Nick Olivas was justifiably a bit surprised when he received papers for $15,000 in back child support for a six-year-old child that he never knew that he had fathered. He was even more surprised that the demand and threat of jail was triggered by a woman who had had sex with him when he was 14. That would constitute statutory rape and make the woman a rapist but he never reported the crime to the police. Now he could go to jail at the behest of the woman.
The woman was 20 when she had sex with the 14 year old boy. He could not legally consent to such relations under state law.
Olivas wants to be part of his daughter’s life and balks at the notion of back payments, including while he was a minor. He is now 24. He is a high school graduate and went to college and became a medical assistant.
When he received the original notice, he ignored it and never got the required paternity test. The state finally tracked him down and demand $15,000 in back child support and medical bills going back to the child’s birth, plus 10 percent interest. His bank account was seized and now his wages are being garnished at $380 a month.
He is not the first such case, but there are distinctions. In 1993, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled that a boy who impregnated his 17 year old baby sitter was liable of child support. She could consent to sex but not him. California also ruled that child support was due from a 15-year-old who was statutorily raped by a 34-year-old woman who was convicted of the crime. California Judge Arthur Gilbert (right) said that the boy was not entirely innocent in the matter despite the lack of legal consent:
California law provides that every child has a right to support from both parents. (Fam. Code, §§ 3900, 3901 [former Civ. Code, §§ 196, 196a, 242]; County of Shasta v. Caruthers (1995) 31 Cal. App. 4th 1838, 1841 [38 Cal.Rptr.2d 18].) Family Code section 3900 provides that, subject to other statutes governing support, the father and mother of a child bear “equal responsibility” to support the child.
The law should not except Nathaniel J. from this responsibility because he is not an innocent victim of Jones’s criminal acts. After discussing the matter, he and Jones decided to have sexual relations. They had sexual intercourse approximately five times over a two-week period.
Here is that opinion: San Luis Obispo v. Nathaniel J.
Olivas now lives in Phoenix and Arizona has no exemption for children born to children.
Source: USA Today
149 thoughts on “Statutory Rape Victim Ordered To Pay Child Support Or Face Jail”
She knew that he was underage, and yet the state wants to let her retain custody of the child and hand her money?
If I were the judge, I would order a DNA test, NOT order retroactive child support, and consider giving the father full custody of the child because of the mother’s illegal and predatory behavior.
If an older man pursued and impregnated a high school girl, he would be in jail without anyone thinking twice, but an older woman can rape an underage male without any consequences.
Equal rights means equal responsibilities, and should not be used as an excuse to continue the well-documented gender bias in the courts.
“When he received the original notice, he ignored it”
Very salient fact in this case.
Are you serious Squeeky?
If a 14 year old girl was impregnated by a 20 year old man & he was granted custody (being the adult in the situation) would you be OK with her having to pay child support to him?????????
He should go for custody. A rapist should NOT have custody of a child. Once he has custody he can sting her for child support & ask the courts to make her visitations with the child supervised given the fact that she is a sex offender. Two can play that game.
It’s one of those twists to the law.l.
How did this lady rape him when he was 14 (10 years ago) but have a SIX year old child from her? They had sex 5 times over a two week period and she was pregnant for 4 years? FISHY FISHY.
Looks like I missed the fun & games on this one. Are Annie & Karen still fighting on another blog?
There may be procedural issues going on here, but I would suggest that the victim of the statutory rape still may have a cause of action for the assault, being a minor the statute of limitation more than likely tolls. So, he should sue the mother for that to, at the very least, offset the child support.
All this nonsense about “right” and “wrong”. Pork em if ya gottem is not sexist. It works both ways. She had him so she porked him and vice versa. There is no vice here and hence we don’t need the vice squad. After all that apCray about Ferguson, I did not hear one peep out of a commenter here about whether Browns daddy ever paid child support or if Brown, Brown’s mommy, and Brown’s daddy lived off the public tit. We heard that Brown was living with someone other than mom or dad. Granma maybe. Why was that? Did he have an arrest record? When mommy and daddy sue the cops then they should have to disclose all of this. If they are entitled to compensation then why should the State of Missouri not be entitled to compensation if the State was the one that supported Brown, his mom, his daddy, and possibly granma for his 18 plus years? As a taxpayer of the United States, I demand that the government join the lawsuit to collect from mommy and daddy the amount paid over the life of the 18 year old 300 pound, fleeing felon. And having sex on a public elevator is only wrong on any level if the public is present and no condum was used or if there is a squirt of you know what on the floor when all is said and done. Nuff said.
Am late to this one. Seems to me that, if someone can’t legally consent to have sex under the law, i.e., there is a statutory rape, they should not be held liable for child support, as a legal matter. That is a different question than determining the circumstances under which sex by someone under a certain age should be treated as statutory rape.
In this instance, my view is that it should be treated as statutory rape, based on the age difference, and the father should not be held liable for support. Holding him liable for support is wrong if, as a legal matter, he lacked the ability to consent.
Having sex on a public elevator is also wrong, on many different levels.
Don de Drain –
But it is so much fun on so many levels. 😉
I’m confused. Or maybe it’s the new common core math. He was raped when he was 14. He is now 24. The child of the rape is 6. ??????
The child support claim is probably because the woman applied for assistance where naming the father of the child is required in order to be approved. What woman would want to admit to statutory rape? Or has the statute of limitations on that crime passed so that she cannot be charged?
He should not have to pay back child support for a child he didn’t know about and that was a result of his rape. Since he wants to be a part of his child’s life, he should sue for joint custody and pay child support from here on out.
Thx!!! I am glad it made you laugh.
I wrote you your very own Irish Poem at 8:41 on the 99.999% thread. I hope you like it.
Karen, you copy and paste and then go on to put your own spin on it. You build a straw man out of my words and then expect me to agree with your straw man? That is also incredibly intellectually dishonest. Are you dong it on purpose, or do you think no one will notice? Wow.
Karen, Let it go. Make an ignore list. It shall make you free. There are 5 easy picks for that list.
Nick – 🙂
Aridog – great analogy to equine semen collection. You’ve explained it much better than I could.
Squeeky – I will now have the phrase “unclean weenie” stuck in my head for a while. You are so funny! 🙂
Karen, You are a valuable, thoughtful commenter. That makes you a target for people who have nothing but envy and hate.
Pretty hard to “misrepresent” what anyone said when I copy and paste it exactly. LOL.
“Anybody ever hear of Rep Todd Akin? He lost his seat over a comment about “legitimate rape” and some physiological nonsense about the female sex system. This case makes the same silly assumptions about male sexuality. ”
YES, so true! And yet the double standard will prevent any repercussions.
Comments are closed.