Victim wants rapist's parental rights restricted

[Omaha Steve]

http://www.omaha.com/article/20140126/NEWS/140128981/1685#victim-wants-rapist-s-parental-rights-restricted

By Joe Duggan Published Sunday, January 26, 2014 at 12:01 am

LINCOLN — She made an agonizing decision two years ago to give birth to a child who was conceived during a rape.

Today, the 20-year-old Norfolk, Neb., woman has a beautiful toddler, but a different sort of agony. Recently a judge granted child visitation rights to the man who pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting her.

“Most victims of rape choose to abort their babies,” she said. “Those of us who choose to keep our child have to face the overwhelming fear of being bullied and being controlled by the rapist.”

The woman testified last week in support of proposed legislation that would make it more difficult for sex offenders to claim parental rights to children conceived in a sexual assault.

FULL story at link.

Pro lifers better support the mom on this.

[Jefferson23]

1. Disgusting, and it is preventing the woman from keeping boundaries in place..you know,

the ones the rapist was not capable of doing in the first place.

Horrific that she would even have to consider such a thing.

[In_The_Wind]

2. No woman should have to face her rapist or hand over her child to him.

[cinnabonbon]

3. This is unacceptable in so many ways

How many states allow the rapist to claim parental rights for the kid?

[wavesofeuphoria]

6. 32 states give rapists parental rights

To their victim's child.

[cinnabonbon]

14. That is.... wow.

That actually makes me so pissed off I am having trouble putting words to it.

We desperately need to change that. It should be zero.

[okaawhatever]

34. This isn't the first case. There have been several like it. nt

[redqueen]

64. That is patriarchy. That is rape culture.

The priorities displayed by these laws are clear.

[Dash87]

4. Where exactly is Lincoln, Iran?

Oh wait...

[yellerpup]

5. Had she given the child up for adoption

would the court impose visitation rights for the rapist on the adopting family?

On edit: Has the rapist been paying child support? Is he up-to-date on his payments? I am totally outraged that the law would enable a convicted rapist to be anywhere near his victim or her child.

[leftyohiolib]

9. good question another one along those lines, could he prevent the adoption

[Swede Atlanta]

17. The answer is likely yes in most states......

A woman can surrender her parental rights under an adoption decree but the putative father, regardless of how his fatherhood was obtained (i.e. consensual sex or rape), must have an opportunity for a hearing.

In a case where all you have is an unwed couple and the "father" cannot be found the court will usually advertise or use private detectives to try to ascertain his whereabouts. The court has a constitutional duty to the father to establish his wishes with respect to the child. The court still has a fair degree of latitude in determining the best interests of the child. If the putative father cannot be found after reasonable efforts have been made to find him the court can terminate his parental rights as being in the best interests of the child. With now only the mother having parental rights the child can be adopted.

In a case of rape I'm not sure how this works. If they have caught the alleged rapist it would indeed be unusual to have him acknowledge the child is likely his and ask his parental rights are recognized but it could happen.

[yellerpup]

42. If there aren't special condition for rape

there should be. Did he order paternity tests or did the Prosecutor? I'm sure he doesn't give a rip but is just using this to amuse himself while he is in jail by turning up suffering of his victim.

[dsc]

65. the Kansas welfare department ordered the test

She wound up applying for benefits and they ordered her to tell them who the father was and they ordered the paternity test.

[yellerpup]

115. Thanks for that clarification.

The state told him that he was a father? So, is the rapist suing her for visitation himself, or is the state suing and paying for his lawyers? That is so messed up for mother and child.

[dsc]

138. He has sued himself

the order was the result of a negotiation that the parties agreed to.

[yellerpup]

44. Too frightening to contemplate.

This has to be torture for the young woman.

[ybbor]

18. Great points!

But,of course, this pregnancy was a "blessing from God". Maybe for the rapist. Truly disgusting reality our nation has become. I am so glad I live in deep (and Go) blue Ann Arbor, but even here we see and feel the effects of our very red state government.

[yellerpup]

43. Welcome to DU!

From big blue New York!

[ybbor]

90. Thanks

I've been a member since 2007 or 2008 but don't say a whole lot. Been daily reader since 2004. But thanks!

[Demo_Chris]

7. Insanity. nt

[Squinch]

8. What rape culture? What war on women? Nope, nope, hysterical women are just making those up,

and we don't like to talk about them.



ETA: an article listing all the states where rapists have parental rights, and what those rights are:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/26/pregnant-rape-abortion_n_2552183.html

[etherealtruth]

12. Hard to believe that anybody anywhere would find this acceptable ...

... yet there you have it, a majority of states give parental rights to rapists

[theHandpuppet]

16. Some more from that article...

A Republican state representative in New Mexico introduced a bill Wednesday that classified abortions for rape victims as "tampering with evidence," effectively requiring women to carry their pregnancies to term in order to prove their case in a sexual assault trial.

This bill will not pass, as Democrats control both chambers of New Mexico's state legislature, but there are plenty of other state laws that extend the nightmare for women who are impregnated through rape.

Of the 26 states that require a waiting period (usually 24 hours) for women seeking abortions, only Utah makes an exception for cases of rape or incest. Pregnant rape victims in some states must also undergo counseling about the negative effects of abortion before having the procedure.

If a woman who conceives through rape does go on to have the child, she can open herself up to being victimized by her rapist again and again. In 31 states, paternal rapists are allowed to sue for custody and visitation rights like any other father, as a Chicago woman who was served with custody papers from her rapist brought to the public's attention last summer after former Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) made his "legitimate rape" comments....

[davidpdx]

103. Tampering with evidence?

That is fucked up.

[90-percent]

10. Question

Shouldn't this be a moot point because her rapist is in jail for a few decades for committing the crime of rape?

-90% Jimmy

My bad; read the article; "By late September 2011, the prosecution reduced the charges and the man pleaded guilty. He served about two weeks in jail and 18 months of probation. He also must register as a sex offender for 15 years."

Looks like the rapist clean got away with it virtually unpunished!

[Squinch]

13. Welcome to the world. No. Rapists usually are not in jail. See Steubenville,

where the hacker who exposed the rapists faces a longer sentence than the rapists.

[redqueen]

67. [phone]

[gollygee]

19. That's what often happens

rape is almost legal.

[bettyellen]

27. how often does a rapist do 20 years? Rarely.

[justiceischeap]

32. I've found that when people rape children, particularly boys, the sentencing is much harsher. nt

[bettyellen]

33. absolutely- although there has been more victim blaming lately toward young girls

there is a marked difference how they are treated if, god forbid, they as much as "flirted" with anyone, ever.
Them, they are "asking for it". When puberty arrives, we tend to treat victims as whores.
Only young children and those will grave physical injuries are trusted.

