OK - RSO child molestation parent granted sole custody of six-year-old daughter

wfgodot

Former Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
30,166
Reaction score
719
Convicted sex offender gets sole custody of 6-year-old daughter. (kfor.com)
OKLAHOMA CITY — 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.
---
They thought it was a no-brainer. Both Sarah’s mother and cousin think there is more to Judge Howard Haralson’s decision than what was presented in the courtroom.

“His attorney was in the chambers with the judge while he was deliberating his decision,” said Sarah’s cousin Jodi Coomer. “There was laughter coming from the room.”
---
Coomer says with a registered sexual predator as a father her childhood may not be much of a childhood.

“He can`t take her to Chuck E. Cheese. He can`t take her to a park,” said Coomer. “He can`t go to her school. He`s not allowed in school.”

With only hours left with Sarah they are both trying to keep a brave face. They say her father’s past will haunt her future.
---
much more, with a video, at link above
---
As for his conviction in 1995, Elizondo said he merely took a plea bargain given what he was facing. Elizondo was facing 11 felony charges of lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14, but 10 of those were dismissed in exchange for Elizondo pleading no contest to one charge.

"It never happened," said Elizondo of the charge against him.

He said Thursday that police encouraged the child to say incriminating things during the investigation to build a case against him.

The incident happened a few years after Kern County prosecutors tried and juries convicted numerous people on child sex abuse charges, known as the "Witch Hunt" trials. People were given long prison sentences. Many of those same convictions were later tossed out after an appellate court found the accused had been wrongly convicted. The last of the wrongful conviction lawsuits was settled in March of this year.

During a court hearing in Oklahoma City regarding visitation, the victim, who authorities say was molested by Elizondo, testified that she was never molested.
---
much more at ink below:

Sex offender awarded custody of 6-year-old girl. (bakersfieldnow.com)
 
Oh.My.Stahs.

Mom: Take your child and run. Run like the wind.
 
The horrors of the "witch trials" in Kern County and across the country in the '80s and '90s are well-documented; many were convicted on false evidence coerced by law enforcement from alleged child victims. BUT the apparent fact that Elizondo did not seek to have his conviction overturned does speak volumes here.
 
The horrors of the "witch trials" in Kern County and across the country in the '80s and '90s are well-documented; many were convicted on false evidence coerced by law enforcement from alleged child victims. BUT the apparent fact that Elizondo did not seek to have his conviction overturned does speak volumes here.

True. In and amongst those "witch trials" were bona fide cases. If I were a judge, no way would I take it on my conscience to determine that this was one of the "witch trials" and give this child's life over to this man. What the heck are they putting in the water in OK these days? It's surely not brain food! Judge: Check your water source and your oxygen levels, because your brain cells aren't functioning!
 
That first article is very confusing and appears to be wrong. It makes it sound like he just got out of prison where he was for six years and then got custody of daughter. But I don't believe that to be the case from reading other articles. He wasn't convicted six years ago, he was convicted in 1995.
 
That first article is very confusing and appears to be wrong. It makes it sound like he just got out of prison where he was for six years and then got custody of daughter. But I don't believe that to be the case from reading other articles. He wasn't convicted six years ago, he was convicted in 1995.
Yes, first article muddled enough I went looking for more info and found that second one.
 
Yes, first article muddled enough I went looking for more info and found that second one.

Was he falsely convicted the first time? Appears the supposed victim says now nothing happened. That certainly makes a big difference. Did he ever try to overturn that conviction?
 
Was he falsely convicted the first time? Appears the supposed victim says now nothing happened. That certainly makes a big difference. Did he ever try to overturn that conviction?
The Bakersfield Now article does not say if he tried to have the conviction overturned. Apparently not. It does say the last of the lawsuits was settled in March.
 
one more reason why it is not a good idea to get pregnant by convicted child molesters.
 
Sounds like maybe the court was threatened with a false arrest lawsuit, and traded the girl to get out of it.

He was absent from the girl's life for 6 years. Which means that they are now unfamiliar with each other. Regardless of whether the abuse happened or not, likely the girl missed her father. But the answer is not to throw the girl back to him full time. Give him liberal visitation rights until she is like 16. But make Mom the custodial parent. That way if they are wrong, if he really was guilty, at least the girl has someone she can tell.

I hope Mom files an appeal on this.
 
Sounds like maybe the court was threatened with a false arrest lawsuit, and traded the girl to get out of it.

He was absent from the girl's life for 6 years. Which means that they are now unfamiliar with each other. Regardless of whether the abuse happened or not, likely the girl missed her father. But the answer is not to throw the girl back to him full time. Give him liberal visitation rights until she is like 16. But make Mom the custodial parent. That way if they are wrong, if he really was guilty, at least the girl has someone she can tell.

I hope Mom files an appeal on this.


He wasn't absent for six years. He had visitations. And I don't think judge who awarded custody had anything to do at all with a criminal case against him back in 1995.
 
Current court case in Oklahoma, other in California. He was allowed supervised, and, later, unsupervised, visits with his daughter - either of which could have (and maybe were) fought against by the mother, but the allowance of which undoubtedly came into play in last week's OK decision.
 
The Bakersfield Now article does not say if he tried to have the conviction overturned. Apparently not. It does say the last of the lawsuits was settled in March.
But, his case was not part of the Bakersfield Witch Trials cases. His case happened a few years later.

"The film, "Witch Hunt," had a premier showing Sunday night at the American Film Institute Festival in Los Angeles. (November 2008) It tells the story of a string of child molestation cases during the 1980s in which 34 people from Bakersfield were falsely convicted to hundreds of years in prison.

Filmmakers allege Kern County prosecutors used coercive techniques to get children to testify against their own parents, and the film shows that every conviction was ultimately overturned."


- http://www.bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/33782564.html

Following snips are from the Bakersfield Now article originally linked to:

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

"As for his conviction in 1995, Elizondo said he merely took a plea bargain given what he was facing. Elizondo was facing 11 felony charges of lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14, but 10 of those were dismissed in exchange for Elizondo pleading no contest to one charge."

""It never happened," said Elizondo of the charge against him."

"During a court hearing in Oklahoma City regarding visitation, the victim, who authorities say was molested by Elizondo, testified that she was never molested."
 

From the article ^ "Ms Knight has vowed to fight to regain custody of Sarah as soon as she can afford the legal costs."

:please: let an attorney come forward and take this case pro-bono for this little girl's sake! I am typically not one to judge anyone based on their appearance but this guy's pic gives me the creeps - maybe cause I know his history...
 
I keep telling myself that surely there must be more to this story? This can't be true.
 
The conviction aside for a moment, it doesn't explain why mom was granted custody. Is she a bad mom, on drugs, prostitution etc? What did she do to lose custody?
That's a good question - I wondered that too. She and her cousin claim it was just that she couldn't remember all of the names of her daughter's doctors and also that the judge thought they made up the tale about the half-brother molesting the girl. Must be more to it though, I'd think. Or maybe the judge was the dishonest sort.
 
My impression from reading the article is that judge believed that the story of molestation by a half-brother was made up. And thus granted custody to the father.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
135
Guests online
2,597
Total visitors
2,732

Forum statistics

Threads
590,021
Messages
17,929,101
Members
228,039
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top