Found Safe TN - SLP, 14, Madisonville, Monroe County, 13 Jan 2019 #3 *ARRESTS*

[GoBuckeyes]

Only the two oldest girls. The other two are RP's children, apparently. Imo

Did he also not participate in 2 boys' lives or does he currently have 2 boys or did I just get that completely wrong from the summary?

 

[oviedo]

Again, what do we know for a fact about the mother?

We can’t sleuth her but my bet is that SP will not be going back to her IMO

 

[GoBuckeyes]

I think Larry is referring to RP re: church deacon

Okay, I'll stop commenting until I can read a transcript. My apologies for muddying the water.

 

[PommyMommy]

Deleted because of broken quotes

 

[darring21]

Did he also not participate in 2 boys' lives or does he currently have 2 boys or did I just get that completely wrong from the summary?

He didn't make that clear. I got the impression that Larry has two boys with someone else but not sure if he is in their lives or not.

 

[MsBetsy]

Again, what do we know for a fact about the mother?

Not much at this point, but CPS would normally complete a full investigation before deciding whether or not to place the children in her care. We may never learn the details. Imo

 

[gitana1]

I am not saying it is the case. I don't know what part you don't understand. Once again, unequivocally I have stated that under all circumstances this is rape. Never said it was anything but rape. Never even implied it was anything else. There is no way that anything makes it other than rape. I don't know how many times I can say it. Would a billion times suffice?

And, I am not thinking of any specific charge or class of charge. I have repeatedly said that we have not seen the specific statute he was charged with. Nothing more. Nothing less. If you have seen the charging document and can link it that would be great?

My opinion is that he can be charged with any and possibly several of the classes of rape. I just don't know which one(s) they have chosen but I do know we should find out on Tuesday - along with whether they have additional charges and counts to file against him. Keep in mind that at the time they charged RP they had not yet interviewed SP. Detectives did not even head to Wisconsin to talk to her until Friday. So, I expect that there will be additional charges and likely multiple counts since I don't believe this is a one-time situation.

And once again the BBM. 100 percent true - and I never said differently no matter how many times you try to imply otherwise. What you describe is coercion and/or force via coercion and that is way different than a willing participant and the two cannot possibly be confused in any way, shape, or form. I have no confusion between the two.

Maybe I'm not understanding you. You've said there are different classifications of rape. You've stated some victims of rape can be "willing participants" but can't legally consent due to age. When I asked someone totally different (not you) why some were assuming this is a statutory rape case (not referring to you), and stated that there is "nothing to indicate she was a teen willfully engaging in a sexual "relationship" with her "father"", YOU replied saying that we don't know what class of rape she's been charged with, which indicates to me, when taken together, that you are suggesting that one possibility is that she willfully engaged in a sexual relationship with the man charged with raping her, thus leading to a lesser charge of rape. You finally stated that being a "willing participant" still makes it rape and doesn't mitigate it (which is incorrect. See below).

You've created an inference here, IMO, that this child may have been a "willing participant" even though due to her age and/or his positions of trust, it could still be rape.

I don't think you feel there is only one possibility but your words seem clear that you think it COULD be a possibility that she was a willing participant. If that's not what you meant, your words certainly created confusion. Quotes are below, BBM:

Well you could have a willing participant that legally cannot consent. For example, you could have a 16 year old willing have sex with a 26 year old but the law says you can't. So just because a person consents doesn't mean or lessen the fact that it is rape. Not every rape is a forced or even coerced situation but it is rape nonetheless.

Why are people assuming this is a statutory rape case? She was a child being molested by her father. Nothing to indicate she was a teen willfully engaging in a sexual "relationship" with her "father".

In any event, siblings, stepparents and adoptive parents can be charged with incest.

The media hasn't reported what class of rape under Tennessee law he has been charged with. I don't think we will know until Tuesday when his first appearance/arraignment is.

The statute of the classes starts here.
Tennessee Code Title 39. Criminal Offenses § 39-13-501 | FindLaw

Not saying anything of the sort - not even arguing it is the case. Just saying that we don't know what class he is charged with. We could guess and assume to our hearts content but all I am saying is we don't know for certain until Tuesday. There could be be more charges or more counts of rape filed and we don't know that either.

And the BBM. Never said it was and I have consistently said it is clearly rape and never said otherwise and made no mention of "not fighting" or "not being beat up" or any such thing since neither is required for a rape to occur and being a willing participant does not mean it isn't rape nor does it mitigate it in any way. I am quite consistent on this.

In any event, "being a willing participant" does INDEED mitigate it. It lessens the class of rape and leads to a lower sentencing range, as I will describe in another post.

I disagree strongly with the possibility that this kid was in any way, shape or form a "willing participant" in her rape by her father who raised her since age of 2. She was scared, helpless and if he didn't use a weapon or battered her into submission, he undoubtedly told this kid to comply or she would be in trouble or someone else would get hurt.

