Court Rules Boy Must Pay Child Support to His Rapist

Court Rules Boy Must Pay Child Support to His Rapist

www.americanchronicle.com

A paternity test shows that the teen is the father of the baby born April 7 to Jane C. Crane, who was 19 when she became pregnant. Now, a judge has ordered him to pay $50 a month in child support and set visitation at seven hours a week.

(visit the link for the full news article)

It's quite mind boggling. If this doesn't show the blatant inequality of the law I don't know what does.

www.americanchronicle.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Sickening. The victim has to live with being raped for the rest of their life, and now, in this instance, it is a monthly gym due.

This is an unusual case.

The boy although 'technically' raped was a statutory rape case as opposed to a knife to the throat rape. I read this as the boy agreed to it although not 'legally' old enough. By 15 he should be aware of his actions and should have learned about the consequences by now.

On the other hand, Ms Crane facing a conviction should not be allowed any financial gain from the crime committed therefore should not recive child support.

To be honest, I don't think this is a case of forced sex. Sure the woman was most likely preying on the boy, but seeing as the boy was 15 and the female was 19, I'd most likely assume that the sex was consensual. What boy doesn't have fantasies about sleeping with an older woman.

Well I sure did when I was that age. And excuse me if I come off as ignorant here, but wouldn't it be harder to rape a male? Just because to do the act of raping him you have to get him erect, and I know for myself if I'm not aroused I won't be popping anything.

I'm definitely not saying what she did was acceptable, she definitely took advantage of him, but this doesn't seem like a regular case of forced sex rape. If this woman was in her 30's it would probably be a different story, but they weren't that far off in age in this case.

I don't think the boy should have to pay child support though, thats utterly ridiculous because the sex may have been consensual, but the boy was still taken advantage of.

The boy's parents probably will get custody of the child because of the horrible living conditions and the females house.

It's a dangerous line to walk saying the sex was 'consensual' and the classification for rape is simply due to the boys age. Regardless of what the boy wanted though, it's very different actually getting it and understanding the implications of your choices like STD's, pregnancy etc.

Originally posted by Shere Khaan
Regardless of what the boy wanted though, it's very different actually getting it and understanding the implications of your choices like STD's, pregnancy etc.

By fifteen I'd already been through education on those topics. My schoolsystem started dispensing info on that by 7th grade, or when I was 13 which is about the right time-- not to mention all the amusement with inflating rubbers, putting them on bananas and tossing diaphragms around like frisbees.

Originally posted by Shere Khaan
It's a dangerous line to walk saying the sex was 'consensual' and the classification for rape is simply due to the boys age. Regardless of what the boy wanted though, it's very different actually getting it and understanding the implications of your choices like STD's, pregnancy etc.

It isn't possible to live in America as a fifteen year old boy, and not realize that you could get someone pregnant or contract an std by having $ex.

I remember the stuff they taught me in High School.

On top of the fact that the nineteen year old girl probably didn't even "rape' the boy, and it really is only a matter of age.

The Judge in this case, apparently has wisdom, figuring that their is a baby to think about.

I would have given ANYTHING to make it with a 19 year old when I was fifteen...

WHAT THE HELL??

Whats with the "Rapist" term!

I can assure you that, if I was fifteen and had had sex with a NINETEEN year old....

....It would NOT have been rape (unless that was the flavour of the night

Alarmist headlines..pfft

AoN

Edited for tired grammer, and its still rubbish
[edit on 19-8-2008 by Anomic of Nihilism]

[edit on 19-8-2008 by Anomic of Nihilism]

Originally posted by dalan.

I would have given ANYTHING to make it with a 19 year old when I was fifteen...

Even a $50 a week maintenance bill for a kid you had almost zero access to? I'm sure that would make it all worthwhile.

Besides I'm not arguing the boy didn't want it or that he knew about these things, but there's a reason adulthood doesn't start at 12. Understanding consequences of your actions takes time to develop, it's why these laws are in place.

Originally posted by ben420
To be honest, I don't think this is a case of forced sex. Sure the woman was most likely preying on the boy, but seeing as the boy was 15 and the female was 19, I'd most likely assume that the sex was consensual.

So, you have no problem with an older male screwing a 15 year old girl as long as it was "consensual", right?

