The Porn Dude

Surrey parents wanted daughter to become prostitute

The Lizard King

New member
Jul 8, 2003
1,272
0
0
Holy fucking cow!!! Amazing that you need a license to drive a car but any dirtbag or pair of dirtbags can have kids....

british columbia news archives
Wednesday, Oct 26, 2005

Surrey parents wanted daughter to become prostitute

SURREY, B.C. (Black Press) - A Surrey mother and father who tried to talk their 15-year-old daughter into becoming a prostitute and convinced their brain-damaged 12-year-old son to stop taking his medication have been ordered to have no contact with either child.

The two were among 10 children removed from the custody of the couple in 2001 after child welfare authorities identified their Whalley residence as an "extremely dysfunctional home," court records show.

In issuing the order at the time, Surrey Provincial Court Judge Suzanne MacGregor said the children's "minimum needs for health, dental care and cleanliness were not met. They were not always fed enough. Their social and behavioural problems indicate that they were left to their own devices. They got little, if any, guidance or restraint. Those of school age and in school were markedly delayed in academic measures. Each has significant emotional problems."

Despite the degree of abuse and neglect, the 15-year-old girl and her 12- year-old brother have fled their foster homes more than once to visit their parents.

Social workers recently learned that the mother and father took the 15-year-old girl to Vancouver's East Hastings area and introduced her to a pimp "...a young man ... who took (the teen) around to meet 'the girls'."

"Reportedly, the mother, father and (pimp) thought it would be helpful if (the girl) had some alcohol to help loosen her up for these visits," Surrey Provincial Court Judge Jean Lytwyn said in her written reasons for banning contact.

"(The girl) was told she could make $200 a day as a prostitute."

The mother "has a lengthy involvement and reliance on prostitution" herself, the judge noted.

According to the written ruling, matters came to a head in August of this year when the mother attacked the daughter, claiming the girl had stolen money.

The brother, who may be suffering from Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, "exhibits a number of extreme behaviours" when he is not his medications, the judge noted.

Yet the mother convinced him to stop taking his pills, the result being the boy is "spiralling out of control quickly."

Judge Lytwyn issued a restraining order forbidding contact and giving police the power to arrest both parents without a warrant if an officer has reasonable grounds to believe the parents have violated the order.

A court order bans identification of all involved.
 

dick slap

Guest
May 18, 2004
189
0
0
65
at the ex in-laws
Surrey mom and daughter

Q/ What the Surrey (ok, Whalley) mother say to her daughter before going out for the evening?

A/ If your not in bed by 10 come straight home.
 

Chingada

Banned
Feb 14, 2004
341
0
0
Victoria
hifisex said:
actually that would be the Surrey RCMP who are too busy being on serve and protect to actually stop shit like this


HFS
Pretty flippant comment!! How would you suggest the police stop it?
 

BS Detector

Active member
Sep 7, 2003
1,516
4
38
www.bsdetector.com
dick slap said:
Q/ What the Surrey (ok, Whalley) mother say to her daughter before going out for the evening?

A/ If your not in bed by 10 come straight home.
Not sure I understand how this story is humourous and is to be joked about :confused:
 

dick slap

Guest
May 18, 2004
189
0
0
65
at the ex in-laws
It's a joke

BS Detector said:
Not sure I understand how this story is humourous and is to be joked about :confused:
It's a joke because I have a sense of humour.

Of course this is a sad story but it is what's happening as our society slowly erodes. Panty wetting liberals feel these 'parents' have rights. The price we pay for 'freedom for everyone'. Don't blame the RCMP or the courts - they just enforce the will of the people.

DS
 

dexi

New member
Feb 28, 2004
268
0
0
van
Those "panty wetting liberals" are the ones who would defend your rights if you were busted for the very thing this board is designed for and promotes.

The righteous, judgemental, mothers-against-everything types would just as soon lock you up for life, have you stoned to death, or mark you with a scarlet letter.

You should be careful which rights you're really willing to give up.
 

rickoshadows

Just another member!
May 11, 2002
902
0
16
66
Vancouver Island
dexi said:
Those "panty wetting liberals" are the ones who would defend your rights if you were busted for the very thing this board is designed for and promotes.

The righteous, judgemental, mothers-against-everything types would just as soon lock you up for life, have you stoned to death, or mark you with a scarlet letter.

You should be careful which rights you're really willing to give up.
Nicely said Dexi!

Although we all agree that when people cross the line, they should be held acountable, we just can't agree on where the line should be drawn or who gets to draw it.

On a related note, I see Bush has narrowed down his next Supreme Court nominees to two Conservative Appeals court judges. I hope our American Perberts are prepared for life on the Sex Offender Registry!
 

dick slap

Guest
May 18, 2004
189
0
0
65
at the ex in-laws
Agreed

dexi said:
Those "panty wetting liberals" are the ones who would defend your rights if you were busted for the very thing this board is designed for and promotes.

The righteous, judgemental, mothers-against-everything types would just as soon lock you up for life, have you stoned to death, or mark you with a scarlet letter.

You should be careful which rights you're really willing to give up.
Point taken. However, these same liberals will defend these parents. All I'm saying is that is the price of freedom.

We can't blame anyone for everything if nobody takes responsibility for anything.
 

festealth

Resident Troll
Sep 8, 2005
276
0
0
with the poster mentioning driver's license, maybe it's time that we introduce licensing for parents. like you gotta complete a certain course, psych profiling, and you gotta then apply for a license to have kids. very extremely and demeaning, but for cases like the one listed above, it may prove to be beneficial, lol. :cool:
 

ace85

Banned
Jan 30, 2004
740
0
0
51
Sadly

There are pooner reading the board wishing they would have had a crack at the 15 year old.
 

BobbiVan

Busty Bobbi
Jun 14, 2004
488
0
18
44
Fraser Valley
parenting courses

Not surprisingly, if you go to court for any parental reason with your ex, you NEED to take the "Parenting after seperation course"

If there were a course you needed before becoming a parent, it would cover a lot of the same stuff... it's stupid that they wait until something has already screwed up before the court orders a course.
 

Ilovethemall

Banned
Jul 12, 2005
794
0
0
3rd rock from the sun
anybody

Anyone that wants a crack at a 15 year old is a pedophile cockroach that should be neutered and shot.....unless you happen to be 15 - and no, your mental age does not count
 

ace85

Banned
Jan 30, 2004
740
0
0
51
Your opinion

Doesn't change the fact that most of the guys that look for street walkers have either been with or considered 15 year olds. Intentionally or unintentionally.

Is 17 OK??
 

Ilovethemall

Banned
Jul 12, 2005
794
0
0
3rd rock from the sun
just my opinion

You're right Ace it is just my opinion.....but as the old story goes, I may not be able to define it but when I see it, I know it is wrong.

I don't know what the magic number of consent is - but I do know, it ain't 15. IMHO, it should be when the person is able to understand what it means to have sex, so, I will say minimum 18 - minimum.
 
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts