Tethered to their rapists

christiefan915 said:
Why don't you take it up with Prewitt? Ask her to send her records for your perusal. She says she was raped and I have no reason not to believe her. But not you guys, apparently your knee-jerk reaction is that if a woman says she was raped, she's lying. My claim, as you put it, is that over 30 states have laws in effect that a rapist can ask for custodial rights if a child is born from the assault. My comment about this fact is that nothing could be more hurtful and damaging to a rape victim than to have the courts give custody rights to her attacker. If you think this is fair, just say so. Otherwise stop trying to imply Prewitt is a liar because of the choice she made. Stop missing the forest for the trees.
Click to expand...

what the fuck is your problem?

i took your OP at face value. and said this needs to stop. SEE my first post in this thread. but do you recognize that? no, you just bitch because i posted something. you need read what people actually say before you make shitty accusations. you can't even see the fact i agreed with you.

you're part of the problem christie. you don't see the content, you see the poster.
 
Rana said:
Wow, I love how you turn this back on the victim, that is messed up.
Click to expand...

christies post irked me and my trolling tendencies are bubbling to the surface. i really can't resist. what I say is true though. it's a net negative to have a rapist roaming the streets. I think the women should put the rapist in jail, and then I am pretty sure he would have a hard time having custody while being behind bars. We grant sole custody to parents all the time for things far less worse.
 
gone said:
what the fuck is your problem?

i took your OP at face value. and said this needs to stop. SEE my first post in this thread. but do you recognize that? no, you just bitch because i posted something. you need read what people actually say before you make shitty accusations. you can't even see the fact i agreed with you.

you're part of the problem christie. you don't see the content, you see the poster.
Click to expand...

You agreed with me UNTIL Grind dropped in with his comment about rape/no rape, then you went right to a snide comment: "so what is christie's point? geeze..that is what i get for not carefully checking her OP. her OP makes it as if the guy is guilty and couple that with her own OP words...i ASSumed."
 
GRIND said:
christies post irked me and my trolling tendencies are bubbling to the surface. i really can't resist. what I say is true though. it's a net negative to have a rapist roaming the streets. I think the women should put the rapist in jail, and then I am pretty sure he would have a hard time having custody while being behind bars. We grant sole custody to parents all the time for things far less worse.
Click to expand...

What about when he gets out of prison? Rapist usually don't get life.
 
Rana said:
What about when he gets out of prison? Rapist usually don't get life.
Click to expand...

they usually serve very long sentences. and yes, a lot of them do get life. And when he gets out in like... 2 decades or whatever it will be, shouldn't be hard to convince a judge that having your daughter be with a convicted rapist is a bad idea.

(actually... by the time he's out the child will probably be of legal age and they can decide on their own if they want to meet him or not)

Just because laws allow for things does not mean that they are applied. Again, parents are granted sole custody of children all the time for reasons far less severe. Additionally, it's the best thing for society, as by not prosecuting this man, more women will probably end up being raped and having their lives ruined.
 
GRIND said:
they usually serve very long sentences. and yes, a lot of them do get life. And when he gets out in like... 2 decades or whatever it will be, shouldn't be hard to convince a judge that having your daughter be with a convicted rapist is a bad idea.

(actually... by the time he's out the child will probably be of legal age and they can decide on their own if they want to meet him or not)

Just because laws allow for things does not mean that they are applied. Again, parents are granted sole custody of children all the time for reasons far less severe. Additionally, it's the best thing for society, as by not prosecuting this man, more women will probably end up being raped and having their lives ruined.
Click to expand...

The average time 117 months, the time served 65 months

http://t.answers.com/answers/#!/ent...l-time-for-rape-be,4fd8b2c74b672622b835aaf9/2
 
GRIND said:
christies post irked me and my trolling tendencies are bubbling to the surface. i really can't resist. what I say is true though. it's a net negative to have a rapist roaming the streets. I think the women should put the rapist in jail, and then I am pretty sure he would have a hard time having custody while being behind bars. We grant sole custody to parents all the time for things far less worse.
Click to expand...

I irked you? My job for tonight is done. :D
 
GRIND said:
still better than nothing. and it's 5 years they are off the streets not harming other people. and with a record like that it will be very hard to get even partial custody of the child.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't think so, otherwise, there would be an explicit law that states no custody, no visitation rights.
 
Rana said:
Well, I don't think so, otherwise, there would be an explicit law that states no custody, no visitation rights.
Click to expand...

no rana. just because there isn't a law for every conceivable circumstance doesn't mean that one would get custody by being a rapist. Character, possible threats to the child, child endangerment, good emotional upbringing, etc are all factors that WOULD be considered for the interests of the child that this rapist would almost certainly fail.
 
Disillusioned said:
He has not, repeat not, been convicted.

No matter what Bijou says, not convicted means not convicted. Until she presses charges and he is convicted, he is presumed innocent, once he is, lock him up, toss out his parental rights, do whatever, but until then, he still has rights as 50% of the genes.
Click to expand...

You just earned the ignore feature.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top