[Comrade Grumpy]

38. A quick Google news search reveals many, many long rape sentences.

"Rape sentence" gave the following results in the first four pages (excluding foreign cases and rape/murder cases):

31 years, Richmond, California

14 years, Canton, Ohio

50 years, Chattanooga, Tennessee

20 years, Charlottesville, Virginia

Life in prison, Medina, Ohio

6 years, Canton, Ohio

27 years, Northampton, Pennsylvania

Life in prison, Huntsville, Alabama

Life in prison, Syracuse, New York

22 years, Bradenton, Florida

3 years, New Port Ritchie, Florida

And:

5 years, woman convicted of making false rape charge, Port Huron, Michigan

[bettyellen]

39. Why would you want to obfuscate the truth about rape sentencing? Avg time served is is 5 1/2 years.

But you probably looked that up, and realized the facts support me, so looked for random anecdotes… hoping someone would think they were averages? Supporting rapists' rights to parent their victims' children? It would appear so, given that is the issue being discussed here.

That isn't very nice!

[Comrade Grumpy]

41. I did exactly what I said I did, a Google news search for "rape sentence."

Try it. You'll get the same results.

You might want to reflect on your need to impute devious motives to other posters. It's like you're making shit up out of the whole cloth.

That isn't very nice, either.

I was frankly somewhat surprised to see so many lengthy rape sentences. Perhaps those are somehow exceptional cases, made more newsworthy by their hideousness or something and thus skewing the search results.

On edit: I was replying to your assertion that rapists "rarely" get 20-year sentences. It didn't strike me as correct. And that Google news search would suggest that rapists getting lengthy sentences is not rare.

[bettyellen]

46. and gave us deceptive information about jail time for rape? pulling a list off google tells us

absolutely nothing about how rare or frequent long sentences are. I am shocked you claim not to know that, and assume that list was at all useful. But I bet you could go on for a few posts parsing "what is rare" instead of acknowledging the 5 1/2 years stat means that "daddy" can come back into a child's life quite young, and cause mother and child another 13 years of hell. But go ahead, parse "rare". Knock yourself out.

The first few pages of 20 years plus + rape show every crime involved additional charges, kidnapping or serious assault charges- so you can toss those out of your sampling, if you care to be accurate.

[El_Johns]

51. Then you should likewise toss out the "rape" cases of 18-year-olds having sex with 15-year-olds

consensually.

If you want to parse statistics.

What is your prototypical rape case? Penetration without assault? or only "mild" assault?

[bettyellen]

53. look at his list with facts of the crimes added…… there is no consent going on anywhere, and if you

would really like to discuss consensual rape, I'd suggest starting a thread- because that is not the topic here.

[El_Johns]

57. Statutory rape = rape under the law.

[bettyellen]

61. yeah, and if you disagree with the current laws in various states, go for it- but this is a DERAIL

from a topic about other laws that apply to ALL convicted rapes.
that there is a subset you believe should not be convicted is an entirely tangential- and COMPLETELY different- issue.

[El_Johns]

62. Statutory rape is part of those statistics. You want to take out the ones that involve serious

assault so you should likewise take out the ones that don't involve any assault, until you pare it down to whatever your prototypical "rape" case is, which I still haven't figured out.

The mandatory sentencing for rape is about the same as for assault, which is as it should be, IMO. I don't see the big injustice here.

http://www.statisticbrain.com/mandatory-prison-sentence-statistics/

[bettyellen]

63. since you haven't "figured out" what prototypical "rape" actually IS, I am out of here, and YOU

can go try and disrupt and derail this conversation with someone else.

And that list was bullshit, because the topic was rape. PERIOD. (which exists whether you can wrap your head around what it is) not rapes with "special circumstances"- kidnapping and children- which incur special sentencing guidelines. For anyone to pretend people get life sentences for rape alone is complete bullshit.

[El_Johns]

75. I haven't figured out what *your* prototypical rape case is.

And yes, people do sometimes get life sentences for rape. Usually they are black men.



BAY MINETTE, Alabama -- A Baldwin County Circuit judge on Thursday handed a life sentence to a local man convicted of rape, but the defendant’s attorney said she plans to appeal the case.

Presiding Circuit Judge James H. Reid issued the sentence to Joe Nathan Thomas of Bay Minette. In late January, a jury found Thomas guilty of first-degree rape in a case stemming from a July 2008 attack on a woman in a city park.

According to police reports, the then 24-year-old victim, who was acquainted with Thomas, said she had helped him pick up his car. She later met him at Bay Minette’s Brownwood Park on Newport Parkway, where she was overpowered and attacked, according to authorities.

Assistant District Attorney Patrick Prendergast told Reid that the victim did not appear in court for the sentencing because she had been intimidated and was afraid.

Thomas, who had two previous felony drug distribution convictions in Baldwin County, according to prosecutors, was sentenced as a habitual offender. In recommending the life sentence for the rape, Prendergast told the judge that the state believes it was appropriate.

Defense attorney Cali Armstrong said she will seek a new trial. She pointed to an absence of DNA comparisons and inconsistencies in the victim’s testimony.

http://blog.al.com/live/2011/03/man_convicted_of_rape_gets_lif.html


But not always:

David Velasquez Faces Life In Prison For Attempted Rape Of His High School Teacher

REDWOOD CITY, Calif. -- REDWOOD CITY, Calif. (AP) — A former Northern California high school student faces a maximum sentence of life in prison after being convicted for attempted rape and kidnapping of a teacher which he testified was a prank.

San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe says Wednesday that it took a jury just 90 minutes to deliberate before returning guilty verdicts an all charges against 21-year-old David Velasquez including kidnapping with the intent to commit rape.

Wagstaffe says the convictions carry a possible life sentence for the ex- student at Summit Preparatory Charter High School in Redwood City.

Velasquez testified he was playing "a prank" when pointing a knife at the teacher and attacking her outside the school in January 2012. The attack ended when another teacher came upon the crime and screamed.

Velasquez remains in the San Mateo County jail on $1 million bail. He faces sentencing on Nov. 8.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/04/david-velasquez_n_4042632.html


HOUSTON — An ex-Houston police officer broke down in tears after he was sentenced to life in prison Monday for raping a waitress in the back of his patrol car.

Abraham Joseph stood stunned when he heard the sentence. He stared at the jury as he tried to process what just happened to him, then began crying.

The former cop’s wife collapsed into the arms of another family member in the back of the courtroom.

Joseph was fired in 2011 after he was indicted for the rape of a 38 year-old immigrant from El Salvador.

During the trial, the victim testified that she was arrested, handcuffed and raped by Joseph as she left her job at a central southeast Houston cantina.

http://www.khou.com/news/crime/Jurors-sentence-ex-HPD-cop-to-life-in-prison-for-raping-waitress--173135661.html

[bettyellen]

78. life was ONLY given for having three felony convictions…. scraping the bottom of the barrel to TRY

and make a point.
Second case was kidnapping conviction with witnesses. What was your point, that these are typical rapes? Seriously?
Who are you trying to fool, why would you think to pull examples like this and pretend these cases are only about rape?

[El_Johns]

84. Still trying to whittle away to what *your* prototypical rape case is...

I suppose the last perp was a cop, so that's why he got life...


I'm honing in on it; over 18, no weapon involved, victim is not taken to 2nd location and does not enter perp's car, victim is not raped in home by stranger who entered illegally...rapist has no priors...of any kind...and the perp doesn't hold the victim against her will.

Seems like your prototypical case is: College girl raped by college boy after using alcohol or drugs.

This one is obviously not "mere rape" because the victim was 16, and the perp had priors.

The 16-year-old victim was going to visit a friend when a man grabbed her from behind, threw her into bushes near a stoplight and assaulted her.

She told investigators that shortly before the attack, she saw a man staring at her from a light-colored truck with a camper shell....A witness later came forward, saying a similar truck had been spotted in Oceanside. Investigators traced it back to Courtney, a North Park man with a checkered past. He was already under investigation for a drug case, and in January 2005 escaped from a work release program.

Courtney was sentenced to life in prison. At his sentencing, he told the victim that he didn’t commit the rape, and he hoped that someday she’d find that out.

He also pleaded guilty to an unrelated charge of possessing more than $100,000 in drug proceeds. For that crime, he was sentenced to eight years and eight months.

Courtney, 33, was released from Donovan State Prison on May 6 after new tests showed DNA from the victim’s clothing matched another felon who lived in the area of the attack.

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/Jun/25/dna-uriah-courtney-rape-innocence-project/

[bettyellen]

86. the context is sentencing for raping women- not minors, not kidnapping, not "three strikes" felony

sentencing….. and we are also not false convictions. Again, derailing. If this actually mattered to you- you might be opting OPs about the innocence project, or discussing it. Instead, you are listing a bunch of other crimes, or non crimes.
Do you think sentencing for all crimes should be lighter because a some people are wrongly convicted? Rape is very difficult to prosecute, that's a pretty well know fact. Not sure what your point is here at all.

It's not that hard.

[El_Johns]

88. I didn't mention the Innocence Project because the Innocence of the men who got life sentences

Last edited Sun Jan 26, 2014, 11:00 PM - Edit history (3)

for rape isn't my main interest here, even though there appear to be lots of life sentences for rape on their website.

My main interest is in trying to determine what *your* prototypical rape case is. I'd think you'd just tell me instead of trying to make me guess.

But no, I doubt very many college boys have gotten life sentences for raping their dates after a night of drinking. Is that what you mean?

And these were hardly "non-crimes". Someone was actually raped, and someone was sentenced to life in prison -- just not the person who did the crime.

The woman in this case was an adult, but obviously it's not mere rape because there was kidnapping.

On December 12, 1986, the victim left a bar in Marrero, Louisiana, and went to a restaurant to get breakfast for her son. As she was exiting her car at the restaurant, she noticed a piece of paper on her windshield and put it in her pocket. A man then came up behind her and ordered her into his car. Once in his car, the man bit her several times and performed oral sex on her. He then raped her and dropped her off in a nearby neighborhood. The man told her that no one would help her because she was black.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Willie_Jackson.php

Willie Jackson got 40 years for that; not quite life, but close enough at his age. The charges were: Attempted Aggravated Rape, Robbery


In the pre-dawn hours of October 25, 1986, a woman was attacked as she walked in the rain to a bus stop. The assailant hit her, dragged her to an embankment and raped her three times before she was able to get away and notify the police. During the incident, the assailant also stole her watch. Harrison became a suspect based upon a prior conviction for robbery and a tip that someone at his house was trying to sell a watch, although the victim's watch was never found. Both the rape victim and the person providing the tip picked Harrison from a photo lineup. It was largely on this identification that Harrison was convicted on March 18, 1987, and sentenced to life in prison.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Harrison

The charges were: Rape, Robbery, Kidnapping (because he dragged her to an embankment).

He didn't have a weapon, so it appears that if the perp hits the victim it's not simple rape either.
Because rapists don't get life sentences.

So in your world, is "just rape" forcing sex on someone who says no? Without any overt physical coercion, maybe just the threat of it, or psychological manipulation, or taking advantage of someone who's drunk?

[bettyellen]

91. I define rape as the law does. It was you who felt adding kidnapping charges was no biggie, LOL.

Is date rape not enough of a rape or something to matter to you? I would hate to think that is the implication, because it's a serious crime.

[El_Johns]

92. You said rapists don't get life sentences. They do. You also complained because the average

time served for rape is five years, but then took exception to every counter-example shown to you as not being "just rape", so much so as to exclude everything *but* date rape. You don't seem to understand that e.g. you can get a kidnapping charge for moving someone 10 feet against their will. Is that 10 feet the difference between 5 years & life? I don't think so.

I think five years is a just sentence for date rape.

[bettyellen]

93. Not if it's only a rape charge, nope. Kidnapping can only be a few feet because that's

What it takes to go from walking past a house or car to be pulled forcibly into that house or car!

Seriously? WTF? Date rape is not so serious, and now kidnapping isn't much worse. Whoa!

Have you ever made these bizarre rationalizations about robberies? I'm guessing you haven't. I know a lot of people who haven't. Speaks volumes.

[El_Johns]

95. Is raping someone in a house or car worse than raping them in the bushes? Worse to the

extent of a life sentence?

It's you who's making bizarre rationalizations, I believe.

Also putting a lot of words in my mouth. I find people do that when they can't argue something on its merits.

People get life sentences for rape. "Kidnapping" is one of the charges used to *give* life sentences to rapists. Raping someone in a car, as opposed to in the bushes, does not make a life-worthy crime out of a 5-year-sentence. Nor does the "robbery" of a $25 dollar watch.

The extra charges are given to put people in prison for a long time, including life.

[bettyellen]

100. The criminal sentences you cited were NOT for rape...

Spin all you want, but none were. And that is bullshit.
It actually IS worse to pull a potential victim into a more private space where they are in more danger. Wow, sad to hear that needs explaining to you.

Are all laws fairly applied to everyone? No. That goes for every crime out there. Why this interests you here and now so very much is what's pretty repulsive.

