Sex offenders visitation rights?

[HawkFan08]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Washington



My fiance is pregnant with her ex's baby. He is a registered level II sex offender and says he has rights to see the child. I was told that if my fiance doesn't give him rigths, then he doesn't have any. I am just wondering, does he have any rights if he is a registered level II sex offender? I am just asking to get all the information I can, just in case my fiance's ex wants to go to court for visitation rights.

[JETX]

does he have any rights if he is a registered level II sex offender?

He has all the rights given to him in the court order of visitation.

[Ohiogal]

And yes it is possible for him to get rights (if your fiance and her ex are NOT married). Being a tier II sex offender does not immediately terminate his rights -- not all tier II sex offenders are pedophiles. And bieng a pedophile does NOT necessarily mean he will receive no rights.

[LdiJ]

And yes it is possible for him to get rights (if your fiance and her ex are NOT married). Being a tier II sex offender does not immediately terminate his rights -- not all tier II sex offenders are pedophiles. And bieng a pedophile does NOT necessarily mean he will receive no rights.

While that is technically correct, its also a bit misleading for the ordinary person. The odds of a convicted pedophile getting rights to any child are very slim. Its far more likely that their parental rights would be terminated.

I will also go on to say what neither of the previous responses clarified. He will have no rights of any kind until paternity is established and a judge orders visitation rights.

[Ohiogal]

[QUOTE=LdiJ;2105680]While that is technically correct, its also a bit misleading for the ordinary person. The odds of a convicted pedophile getting rights to any child are very slim. Its far more likely that their parental rights would be terminated.

I will also go on to say what neither of the previous responses clarified. He will have no rights of any kind until paternity is established and a judge orders visitation rights.[/QUOTE]

Bull. That is not based on law. The bolded however is correct.And it is what I said. What I stated is NOT misleading. Pedophiles can get visitation rights. It depends on a variety different reasons -- how long ago the crime was, what the crime entailed, if it dealt with the child in question. Caselaw backs me up on that.

[Ohiogal]

LD you are incorrect especially in Washington by what you stated:

100 Wn. App. 424, STATE v. LETOURNEAU

This case dealt with a woman convicted of two counts of child rape. Her victim was 13. She became pregnant by him.

You might remember her based on her name. She is what would be considered a pedophile -- a teacher who had sex with a child. She is also a sex offender who must register.

Superior Court: The Superior Court for King County, No. 97-1-01523-1, Linda Lau, J., on February 6, 1998, entered a judgment on a guilty plea and imposed a suspended sentence under the special sexual offender sentencing alternative. The court ordered that the defendant have no in-person contact with her biological minor children without the supervision of a responsible adult having knowledge of the convictions. The court also imposed a community custody sentence with a condition that the defendant not directly or indirectly profit from publishing or otherwise commercializing the story of her crimes. After revoking the special sexual offender sentencing alternative, the court clarified that the prohibition against profiting from commercialization was a condition of the defendant's sentence, not merely a condition of community custody.

Court of Appeals: The court holds that the trial court did not have statutory authority to extend the financial gain prohibition beyond the period of community custody because the prohibition does not affect public safety, that the financial gain prohibition was not directly related to the defendant's crimes, and that the prohibition of unsupervised in-person contact between the offender and her biological minor children during the term of community custody was not reasonably necessary to protect those children. The court vacates the condition prohibiting the defendant's unsupervised in-person contact with her own minor children and the condition prohibiting her from profiting directly or indirectly from any commercialization related to her crimes.

Her rights were not terminated AND the courts found that it was infringing upon her constitutional rights as a parent (even though she is a convicted CHILD RAPIST) for her to be prohibited from having UNSUPERVISED in-person contact with her biological minor children.

The court did the following:

We strike the provision that requires Letourneau's in-person contact with her own minor children to be supervised because there is insufficient evidence in the record that such a restriction is reasonably necessary to prevent Letourneau from sexually molesting her children.

MOm would need to prove that the restriction is REASONABLY NECESSARY to prevent the parent from sexually molesting his children. Can she do that? Him being a pedophile is NOT enough as these are his children and HE has constitutional rights based on being their parent.

The caselaw is precedent by the way in WASHINGTON. Where the OP is from.

[LdiJ]

[QUOTE=Ohiogal;2105685]

While that is technically correct, its also a bit misleading for the ordinary person. The odds of a convicted pedophile getting rights to any child are very slim. Its far more likely that their parental rights would be terminated.

