Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm pretty sure the law see it that way as well, so no need to prove consent. I would think the childs DNA would be enough to prove intercourse did indeed occur.
I think sometimes the family just doesn't want to have their child drug through the court process.
I find it strange that the family wants their 13 year old son to have sole custody of the child.
"The victim’s family is also looking ahead to the next steps in this case. They plan on asking the courts to give the 13-year-old custody of the baby. Currently, Serrano has custody."
She is saying this is forcing her son to be a father, yet they are petitioning the court for custody.
"The victim’s family is also looking ahead to the next steps in this case. They plan on asking the courts to give the 13-year-old custody of the baby. Currently, Serrano has custody."
She is saying this is forcing her son to be a father, yet they are petitioning the court for custody.
I realize what she's saying...but SHE wants that baby.
Personally, I don't think the 13 yr old (or grandma) is going to get sole or primary custody. The mom might be a sex offender, but that doesn't make it illegal to be a mama.
"The victim’s family is also looking ahead to the next steps in this case. They plan on asking the courts to give the 13-year-old custody of the baby. Currently, Serrano has custody."
She is saying this is forcing her son to be a father, yet they are petitioning the court for custody.
Since Serrano apparently wants custody of the baby, losing this privilege (and it is a privilege, all things considered) might be considered punishment of its own. Perhaps this is the perspective of the victim's family. Also, if the victim's family is awarded full custody, Serrano would probably be required to pay child support for eighteen years.
I realize what she's saying...but SHE wants that baby.
Personally, I don't think the 13 yr old (or grandma) is going to get sole or primary custody. The mom might be a sex offender, but that doesn't make it illegal to be a mama.
That's fair. It would be different if we were talking about a mother (or father) who sexually abused their own child, in which case parental rights would almost certainly be terminated. But in this case, the mother's judgment--no matter how poor--does not mean that she's a danger to her child. My two cents anyway.
I'm pretty sure the law see it that way as well, so no need to prove consent. I would think the childs DNA would be enough to prove intercourse did indeed occur.
I think sometimes the family just doesn't want to have their child drug through the court process.
I find it strange that the family wants their 13 year old son to have sole custody of the child.
If the concern is non-cooperation, the 13-year-old could refuse to take the DNA test. I'm not saying that this is the most likely outcome, but if it happens, what is the judge going to do? Hold him in contempt?
If the concern is non-cooperation, the 13-year-old could refuse to take the DNA test. I'm not saying that this is the most likely outcome, but if it happens, what is the judge going to do? Hold him in contempt?
I'd wager that the child's parent/guardian would be held in contempt until they produce the child for DNA testing.
I'd wager that the child's parent/guardian would be held in contempt until they produce the child for DNA testing.
This. I doubt the child could legally say "no" to the DNA testing at this point. If it's his, it's his.
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident
That's fair. It would be different if we were talking about a mother (or father) who sexually abused their own child, in which case parental rights would almost certainly be terminated. But in this case, the mother's judgment--no matter how poor--does not mean that she's a danger to her child. My two cents anyway.
The child was 13. If a parent can't semi-control a 13 year old, they're the problem. I don't know if it merits charges or not - I won't be the arbiter of that. With that said, it's evident a lot of poor habits and practices developed. The parents are probably unfit themselves, and it sounds like this young man needs better guidance going forward.
It very well could have been the young guy badgered the woman until she gave in. I don't know enough about the story to say fully either way, but I know I was hot for some teachers around that age, and if those women would have given me the slightest bit of daylight, I was smart enough to run through it and seduce them on the way.
I'm not holding the kid accountable, but I certainly bet he egged it on and got what he wanted.
I'm not holding the kid accountable, but I certainly bet he egged it on and got what he wanted.
I think the antiquated and sexist notion here is that only men (or in this case boys) have any agency. Men do things, women have things done to them. So even if we have a fully-grown woman and a 13-year-old boy, the boy should accept some if not all of the responsibility because women are inherently unable to act.
Perhaps in your case it's not sexism. Maybe you're a person who would say the same thing about a 13-year-old girl, that while you don't hold her responsible, you "certainly bet she egged it on and got what she wanted". Most people would take extreme exception to that sort of statement if it were about a girl. As a parent of two girls I certainly would not take that stance if it were either of my daughters. They are kids and an adult doing something like that bears the full responsibility for their actions. I don't see why it's reasonable or fair to think differently of boys.
I realize what she's saying...but SHE wants that baby.
Personally, I don't think the 13 yr old (or grandma) is going to get sole or primary custody. The mom might be a sex offender, but that doesn't make it illegal to be a mama.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JulieThruTheGlass
Since Serrano apparently wants custody of the baby, losing this privilege (and it is a privilege, all things considered) might be considered punishment of its own. Perhaps this is the perspective of the victim's family. Also, if the victim's family is awarded full custody, Serrano would probably be required to pay child support for eighteen years.
Yes I agree that this is the reasoning. Makes no sense her going on about how her son is being forced to be a father when she is pushing for custody. They could walk away and I would bet given the circumstances the 13 year old would get out of paying any child support.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
