- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Tangipahoa Parish rape victim ordered to pay her abuser child support
Posted on 6/14/22 at 2:38 pm to Olderthandirt
Posted on 6/14/22 at 2:38 pm to Olderthandirt
quote:
I browse through Duck Duck Go so it is all you, Bahuda Boy.
lol Whatever you say stud...interesting how when I search the same thing through DuckDuckGo I dont get a bunch of pics of homoerotic magazine covers, I just get, a Bronco and Pelicans posts
LINK
Anyways, you do you, others might, but I'm not here to judge you
1
Posted on 6/14/22 at 2:39 pm to TigerintheNO
quote:
Problem is her timeline:
-baby conceived in '05
-father finds out in '11
-father seeks and is awarded custody in '11
-mother files rape complaint in '15, 4 years after the judge awarded him custody
-mother is complaining about child support, her daughter was conceived 17+ years ago, she will turn 18 before this case is back in court
Bunch of problems involved here. The least concerning is her timeline
Posted on 6/14/22 at 2:43 pm to Basura Blanco
quote:
I am only trying to conceive of a legal reason why a judge granted him full custody.
Using the technicality that the police department the rapist has a business contract with has refused to investigate or charge the case.
Posted on 6/14/22 at 2:45 pm to Bronc
quote:
But I also cant get over the irony of him in a court battle over cell phones, now trying to monitor and control his 16 year old daughter's phone from guys presumably just like him. The dude clearly knows he was a POS and wouldn't want his daughter ending up like he did to his mom.
I have stated numerous times in this thread, the dudes actions were at best, creepy.
That said, it is a huge stretch to assume anything with the cell phone situation. It could just as easily be assumed he made a really stupid, creepy decision 16 years ago, and the girl has been a shite mother to the child, and he is after the best interests of the child and the cellphone law loophole referenced earlier was a legal maneuver to ensure he got the child out of dangerous environment.
Each of those assumed scenarios are exactly that. Assumptions without any facts.
One thing that is obvious here. By coming forward and seeking custody, he likely had an attorney advise him that a DNA test he willingly took and submitted to the court would be an admission of a felony carnal knowledge, likely risk him being charged with criminal rape, and certainly risk him losing a ton financially. Yet he did so anyway. It is tough for me to come up with a scenario of him making this decision based on evil intentions.
Posted on 6/14/22 at 2:49 pm to Basura Blanco
quote:
Each of those assumed scenarios are exactly that. Assumptions without any facts.
They are assumptions, reasonable ones.
The facts we have are he committed rape, statutory or forced, felony either way. Admitted to the crime, DNA evidence proves it. The police refuse to open an investigation, have an ongoing contract with his business, have taken the unusual step of sealing the accused's records.
quote:
It is tough for me to come up with a scenario of him making this decision based on evil intentions.
The victim has stated he has enormous hubris about his ability to avoid accountability or be charged. And so far, he's not wrong.
quote:
It is tough for me to come up with a scenario
Heres the thing, she filed charges YEARS ago, and a DNA test confirmed the timeline of the rape. We shouldn't have questions, cause this should have been investigated and processed already.
This post was edited on 6/14/22 at 2:53 pm
Posted on 6/14/22 at 2:51 pm to SPEEDY
The Florida Parishes really do belong in Florida.
It feels like the worst backwoods slop in the south comes from Livingston, Tangipahoa, Felicianas, and St. Helena
It feels like the worst backwoods slop in the south comes from Livingston, Tangipahoa, Felicianas, and St. Helena
Posted on 6/14/22 at 2:52 pm to Tigers0891
quote:
Sounds like it's time to call on Bobby Bacala Jr. He is no terminator like his dad, but I think he could work this one out.
Nah. You've gotta hand this one off to Sil. He's remorseless.
Posted on 6/14/22 at 2:54 pm to Bronc
quote:
Using the technicality that the police department the rapist has a business contract with has refused to investigate or charge the case.
While a valid question, that has nothing to do with the question of whether or not a felony carnal knowledge of juvenile conviction meets the legal standard of rape precluding him of gaining custody.
For shits and giggles, lets assume it does. In a totally opposite scenario, would this same law apply if the 30 year old was a female and the 16 yr old was a male? Nine months after the rape (your word) would the 30 yr old female, having gotten pregnant by raping a boy force her to give up custody of the child at birth as it was conceived then carried to term by a rapist?