For future reference, defending rapists against kidnapping charges because the victim wasn't dragged far enough for your liking, is fucking creepy. There's no other word for it. You crossed a line there. Good bye and good riddance.

[El_Johns]

105. Uh, yes, they were. You can accuse me of all the made-up stuff you want; it's because

you can't defend your claim that rapists are never sent to prison for life. Bullshit accusations like
"defending rapists against kidnapping charges because the victim wasn't dragged far enough for your liking" are what's creepy.

There is nothing in my posts that constitutes "defending rapists".

There is nothing in my posts that claimed a rapist "didn't drag someone far enough".

The motivations of my posts have been:

1. To determine what *your* prototypical rape case was.
2. To provide evidence that contra your claim, rapists are indeed sentenced to life.

It's *your* claim that dragging someone down an embankment or a victim getting into a perp's car makes the rape "more than rape" and thus the life sentences given in such cases don't count.

But they don't give life sentences for dragging someone 10 feet into an embankment unless there's rape or murder involved, which pretty much tells me you're just special pleading to defend your own notions of righteousness.

Lots of rapists get life sentences.

In your mind apparently anyone who disagrees with you is "defending rapists".

[geek tragedy]

50. Are you familiar with this field called 'statistics?'

Heck, anyone could link to the ESPN profiles of NBA players and conclude that most men are at least 77 inches tall.

[bettyellen]

54. look below you, his "list" is bullshit. anything over 7 years had additional charges that show up in

the google paragraphs he took them from. They are mostly for raping children and kidnapping. What a pile of shit.

[Comrade Grumpy]

107. "Statistics," you say?

Well, the only one I could find easily, and the one which appears to the basis of sentence length claims made here, the 1995 Bureau of Justice Statistics report, says the average sentence length is 117 months and the average time served is 65 months.

I would note, as the report does, that rapists get longer sentences than any other violent offenders except murderers.

And that they serve the longest percentages of their sentences.

Bettyellen claimed long prison sentences for rape were rare. A Google news search of the most recent instances of "rape sentence" showed they happen with some regularity. It's not ironclad statistical evidence that such sentences are not rare, but it is suggestive.

[geek tragedy]

111. The question was whether they frequently serve 20 years.

Per your statistics, the answer is clearly no--the average time served is barely a quarter of that.

[bettyellen]

125. god forbid anyone stay in the context of the thread- instead of derail with examples of

thirty year old mistaken identity cases, kidnapping, raping minors and three strikes you're out felons.
What a lovely bunch of examples they have dredged up, accidentally supporting exactly what I said.

[mercuryblues]

132. I did google

this is what I came up with....

India: woman sentenced to rape by village elders


India, where latest gang rape is tribal sentence

Laws regarding rape - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rape in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Indian woman gang-raped as 'punishment' - News - Al Jazeera ...

Rape and Sexual Offences: Chapter 19: Sentencing - Crown ...

India, where latest gang rape is tribal sentence | euronews,

Montana judge defends one-month rape sentence - CNN.com

I got a different result than you, using the exact same terms you said you used.

[bettyellen]

146. I got almost the same list- all very short term sentences.

but it's BS anyway, he knew he was editing out the special circumstances in pretty much of all of them .
Very dishonest post. Thanks for cross checking!

[bettyellen]

52. every crime you listed to refute me was NOT MERELY RAPE. Wow, it takes a lot of nerve to pretend

any sentence over six years was given just for rape charges. What a list of total bullshit, you really did try to deceive DUers about this. Why would you do that?



31 years, Richmond, California HATE CRIME, SODOMY AND GANG RAPE OF 15 YR OLD

14 years, Canton, Ohio FOR TWO RAPES AGAINST MINORS

50 years, Chattanooga, Tennessee KIDNAPPING, TORTURE OF TWO TEENS AND RAPE

20 years, Charlottesville, Virginia RAPE, ABDUCTION , SODOMY

Life in prison, Medina, Ohio (NOPE, ACTUALLY 25-LIFE) FOR CHILD UNDER 13

6 years, Canton, Ohio WOW- THIS ONE COULD ACTUALLY "JUST" BE RAPE- CONGRATS!!

27 years, Northampton, Pennsylvania RAPING A FOUR YEAR OLD

Life in prison, Huntsville, Alabama SODOMY AND RAPE OF A 12 YR OLD

Life in prison, Syracuse, New York IS THIS THE CARJACKER WHO KILLED THE MOM AND RAPED HER 10 YR OLD?

22 years, Bradenton, Florida HOME INVASION AND ATTEMPTED RAPE- REDUCED FROM 50 YR SENTENCE.

3 years, New Port Ritchie, Florida IF TRUE, THIS IS VERY SAD.

[Comrade Grumpy]

106. I said I did a Google news search for "rape sentence" and that was the result.

I responded to your assertion that rapists "rarely" get long sentences. It wasn't meant to be a comprehensive, peer-reviewed refutation of your point; merely a quick sampling of cases that made the news.

And I didn't do much more than scan the headlines. Kudos to you for digging deeper.

These are all essentially rape crimes, despite the additional charges (with the exception of the carjacker murderer). I mean, if we're talking about somebody charged with "kidnapping, rape, sodomy," I think we're talking about multiple criminal charges for the same event.

You didn't say only certain types of rapists got long sentences, you said rapists rarely got long sentences. Rape of a minor may be deserving of a longer sentence, but you didn't specify which rapists you were talking about.

The point is, some rapists do get long sentences. It's a silly one to have to make.

That said, the common stat I've seen is that the average sentence is 11 years, with five years and some months the average time served. But that stat is nearly 20 years old. I don't know how much things have changes.

[bettyellen]

108. No, the words kidnapping and minor were in all the summaries.

Very prominently. And the context of this thread was rape victims. You made all that effort to edit and took out entirely relevant info. Now you make excuses for it. There are none.

Believe it it not, rape is a separate and serious crime without the kidnapping or assault charges. And your BS list including the additional serious charges in every sentence over 7 years proves my point.

And gives us all a window into those who minimize rape alone as not being serious enough. Jerks who want to joust on the Internet about kidnapping being too broadly applied because the victim wasn't taken far enough, and women who don't struggle enough and are "merely" date raped. That's the context you gave to this discussion with your deceptively labeled list. And I don't see how you couldn't have known it since you edited it all out yourself.

Not a mistake at all.

[OwnedByCats]

114. Andrew Luster, Max Factor heir

got life for rape, but he had 80+ counts of rape and he drugged them with GHB and filmed himself violating them while they were completely passed out. So that one had extenuating circumstances beyond a count or two of rape, hence why he got so long. But usually rapist's sentences aren't anywhere near long enough IMO.