I will also go on to say what neither of the previous responses clarified. He will have no rights of any kind until paternity is established and a judge orders visitation rights.[/QUOTE]

Bull. That is not based on law. The bolded however is correct.And it is what I said. What I stated is NOT misleading. Pedophiles can get visitation rights. It depends on a variety different reasons -- how long ago the crime was, what the crime entailed, if it dealt with the child in question. Caselaw backs me up on that.

OG..its misleading for the ordinary person. Of course there is case law showing that convicted pedophiles have recieved some form of visitation and of course the factors you listed would apply. However, you made it seem common, and it is not.

[Ohiogal]

[QUOTE=LdiJ;2105697]

OG..its misleading for the ordinary person. Of course there is case law showing that convicted pedophiles have recieved some form of visitation and of course the factors you listed would apply. However, you made it seem common, and it is not.

Its not common for parents to be pedophiles and petitioning for visitation. What do you mean ORDINARY person. It is not misleading to state what the law says. What the courts state regarding the constitutional rights of parents -- convicted of sex crimes or not. You were misleading stating that he won't get visitation and will more than likely get his rights terminated. WRONG. Caselaw does NOT back that up. Caselaw supports what I stated. OP never stated the guy molested girlfriend's child. NEVER stated that. He says he was a tier II sex offender. WHICH DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY EQUATE with being a pedophile. And even if he was a pedophile, it does not mean that he will not be entitled to visitation -- supervised or unsupervised.

Good grief. In Washington state, WHERE THE OP IS FROM, what I posted is fact and NOT misleading. YOU are the one misleading here.

[LdiJ]

[QUOTE=Ohiogal;2105703]

Its not common for parents to be pedophiles and petitioning for visitation. What do you mean ORDINARY person. It is not misleading to state what the law says. What the courts state regarding the constitutional rights of parents -- convicted of sex crimes or not. You were misleading stating that he won't get visitation and will more than likely get his rights terminated. WRONG. Caselaw does NOT back that up. Caselaw supports what I stated. OP never stated the guy molested girlfriend's child. NEVER stated that. He says he was a tier II sex offender. WHICH DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY EQUATE with being a pedophile. And even if he was a pedophile, it does not mean that he will not be entitled to visitation -- supervised or unsupervised.

Good grief. In Washington state, WHERE THE OP IS FROM, what I posted is fact and NOT misleading. YOU are the one misleading here.

I was disagreeing only with the part that I bolded in my original post. Which is why I bolded it.

And bieng a pedophile does NOT necessarily mean he will receive no rights.

I also was not disagreeing with what you stated, I was disagreeing with the impression it would give someone who has no knowledge of the law.

In other words, I felt that your statement, combined with the other things that you said, gave the impression that it was fairly common for convicted pedophiles to recieve visitation with children. I don't believe that case law demonstrates that its fairly common. I believe that case law demonstrates that there are occasions when it happens, rather than it being fairly common.

You are getting all worked up over a very minor disagreement.

[swrdmbo]

I remember the Letourneau case..she was a teacher that had sex with her student...what really got me was that after she got out of prison......they had a TV special about her and her victim/boyfriend's wedding!!

I could not believe they did this...and all kinds of people watched it (no I did not). Just goes to show anything can happen in this society.Crazy.

[Bloopy]

There is a gender bias in these matters.

A man boinking a student would be a raving pedophile but a woman is lonely and in love with a young man.

[stealth2]

My fiance is pregnant with her ex's baby.

I'm personally astounded that that two people would get engaged while one is still pregnant with another man's child. Whatever happened to getting to know one another for a decent period of time?

[Perky]

I'm personally astounded that that two people would get engaged while one is still pregnant with another man's child. Whatever happened to getting to know one another for a decent period of time?

Ditto, and I'm just a little curious about the fiancee's age...

That term, fiancee, is used so frequently in situations with otherwise married partners or partners with very recently ended relationships, that I wonder if some people think it means boyfriend or girlfriend.

[Ohiogal]

There is a gender bias in these matters.

A man boinking a student would be a raving pedophile but a woman is lonely and in love with a young man.

There may appear to be but the outcome of the case is applied to both males and females. In fact I was reading a case regarding a man who was a pedophile when it cited this case as the reason WHY he would get visitation. I just decided to cite the original case rather than the secondary case. It is applied to both males and females in Washington.

[onebreath]

Perhaps it makes no difference in WA state, but at least find out what the father of unborn child was actually convicted for. Could make some difference.

Regarding previous post...how can a woman marry a boy child under the age of 18?

And, eternally curious, Ohiogal, will you help me how to look up case law that gives a pedaphile, male or female, constitutional rights for visitation??