Louisiana mother ordered to pay child support, give full custody to her rapist

[jmdrake]

It wasn't rape so again you prove you have no idea what you are talking about and you prove it again and again in this very post.

It's not about a cell phone. That you would ignore everything else which is much more problematic because you are trying so hard to be right instead of seeking the truth does not surprise me.


I don't think it's okay a grown man to have sex with an underage girl and you have no proof I do. That you have to make things up in order to deflect because you don't have a leg to stand on is repulsive.

he never admitted that he knew she was drunk and you cannot prove it.

No proof she did pass out.

has nothing to do with the fact that the birth mother is a scumbag. Has nothing to do with the false rape allegations that didn't surface until years later.

You haven't provided any.


I used facts and the judge agrees. That you want that lowlife gutter skank to have custody is disgusting.

It was rape based on Louisiana law. The judge no longer "agrees." You must have missed that (or chose to ignore it because...reasons), but he reversed his ruling. And the dad is being a hypocrite. All this talk about "12 year olds should be able to have sex if they want" went out the window with his 14 year old daughter and her 17 year old boyfriend.

 

[jmdrake]

I didn't expose the hypocrisy. You just made that up in order to deflect from the actual issue.

What I did expose, by using facts from the custody cases, was that he deserves custody over the scumbag birth mother who is a horrible influence and a liar. Something she has proved over and over again.

The actual issue is the judge made a stupid ruling that he had to reverse and the dad is being a hypocrite. It's okay. You can admit you are wrong. The judge already did.

 

[tebowlives]

Yes. But this isn't about someone being young. It's about someone being older sleeping with someone young.



Except...it's not a false accusation. The only think possibly false is the accusations HE made against HER with regards to their daughter and whether or not the mother was unconscious at the time of the sexual encounter. Now the dad's being a bit of a hypocrite. But I get it. He doesn't want her doing what he did to her mother when she was young.

Yet you have no problem with the birth mother encouraging that behavior. It's hypocritical.

That's nice. I'm not even sure what you think that has to do with the subject at hand. And all circumstances are different.

Which is what can be said about your posts in this thread.

 

[tebowlives]

The actual issue is the judge made a stupid ruling that he had to reverse and the dad is being a hypocrite. It's okay. You can admit you are wrong. The judge already did.

What the judge did was make the correct ruling based on the evidence presented. It's okay. You can admit you are wrong. Granted it's been proven you are.

 

[jmdrake]

Yet you have no problem with the birth mother encouraging that behavior. It's hypocritical.

I don't think a 14 year old and a 17 year old making out (no accusation they were actually having sex) is a reason for the mom to lose full custody. But facts aren't important to you apparently. The judge reversed his ruling. He admitted his mistake. You could do the same. Or not.

 

[tebowlives]

It was rape based on Louisiana law. The judge no longer "agrees." You must have missed that (or chose to ignore it because...reasons),

No I didn't/ I pointed out the age difference for different states. Not that you care baout the truth.

but he reversed his ruling. And the dad is being a hypocrite. All this talk about "12 year olds should be able to have sex if they want" went out the window with his 14 year old daughter and her 17 year old boyfriend.

What's worse is you missing the point. Explain why you want that lowlife scumbag mother who encourages the exact behavior you SAY your against. But you won't. You'll just deflect away. The birth father isn't the hypocrite here.

 

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

I made it 2 city mayors bleeting over federal dollars before I turned it off.

Was there a point there?

Other than to end free-stuff programs which I'm willing to bet wasn't even discussed.

All the places that are top Democrat donors and vote Democrat/liberal are big on diversity but all of them live in places with little or no diversity. Send 300,000 illegal aliens to Marthas Vinyard, Malibu, and Aspen. Everyone living there supports Diversity as our greatest strength. Oh yes and places that welcomed them and promised them heaven on earth now say it is extremely costly and need Federal help.

 

[tebowlives]

I don't think a 14 year old and a 17 year old making out (no accusation they were actually having sex) is a reason for the mom to lose full custody. But facts aren't important to you apparently. The judge reversed his ruling. He admitted his mistake. You could do the same. Or not.

Again that wasn't the only reason. At least you actually are admitting there is more to it than just a cellphone which she used to transmitted sexually explicit material that her sleazy mother doesn't care much about.

