Sex Offender Awarded Custody of 3 Year Old

[Annie]

If you look at that video in post #18, you will be even sicker. How could that judge do that? Something must be done. I am talking about the last part of the video where that woman comes to the door.

 

[tfrohning]

This is outrage! Really ! I have no words.

 

[Nova]

So the court awarded custody of little girl to a sex offender, even though that sex offender is not related to the little girl? I don't care if he legally is the father, that appears to be nothing more than a technicality, since the child is not biologically his. Shouldn't these facts be considered by the court?

I'm not saying I agree with the judge's decision, but IIRC the law that any child born to a married woman is automatically the legal child of her husband isn't just a technicality. It dates back at least to when I grew up in Florida in the 60s and 70s.

Before DNA testing and before divorce became so common, the intent was to insure stability in families and a sure way to assign paternity. I haven't thought it about lately so I'm not going to assume it's a bad law, even though it made for a bad outcome in this case.

 

[jjenny]

I'm not saying I agree with the judge's decision, but IIRC the law that any child born to a married woman is automatically the legal child of her husband isn't just a technicality. It dates back at least to when I grew up in Florida in the 60s and 70s.

Before DNA testing and before divorce became so common, the intent was to insure stability in families and a sure way to assign paternity. I haven't thought it about lately so I'm not going to assume it's a bad law, even though it made for a bad outcome in this case.

I realize the intent of the law was to protect the interest of a child, but now that we do have DNA testing, I think that law should be done away with.
It sure appears that in this case, the law resulted in a sex offender whose offense was against a teenage girl, getting a custody of young girl not related to him. From the article, it appears him and his wife separated before the conception of the child, but weren't legally divorced. So how does it make sense for him to be considered a legal father? It doesn't make sense to me.

 

[*~Aimee~*]

I had no idea that parents can sign so their 14 year olds can get married.

depends on the state - here in Illinois one has to be 16 and 1 day. Hence, my anniversary is the day after I turned 16. Been married going on 26 years in October

 

[mrsu]

I heard this story earlier! WTH is wrong with this judge?? Absolutely sick and wrong! This makes me SO upset.

 

[Nova]

I realize the intent of the law was to protect the interest of a child, but now that we do have DNA testing, I think that law should be done away with.
It sure appears that in this case, the law resulted in a sex offender whose offense was against a teenage girl, getting a custody of young girl not related to him. From the article, it appears him and his wife separated before the conception of the child, but weren't legally divorced. So how does it make sense for him to be considered a legal father? It doesn't make sense to me.

I understand. I'm no happier with the current decision that anyone.

But the facts could have been reversed. It could have been the bio dad who was the RSO and the man married to the mother could have been a decent guy; would we still want the child given to the biological father? I doubt it.

I don't think contributing a sperm sample should convey magical parental rights to a father who isn't involved with the mother or the child. If a married woman gives birth to somebody else's child, but her marriage is working and her husband wants to parent the kid, I think that may be a better choice for the child in the long run.

Perhaps you and I could agree that this should be a matter for family court rather than an automatic ruling for one man or the other based on DNA or a marriage certificate.

(In this case, we'll agree the legal father should be disqualified for other reasons.)

 

[jjenny]

Well if a man wants to support a child that isn't his that one thing. But if a married woman is cheating while married, has a child with someone else, why should the husband then be punished by being required to pay child support on a child that isn't his? It doesn't make sense to me to just automatically assume someone is the father because of marriage, now that we do have DNA testing. Why shouldn't the bio dad be responsible for child support, just as he would have if the woman wasn't married?
And in this case, the sex offender got a custody of young girl unrelated to him, and he wasn't even the one raising her up until now. Just because he is the "legal father." And the woman left him in 2005, so I presume the two of them weren't even together when the child was conceived. How does that make sense?

 

[Linda7NJ]

I think the more important question is where have these two "fathers" been all this time? The child should remain w/ her grandmom. imo

 

[CHICANA]

Well if a man wants to support a child that isn't his that one thing. But if a married woman is cheating while married, has a child with someone else, why should the husband then be punished by being required to pay child support on a child that isn't his? It doesn't make sense to me to just automatically assume someone is the father because of marriage, now that we do have DNA testing. Why shouldn't the bio dad be responsible for child support, just as he would have if the woman wasn't married?
And in this case, the sex offender got a custody of young girl unrelated to him, and he wasn't even the one raising her up until now. Just because he is the "legal father." And the woman left him in 2005, so I presume the two of them weren't even together when the child was conceived. How does that make sense?

I wonder if grandma was collecting child support from him ? That would be a big motivator for him to go after custody. Maybe if they give up rights to child support, he'll let her stay with grams.

 

[CHICANA]

So the court awarded custody of little girl to a sex offender, even though that sex offender is not related to the little girl? I don't care if he legally is the father, that appears to be nothing more than a technicality, since the child is not biologically his. Shouldn't these facts be considered by the court?

I don't like grandma either. She pretty much gave her 14 year old to the same sex offender when she signed for them to get married instead of having him arrested.

 

[AnaTeresa]

I wonder if there was a guardian ad litem in this case - there generally is when there's a convoluted family court issue involving custody. Even though it looks bad on paper, her placement may truly be "in the best interest of the child" - a lesser of two evils, so to speak.

It sounds bad, but I know the media can be inflammatory and less than truthful. I'd like a good look at the court documents, as the entire situation sounds weird.

 

[dsntslp]

I wonder if there are law suits from the accident mom was killed in and the motivation for custody of the child is to be in control of $ that the child would be entitled to from law suits. The younger the child the more $. Older children = less percentage of the $. Hopefully a Judge overseeing the wrongful death suit, if there is a case pending, would also establish an attorney or other such person and put the $ in a trust for the child/children.

Ana Teresa. I agree.

 

[Bobbisangel]

I'm floored that the judge is a woman. I can't understand why she would hand this baby girl over to a sex offender. Does it not matter to the judge because the victim was the baby's mother and he hasn't offended since then? He has a violent history. That man probably doesn't even want this baby. He probably is proving something to the gramma or the bio father. Where was this creep for the past 3 years...in prison? This is wrong and I'm going to find the address of the courthouse there and write a letter to that female judge. I wish other people would do the same thing. If not the judge then who should letters go to? Anyone know?

 

[Nova]

Well if a man wants to support a child that isn't his that one thing. But if a married woman is cheating while married, has a child with someone else, why should the husband then be punished by being required to pay child support on a child that isn't his? It doesn't make sense to me to just automatically assume someone is the father because of marriage, now that we do have DNA testing. Why shouldn't the bio dad be responsible for child support, just as he would have if the woman wasn't married?
And in this case, the sex offender got a custody of young girl unrelated to him, and he wasn't even the one raising her up until now. Just because he is the "legal father." And the woman left him in 2005, so I presume the two of them weren't even together when the child was conceived. How does that make sense?

Excellent point, jenny. I wasn't thinking about the financial implications, just who might actually be in a position to do the most parenting.

I have no problem with demanding that the bio dad pony up, not even while the mother's legal husband does the everyday parenting. We have that now, though often "unofficially."

And you're right that the facts of this case really don't provide a common-sense reason why the RSO should have the child. That's why I carefully listed an "ideal" case to show how the same law might sometimes give more desirable results.

I don't see any point in insisting a husband is the "legal father" of a child who is not his in a family where the marriage is already in separation or in the middle of divorce proceedings. On the other hand, other than financial obligations (which, as you know, are poorly enforced), I don't see the point in insisting that a bio dad is the "legal father" when he refuses to have anything else to do with the child.

Maybe this all means that family courts need to rethink parental rights and what is best for children. With half of all marriages ending in divorce, it shouldn't surprise us if new laws are needed. After all, we now have families with two legal dads in the case of gay parents; maybe we need something similar for instances where the mother is married to someone other than the bio father of her child.

(Side note: my kids have divorced parents and two stepfathers, one married to their mother and one married to their father. Every parent has contributed financially and emotionally to raising the children and everyone now dotes on the grandkids. This is all thanks to the graciousness and wisdom of my husband's ex-wife and I can never thank her enough.)

 

[Nova]

I'm floored that the judge is a woman. I can't understand why she would hand this baby girl over to a sex offender. Does it not matter to the judge because the victim was the baby's mother and he hasn't offended since then? He has a violent history. That man probably doesn't even want this baby. He probably is proving something to the gramma or the bio father. Where was this creep for the past 3 years...in prison? This is wrong and I'm going to find the address of the courthouse there and write a letter to that female judge. I wish other people would do the same thing. If not the judge then who should letters go to? Anyone know?

Sometimes judges have to make rulings they detest because they are forced to follow the letter of the law. I don't know the judge's private feelings in this case, but she may be as horrified as the rest of us, but feel her hands are tied.

 

[peeples]

It's not just Florida. I am volunteering as a victim's advocate and a judge just gave custody of a 3 yr old boy to a woman's RSO ex husband. The judge said it's because the woman is home less. (She's homeless because he kicked her into the street after 5 yrs of abuse). I wish I could say more.. your jaw would drop. This case out of Florida is not surprising to me at all.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

It's not just Florida. I am volunteering as a victim's advocate and a judge just gave custody of a 3 yr old boy to a woman's RSO ex husband. The judge said it's because the woman is home less. (She's homeless because he kicked her into the street after 5 yrs of abuse). I wish I could say more.. your jaw would drop. This case out of Florida is not surprising to me at all.

And there it is!

This is why WS is so full of threads on abused and murdered children.

 

[southcitymom]

I wonder if there was a guardian ad litem in this case - there generally is when there's a convoluted family court issue involving custody. Even though it looks bad on paper, her placement may truly be "in the best interest of the child" - a lesser of two evils, so to speak.

It sounds bad, but I know the media can be inflammatory and less than truthful. I'd like a good look at the court documents, as the entire situation sounds weird.

UBM

I was thinking along these lines too. Of course, it goes without saying how depressing the 3-year-old's care options are. God bless this family.

 

[southcitymom]

It's not just Florida. I am volunteering as a victim's advocate and a judge just gave custody of a 3 yr old boy to a woman's RSO ex husband. The judge said it's because the woman is home less. (She's homeless because he kicked her into the street after 5 yrs of abuse). I wish I could say more.. your jaw would drop. This case out of Florida is not surprising to me at all.

Thanks for your service, peeples. I know from experience that family court and cases involving children are not for the faint of heart.