Posted on 10/23/2007 2:31:25 PM PDT by uxbridge
The report of a Weare father attacking his daughter's boyfriend on school grounds after discovering the teenagers had sex earlier that day has evoked passion in readers.
The boy is 17 and the girl is 15.
Police say the attack happened Sept. 10 as John Stark High School in Henniker was letting out for the day and was witnessed many students.
The girl's father was charged with simple assault, a class B felony.
A Weare police detective was interviewing the 17-year-old from Henniker yesterday, said Deputy Chief Bill Quigley, but no charges have been filed against him.
Because the girl is not old enough to consent under state law, police are investigating the father's allegation as a sexual assault.
The story drew comments from Myrtle Beach, S.C., to Baghdad, Iraq.
Many people defended the irate father's actions, with one reader suggesting a defense fund be set up and several others saying they would contribute.
"If more parents acted like this father maybe we wouldn't have so many teen pregnancies," wrote Dorie Smith of New Boston. "It's refreshing to see a father stand up for his child and not just say, 'Oh, that's what teenagers do.'"
Others said the man should be prosecuted for violently taking the law into his own hands.
"I am also shocked at the number of people defending the father's actions," wrote Tina Thompson of Sutton. "The father's actions are vigilantism at its worst, and I hope the authorities throw the book at him."
Michelle Howard, of Henniker, said an adult should be expected to have more control over his fist than a teenager has over his hormones.
"As a mother of three boys," she wrote, "I will make sure they get every kiss and so on in writing, to protect us from some testosterone-raging father."
The boy, who police say was dating the girl, was bruised in the attack and required two stitches in his face.
Police said the father discovered the teens had sex during school hours but not on school property.
The New Hampshire Union Leader does not identify sexual assault victims. For that reason, the newspaper is not identifying the father.
Chris, of Nashua, said there's little danger of stigma being attached to anyone involved in the incident.
"The 15-year old girl is not a victim here," he said. "She is a teen engaging in sexual activity - just like 90 percent of her peers. Therefore the father does not deserve to have his name hidden from the public. Publish his name in the paper just like any other adult who is charged with assault."
Meg, of Derry, agreed, saying many teen girls are sexually active.
"People see the word 'rape' in statutory rape and think that the boy forced himself on her like a beast," she wrote. "Let me tell you, that is hardly the case in many instances. ... Assault is assault, Pops. Jail is where you go, and you learn YOUR lesson just like your daughter and her boyfriend learn theirs."
Sue, of Pembroke, said lessons could have been learned, but weren't.
"This would have been the perfect opportunity (for the man) to show his daughter how adults behave themselves when faced with a difficult situation," she wrote. "When she is an adult she will look back and realize the infantile manner in which her father behaved himself."
Tonya Ferrara, of Manchester, said vigilante justice - family style - might play a useful role in crime fighting.
"Maybe if this happened to sex offenders the first time they were caught we wouldn't have repeat offenders," she wrote.
Using violence to solve problems is the real threat to society, wrote Christina, of Henniker.
"Let the father of the boy beat up the father of the girl, and then the older brother beat up the older brother," she wrote. "Why stop there? Why not have his friends beat up her friends? It's views like this that start world wars."
Mark Emerson, of Lancaster, said the man's chief mistake was getting caught.
"Put in that same situation," he said, "I probably would have knocked his lights out also, just without all the witnesses."
Tom Linehan, of Salem, defended the father's actions without qualification.
"There ought to be a fund to help pay the legal fees for people like this father who not only defend their kids but also more broadly defend the rest of us from miscreants," wrote Linehan. "There is no defense for rape."
Please post your entire opinion in one response, then. I was replying to what you posted.
But you already admitted that if your daughter was having consensual sex at 15 you would have failed. I’m assuming that you would have already talked to her about STDs, pregnancy, casual sex, values, etc. so what’s the point of doing so again? You should join the state dept. Talk, talk, talk, talk. They, like you, accomplish nothing. I haven’t seen where you are taking the responsibility for anything. You are just talking to your daughter again. BFD.
By the way, you are like the MSM. A 17 year old doing a 15 year old isn’t a “kid” in the sense that you mean it. He has stepped into the realm of adulthood, and must accept the consequences of his actions.
But I expect others to do the same. And I'm not willing to give him a pass, but you are.
But, but, but if your daughter is having consenual sex at 15 then, according to you, you are a failure as a father. Also, if you haven’t instilled values in her by age 15, what makes you think that you can do so now as you have obviously FAILED to do so to date.
Here’s a clue. Sometimes, inspite of a parent’s best efforts, the kid blows it off and does something really stupid. That is what kids, particularly teenagers do. If you haven’t gotten to that part yet I suggest that you pack it in, because you are a menace to society. Now, if you think that any child who makes a mistake is proof positive of poor parenting then you are a bigger fool than your posts reveal.
I have enjoyed reading your arrogant, holier than thou, I’m the best parent in the world posts. They have been amusing, and I have enjoyed jerking your chain. Go away, and grow up.
Thanks for the advice. LOL. Now go back to your soap box. You have another attribute. You can read minds. My God, you are amazing!
One more time: IRRELEVANT means IRRELEVANT.
“And lastly, the only balance of power that could possibly shift is giving the teenager involved sovereign right to his body.”
I wish I knew WTF this means.
In any event the kid has no more or less right to his body than before. While we are discussing ‘rights’ though we might also interlard a few ‘responsibilities’, remember those? THEY happened in the past too. Such considerations were inseparable.Thats part of the reason WHY the cops would once have told the punk to wipe his nose and STFU. Another part would be the sexual actives risk of disease, mental health complications as well as the very real specter of a new unwanted and unprepared for life. “Sovereignty” is a nice, grand sounding word but it ASSUMES “responsibility”. It DEMANDS it. How do you suppose this pantywaist punk defines responsibility? Let me help you: Anything that gets him into the next girls pants and damn the complications.
If he see this (which i doubt)he will in all likelihood be grateful for your help and support for him in his mission in life. He has no responsibilities and there is no price to his game. I'da' LOVED that at 17.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.