State Awards Joint Custody of Child to Alleged Rapist in Money-Making Scheme
Christopher Mirasolo, Rebecca Kissling, Sanilac County Circuit Court, Judge Gregory S. Ross
Man Who “Allegedly” Raped 12 Year Old Girl Awarded Joint Custody of Child She Conceived Afterwards
SPONSORIf you like this content, be sure you click here and support iState's ability to deliver to you news for the iStater, the state of one.
Introduction: Note, if you want to get right to the story, start at paragraph eight.
Last night, a friend of mine, Agent Jon Smith, who runs the Conspiracy Garden Facebook page, shared a story on my personal page with a note that said “iState has to talk about this.” The headline of the story, which was from antimedia, read “Man Who Raped and Impregnated 12-Year-Old Now Has Joint Custody of Her Child.”
That title certainly grabbed my attention, but honestly, the type of stories that I cover on iState might not include this story. At least this is what I thought. Still, I decided to put the story in the queue of possible stories I would cover the next day.
As I went through potential stories to cover, trying to decide which stories would become features in the categories I cover every day (iTop, iTalk, iDefense, uThreat, iBuild, iLulz), I came upon this story and decided to read it.
As I read the story, it became clear to me that this was more than a story of the state pulling a bone-headed, potentially dangerous move, this was really a story of the state potentially putting a child in danger, potentially putting a young woman in danger (who, thanks to the state, would now be forced to deal with the man who ALLEGEDLY raped her) not because it was boneheaded, not because it had a momentary lapse of reason, but because the state was attempting to collect money.
As I describe this case to you, what you will discover is THIS is a story about the state attempting to collect money from a rapist (ALLEGED rapist).
First, I am going to give you the facts of the case, then, I will give you my thoughts about this case.
THE FACTS. Sanilac County Circuit Court Judge Gregory S. Ross recently granted joint legal custody of the child of a woman that 27-year-old Christopher Mirasolo allegedly raped, when she was 12 years ago. There is no doubt the now 8-year-old child is his as a DNA test has proven he is the father. The alleged rape happened in 2008.
According to court records, Mirasolo gave the then-12-year old a ride, along with her 13 year old sister and her friend. But, after they got in the vehicle, Mirasolo then threatened to kill the girl if she didn’t have sex with him.
Rebecca Kissling, the lawyer representing the young girl, now a young woman, said to the Detroit News,
“She, her 13-year-old sister and a friend all slipped out of their house one night to meet a boy and the boy’s older friend, Mirasolo, showed up and asked if they wanted to go for a ride…They thought they were going to McDonald’s or somewhere.”
“Instead, he tossed their cellphones away, drove to Detroit where he stole gas from a station and then drove back to Sanilac County, where he kept them captive for two days in a vacant house near a relative, finally releasing the older sister in a park. He threatened to kill them if they told anyone what happened.”
A month later Mirasolo was arrested. He later plead guilty to “attempted third-degree criminal sexual conduct.” He served just six months in county jail. But upon his release, would later be convicted, in 2010, for sexual assault against a minor. This time he would serve four years.
So how did the Judge come to award this convicted pedophile joint legal custody of a child that was the product of him ALLEGEDLY (I have to say that for legal purposes) raping and kidnapping a 12-year-old girl?
Well, if you talk to his attorney, Barbara Yockey, you will learn that Mirasolo had absolutely nothing to do with this case even coming before the judge. His attorney stated, “He never initiated this. It was something routinely done by the prosecutor’s office when a party makes application for state assistance.”
That last part is really the key part that I am focusing on in this case. The victim, who is now a young woman, applied for state assistance. She was receiving $260 a month in food stamps for her and her son, along with health insurance coverage.
The state, it seems, was looking for a way to get some of the money back, so they initiated a process to declare that the convicted sexual assaulter and ALLEGED rapist and kidnapper be awarded legal custodial rights of a child born to one of his victims so that they could then start legal proceedings to get this man to pay custody for the child.
That’s right, the court awarded joint custody of a child to a convicted pedophile so that they could get money out of him. There was no provision provided, no conditions, which means, if this man so chose, that he could insist on having the child stay with him. This man can now interject himself into the life of one of his victims because the state wanted to get money from him.
And now for my opinion:
This case, to me, illustrates an ugly reality about your relationship to the coercive enterprise, the state, that is, thankfully, not often laid so nakedly bare as it is here. Who and what you are as it relates to the state is an asset or a liability. According to that status, the state will act either for you or against you.
In this case, you have a poor young woman and her son who are a net loss to the state’s bottom line. The sexual assaulter and convicted pedophile is a potential source to offset the net loss of the young woman and her son. This fact, and the fact that this young woman has little real power to resist the state’s ‘legal’ assault on her security and the safety of her son, makes it an easy decision for the owners and managers of the coercive enterprise to make, to open a door to danger for the sake of getting a few bucks from someone.
This young woman was lucky. Her story was picked up by a local radio station, then a newspaper, and now it has been circulated to multiple other news outlets and blogs, including this one right now. There was a backlash, a real display of power that raised the cost of coercion for the state and made it a net loss for them to continue to allow the door to remain open, the door that they opened, the door that allows a convicted pedophile to walk right into the life of one of his victims.
As a consequence of a real display of power, the district court judge stayed his order this past Tuesday, October 10th. He did not do this because he suddenly saw the insanity of his decision, but because the person looking back at him was no longer simply a young girl with no real power to resist an insane ruling. He was looking back at a courtroom filled with media and allies and pissed off ‘citizens.’
The state had shown itself to be too nakedly ruthless in its assessment of asset versus liability. The state had shown itself to be too nakedly ruthless in attempting to cut out a lost pound of flesh from someone else’s flesh.
This case, and many like it that sadly never see the light of day, is an illustration of a saying I often repeat; there is no rule of law, there is only rule of power. Sure, the state will dress this up with all kinds of polite legal expressions, and even the ones who fought to protect this girl will cite the power of law to right wrongs, but, at the end of the day it was simply power that rolled back the latest attempt by the state to get as much as it can out of the livestock, the livestock that is you and me.