 

[JudgeJoe]

You skipped a part though, lol. While CP was with LS, she slept with the neighbor - a church deacon named Merle - and the next week she married him. When LS filed for full custody, she cried and begged and he took her back. THEN she met RP... I am still listening. I feel sorry for this man!
MOO

The old adage is true. Fact really is stranger than fiction. No Hollywood plot can touch this. I sincerely hope & pray that SP is taken in by some normal people, wise and kind and funny and clear, who can help her make sense of this madness, celebrate her courage, and move on to great and happy things from here on out.

 

[Jabarn]

Fwiw, and all, this case has closure in terms of understanding the unfortunate situation and who was responsible for the ultimate evil crime. Not sure where she went and why to get out of this situation and also not sure it is a helpful aspect to keep delving.

Sometimes there must be a pause and there is nothing left to sleuth to be really helpful. IMO. Unfortunately, there will prob be another case that needs attention.

 

[happyday]

That was me. I don't know which state he adopted her in but in Georgia the law holds that if you can prove to the court that the natural parents abandoned the child then if all other conditions are met the stepparent can adopt the child. There has to be notice and good evidence though. Here is a link to a website that explains all the conditions:

Our Experienced Duluth Attorneys Help Clients Navigate the Complex Stepparent Adoption Process

Thank you for the info.

I ran my hyena today too!

 

[GoBuckeyes]

In the interview, I never heard him say CP was the 15 year old he referenced, but I could not listen to the entire show.

Yes, I made the comment in error. My apologies. I was going off of various summaries of the video, as I couldn't see it all. Waiting until I read a transcript to comment further. Thanks.

 

[gitana1]

I respectfully disagree. Negligence laws are MUCH more complex than what was suggested. Criminal versus civil. Compensatory versus contributory... and so on and so forth. I'm not quick to support anything without thoughtful consideration and being satisfied that it will promote justice equally. Laws such as the one proposed offer no consideration for differences in intelligence, critical thinking, or even equal access to information. When a law says a corporation reasonably should have known about a faulty product or component, it's MUCH different than what someone reasonably SHOULD BE expected to KNOW about an individual. That is hard to quantify or legislate and just opens up a whole mess of worms.

I'm an attorney. I understand the law. As I said, what I propose is what a parent actually knew or reasonably should gave known. Those were my exact words.

Here's a scenario: Adoptive father keeps coming out of daughter's room in the middle of the night. Mother sees this. Asks him what he's doing. He's says "teaching her rules." Daughter tells mom one day that she doesn't want to be left alone with daddy. Daughter becomes withdrawn. Daughter starts asking mom about sex and sexual assault. Says she's scared of her father.

Dad suddenly states he wants to move the whole family out of state to a remote farm and have child homeschooled. They go. Dad begins spending even more time with daughter, taking her on "trips" around the farm. Child continues to act withdrawn and cries a lot.

Mother knew "daddy" had an extensive criminal history and allowed him to adopt her kids anyhow.

Eventually, dad is arrested for rape.

Did mom know child was being assaulted. Or should she have reasonably known? My suggestions is that if that is determined to be yes, she should be charged with child neglect, for not getting her child away from the man.

I would love a law like that.

Any law can be unequally applied, sadly. That doesn't mean we don't enact them.

It is not hard to quantify what someone should reasonably have known. That's determined in courtrooms on a regular basis.

 

[SharonNeedles]

Is there anything supporting that RP actually legally and officially adopted her? Because I’m really suspecting not.

 

[Love Never Fails]

He was interviewed by Gray Hughes (link upthread) and said he never signed away his rights, and that if there is some paperwork that says so, he would like to see it. (paraphrasing)

Yes, although according to him, CP told her that he was dead.

It's playing now.

You skipped a part though, lol. While CP was with LS, she slept with the neighbor - a church deacon named Merle - and the next week she married him. When LS filed for full custody, she cried and begged and he took her back. THEN she met RP... I am still listening. I feel sorry for this man!
MOO

I listened to this entire interview. If and when we can discuss it, some things should be clarified. People are getting things mixed up and making incorrect assumptions. I agree with you Pommy Mommy, I feel sorry for this man. Guess we cannot discuss CP’s past but she really screwed him over, pardon my expression there. The only thing I have a problem with is him not fighting hard enough to get custody and allowing the P’s to get away with telling his children he was dead! And he broke down several times. His own guilt at not fighting harder is getting to him, IMO.

 

[gitana1]

Gitana1, do you have a link on this in TN, please? TIA

Yes. Here it is:

Here is the full TN code on sex crimes. 2014 Tennessee Code :: Title 39 - Criminal Offenses :: Chapter 13 - Offenses Against Person :: Part 5 - Sexual Offenses

The only possible rape charges that would apply (unless he raped her when she was under 13) are as follows:

1. 39-13-502 Aggravated rape

(a) Aggravated rape is unlawful sexual penetration of a victim by the defendant or the defendant by a victim accompanied by any of the following circumstances:

(1) Force or coercion is used to accomplish the act and the defendant is armed with a weapon or any article used or fashioned in a manner to lead the victim reasonably to believe it to be a weapon;

(2) The defendant causes bodily injury to the victim;

(3) The defendant is aided or abetted by one (1) or more other persons; and

(A) Force or coercion is used to accomplish the act; or

(B) The defendant knows or has reason to know that the victim is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated or physically helpless.

