

Yup. I want more evidence before being willing to convict on statutory rape, but there's no question the judge is nuts.

 

[Jarhyn]

Really the heart of the discussion is "corrupt judge gives corrupt asshole custody of his rape baby from a grown woman as that girl becomes the same age as her mother was when she was raped.

There's no excuse giving a sick fuck who fucks kids access to a kid the age of the kids he fucked

Yup. I want more evidence before being willing to convict on statutory rape, but there's no question the judge is nuts.

Not nuts. He is corrupt. Don't pull the punch, there is no way he is not conflicted in his interest after seeing that.

 

[Toni]

Really the heart of the discussion is "corrupt judge gives corrupt asshole custody of his rape baby from a grown woman as that girl becomes the same age as her mother was when she was raped.

There's no excuse giving a sick fuck who fucks kids access to a kid the age of the kids he fucked

Yup. I want more evidence before being willing to convict on statutory rape, but there's no question the judge is nuts.

I believe that the ages of both individual are a matter of record.

I get that certain men like to delude themselves that 16 year old girls are hot for middle aged men and are oh, so tricky! Just lying little underaged slits who deserve what they get. Breaking one rule ( drinking underage) means that you’re a slut if you are a girl. For guys? Raping someone just makes the man a victim, it’s not really rape after all. Not if he deluded himself that she wanted it.

I would like to remind everyone that she did not allege merely statutory rape—which it ibviousky was. She alleged forcible rape. I believe her, but it is always difficult to price forcible rape the further in the past the rape occurred.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I don't think they are saying deserving of it. The point that some are trying to make is she "wanted" it. And as long as she wanted it, and there are enough ambiguous signs, it is okay because no harm, no foul.

I don't think those people have seen a teen in a while. Or are lying to themselves that they couldn't tell. I can't imagine a 16 yr old carrying on a conversation that can convince someone she is legal aged. Of course at this point, the man isn't trying to gage age, but obfuscate, if even that.

Not all guys, just adult males who fuck minors.

 

[Toni]

I don't think they are saying deserving of it. The point that some are trying to make is she "wanted" it. And as long as she wanted it, and there are enough ambiguous signs, it is okay because no harm, no foul.

I don't think those people have seen a teen in a while. Or are lying to themselves that they couldn't tell. I can't imagine a 16 yr old carrying on a conversation that can convince someone she is legal aged. Of course at this point, the man isn't trying to gage age, but obfuscate, if even that.

Not all guys, just adult males who fuck minors.

I had a conversation with my oldest son some years ago about this subject and he agrees: It is often difficult to tell by how a girl/woman dresses or wears her hair, etc. how old she is. But actually talking to her for 5 minutes definitely clears that up.

And for those who do not realize this or who are lying to themselves:

A teenager who accepts a ride home things she's just getting a ride to her house. Without any stops along the way. Where her parents are waiting for her.

 

[laughing dog]

Really the heart of the discussion is "corrupt judge gives corrupt asshole custody of his rape baby from a grown woman as that girl becomes the same age as her mother was when she was raped.

There's no excuse giving a sick fuck who fucks kids access to a kid the age of the kids he fucked

Yup. I want more evidence before being willing to convict on statutory rape, but there's no question the judge is nuts.

Perhaps you don't understand what "statutory rape" means. If she was under the age of consent, it is statutory rape. IT really is that fucking simple.

 

[bilby]

Really the heart of the discussion is "corrupt judge gives corrupt asshole custody of his rape baby from a grown woman as that girl becomes the same age as her mother was when she was raped.

There's no excuse giving a sick fuck who fucks kids access to a kid the age of the kids he fucked

Yup. I want more evidence before being willing to convict on statutory rape, but there's no question the judge is nuts.

Perhaps you don't understand what "statutory rape" means. If she was under the age of consent, it is statutory rape. IT really is that fucking simple.

Indeed. If a girl under the age of consent becomes pregnant, then there's no possibility in law that a statutory rape has not occurred; The only remaining possible doubt is the identity of the perpetrator. And given a suspect, it is a simple matter today to use a DNA test to determine whether or not a particular individual is that perpetrator.

The only room for doubt is where no suspect can be found (or all those found are proven not guilty by DNA testing); Or where the police and/or courts refuse to do their jobs.

