Partial translation of a news article in La Voz de Asturias. Comments in italics.
14th June 2016
The Provincial Court grants custody to a father after false reports of sexual crimes by his ex-wife
[The tide may be slowly starting to turn? At last? Let’s see what happened exactly.]
She accused her ex-husband of raping her, and her husband’s brother of molesting their six-year-old son. The mother will have to stick to a visitation schedule and will have to pay child support.
The Provincial Court of Asturias has granted guardianship and custody of a six-year-old boy to his father, after deciding that he is the best guarantor of the child’s interests. The court has contrasted his behavior to his ex-wife’s, the mother of the boy, who tried who set him against his father’s family, as well as filing a report against her husband for rape, just as the divorce procedure began, and afterwards accused an uncle of the boy of sexually molesting the minor. As the court remarks, both accusations were totally baseless.
[This kind of thing is our daily bread in Spain. And she didn’t even try to hide it. As soon as the divorce began, she filed a report against the husband. Then she shot the silver bullet: child molestation (against a relative, in this case). It’s a textbook example of how a woman can use the force of the State against a man. It is even recommended by lawyers.]
The experts declared that the mother manipulated the boy to make it look as if he had suffered serious sexual molestation by his paternal uncle, which was totally baseless and fabricated by her.
[Surprisingly, very surprisingly, they didn’t take the accusation at face value and actually investigated what was going on. After medical examinations, they found no signs that the child had been anally raped (which was the mother’s actual accusation), and then there was a backlash against her for forcing her son to undergo such a traumatic process]
For the experts, these baseless accusations by the mother have had a negative influence on the child. “They have a brutal and immense transcendence on a young boy, who sees himself put in the middle of baseless suspicions of child sex abuse, which are also changeable and functional, depending on the needs of the mother.”
The mother was asking for the suspension of the father’s visit schedule, established in the divorce sentence, claiming that they would interfere with a medical treatment that the boy was undergoing.
[So the mother was trying to inflict the final blow on the father and his family, and prevent them from ever seeing the boy again. As we see, her excuse was that such visitations made him miss his vital medical treatment. Crazy is just acting crazy (hi Paul) and pretending that very important emergencies are at play here, completely incompatible with the visitations. She’s just trying to control (I need to review Say Goodbye to Crazy; awesome book. Maybe I’ll start a MRA book club here at the blog).]
The mother will have to stick to the following visitation schedule: every other weekend from 5 PM Friday to 8 PM Sunday, as well as 1 weekly day (same schedule) and half of school holidays in Easter, summer and Christmas.
The father will get to choose the periods in even years, and the mother will be able to do so in odd years. Both parents will be able to communicate with their son, as long as they don’t interfere with his rest and/or academic obligations. They also agree to cancel the child support previously payable by the father. The mother will pay child support ascending to 180 euros [202 dollars] per month; she will have to deposit the money in the bank account of the father’s choosing, as well as covering half of the expenses of his education and care.
[You love it when a plan comes together, right psycho mom?]
- Los maricas están oficialmente fuera (del bando progresista) - November 16, 2016
- Sword and Glory – A game about male disposability - November 15, 2016
- Guía para dummies para que las adolescentes respeten a los chicos - November 14, 2016
Truth and justice, yay
If I was a journalist I would carefully follow the future career of the judges. Whoever they are, they might have professional trouble because of this case. If that happens, that story would also be of great interest.