Convicted sex offender gets sole custody of 6-year-old daughter

[cali]

In California, just six years ago, Nicholas Elizondo was convicted for raping his then six-year-old daughter. He took a deal and served six years in jail. During that time his ex-wife, Lisa Knight, has been raising their daughter Sarah in Norman.

After six years of little contact with Sarah, he started fighting for sole custody. Yesterday, he won.

Little Sarah’s family is shocked by the Oklahoma County judge’s decision.

“Then he comes out with this solemn face and ‘Oh this is a really hard one for me’,” said Sarah’s cousin, Jodi Coomer. “And I`m thinking hard?”

<snip>

http://kfor.com/2013/06/25/convicted-sex-offender-gets-sole-custody-of-6-year-old-daughter/

[Xithras]

1. Clearly there has to be more to this story.

The custody of a six year old girl, raised by her mother in Oklahoma since birth, is handed to her newly-released-from-prison convicted child molester father halfway across the country, who she barely even knows?

Either this is the most corrupt judge on the planet, the dumbest judge on the planet, or there is a LOT more going on here than is being reported.

[atreides1]

3. It's Oklahoma

We already know that they have very little respect for the rights of women, why think that some corrupt judge would be any different?

Just when you think that Oklahoma can't sink any further into the muck, someone there does something to prove how wrong you are!!!

[davidn3600]

8. Well a common complaint among men is that the courts favor women

The claim is made that women get custody more often, that courts typically rule in favor of women concerning alimony, and that women typically serve less time than a man for the same crime.

Men's Rights Activists have made these claims for years. And in general, I think most men believe it. Even in my peer groups for years, guys tend to think women get advantages in the courts.

Obviously the court didnt favor the woman in this case. But I'd have to do some research to see where the truth is.

[TDale313]

2. I'm speechless.

Seriously, how does this happen? Is there more to this than meets the eye? I can't imagine how any judge could rule this way.

[geek tragedy]

4. Per another story, conviction was in 1995 and he fathered this child several years

after being released (was released in 2001, child would have been born in/around 2007).

http://www.kcby.com/news/national/Sex-offender-awarded-custody-of-6-year-old-213445461.html

That obviously doesn't make the judge's decision correct or even defensible, but it is relevant.

[last1standing]

7. Thanks for this link. It's definitely less one-sided than the one in the OP.

So, it looks like this guy was convicted 18 years ago of "lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 years of age." However, he pled guilty in a city that has had many similar convictions overturned because the police had been coaching children to allege claims that weren't true. Apparently, it got so bad they named them "The Witch Hunt" trials.

This doesn't mean that the father is innocent, only that there's much more to this story than first meets the eye.

[Jazzgirl]

12. Wenatchee, WA maybe?

I remember visiting there on business. A lot of people that worked for the company had relatives pulled in and accused of child molestation by this one particular cop. It was very weird.

[last1standing]

13. This was in Kern County but it wouldn't surprise me if it was widespread.

I know that many areas of this country still have major problems with police setting up traps for gay men by propositioning them for sex then arresting them for public indecency. These victims also end up on sex offenders lists, which is the major reason I don't support them. Sex offenders lists are a lifetime sentence for crimes that are very, very easy to be convicted on with little or no evidence. I know that's not a popular thing to write but I've seen too many examples of people's lives being ruined because of trumped up charges.

[Xithras]

9. See, NOW it makes sense. Just needed more of the story.

The father was convicted in the mid 90's in Kern County, which was infamous at the time for their history of crafting false child abuse allegations (many of the convictions were later overturned, and many of the falsely accused were later awarded considerable damages). The guy has always maintained his innocence, and in this custody trial his "victim" actually came in and testified that the molestation charges were false and that she hadn't actually been molested.

The girl actually did have a relationship with her father for much of her life, and the custody orders said that he had visitation rights. The mother arbitrarily stopped following the previous custody orders, which immediately gave him the higher ground.

It also appears that the court believed that the molestation allegation against her stepbrother was fabricated, and was simply an attempt to keep the girl away from her father.

I still don't agree with the order granting sole custody to a convicted child molester (if the victim is now publicly stating that the molestation never happened, the guy should have his lawyers try to get the conviction overturned first), but I can see how he might have come to his decision.

[cbdo2007]

11. Thanks for the extra research, I hate sensationalist OPs like this one who don't

follow up with actual facts. Seems like they're baiting us for some kind of response, when obviously there is more to the story that is being left out.

[octoberlib]

5. Elizondo's lawyer and the judge were buddies? This is sick.

“His attorney was in the chambers with the judge while he was deliberating his decision,” said Coomer. “There was laughter coming from the room. We waited for what seemed like hours but it was just minutes.”
She thinks the judge questioned her parenting when she couldn’t name all of Sarah’s doctors off of the top of her head. Born with a cleft lip and palette, Sarah has lots of specialists.
“There is no threat to her whatsoever here. Nothing`s happened to her. She`s made all of her appointments,” said Coomer. “Because mom can`t remember the doctor`s names then she`s a bad mom? I don`t think so.”

[Pamela Troy]

15. And you've concluded

they were "buddies" because....?

[last1standing]

6. I don't know all the facts to this story and can't find them online...

but I did read the comments in that link and it's almost entirely filled with posters calling the judge a "liberal" and stating that they're sending the story to O'Reilly, Beck, Drudge and Nancy Grace.

I certainly don't support this judge's decision based on the facts the link provided but something doesn't smell right here. It just seems too politically based from those comments.

[WinkyDink]

10. What could possibly go wrong? (There are pedophiles in the judiciary, too. J/S.)

[Pamela Troy]

14. There are good reasons for questioning the man's guilt in the original case.

He seems to have been caught up in the Kern County child molestation witch hunt of the '90s. His original alleged victim has denied the abuse for which he was convicted ever took place.