(b) Aggravated rape is a Class A felony.
2014 Tennessee Code :: Title 39 - Criminal Offenses :: Chapter 13 - Offenses Against Person :: Part 5 - Sexual Offenses :: § 39-13-502 - Aggravated rape.

Class A felony = 15-60 years


2. 39-13-503 Rape

(a) Rape is unlawful sexual penetration of a victim by the defendant or of the defendant by a victim accompanied by any of the following circumstances:

(1) Force or coercion is used to accomplish the act;

(2) The sexual penetration is accomplished without the consent of the victim and the defendant knows or has reason to know at the time of the penetration that the victim did not consent;

(3) The defendant knows or has reason to know that the victim is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated or physically helpless; or

(4) The sexual penetration is accomplished by fraud.

(b) Rape is a Class B felony.
2014 Tennessee Code :: Title 39 - Criminal Offenses :: Chapter 13 - Offenses Against Person :: Part 5 - Sexual Offenses :: § 39-13-503 - Rape.

Class B felony = 8-30 years


3. 39-13-506 (c) - Aggravated statutory rape (three kinds under the code section but here the only one that would apply would be aggravated statutory rape)

(c) Aggravated statutory rape is the unlawful sexual penetration of a victim by the defendant, or of the defendant by the victim when the victim is at least thirteen (13) but less than eighteen (18) years of age and the defendant is at least ten (10) years older than the victim.
(d) (3) Aggravated statutory rape is a Class D felony.
2014 Tennessee Code :: Title 39 - Criminal Offenses :: Chapter 13 - Offenses Against Person :: Part 5 - Sexual Offenses :: § 39-13-506 - Mitigated statutory rape -- Statutory rape -- Aggravated statutory rape.

Class D felony = 2-12 years.


4. 39-13-532 - Aggravated statutory rape by an authority figure
(a) Statutory rape by an authority figure is the unlawful sexual penetration of a victim by the defendant or of the defendant by the victim when:

(1) The victim is at least thirteen (13) but less than eighteen (18) years of age;

(2) The defendant is at least four (4) years older than the victim; and

(3) The defendant was, at the time of the offense, in a position of trust, or had supervisory or disciplinary power over the victim by virtue of the defendant's legal, professional, or occupational status and used the position of trust or power to accomplish the sexual penetration; or

(4) The defendant had, at the time of the offense, parental or custodial authority over the victim and used the authority to accomplish the sexual penetration.

(b) Statutory rape by an authority figure is a Class C felony and no person who is found guilty of or pleads guilty to the offense shall be eligible for probation pursuant to § 40-35-303 or judicial diversion pursuant to § 40-35-313.
2014 Tennessee Code :: Title 39 - Criminal Offenses :: Chapter 13 - Offenses Against Person :: Part 5 - Sexual Offenses :: § 39-13-532 - Statutory rape by an authority figure.

Class C felony = 3-15 years.


Link to sentences per class of felony:
Tennessee Felony Crimes by Class and Sentences

 

[Love Never Fails]

Is there anything supporting that RP actually legally and officially adopted her? Because I’m really suspecting not.

Her bio dad said no.

 

[MsBetsy]

Is there anything supporting that RP actually legally and officially adopted her? Because I’m really suspecting not.

LE referred to him as the adopted father. Would they have made that statement without verifying it? Idk.

 

[SharonNeedles]

LE referred to him as the adopted father. Would they have made that statement without verifying it? Idk.

Absolutely they would.

 

[MsBetsy]

I listened to this entire interview. If and when we can discuss it, some things should be clarified. People are getting things mixed up and making incorrect assumptions. I agree with you Pommy Mommy, I feel sorry for this man. Guess we cannot discuss CP’s past but she really screwed him over, pardon my expression there. The only thing I have a problem with is him not fighting hard enough to get custody and allowing the P’s to get away with telling his children he was dead! And he broke down several times. His own guilt at not fighting harder is getting to him, IMO.

Yes, it's a little late now. By about ten years. Imo

 

[gitana1]

Please, can we stop victim blaming? As for now, that is exactly what the mother is...a victim!! I'm amazed. Bio Dad, for whatever reason, not involved. Adoptive Dad rapes his daughter and SHE is partly to blame!?! We know nothing about this woman. With the information we have right now, how can you blame her for her choices in men? You have 2 examples and know nothing about 1 of them and very little about her.

She is not a victim. In no court of law would she have nay victim's rights of any kind. If her daughter had been murdered, that would be different.

I can't blame her at this point. Indeed she could've been totally oblivious. But I'm skeptical about her, sick of parents allowing monsters to have access to their kids and I'm hoping the child is kept out of her custody until everything about her and what was happening in that house is known.

I recall the case of the singing Christian mega-family whose dad was arrested for rape after one of the older daughters talked to police. The Willis Clan. Well, mom came out and denounced him and said she was all about protecting her kids and supporting them.

Turns out they had made allegations against him, directly to her, for YEARS. He had been raping all his daughters. She knew or should have known and I think she deserves jail time for not protecting her kids.