Posted on 6/14/22 at 2:54 pm to Bronc
quote:You've done a lot of presuming in this thread.
But I also cant get over the irony of him in a court battle over cell phones, now trying to monitor and control his 16 year old daughter's phone from guys presumably just like him. The dude clearly knows he was a POS and wouldn't want his daughter ending up like he did to his mom.
The judge granted him full custody of the 17 yr old daughter (of which he has an existing relationship) + the mother is to pay child support and it's not because of a cellphone disagreement about a teenager.
Posted on 6/14/22 at 2:58 pm to Basura Blanco
quote:
whether or not a felony carnal knowledge of juvenile conviction meets the legal standard of rape precluding him of gaining custody.
If you watched the report as you said, the lawyer from the Louisiana Foundation Against Sexual Assault literally quotes the statute in LA law stating under no circumstance stemming from felony conviction of rape, which this would be, shall even visitation rights be granted.
quote:
would this same law apply if the 30 year old was a female and the 16 yr old was a male? Nine months after the rape (your word) would the 30 yr old female, having gotten pregnant by raping a boy force her to give up custody of the child at birth as it was conceived then carried to term by a rapist?
The law makes no exception
This post was edited on 6/14/22 at 3:07 pm
Posted on 6/14/22 at 3:03 pm to Bronc
quote:
a DNA test confirmed the timeline of the rape
How did it do that?
Posted on 6/14/22 at 3:03 pm to RT1941
quote:
You've done a lot of presuming in this thread.
You've made three posts and literally each one is presuming on behalf of the rapist or questioning the mother. Seems like your issue isnt with presuming or assuming, it's with the people not coming up with defenses for the rapist.
Posted on 6/14/22 at 3:05 pm to Havoc
quote:
How did it do that?
Do I need to explain how pregnancies work?
99% DNA match and admission that the father fricked the mother on the night in question, the child is 16, the mother 32.
There is no scenario where this is not statutory felony rape at a minimum....unless you have a police department refusing to investigate or prosecute for half a decade that happens to have a business deal with the accussed.
This post was edited on 6/14/22 at 3:06 pm
Posted on 6/14/22 at 3:08 pm to Bronc
Now all this thread needs is Gingerkittie showing up and knowing all the players.
I always liked her.
I always liked her.
Posted on 6/14/22 at 3:11 pm to SPEEDY
Haven’t seen this mentioned but really sounds fishy:
Really??
quote:
Abelseth said she waited to file the police report because she did not know the law. "I thought if I didn't do it the next day, there was nothing I could do about it," Abelseth said.
Really??
Posted on 6/14/22 at 3:18 pm to Ponchy Tiger
quote:
Story says it happened in Hammond and I would guess that it was Extra Innings. That place was a haven for the under age.
Yuuuup. That's been common knowledge since I can remember. Even when I was in high school in the 1990s everyone knew Extra Innings was easy to get into with a fake ID.
Posted on 6/14/22 at 3:26 pm to Havoc
quote:
Really??
If she waaited 25 years, it is still within the statute of limitations, and the proof is walking around.
At what point does she sue, in federal court, for violating her civil rights? The lack of any effort to go after their buddy looks shady as hell on the LEO's part.
Posted on 6/14/22 at 3:47 pm to Hangit
I’m talking about her saying she thought rape had to be reported the next day. Nobody thinks that.
Posted on 6/14/22 at 3:47 pm to JackaReaux
I only read page one. Heard enough. Who goes out to eat, without a planned ride home ??
Who gets in a car with a stranger ?
During the attempt rape, he would have ended up 10-7, one way or another.
Does not sound logical
Who gets in a car with a stranger ?
During the attempt rape, he would have ended up 10-7, one way or another.
Does not sound logical
Posted on 6/14/22 at 3:53 pm to EF Hutton
quote:
I only read page one. Heard enough. Who goes out to eat, without a planned ride home ??
She went to a bar, not a restaurant. That was a typo by the transcriber online. The report and both the woman and reporter only mentioned a bar.
She had a ride, but John Barnes, the 30 year old hanging out at bars that let underage kids in, convinced her he would take her home instead. Took her to his house, not hers, fricked her.
This post was edited on 6/14/22 at 3:54 pm
Page 13 of 42
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News