Skip to comments.Court Rules Boy Must Pay Child Support to His Rapist
Posted on 08/18/2008 11:37:43 AM PDT by PercivalWalks
"I couldn't believe that our son has to pay child support to his abuser."
I've previously discussed cases where boys who have been statutorily raped by older women are forced to pay child support to their rapists. Here's a new one, from Ohio. From Boy's parents sue to get his baby from mom, 21 (Columbus Dispatch, 8/16/08):
LANCASTER, Ohio --- A Pickerington couple and their son are fighting for custody of a baby born to a Lancaster woman charged with having unlawful sex with the boy, who was 15 at the time of conception.Note also that the boy is allowed only seven hours a week of "visitation" with his son. He's really getting an early education on the joys of the family law system...
A paternity test shows that the teen is the father of the baby born April 7 to Jane C. Crane, who was 19 when she became pregnant. Now, a judge has ordered him to pay $50 a month in child support and set visitation at seven hours a week.
Crane, meanwhile, faces criminal charges. A Fairfield County grand jury indicted her last month on two counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, a fourth-degree felony. Conviction carries a maximum sentence of 18 months in prison and a requirement to register as a sex offender for 25 years.
Crane is living with the baby and her family in Lancaster.
The boy's parents say they can provide a better upbringing for the baby than Crane can. Her household includes her stepfather, David L. Jacobs, who was convicted of domestic violence last year for hitting, choking and pointing a gun at Crane's 17-year-old sister and was placed on two years' probation, court records show.
"We don't want to have our granddaughter abused by these people," the boy's father said. "We are trying to do the right thing.
"The child support was the icing on the cake. I couldn't believe that our son has to pay child support to his abuser."
Read the full article here.
[As an aside, I don't believe a 19-year-old having sex with a 15-year-old should be statutory rape. However, legally in this case it is statutory rape--just as it would be if it were a 35-year-old with a 15-year-old--so demanding that the victim pay child support should be out of the question.--GS]
Glenn Sacks, www.GlennSacks.com
[Note: If you or someone you love is faced with a divorce or needs help with child custody, child support, false accusations, Parental Alienation, or other family law or criminal law matters, ask Glenn for help by clicking here.]
Obama thinks children are a punishment. Some freepers agree. I think they’ll be along shortly, to explain.
Should we start inflitrating law schools to see what they are telling those students? Or just analyze the drinking water.
law schools are a dime a baker’s dozen.
We have more law school seats than students, the only limiter on lawyers is the bar exam and most of those ave 85% more or less pass rates.
Come on kid, pay the $50.00 a month to the girl you made a baby with.
You knew better and you knew the consequences.
You should have grabbed a condom from your school’s Nurse’s office.
Time to man-up and take responsibility.
No, no, no. According the Deadbeat Dads Society, child support is a punishment inflicted on men and boys, to punish them for being raped by women who will squander the child support on anything other than the offspring. And what would she do with all of $50 a month? It can’t cost that much to raise a kid. Blah, blah, blah.
Maybe we should have only one and just teach common sense the first two years.
Setting aside the circumstances surrounding the conception and the moral problems raised by them, the welfare of the baby should be the court’s ultimate concern and it appears that this was the approach of the judge. In that aspect, I dont really have a problem establishing the 17 year old’s obligation to assist in supporting and raising the baby. What I dont get is why the seven hour restriction in visitation? If you’re going to make the teenager fully responsible for his actions regardless of whether or not he was ‘coerced’ then he should get full visitation privileges without restrictions.
It says nothing about the girls family and the boys Mom seems a bit over bearing at this point. All the facts haven’t been told in this story.
Actually, I think they should both take responsibility for their own behavior. I don’t know when that started to be frowned upon in so-called conservative circles.
Children are not punishment. They are to be loved and taken care of. Hating your former spouse (or one-night-stand) is no reason to disown your own children.
There are a few octagenerians (men & women) still alive who will tell you they were married at 15 and stayed married.
As we became more “civilized” and our laws evolved to keep up with “new age” configurations i.e. life expectancy, labor laws, school attendance, age of consent etc., we should have considered that over the millenia - sexual maturity differed by race, ethnicity and traditional cultures...and almost every society had strict rules on male/female relationships - generally described as WEDDING VOWS OR MARRIAGE!!!!
Nevertheless, it will always be the parents’ responsibility to discourage sexual promiscuity in both young boys and young girls - IN OTHER WORDS - make sure your children understand the LAW and the consequences for breaking it.
So how does placing the child in a home the mother's step-father, a convicted domestic abuser, figure in with the welfare of the baby?
YEA! And that dirty bitch that dressed like a whore, went out dancing and got raped should have known better too.
Nothing about her family? Really? What about this little tidbit:
The boy's parents say they can provide a better upbringing for the baby than Crane can. Her household includes her stepfather, David L. Jacobs, who was convicted of domestic violence last year for hitting, choking and pointing a gun at Crane's 17-year-old sister and was placed on two years' probation, court records show.But the boy's mom seems a bit over-bearing, so it's probably better to have the baby living with a convicted abuser.
What the hell is this, An episode of Confused Judges?
My My where are all the lawyers who could create a Release of Responsibility for a poor raped boy child?
If these young studs could pack it along on their dates with older women - they could get the form signed before action took place - very efficient!
There has to be some advantages here for our legal community. ahem
I didn’t agree with that aspect of it either. The fact that the father is a minor likely tipped the decision in favor of the baby staying with the mother. BUT, The fact that the courts side in favor of the mother in the preponderance of cases is a sore point with me. It blows my mind that a mother could be a crack-ho living in filth with no visible means of support and she will still get custody of the children 99% of the time. That particular aspect of it IMO is feminism run amuck.
******Crane, meanwhile, faces criminal charges. A Fairfield County grand jury indicted her last month on two counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, a fourth-degree felony. Conviction carries a maximum sentence of 18 months in prison and a requirement to register as a sex offender for 25 years.*****
So the mother has not yet been brought up on charges? What happens to the child when she is in prison? If the daddy can pay child support - then he should be awarded custody.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.