[bettyellen]

123. Yeah, it takes multiple felonies. Has absolutely nothing to do with the context of this thread...

But it's nice to know we have people here explaining to us how very hard the justice system is really hard on typical rapists.

[OwnedByCats]

141. I was on your side

by saying "look this asshole got life, but look at how this isn't a typical rape". I said I agreed that typical rapes don't usually result in much prison time.

No need to attack me

[bettyellen]

145. And I was agreeing, and never "attacked you". my post said nothing about you.

I only said it takes multiple attacks or special circumstances to get a long sentence.
There was absolutely no attack in my reply. Jeeze, read it again.

[OwnedByCats]

148. Sounded very

sarcastic, my apologies

[bettyellen]

149. Thanks- was not meant to be sarcastic at all

Just trying to clarify. I try to stay clear of all the weird personal hostilities that go on here, so it stung a bit. Appreciate your response! *olive branch*

[OwnedByCats]

150. No problem

I took it wrong so it was my fault but you are right, tempers flare here and sometimes we get lost among them. Thanks for understanding!

[Revanchist]

74. Perhaps those results show up in the search results

Because those are the exceptions and not the rule. If long sentences were common then they wouldn't be newsworthy.

[niyad]

76. how about providing the actual links to those sentences. that would be helpful to know axactly

what you were looking at. otherwise, they are just numbers with no context. and don't say "google it", that is dodging the question.

[bettyellen]

94. I googled for him, they all include minors, kidnapping or are

Such light sentences that they are beside the point.
So now we have someone complaining dragging a woman 10 feet should not be considered kidnapping. Because god forbid he gets a big sentence for stuffing someone in his car trunk. WTF.

[niyad]

97. and I thank you for going into that cesspool for us. knew there was a lot more involved than

a sentence for rape.

I am looking for that graph that shows rapes and reported rapes and rapists jailed in human-like figures? I thought I had it saved, but cannot locate it.

[bettyellen]

102. It turned into a cesspool- now it's unfair to charge someone with kidnapping....

If they didn't drag the person far enough away. Just ick. Hope his loved ones know he's on the net complaining rapists and kidnappers serve too much time in jail.

I need a shower.

[redqueen]

66. Or when the rapist is nonwhite, and the victim is white.

Otherwise, nah.

[bettyellen]

71. good point those sentences will be longer! but look at this list I was given as a sampling of

typical sentences for rape, VS what the charges proven in court actually were. we care about kids, but past puberty it needs to be violent for the justice system to do very much at all. Including testing rape kits.


31 years, Richmond, California HATE CRIME, SODOMY AND GANG RAPE OF 15 YR OLD

14 years, Canton, Ohio FOR TWO RAPES AGAINST MINORS

50 years, Chattanooga, Tennessee KIDNAPPING, TORTURE OF TWO TEENS AND RAPE

20 years, Charlottesville, Virginia RAPE, ABDUCTION , SODOMY

Life in prison, Medina, Ohio (NOPE, ACTUALLY 25-LIFE) FOR CHILD UNDER 13

6 years, Canton, Ohio WOW- THIS ONE COULD ACTUALLY "JUST" BE RAPE- CONGRATS!!

27 years, Northampton, Pennsylvania RAPING A FOUR YEAR OLD

Life in prison, Huntsville, Alabama SODOMY AND RAPE OF A 12 YR OLD

Life in prison, Syracuse, New York IS THIS THE CARJACKER WHO KILLED THE MOM AND RAPED HER 10 YR OLD?

22 years, Bradenton, Florida HOME INVASION AND ATTEMPTED RAPE- REDUCED FROM 50 YR SENTENCE.

3 years, New Port Ritchie, Florida IF TRUE, THIS IS VERY SAD.

[OwnedByCats]

116. I don't live very far from that incident that happened in Syracuse

Well it was actually Clay, which is just on the outskirts of Syracuse, in an area you'd never expect. Not only did he murder the mom and rape the child, but he had been out on bail at the time for possessing a huge amount of child pornography on his computer. Really disgusting case, but yeah, you can see why he'd get life in prison as this is not just a simple case of rape.

[kairos12]

11. I don't think the late George Orwell could dream of the scenario this woman faces.

[theHandpuppet]

15. Sometimes there simply are no words...

... just RAGE.

[niyad]

20. "make it more difficult"??? there should be NO WAY a rapist should EVER have "parental rights"

what sick and twisted, woman-hating bastards came up with this insanity. and yet, THIRTY-some state grant parental rights to the RAPIST. sick, disgusting, obscene.

[NobodyHere]

59. Out curiosity, how do you feel about a case like this?

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1996-12-22/features/9612220045_1_pay-child-support-child-support-behalf

[kcr]

79. What about that poster's post made you curious to ask that? n/t

[bettyellen]

109. The courts are fucked up about this, and it's just more proof.

[gollygee]

21. Well this is a good reason to have an abortion if you get raped.

Can you imagine dropping your child off alone at a rapist's house on a regular basis? I can promise I'd have an abortion if I got pregnant due to rape, and I would recommend to my girls that they have abortions if they got pregnant due to rape, and I'd tell them about this so they're fully informed about why. I can see why the anti-abortion crowd is opposed to this.

[stevenleser]

24. That would be my advice at this point to any women in my family. It's bad enough...

to have to get over the whole thinking of the rapist and the experience each time you see the child and trying not to let that get in the way of being a loving parent. To have to hand the child over every two weeks and maintain some sort of contact even via a third party is disgusting. Who even wants money from that person? Even that seems invasive.

[niyad]

80. don't forget that some woman-hating fool in nm is trying to make it a crime to have an abortion

in a rape case, as that would be "destroying the evidence".

[stevenleser]

22. A conviction for sexual assault that results in a birth should terminate parental rights

automatically and completely. That person should not be considered a parent in any way.

[davidpdx]

104. I like that idea

I wonder if such a law would hold up on court if it was challenged.

[mbperrin]

23. So continuing and state-required rape is the law?

Rapists are not even human beings, but most state legislators must think they either are or could be one, so they protect them.

Can't say more, pretty sure it would violate laws in many states.

[NobodyHere]

58. Ummm

Rapists are human beings, like it or not.

[mbperrin]

68. I suppose some case for simple biological similarities, DNA, and the like

could be made.

So I'll content myself with thinking that they are junk human beings with no reason to exist.

[L0oniX]

25. That "judge" needs to go! What a mockery of justice that asshole is.

[Heather MC]

26. Then doesn't this also mean a Victim can't sue for child support?

This is a horrible law, but does suspending their parental rights also dissolve their financial responsibility?

I don't know, just asking

[lumberjack_jeff]

29. Yes.

No parental rights = no parental obligations.

[Heather MC]

30. It would be so much easier if there were no rapist

[tammywammy]

35. Nebraska is proposing removing rights, but still requiring child support.

From the OP's link:

She and Richardson said they support Legislative Bill 748, which was introduced by State Sen. Bill Avery of Lincoln. In cases in which a child is conceived through sexual assault, the bill would require county attorneys to file petitions to terminate the man's parental rights. The bill would allow for exceptions if the mother or guardian consents or if judges find that terminating parental rights is not in the child's best interest.

The bill would still require the man to pay child support.

[kcr]

83. Termination of parental rights alone in most states does not end the obligation of child support n/t

[Jim Lane]

112. Not necessarily.

Child support is for the benefit of the child -- and, often, the benefit of the taxpayers, when a government agency goes after the father for reimbursement of welfare payments made on behalf of the child. (See this story posted by NobodyHere in #59, in which a 15-year-old boy was the victim of statutory rape and was then ordered to pay child support because his rapist became pregnant. The push for payment came from the state, which sought to recoup its welfare payments made to the rapist.)

Visitation is different. I can see two major reasons to deny visitation rights: It's not in the best interest of the child to be constantly exposed to the rapist, and it's an appropriate part of the punishment for rape that the rapist forfeits his parental rights to the extent necessary to prevent further harm to his victim. Either of those considerations would justify eliminating visitation rights but would have no effect on the support obligation.

[Heather MC]

117. "Child support is for the benefit of the child" Not really

If child support was for the benefit of the child, then any money paid to the childs primary care giver should count toward child support, if it can be proven.

However, in this country, if a man pays support outside of the childsupport system. Child support agency will say it doesn't count even if both parents show proof that he paid it.

Child Support benefits the system not the child because they charge interest on the money owed.

And In the case of the Father who was sent to jail anyway even after paying all his childsupport plus a thousand extra. The taxpayers are in no way benefitted now that man is in Jail, lost his job and his home. We are now paying for him and his son.

And I know lots of men that get put in jail from the first complaint of non-payment.

That doesn't benefit the child, the tax payer, or the father.

Recouping welfare goes back to the State not the child, still doesn't benefit the child. I had a friend once that got TANF, once the childsupport kicked in, The state took all but $50.00 of the money untill the TANF was paid off it took 4 months. now in the 4 months time she still had a son that need food everyday, and $50.00 was not covering it. but the State did not care. And the State determined the father could afford to pay $625.

Child Support through a State agency is a scam. It is often times more trouble for the family seeking support, than it helps

Thank you for the explanation on Visitation

[kcr]

118. Yes, really

It doesn't count because if a parent is going to pay it, they should pay it in the system. The fact they don't let people get away with it doesn't mean it isn't for the children. It means the courts are serious about enforcement.

And people sometiems go to jail for non payment. If no one is ever punished, then fewer people will pay. That won't benefit children either.

[Heather MC]

119. Let me tell you what happened to people I know and stories I have read

1st Case, A father paid for his son most of his life, he was actively in his life, his entire life. When the Child turned 16, the father fell on hard times and lost his job. The mother didn't like that and decided to take him to court for Child Support. The Court Decided to make him pay for ALL 16 years prior basically telling him he was 16 years behind, even though he and the mother showed proof he had been actively envolved in his sons life and paying money up to that point. Who is that helping?

2nd Case A friend of mine is raising her grandson, she decided to take the father to court because he was $1,000 behind on CHild support, his first offense. He got sent to jail that was 6 months ago, he is still there. He is unable to pay additional child support, and the amount he owes is continually racking up. The Grandmother told me it was never her intent to get him arrested. And she wrote a letter to the court asking them to reverse the decision. Now the Child is not receiving any Child Support. Who does that help?

3rd Case Another Friend, had a baby daddy who got one of those over paid contractor Jobs in Iraq. They decided it would be easier to have the courts Garnish his wages, than rely on snail mail to send money. Now this guys was making 300K per year in Contractor Job, and his intention was to pay. Welp the Childsupport Agency, was not taking the money out properly, one month they would take $160, the next month $500. The total amount was suppose to be $875. The mother would only receive $200 one mother, $120 the next. Meanwhile unbeknowst to both the Father and the mother, the Child support Agency was creating a balance against the father saying he was in the rears. The mother was calling the agency trying to get a straight answer as to why they were not taking the money out consistently to no avail. At first the father decided he would just send the money directly to the mother to make up the difference of what the CSA was not deducting. Bad Idea. they eventually discovered he was $10,000 behind in childsupport, and this was effecting his job. Some countries will not give you admittence if you are behind on child support.

The mother dropped the case, it was the only way to bring the balance to zero.

ChildSupport may help some, but it screws over many more. Child Support is the only debt that lands you in jail. And I promise you a disproportionate amont of black fathers end up incarcerated, over men of other races. And exactly how does it help a father to find and keep a job, if he now has a prison record??? And let's face it with Jobs being sent ove seas, and all that's left are the low wage non union jobs, it seems like they are purposely creating a no win situation where a father will end up in jail for non payment. Daddies in Prison can not help their children ever.

[kcr]

120. Sorry.

Anecdotal stories on the internet aren't going to change my mind and make me thing gee, we should abolish child support or further weaken its enforcement and create millions more children living in poverty because they have to live on one income.

In your first story. Why didn't the father pay child support for the first 16 years? THe mother "didn't like that" Maybe she "didn't like that" because she needed the money?

2nd story. Why didn't he pay his child support? What does that help? It helps people realize they'd better pay their child support.

3rd story I'm sorry, but I'm having a hard time believing you can be tens of thousands of dollars in arrears and not know about it to the point where you won't get admittance to other countries. That doesn't happen overnight. That whole thing sounds like a right mess, and when things happen to our friends and family we aren't objective in our judgments of what happens to them, and we're going to think they're totally innocent, and did absolutely nothing to contribute to that mess. But I think there's more to the story there. At any rate, I'm still firmly in the camp that we keep child support firmly enforced. Millions of children count on it.

[Heather MC]

121. I never said Abolish Child Support, but it is a hot mess

The father was active in his childs life, why is there this assumption that of child support is the only

2nd why is it that this young man has to be made an example of for the rest of the world. and the Grandmother told she didn't want him jailed, because guess what now his son can't even be with his father

3rd story, I am not friends with baby daddy, in a lot of ways he is jerk, however, the mother lived with me for a while so I know this story well. Child support was the problem not the solution.

As it I said I am sure it helps a lot of kids, but sometimes the CSA makes things worse not better

http://www.sott.net/article/271748-Father-sentenced-to-6-months-in-jail-for-paying-too-much-child-support
This story proves you can be behind and not know it. but please show me your examples of how great it is.
Also if so many women can't take care of their children maybe the father's paying child support on time should be given the children, then the mothers will have less of a burden

[kcr]

122. I'd believe it

If the only evidence for it weren't anecdotes on the internet. I once saw one of those where an attorney showed up and did a brilliant take down of why it was a bunch of baloney. It was a beautiful thing to see.

The son could be with his father if his father had paid child support.

I'm sure you know the story well, but my point remains. I still find it hard to believe that someone can be tens of thousands of dollars in arrears on child support to be missing and not know it. How do you not know? To be that behind for anything? How do you not know? Unless you're a multimillionaire that's a lot of money to be missing. It's a hard story to believe.

The story you link to is a guy who went to jail for contempt of court. It does not prove that you can be behind and not know it. Not at all. It proves that you can be thrown in jail for contempt.

[Jim Lane]

126. I think you're both right.

I agree with kcr that it's usually proper to impose a child support obligation on a noncustodial parent and to enforce that obligation.

I also agree with Heather MC that in a system that has to handle millions of cases, and is administered by fallible humans, there are going to be screwups. I once got a dunning letter from the IRS that noted an account of mine on which I had earned some interest that I hadn't declared on my return. The IRS letter itself, right in its text, identified the account as my IRA account. Of course these things will happen and people will have to try to straighten them out.

It wouldn't surprise me if, in many places, the funds for administration are inadequate, because "government bureaucrats" would be an easy target for politicians who need to cut spending somewhere and who want to appeal to popular prejudices. Furthermore, any large system like this tends to acquire a life of its own, and following the prescribed rules takes precedence over serving the goal that prompted the enactment of the rules in the first place.

[kcr]

127. To clarify, I'm not arguing that there are never screw ups. Nothing is perfect.

I'm just not in the Child Support Isn't For the Children camp. And I tend to be highly skeptical of 99% of the anecdotes I read on message boards especially when it comes to child support. Many of them tend to be unbelievable, like stories of people being thrown in jail over minor issues or not knowing they were hugely in arrears. I don't blame friends and family for taking their loved one's side because people tend to do that, but looking at them objectively they just aren't that believable. And people will talk about the screw ups, but leave out the details where they contributed to the events that led to those screw ups. And I see all the people who just immediately bought the story of the guy thrown in jail for overpaying his child support! But when you learn the details that's not what happened at all. So you know they buy the stories of their friends the same way.

[joeglow3]

128. A friend of mine took custody of his kid, but didn't want to pay to remove child support

Only had one year left, so he had to cut a check to the state, mail it to them who would then cut a check for the same amount to him and mail it back to him. Lot of value that added.

[kcr]

129. What would the value of removing child support

and throwing millions of children into poverty just so your friend didn't have to do whatever it was that you claimed he had to do there be? He didn't want to pay to remove child support? Well, that was his choice, wasn't it? How is that anyone else's fault?

[joeglow3]

130. It shows lack of commone sense in much of government

A couple legal documents were not even close enough. He would have had to spend thousands in legal fees to made what should a common sense, simple change. Sadly, our government prices many people out.

But, try your chicken little, I support the fall of civilization crap anyway.

[kcr]

131. I thought you said he didn't want to pay to remove it?

And now it's a couple legal documents weren't enough. Why? Custody had changed hands. He would have had to pay thousands of dollars in legal fees just to get a child support order amended when custody changed? See, this is what I was talking about when I said I didn't believe most of the anecdotes I read on the internet. Clearly, there is much more to this story.

[joeglow3]

134. Here is the story

His ex had custody and he paid child support. Mom was a piece of work and couldn't support herself, let alone a kid. When the daughter was 16, her family intervened. She refused to let the dad have her (out of spite), so her aunt agreed to take in her daughter (while mom retained legal custody). After some issues, aunt decided she couldn't raise the girl, so she "gave her back" to mom.

During this experience, mom realized she couldn't best raise daughter. Thus, she "let" daughter move in with father. After many discussion with the state, their options were to either get attorneys and go back to court or have the check go to the state and then come right back to them.

As someone who is an advocate for the poor, I would think you would be pissed that the red tape within government prices out all but those who can afford an attorney.

[kcr]

135. Well, no. I'm sorry

Advocates for the poor should never be for removing child support. It would throw millions of children into poverty. I figured there was more to this story. He didn't actually have legal custody. Why should I be pissed off at this "red tape"? It's there for a reason.

[joeglow3]

136. BOTH parties contacted the state and had notarized statements

The state could at least divert the payments. However, as a poor person living paycheck to paycheck, giving the state a $500 loan for a week out of every money was bull shit. They couldn't afford to go to court to get it sorted out for only one year. However, the spent a decent amount of money needing paycheck advances due to the state sitting on their money.

Hardly a system I would line up to support.

[kcr]

137. Your contention is they couldn't afford to go to court and get it sorted out.

But if both parties agreed, then where is this assertion that it all would have cost thousands of dollars coming from? So what if it's for only one year? If they aren't fighting over the terms, there's no reason it should have costs thousands of dollars.

[joeglow3]

144. I agree. It shouldn't.

But it was what it was.

[kcr]

147. No, I'm telling you, there's no reason it would cost thousands of dollars.

Filing for a change of child support won't cost thousands of dollars.

[tblue]

28. They let a sex offender share the child?

Seriously? SERIOUSLY?

[freshwest]

40. You nailed it! You win the thread. n/t

[DeadLetterOffice]

60. THANK YOU!

That's what I kept thinking, too.
The world has stopped making any sense at all...

[Dustlawyer]

31. This is a complex issue. Rape is a horrible crime and can lead to all sorts of trauma

and pain. But, there is a flip side. What about the times when there is consensual sex, the women is pregnant but no longer wants anything to do with the father. There have/will be instances where the father will want to share in the joys/responsibilities of being a parent. If he loses on the rape charge due to the stigma of the charge and the undeniable fact that he had sex with the woman, he has no way to see his child, ever. You cannot tell me there are not women who would do this. Texas's death row has been full of innocent men and women, would there not be innocent "rapists?" If the Court can decide if he is a rapist, cannot the Court decide if it is in the best interests OF THE CHILD to have some type of access to his child? All tough decisions.

[geek tragedy]

48. Not complex for rational people. False rape convictions are more rare than deaths by lightning.

And, no, it is never in the best interest of the child to have a relationship with a man because that man raped that child's mother. Moreover, the harm done to the mother by forcing her to spend 20 years having to deal with the man who raped her is so extraordinary to make all of the nonsense reasons you cited irrelevant by comparison.

[dsc]

72. that isn't even remotely close to being true

Yes, false accusations of rape are rare but they aren't anywhere near that rare. According to the government the average deaths per year from lightning for past 30 years is 53. Even the lowest rates of false accusation that I have seen here are 1% of all rapes, which would be considerably more than 53.

http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/fatalities.htm

[geek tragedy]

82. Only 1/750,000 sexual acts results

in a false rape accusation. 1/84,000 people will be killed by lightning.

False rape claim hysteria isn't any more valid in this context than it is in any other context.

[dsc]

85. that is an absurd way to look at it

A more reasonable way is comparing the number of people the number of incidents. By that standard, more people in the US will be falsely accused of rape in any given year than will die from lightning in any given year. Again, that doesn't make false accusations common, but they are certainly more common than deaths by lightning.

[geek tragedy]

96. 1000 per year, accusations not convictions.

300 million people in the country.

1/300,000 chance.


450 people get hit by lightning.

[dsc]

139. you are moving the goalposts here

you specifically said deaths from lightning, not people struck by lightning. I would love a citation for the 1000 figure.

[geek tragedy]

140. Well, we moved the goal posts when moving from

the chance that a consensual act of impregnation would falsely be reported as rape to whether a person would wind up accused.

The very fact that we're quibbling over whether false rape accusations are as rare as lightning strikes or a subset of lightning strikes is revealing.

[dsc]

142. I think if you are going to lecture people about statistics

something you did in this thread, correctly I will state, then you shouldn't later misuse them in the very same thread and not expect to be called out upon doing so.

[geek tragedy]

143. which comparison do you want?

likelihood that any indvididual sex act will lead to a false rape accusation; or
likelihood that any inidividual sex act will lead to a false rape conviction; or
likelihood that any indvididual person will be subject to a false rape accusation; or
likelihood that any inidividual person will be subject to a false rape conviction

vs:

likelihood of being struck by lightning
likelihood of being killed by lightning

[Gravitycollapse]

56. If he thinks he's innocent, which he very likely is not, he can appeal the conviction.

Until the moment that conviction is overturned, I don't give a shit what kind of emotional rapture he experienced, he can fuck off.

[mbperrin]

70. You said it well.

Thank you!

[LeftyMom]

69. On what planet is it in a child's best interest to hang out with her mother's rapist?

[bettyellen]

73. false convictions are a totally different issue- and one you should advocate for- ELSEWHERE.

if you give a damn, do something constructive about it. we are talking about different laws/ issues here, and you are disrupting the conversation.

[Enthusiast]

36. What a stupid fucking judge!

[Igel]

37. Or a judge who was forced to apply the law as written.

Laws aren't always written to account for every variable.

And often judges don't have as much discretion over one case as we'd like, because then they'd have discretion over cases where we don't want them to have discretion. Take the "affluenza" case--we objected to that judicial discretion. But if we took that away entirely, I'm sure that in the course of a year or two there'd be some other case we'd be outraged over because the judge didn't exercise, or have the ability to exercise, discretion.

Upthread a poster said that most states give rapists parental rights. They probably don't grant such rights to rapists by list, explicitly; but by saying "father" the rapist gets the same rights as any other father by default. Laws aren't always written to account for every variable.

It's an imperfect world. And try as we may, no amount of micromanaging laws and courtrooms will make it perfect. Doesn't mean we don't try; it does mean that when there are outrages we keep them in perspective.

[geek tragedy]

49. the judge has discretion based on the best interests of the child.

finding that, you know what, forcing the kid to have a relationship with his mother's rapist is not in that child's best interest.

A decent judge could figure out a way to make it happen.

[mstinamotorcity2]

45. If republicans have their way...

This will be a fate to all women. Personally I respect her choice to have the child. but it wouldn't be mine. Wouldn't carry that hateful seed.

[JI7]

47. why is this an issue in the first place ?

rapists should not have any rights in this area .

[valerief]

55. Why would they support her? She doesn't have a fetus anymore. nt

[blackspade]

77. A disgusting misapplication of judicial disgression.

WTF?!

[Winning1]

81. Get this...

He served about two weeks in jail and 18 months of probation. He also must register as a sex offender for 15 years.

WTF!

There's a thread I read earlier about a guy who was FALSELY convicted of an ATTEMPTED rape and got a life sentence! (Great Britain)

Child molesters and rapists are sooner to be released from prision, and in this fucked up case county jail, but drug offenders can spend years upon years in prison!

[niyad]

98. welcome to du

[Winning1]

151. Thank you,

niyad!

[DonCoquixote]

87. sorry to offend, but

If laws like these stand, how long till a bunch of white supremacists start organizing "forced pregnancies" to keep the numbers of the "white race" up? Laugh if you want to, but you know there are many in the Republican crowd who would shout amen at the idea, and FUND it through Pacs.

[niyad]

99. "the handmaid's tale" is almost here.

[1awake]

89. I don't care if your pro-life or not,

This is the stupidest thing I have heard in a very long time. The rapist should have no rights... zero... zilch! I'm half disgusted and half pissed after reading this travesty.

[RainDog]

101. A rapist should have no parental rights

and should be in jail.

[Xithras]

110. Nebraska, like most states, doesn't have a law stripping those rights.

The complications with these situations is that parental rights laws are generally subtractive, so you have to specifically pass a law to cover every eventuality. The legal baseline in nearly all of the states is that both biological parents have equal access to a child unless those rights are limited by law, a court order, or a legal agreement.

Until a few years ago, the idea of a rapist suing for child custody was unheard of. States didn't pass laws to specifically ban this sort of thing because it wasn't something that was actually happening (or if it was, it wasn't public knowledge) or a law that voters were clamoring for (again, because people didn't think it was a real threat). Since these custody suits started popping up a few years back, a number of states have passed laws stripping convicted rapists of custody rights. Clearly, not all 50 have done so yet.

The solution is for voters in those states to contact their state legislators and get those exclusions passed. I can't imagine anyone actually opposing a law like that.

[goldent]

124. Your post makes most sense

If this story is true, I think it could lead to many/most states quickly passing laws to address this.

[sl8]

133. They do in cases of first degree sexual assault, if the article is correct.

Nebraska law currently terminates parental rights when the perpetrator is convicted of first-degree sexual assault. Under the legislative proposal, rights would also be terminated for those convicted of less-serious second-degree and third-degree sexual assaults.

In this case, the offender was convicted of third degree sexual assault.

[OwnedByCats]

113. Totally disgusting

I had heard about parental rights granted to rapists, but I first thought that couldn't possibly be true. I guess it must be.

Makes me sick to my stomach.