To review -

https://meaww.com/louisiana-man-joh...belseth-and-their-daughter-denies-allegations


"I suspect drugs were used by him to sedate me as I was unable to move while he raped me," said Abesleth, before adding in her statement, "Now it is alleged that he has committed the same heinous crime on our 15-year-old daughter." On March 18, the allegations were dismissed by the court, which found that "medical evidence does not support allegations in the petition". - She's not credible

"This is the first time that Cache says Abelseth mentioned that Barnes had raped her since the custody proceedings began in 2011." - My how convenient

"Barnes told Fox Digital that he grew frustrated that Abelseth continued to encourage a relationship between ex-con Threeton and the child, taking the girl to see him in prison. "She was undermining my relationship with my daughter, teaching my daughter that she has two dads," Barnes said. A judge later ruled that the child could have no contact with Threeton. He further accused Abelsleth of violating their custody agreement for allowing different men to sleep over at her home in presence of their daughter."

"She had three husbands in six years and it wasn’t healthy."

"And, in May 2015, Barnes filed a petition for sole custody of their daughter, accusing Abelseth of continuing to foster a relationship between her daughter and Threeton and having men stay overnight at the home when the daughter was present. "

"In December 2020, Barnes again filed for full custody, accusing Abelseth of allowing their daughter, then 14, to "make out" with her 17-year-old boyfriend in her room unsupervised. He also accused Abelseth of providing their daughter with a second cellphone with unfettered access to social media when she already had one with parental controls that he had given her. Barnes won the custody by accusing Abelseth of buying a cellphone for their 16-year-old daughter, which Barnes said the teenager was using to 'sext' her boyfriend and post sexually explicit TikToks."

 

[jmdrake]

What the judge did was make the correct ruling based on the evidence presented. It's okay. You can admit you are wrong. Granted it's been proven you are.

The evidence presented is that the dad under the law is a rapist. The judge corrected himself after public pressure. And you are the only one proven wrong here. Even your own facts prove you wrong. But that doesn't stop you from making senseless arguments. You pointed out that the age of consent is 17. The mom at the time she got pregnant was under 17. The father, under the law, is a rapist. The father, and you apparently, have a problem with adults having sex with people under age. Only this dad flipped out not over sex, but "making out" and between two teenagers. And based on that, this rapist, under the law, sought full custody because he didn't want his daughter to have a cell phone capable of contacting her 17 year old boyfriend. The dad probably remembered what he was like at 17.

 

[acptulsa]

You two got caught in that tape loop again.

I don't see how anyone can look at this and see it as clear cut, or deny that either side is displaying some hypocrisy.

The only person involved that I feel sorry for is the judge. And maybe the girl, who has to look at her parents and say, that is the stuff I'm made of.

 

[jmdrake]

Again that wasn't the only reason. At least you actually are admitting there is more to it than just a cellphone which she used to transmitted sexually explicit material that her sleazy mother doesn't care much about.

TikTok isn't pornhub dude. You can't post anything that would actually be child porn on TikTok. So, once again, a sleazy dad (having sex with a drunk woman that may or may not have been passed out) was freaking out over nothing.

 

[tebowlives]

TikTok isn't pornhub dude. You can't post anything that would actually be child porn on TikTok. So, once again, a sleazy dad (having sex with a drunk woman that may or may not have been passed out) was freaking out over nothing.

Making things up again. And yes people can post anything since not everything is reviewed first. It's taken down after the fact.

btw The Judge agreed.

So once again siding with the despicable birth mother who has continually encouraged bad behavior.

 

[tebowlives]

The evidence presented is that the dad under the law is a rapist. The judge corrected himself after public pressure. And you are the only one proven wrong here. Even your own facts prove you wrong. But that doesn't stop you from making senseless arguments. You pointed out that the age of consent is 17. The mom at the time she got pregnant was under 17. The father, under the law, is a rapist. The father, and you apparently, have a problem with adults having sex with people under age. Only this dad flipped out not over sex, but "making out" and between two teenagers. And based on that, this rapist, under the law, sought full custody because he didn't want his daughter to have a cell phone capable of contacting her 17 year old boyfriend. The dad probably remembered what he was like at 17.

It wasn't forced entry and you have no proof. That's what it's about. The use of force and not some legal mumbo jumbo.

My facts are not wrong and you have no proof or you would have presented it.

That you want the repulsive birth mother who encourages sleazy behavior and lied about the birth father drugging and raping his daughter is disgusting.

 

[acptulsa]

It wasn't forced entry and you have no proof. That's what it's about. The use of force and not some legal mumbo jumbo.

My facts are not wrong and you have no proof or you would have presented it.

Neither are his. You two are just using different definitions of "rape" as an excuse to call each other liars.

 

[tebowlives]

You two got caught in that tape loop again.

I don't see how anyone can look at this and see it as clear cut, or deny that either side is displaying some hypocrisy.

The only person involved that I feel sorry for is the judge. And maybe the girl, who has to look at her parents and say, that is the stuff I'm made of.

It's about what the birth parents are doing now and not something that happened over 15 years ago. The birth mother is constantly making sleazy decisions that will do her daughter harm. The birth father is trying to protect his daughter from that sleazy behavior. That's what it comes down to.

The judges have to review the case because the law, not what is justice mind you, says convicted of rape can't get custody. Dunno if that is 100% the case or not.

 

[tebowlives]

Neither are his. You two are just using different definitions of "rape" as an excuse to call each other liars.

As far as the legal law in that state says it's rape just because of the age. A couple hundred miles over it isn't.
I'm defining it as forced. He said, she said.
So yes to 2 different definitions.

Besides my first sentence what other facts related to custody has he presented?????????

 

[jmdrake]

You two got caught in that tape loop again.

I don't see how anyone can look at this and see it as clear cut, or deny that either side is displaying some hypocrisy.

Okay. I certainly see the mom as having made some mistakes. Not sure I'd call them hypocrisy. For me the word "hypocrisy" has a particular meaning. "Don't you dare do what I do or what I did and still justify myself doing." Assuming the worst from the mom....did she try to get full custody? Nope. Did she freak out that her underage daughter was acting as she probably did at that age? Nope. Dad on the other hand "OMG! My 14 year old girl is kissing and getting felt up by some 17 year old and posting pictures of herself twerking on TikTok! The world is coming to an end!"

And yes, I've seen a case where the roles were reversed. Teenage boy was living with his dad. Mom sued to get custody. Dad had been going pro se and missed a filing deadline. I was brought in at the last minute. I talked to the other lawyer (female) about the case before the hearing. She was like "Do you know what's going on in that house? The son posted a video on Facebook holding a bong and saying that he was high a fvck." I went back to talk to the father and son about that. (Nothing worse than clients that don't tell you everything before trial). The boy dropped his head and admitted he'd done that. But then he was like "But I'm scared to live with my mom and her new husband. He put a gun up to the head of one of the other children and pulled the trigger. The gun was empty but the other kid didn't know it." I went back to the lady lawyer and asked her if she knew that. Her face dropped in embarrassment. She said "Yes I did read the CPS file and that was disturbing. Let me talk to the son." Father and son agreed. She told the son "Here's my card. If anything happens you just call me right away." Like she was going to do anything other than call 911. Anyway, the judge wasn't hearing none of any of it. The filing deadline had been missed and that was that. Years later I ran in to the father and son. He eventually got custody again and everything worked out.

 

[jmdrake]

It wasn't forced entry and you have no proof. That's what it's about. The use of force and not some legal mumbo jumbo.

A) I never said it was force so quit with the straw man argument.

B) The proof that it was statutory rape is indisputible.

C) Dad's being a hypocrite.

 

[acptulsa]

Besides my first sentence what other facts related to custody has he presented?????????

Hell, dude, he pasted the whole article in the OP. I don't trust the reporter, and I don't trust any of the witnesses. I don't know if the father is protective or controlling, I don't know if the mother is concerned or just vindictive. And neither do either of you.

All I know is, she hollered rape, you doubted it, and Drake said, "Well technically..." and it has been a triggered clusterfuck ever since.

I don't see enough to like about either the mother or the father to get that excited about the thing.

The headline was designed to push buttons. Seems to have worked.

Anyway, the judge wasn't hearing none of any of it. The filing deadline had been missed and that was that.

Yeah, that. We must put the fate of children in the hands of the state because who else can endanger them and deny them their birthright over the fact that somebody didn't fill in all the blanks on the form. Never mind that was because the county denied him the information he needed to fill them in.

Pardon me, I'm digressing.

The only thing worse than letting people work these things out themselves is not letting them work these things out themselves.

 

[jmdrake]

It's about what the birth parents are doing now and not something that happened over 15 years ago. The birth mother is constantly making sleazy decisions that will do her daughter harm. The birth father is trying to protect his daughter from that sleazy behavior. That's what it comes down to.

The judges have to review the case because the law, not what is justice mind you, says convicted of rape can't get custody. Dunno if that is 100% the case or not.

The birth mom is making a decision that most people in this thread have been excusing up until today. Either 14 year olds can make adult decisions or they can't. And TikTok videos aren't pornographic.