[Newsbot]

Title: Statutory rape victim ordered to pay $15K in retroactive child support
Category: Strange
Posted By: saturn_656
Date: 2014-09-17 12:24:44

[andyt]

Jeesus Christ.

[Brenda]

What the hell??
No, he should not pay child support. His rapist should have paid him.

How can a state legally want child support from a minor?? Thats messed up.

[andyt]

I guess reverse the genders and the rapist could demand visitation rights.

[saturn_656]

This one is even better. Apparently this is SOP.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5773532

$1:

A California court later ruled that a 15-year-old boy must pay support for a child conceived with a 34-year-old neighbor who was convicted of statutory rape in the case.

[andyt]

In the land of hot coffee lawsuits, why isn't some smartypants lawyer helping this guy sue his rapist for all she's got?

[JennyBean]

This is ridiculous!

[PublicAnimalNo9]

And we have a new leader in the category of "things that make you go wtf "

[BartSimpson]

What an impressive miscarriage of justice.

[Freakinoldguy]

I guess in rough and tumble Arizona you've got to man up and pay for being a victim no matter your age.

$1:

He said the woman took advantage of him as a young teen, but he never considered himself a rape victim. The state considers sex with anyone under 15 years old statutory rape.

$1:

"Anything I do as an adult, I should be responsible for," he told the paper. "But as a teenager? I don't think so."

Fair enough but the bigger questions are. Is there a statue of limitations on statutory rape in Arizona and if not, why didn't the State charge this bitch for statutory rape before going after this kid for child support?

This whole scenario seems to be more money than morally driven. This is a convenient way for them to get out of any financial obligations for having her raise the kid.

"Sorry you don't qualify for welfare because the father of your child is supposed to be paying child support".

Oh, I just looked it up and there is no limit on Statutory Rape in Arizona which means that it's definitely financial.

[Strutz]

The article states that he was served with the documents but it does not specify that it has been proven that he is even the father for sure. I would think that there is no way they can garnishee his earnings without a test being done.

[saturn_656]

What I'm wondering is how they can send him a child support bill and not charge her with an offence since the child is undeniable proof that the deed was done.

[Delwin]

This makes perfect sense. Remember that this is statutory rape and is likely consensual. The 20 year old may be guilty of a crime but that crime itself does not make the 14 year old immune from responsibility. If this had been two 14 year olds, I'm sure most would agree that they were equally responsible.

The fact that one of the people is 20 does not remove the 14 year old's ability to make a decision. If he had shot someone, we wouldn't be blaming his parents.

[saturn_656]

Delwin Delwin:

The fact that one of the people is 20 does not remove the 14 year old's ability to make a decision. If he had shot someone, we wouldn't be blaming his parents.

A 14 year old, depending on the jurisdiction, is legally incapable of giving consent. As far as the courts are concerned, he was coerced.

It's pretty nervy to, four years later, send him a massive CS bill. Plus interest.

[Delwin]

The age of consent has nothing do with liability. A teenage mother has a legal obligation to care for their child regardless if it was born of rape, incest, or concentual sex as was the case here. This is regardless of the age of her partner. You are arguing that this 14 year old doesn't bare responsibility and it is bullshit. He knew how babies are made. He is a victim only in the legal sense of the term.

He can't give consent to make the act of sex with him legal, he can however perform an action that he is liable for.

You never addressed the other part of my response. If both partners were 14, would they both be void of responsibility ? Or would they share it ?