eym_sirius

There's a problem with crossing state lines in the interference of custody, possibly endangerment. If she's pregnant already then there's an issue with underage sex if it can be proven that it happened before she turned 16. He has a responsibility to bring her home. Saying "no" is what turns this whole thing criminal. What he should do is to, from Florida, is to secure a Paulding County attorney. Bring her back home and go straightaway to see the attorney. Everything should be negotiated by the attorney! I think that both sets of parents should offer this solution to get the young girl ba

My family is so down-south, that when we-all got the chicken pox --- They were southern fried! Is he bending forward or backward?

I think that everyone is concerned for the safety of the girl. I think that there are emancipation laws in place now that allow a 16 year old to move away from her parents. Until and unless that happens, this is a custody issue. The boy says that he's not bringing her back because he'll get in trouble (?) if he does. I'd take him at his word. So right now, it doesn't matter if she went willingly or not, what I understand is that whether she's willing to come back or not, he's not letting her because he'll have to face justice. Can you see how this is troubling?

The problem with this attitude is that you don't know if the girl is even safe! The boy (although he's legally an adult, he's acting like a boy) is not acting in the best interests of the girl. He has had an opportunity to think this through and he says he's not bringing her back. That's all anyone needs to know! It's now a criminal case, which means that the authorities need to go get here today. Not "hope and pray" she comes home! There's already been A response to the request to come home. That was rejected and should be considered as "intent". He has the intent to continue to harbor a

You beat me to it! I was going to post something similar. After research it seems like the proper way to handle this IS as a runaway if it can be determined that the girl is safe. That puts the young man in hot water for harboring a runaway and interfering with custody. The proper course of action would have been emancipation, if the daughter was interested in being on her own. That would be assuming that there are no other dynamics in this, like the girl is already pregnant, which would be prima facie evidence of underage sex (when she was 15). It's not going to get better. The best t

Excellent Research!

Conversely, when did this young girl reach the age where this is not an abduction? How about if she were 12 or 13? If you apply your same "phllosophical issue" to the opposite side of the equation, you have to reconcile this somehow. The question on the other side of the equation is, "At what age was the girl legally able to give her consent, in each state that they have travelled to?" Is sixteen old enough? If sixteen is old enough, why not fifteen or fourteen? On what day did the young girl begin to have the ability to make her own decisions and to be accountable for them? And if the you

The problem that I see with just leaving this up to local authorities, friends and family is that the assumption is that the boy and girl are in their right mind. Taking the girl away (that is literally what "abduct" means - to take away) was a problem. Refusing to bring her back is a crime, regardless of her complicity. She's a minor! At this time he's not acting in her best interests. If he is a sociopath/psychopath it's possible that he's kept it hidden until now. At best, he's acting in an anti-social way. At worst, he doesn't care about anyone but himself and thinks that he deserves what

I've discussed this with the mom. She's frustrated at the lack of action. Look at this from the young man's point of view. Look through his eyes tonight. He KNOWS that he's in trouble. He KNOWS that eventually the FBI will be involved and that he will go to jail. Look through his eyes. He's not bringing her home - not because they have this eternal love or something - But because he'll get in trouble. So how does he play this out, looking through his eyes? So far, he's not doing right by her. And this failure to take her well-being into consideration is troubling. You're doing the rig

Not sure, LPPT, but I think that 16 is too young for a girl to be able to make adult decisions. Even legally, perhaps. Crossing state lines, they have to also be in accordance with Florida laws regarding juveniles, statutory rape, etc. I think that you're saying that a 16 year old has legal standing to make these decisions and I'm not sure that this is true. I'll have to do some research. I think that an eighteen year old would be on the hook for the responsibility part of this. And this is assuming the best! Worst case scenario? Oh, man!!

.

.

.

.

.

.

This is a very serious matter !

I didn't see the movie. But the question is about the song, so I'm not at a disadvantage. Billie Joe wasn't gay. The reason that the girl lost her appetite was because she was involved with Billie Joe, the TWO of them having thrown something off the bridge. Now, he was just a regular guy who put frogs down the backs of girls in movie theatres. So what was he doing at the sawmill? Maybe getting wood to form a box to put the body into, weight down and toss into the river?

It belonged to momof 3 She was briefly known as momof 4

I think that he may have heard the saying, "Don't throw the Baby Out with the bath water". So he made sure to throw them out separately!

Well, WE are not doomed, but our method of government is. Its fatal flaw is the self. In historical perspective, our method of government SHOULD be in its infant stage. But I see it as on the decline. There will be something to take its place, certainly. In the relatively short term of the next 100 years, the Constitution still may be the guiding document, but so many amendments and changes will be made that it will be barely recognizable. When I say that the fatal flaw is "self", I'm really talking about human nature. Politicians lie and take bribes and use their power and influence to t

It's on YouTube! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYBSQqr4N-o

Didn't he throw something off the bride before he committed suicide? Billie Joe was gay? Nah, word was, "Ol' Billie Joe never had a lick of sense" - THAT was the rap against Billie Joe! What was he doing with a girl up on the Tallahatchee Bridge, throwing something off? It was their newborn, possibly stillborn baby. Pass the biscuits, please. Yes you are! You'll always be a girl!! Unless, that is you have that --- operation (an addadictomy)

Now you're a guy?

Like I said, the sheep are those who put an entertainer on a pedestal. He's not real. He's playing a part. It's what he does for a living. You want proof - Look at your solution to those whom you think are ignorant - "BUY HIS BOOK"????