And in the latter case, you not only have undeniable evidence of statutory rape, you also have undeniable evidence that the authorities are cool with statutory rape occurring and going unpunished in their jurisdiction - which should itself be a crime, and is certainly not acceptable in any polity that wishes to consider itself to be civilised.

 

[Jarhyn]

Really the heart of the discussion is "corrupt judge gives corrupt asshole custody of his rape baby from a grown woman as that girl becomes the same age as her mother was when she was raped.

There's no excuse giving a sick fuck who fucks kids access to a kid the age of the kids he fucked

Yup. I want more evidence before being willing to convict on statutory rape, but there's no question the judge is nuts.

Perhaps you don't understand what "statutory rape" means. If she was under the age of consent, it is statutory rape. IT really is that fucking simple.

Indeed. If a girl under the age of consent becomes pregnant, then there's no possibility in law that a statutory rape has not occurred; The only remaining possible doubt is the identity of the perpetrator. And given a suspect, it is a simple matter today to use a DNA test to determine whether or not a particular individual is that perpetrator.

The only room for doubt is where no suspect can be found (or all those found are proven not guilty by DNA testing); Or where the police and/or courts refuse to do their jobs.

And in the latter case, you not only have undeniable evidence of statutory rape, you also have undeniable evidence that the authorities are cool with statutory rape occurring and going unpunished in their jurisdiction - which should itself be a crime, and is certainly not acceptable in any polity that wishes to consider itself to be civilised.

Pregnancy before 16 indicates statutory rape for anyone. There is no question of suspect. The suspect volunteered claim as the father of the child.

 

[TomC]

Except you DO seem to have decided - you've decided in favor of Barnes.

Except that I've never said that.

As far as I know, Barnes brought all this upon himself.
Even supposing that Abelseth targeted him as a baby daddy, and lied as much as she had to get his baby, the fact remains. Barnes picked it. He doesn't even have youth as an excuse for being painfully stupid, like Abelseth did.

Maybe he was tipsy, horny, and a hot girl came on to him like gangbusters. That doesn't change the fact that he put his own dick into the blender. He picked this. He played a stupid game and won a stupid prize.

I can't work up so much as a tear...

I'm not remotely on Barnes' side. Neither do I believe anything just because Abelseth claims it.
Tom

 

[bilby]

Really the heart of the discussion is "corrupt judge gives corrupt asshole custody of his rape baby from a grown woman as that girl becomes the same age as her mother was when she was raped.

There's no excuse giving a sick fuck who fucks kids access to a kid the age of the kids he fucked

Yup. I want more evidence before being willing to convict on statutory rape, but there's no question the judge is nuts.

Perhaps you don't understand what "statutory rape" means. If she was under the age of consent, it is statutory rape. IT really is that fucking simple.

Indeed. If a girl under the age of consent becomes pregnant, then there's no possibility in law that a statutory rape has not occurred; The only remaining possible doubt is the identity of the perpetrator. And given a suspect, it is a simple matter today to use a DNA test to determine whether or not a particular individual is that perpetrator.

The only room for doubt is where no suspect can be found (or all those found are proven not guilty by DNA testing); Or where the police and/or courts refuse to do their jobs.

And in the latter case, you not only have undeniable evidence of statutory rape, you also have undeniable evidence that the authorities are cool with statutory rape occurring and going unpunished in their jurisdiction - which should itself be a crime, and is certainly not acceptable in any polity that wishes to consider itself to be civilised.

Pregnancy before 16 indicates statutory rape for anyone. There is no question of suspect. The suspect volunteered claim as the father of the child.

There's always a question about suspects until there's hard scientific evidence.

People lie all the time, and we shouldn't believe them even if they're admitting to a crime, without corroborating evidence.

 

[TomC]

People lie all the time,

This^^^^
I've had front row seat to some ugly family dramas.

Listening to the two main parties describe events, even in court, you'd think they'd never been on the same planet. Even though you know that they were legally married for 18 years and had 3 kids together.

Add custody and support payments to the mix of family dysfunction and social media drama and you've got living hell.

You know who I feel the worst about in the Abelseth/Barnes thing? The Daughter. She didn't pick any of this, her parents did. But that living hell is her world, poor thing.
Tom