Are you actually saying that it is ok for an older guy to screw to a 15 year old girl as long as she consents? If not, then you hold a double standard and are a hypocrite extraordinaire.

I am going to join the chorus and say that I am not convinced that he was raped, either.

The article talks about it only in terms of statuatory rape, and provides no evidence that there was anything nonconscentual about it.

Plus there's this:

Crane got to know the family while she worked at a local movie theater with the boy's older sister. When Crane said that her stepfather was abusive, his family allowed her to move in with them.

If the kid's parents were so concerned about this abusive woman, why did they allow her to move in with their children?

Edit to add: the ex quote is from here, not from the original article.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by asmeone2]

reply to post by VIKINGANT

By 15 he should be aware of his actions and should have learned about the consequences by now.

I know I knew what I was doing...

Court rules fairly, dumbarse kid should have used protection .. $50 is a joke though.

PS. I hate it when people call a 4 year difference in consensual sex "rape" .. it's not rape. It's poor choices.

[edit on 8/19/2008 by Rockpuck]

I know I knew what I was doing...

Court rules fairly, dumbarse kid should have used protection .. $50 is a joke though.

PS. I hate it when people call a 4 year difference in consensual sex "rape" .. it's not rape. It's poor choices.

[edit on 8/19/2008 by Rockpuck]

I just wonder where he's going to get the $50? I don't think he can even have a job at 15.

Wow, well that's a pickle...

It's definitely not 'rape' in the sense that he, at least personally and not legally, gave consent.

If the roles were reversed, and it was a 19yo male who got a 15yo pregnant, he'd be lucky not to be executed, castrated, or otherwise emotionally destroyed for the rest of his life.

There's been cases in Australia where a much older female school teacher for example carried out a similar relationship with underage boys and walks away from the courts with no reprimand. If it were a male teacher, they'd be completely railed.

Crazy. There's no way a 15yo would be able to predict he'd end up paying child support through such an encounter.

It certainly wouldn't be something he'd be thinking about at the time.

Originally posted by mattguy404
Wow, well that's a pickle...

It's definitely not 'rape' in the sense that he, at least personally and not legally, gave consent.

If the roles were reversed, and it was a 19yo male who got a 15yo pregnant, he'd be lucky not to be executed, castrated, or otherwise emotionally destroyed for the rest of his life.

There's been cases in Australia where a much older female school teacher for example carried out a similar relationship with underage boys and walks away from the courts with no reprimand. If it were a male teacher, they'd be completely railed.

Crazy. There's no way a 15yo would be able to predict he'd end up paying child support through such an encounter.

It certainly wouldn't be something he'd be thinking about at the time.

The whole idea of statuatory rape annoys me to no end. Cases like this, and the ones you described, are rediculous.

The courts shoudl not decide who is and who is not at the age of sexual conscent. They should not be involved at all unless it was forceble rape.

reply to post by Shere Khaan

reply to post by WyrdeOne


If he and the mother didn't remain together, He would have had to pay the child support, regardless of how old he was.

In a way it would have been just as upsettng if he wasn't made to pay it, becaue he would be getting off without responsibility.

What if the 15 year old was a devout Christian saving his virginity for when he got married and the woman was larger than him and seduced him into having sex? When a male is 15 and hormones are kicking in the slightest breeze or glimpse of skin can cause excitement. We used to call them NRBs - No Reason B*****. Still though, say the kid never expected to be put in the spot where a 19 year old woman would be a predator in his own house. I can see where it could be considered rape if the law was equal and the sexes were reversed. Some boys are brought up in church with the faith of youth and don't behave like sexually adventurous Hollywood teens.

Originally posted by stikkinikki
What if the 15 year old was a devout Christian saving his virginity for when he got married and the woman was larger than him and seduced him into having sex? When a male is 15 and hormones are kicking in the slightest breeze or glimpse of skin can cause excitement. We used to call them NRBs - No Reason B*****. Still though, say the kid never expected to be put in the spot where a 19 year old woman would be a predator in his own house. I can see where it could be considered rape if the law was equal and the sexes were reversed. Some boys are brought up in church with the faith of youth and don't behave like sexually adventurous Hollywood teens.

There was no evidence presented in the article that it was forced, or that she was predatory. Or that he had that particular religious conviction, to begin with.

I stand by what I say, why would the parents allow her to live with them if her morals were so abysmal?