Monday, July 1, 2013

Jeanne Sager blatantly misquotes her own source on the Cafe Mom website

I generally leave the nominations for "Worst News Mutt" to real journalists or at least the more respected websites. I'm not really sure I'd put CafeMom up there as one of the better sites, but the blatant stupidity from Jeanne Sager at CafeMom is the reason this award was created.

The gist is this- a man who was very likely falsely accused (convicted during the time of the SRA witch hunts despite his accuser stating she was not molested) on the registry wins custody of his daughter because the mother is a psycho. Yet this reporter ignores her source material and writes the psycho mother should kidnap the kid.

http://thestir.cafemom.com/big_kid/157765/mom_who_lost_custody_of

Mom Who Lost Custody of Daughter to Sex Offender Should Just Kidnap Her
by Jeanne Sager 6 hours ago

Under normal circumstances, divorced parents should have to share custody with one another. It's what's best for the kids. But when a judge awards sole custody of a 6-year-old girl to a convicted sex offender, a man who went to prison for molesting a (different) 6-year-old girl, all bets are off.

I think I'd run far, far, far away (with my child, of course).

I wouldn't blame Lisa Knight, a mom whose ex-husband (and registered sex offender), Nicholas Elizondo, just took her to court over visitation with their 6-year-old daughter, if she did the same.

Elizondo, who lives in California, challenged Knight in an Oklahoma court recently, claiming she wasn't granting him his visits with the girl. The judge took his side.

And I'm not talking about forcing the visitation. The Oklahoma City judge (Knight and the little girl have resided in Oklahoma since the couple divorced in 2008 when she was pregnant) gave Elizondo full custody, despite the fact that a quick search of the California sex offender registry pulls up his name and lists a conviction for "lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 years of age," despite the fact that Elizondo was convicted of sexually assaulting a 6-year-old stepdaughter back in the '90s.

FULL custody!

Of a child.

To a convicted pedophile!

Yeah, yeah, Dad served his time and he is the 6-year-old's biological father. But whose rights are more important here? Dad's or the little girl's?

Isn't that the point of custody hearings? To decide what is in a child's best interest?

It can't be "what's good for a child" to let a sex offender who is known to have hurt children take them home. That's the point of registries of these creeps; to let us know who shouldn't be around our kids so we can keep them apart.

Even putting a guy like this alone in the room with a 6-year-old girl is risking that child's well-being. If you were a mother who hired a sex offender to babysit your kid, you'd likely be looking at child endangerment charges (or worse).

So what's a mom to do when a sex offender gets custody?

Again, I'll admit it. I'd run. I'd take my child, and I'd skip town and never, ever come back.

I'd do anything to keep my child from a sex offender, even if that sex offender is her own father.

Because my child's right to be protected is more important than his to be a father.

What would you do if you were this mother? Would you follow the court's orders?

1 comment:

  1. I really feel sorry for you Jeanne. You have a lot of anger and hatred. You really should reexamine your life and your own doorstep. From what I read, you are very judgmental and you spread your vile throughout your documents. Usually, those who feel this strongly about something and have so much hate is because they see the same characteristics in themselves. Might want to look at that. It might be helpful if you picked up your Bible and tried reading it. Who knows...it may change your life.

    ReplyDelete