502
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

It was one of the most bizarre sex crimes in recent Tulsa history. Now it's over, and both adults involved are headed to prison.

The 12-year-old girl showed up a Hillcrest Hospital in midtown Tulsa in July 2021 in labor.

The father-to-be apparently expected to walk out with the girl and their new bundle of joy.

"They walked in just like any other couple would, excited to deliver their newborn child," Tulsa Police Officer Danny Bean told FOX23 News in 2021.

When the child, well below the age of consent, showed up to give birth, doctors immediately called Tulsa Police to report what was happening.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] trashmonkey@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I disagree with the no age restrictions statement. That makes it sound like there are no restrictions. According to Wikipedia , in Oklahoma, you have to be 18 to get married, 16 with a parent's permission, and any age under 16 requires a court order.

[-] filcuk@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 year ago

I can't imagine a use for court ordered marriage that would result in anything good.

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 9 points 1 year ago

Q:How did ma ma and pa pa meet?

A:our relationship was Court Ordered.

Literally the future incels want

[-] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

One of my wife's friends needed parental consent because she got married at 17 (to a guy a few years older). The whole thing worked out OKish - they've been together nearly 20 years, had a couple of kids, but I think they both recognise they got together too young, and wouldn't otherwise be together today - though they have no plans to separate.

[-] SterlingVapor@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago

I can. By making it technically possible, you can divert attention.

One example would be for crazy edge situations. Like letting children with terminal illnesses fulfill their last wishes, or letting hormone ridden teens make their case to a judge, keeping them from more extreme actions.

But more practically, I think this is a great idea... 99.9% of anyone asking for this either needs court ordered mental evaluation and/or a referral to CPS to do a deep dig into the situation. By making it technically possible, that means anyone seriously pursuing this has to explain themselves to a judge.

Unfortunately our judicial system has a lot more to do with money than justice (so most people who would actually go through with this probably have the money to protect themselves from consequences), but this law would be a sensible part of a more perfect system... Granted this should almost never be granted by the court (terminally ill child is the only situation that makes sense to me), but there's value in it

My opinion would change greatly if this is a real path to child marriage rather than a mostly theoretical possibility

[-] aceshigh@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

any age under 16 requires a court order.

i wonder under what circumstances this happens.

[-] joel_feila@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

mostly when the girl is raped by her future husband and the family did want to live with the shame/sin of sex before marriage. So they just marry off the girl and pretend the sex happened after the wedding

[-] aceshigh@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

that's not what a court order is.

[-] joel_feila@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

But it is what pushes courts to allow or fill out an order for a child marriage

this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2023
502 points (97.4% liked)

News

23627 readers
2584 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS