Crime (Update) Arrest Made in Rape of Ohio 10-Year-Old Who Had to Travel Out of State for Abortion

Link: https://www.thedailybeast.com/colum...o-traveled-to-indiana-for-abortion?ref=scroll
Archive: http://archive.md/2022.07.13-203034...o-traveled-to-indiana-for-abortion?ref=scroll




An Ohio man was arrested Tuesday for raping a 10-year-old girl who became a central figure in the debate over abortion rights after she reportedly traveled to Indiana to have an abortion when Ohio outlawed the procedure last month.

Arrest records and court records viewed by The Daily Beast confirm that Gerson Fuentes, 27, was arrested Tuesday in Franklin County on a felony charge of raping a person under 13. The Columbus Dispatch, who first reported on his arrest, attended Fuentes’ arraignment in Columbus on Wednesday.

The unidentified girl’s plight became national news when the Indianapolis Star quoted a doctor who said a 10-year-old rape victim, who was six weeks and three days pregnant, had been forced to travel from her home in Columbus to Indiana for an abortion. Her home state had a trigger law that immediately outlawed abortions after six weeks once the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

A Columbus Police detective, identified by the Dispatch as Jeffrey Huhn, testified in court Wednesday that the 10-year-old victim was impregnated and had an abortion in Indianapolis.


“The victim went out of state to have a medically terminated abortion,” he said, according to video of the arraignment.

The video showed Fuentes staring blankly during the arraignment and standing with a slouch as a translator relayed the proceedings to him in Spanish.

Court records say the alleged rape occurred on May 12. Detectives said in court that police were made aware of the girl’s pregnancy through a referral filed with the local child services’ branch by her mother on June 22. Eight days later, the girl had the abortion in Indianapolis.

The aborted fetus has since been tested for DNA and entered into evidence, Huhn said, and officials say Fuentes confessed to the rape when he was questioned.

Fuentes’ arrest comes as conservative media claimed the girl’s story was made up for political theater, something parroted by Fox News presenters as recently as Tuesday night—while Fuentes was already in custody.

But those also with egg on their face in light of the horrific crime: the top law-enforcement official in Ohio.

Indeed, state Attorney General Dave Yost spent much of the past week effectively dubbing the story a hoax, suggesting he had heard nothing about any such crime being reported.

“We have a decentralized law enforcement system in Ohio, but we have regular contact with prosecutors and local police and sheriffs,” Yost said in a Fox News segment Monday. “Not a whisper anywhere.”


Yost released a statement Wednesday afternoon that did not address his previous comments.

“My heart aches for the pain suffered by this young child,” he said. “I am grateful for the diligent work of the Columbus Police Department in securing a confession and getting a rapist off the street.”

Dr. Caitlin Bernard, the Indianapolis obstetrician-gynecologist who first described the rape and its aftermath to the Indy Star, previously told The Daily Beast she expected vindication.

“It will all come out in time,” she said via text message on Tuesday.


Court records show Fuentes is being held on a bond of $2 million. The judge said he was considered a flight risk and, given the brutality of the crime, a high bail was necessary to protect the child involved.

—with reporting by Pilar Melendez

 

[CAPTAIN HAPPY]

@CAPTAIN MATI

I think I can see what Chandelier was trying to say regarding how an abortion could be less traumatic than carrying it to term. It is a fucked situation all around and I personally think either way the girl is going to be severely further traumatized regardless of which option is taken.

However, it should be noted that just because one could menstruate it doesn’t mean that she’s physically capable of carrying to term without extensive medical intervention, assuming a miscarriage doesn’t happen prior. I recall reading in a medical textbook (don’t quote me on this, I need to look it again and will edit this post to share sources) that the bones around the pelvic usually takes anywhere from three to five years to even be halfway formed (usually not fully formed until 25-30, though technically being in your 20s is the best time for pushing out babies).

There’s no way a 10 year old would be able to accomplish the feat of being able to carry out the pregnancy safely in that circumstance, unless they’re under a lot of medical supervision… but what child would want to spend that much time being poked and prodded by devices after already going through the trauma of being raped? Unfortunately I don’t think many maternity wards in the USA are equipped for this specific situation.

That is all a fair point.
But I'll state this as clear as I can.
I want the leftist(s) to simply admit that abortion is a decision made to end another human life.
If the 10 year old indeed could not bear the child, with clear risk to her life if she would have attempted to do that, probably this is even what actually happened here, I still want the leftoid to admit that to "save" this 10 year old another life, a wholly innocent one at that, had to be ended.
I'm not throwing any blame, I can also say that I do not blame the 10 year old for getting that abortion at all.
I literally just want an admission that a life was ended. That's all. Otherwise this discussion would permanently keep circling around emotional strawmen.

It’s why in this instance, I wouldn’t blame the child for not wanting to go through any of that.

That's why I don't either.
I never blame an abused child for getting an abortion, but I sure as shit pounce on any retarded dumbass who then start saying that abortions should be full on accessible, even made into a fucking business. That's the most vile thing that comes out of stories like this. Trauma is used for some kind of fucked up support for murder inc.

On the other hand…

In a sense, simply giving the child an abortion pill would be less physically traumatic than the alternative. She’d have to deal with passing a huge clot, and if she wasn’t told what was happening to her then she’d be none the wiser until told otherwise.

But thats just me low key kind of hoping that no one told her what the pill was for, because I can only imagine the devastation she’d be put through if she was told it was a pill meant to kill a baby in utero. When I was her age, the thought of dead babies was something that would have horrified me… and the idea of ending a life is something I don’t think I’d be able to fathom.

No matter what, I hope the best for the girl and that she gets the therapy she needs. I hope she grows up to not only be a better person than her mom, but that she also has a better judge of character when selecting men in her life.

After all the shit that she had to go through, good chances are that she will grow to be a better person.

The rapist shouldn’t just be charged with rape, but he should be held accountable for the abortion as well IMO. He committed murder by proxy and should burn in hell for causing all of this.

That's why I want the admission that a murder was involved. But leftoids can't do that, thus granting the rapist a pass.

And spiritually, I hope she can forgive herself and never have to do this again.

Spiritually the Christians would probably be the only best side to comfort her. Minus the evangelical nutcases.

Also; Trump’s wall would’ve prevented more shit like this happening on American soil. Simply telling Spics to not rape children isn’t good enough
Source on the hips sperging.

True dat.

 

[Smaug's Smokey Hole]

Important correction: the mandated reporters did not even alert the authorities before going to the media about all of it.

Wasn't the report filed and sent to social services the 2nd of July while the abortion doctor talked about it on the 7th-10th or something like that?

 

[TheBigZee]

@Chandelier, I think the main reason they sent the girl to Indiana is because they didn't want to subject her the heartbeat determination. The abortion was most likely legal under the provisions for performing an abortion after the determination. Definitely under the intent. Otherwise they would have had a total ban like Ky.

It also would have delayed the criminal investigation. The mother was covering for the rapist, and they didn't make an arrest until they could get a warrant to collect DNA from the rapist. If they botched the arrest warrant, being illegal he would have tried to skip the country before they got a second chance. Without the DNA sample or the mother/girl they'd have a hard time showing probable cause.

@Zero Day Defense, NRLC/Jim Bopp would expect the doctors to take a wait and see approach. That's the consequence of his model legislation lacking an incest exception. He's a cornerstone of the modern conservative movement, and he would have known exactly what politico was asking and why they were asking it. That's how I know Ohio intended to allow the abortion in state - they didn't use his bill in it's entirely. They want exceptions. However the statute contributed to the decision to send her across state lines, it was unintentional and the legislature needs to talk to OBGYNs about how to fix it.

@Smaug's Smokey Hole, She mentioned the child had been referred to her clinic in that interview. There may have been a week or two gap between the referral and the visit. The child abuse pediatrician in ohio may have also wanted to wait so they could get info for the genetic test.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

NLRC/Jim Bopp would expect the doctors to take a wait and see approach

There's nothing in an incest case that can be waited out.

That's the consequence of his model legislation lacking an incest exception.

...if you're going to get an abortion "because of incest", then it's certain that the child was conceived by rape. If the incest was somehow consensual, then there's no sense in providing an exception for abortion in that case since it's mechanically regular at that point.

 

[TheBigZee]

There's nothing in an incest case that can be waited out.

You're starting to figure out the problem with Bopp's model legislation. From personal experience with the pro life movement, the "human life begins at conception wing" (mostly catholics) would disagree. South America has provided numerous outrageous examples, some of the girls as young as 7.

...if you're going to get an abortion "because of incest", then it's certain that the child was conceived by rape. If the incest was somehow consensual, then there's no sense in providing an exception for abortion in that case since it's mechanically regular at that point.

Rape and incest are separated when you talk about abortion access. Some pro life advocates support exceptions for incest (due to age), but not rape. The allowance for incest isn't a medical one, it's a moral one. The closer you get to 14, the more it declines.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

You're starting to figure out the problem with Bopp's model legislation. From personal experience with the pro life movement, the "human life begins at conception wing" (mostly catholics) would disagree.

It doesn't matter what he disagrees with-- he even outright says that the model for such exceptions are described in his model legislation despite the fact that he wouldn't consider such a decision ideal.

Rape and incest are separated when you talk about abortion access.

In practice, the latter isn't relevant in an abortion discussion without also implicating the former. You mention that there are some that support exceptions for incest due to age-- specifically, the victim is considered to have been raped by default.

 

[TheBigZee]

It doesn't matter what he disagrees with-- he even outright says that the model for such exceptions are described in his model legislation despite the fact that he wouldn't consider such a decision ideal.

In the interview he's talking in part about the upcoming Indiana bill. Which he says this:

Unless her life was at danger, there is no exception for rape,” Bopp said. “The bill does propose exceptions for rape and incest, in my model, because that is a pro-life position, but it’s not our ideal position. We don’t think, as heartwrenching as those circumstances are, we don’t think we should devalue the life of the baby because of the sins of the father.

His model legislation is not going to be used by the Indiana legislature. It has no exceptions.

https://www.nrlc.org/wp-content/uploads/NRLC-Post-Roe-Model-Abortion-Law-FINAL-1.pdf

In practice, the latter isn't relevant in an abortion discussion without also implicating the former. You mention that there are some that support exceptions for incest due to age-- specifically, the victim is considered to have been raped by default.

For most people. The pro-life movement has been fighting for the overturn of Roe for fifty years. They put aside all of their differences in pursuit of that goal. There is going to be some really ugly legislative infighting now that they have to hash out their differences on when life begins, and under what circumstances abortion should be allowed. Allowing one but not the other is the kind of compromise that would keep some republicans from braking ranks and voting for a dem bill that allowed rape/incest and medicated abortions.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

In the interview he's talking in part about the upcoming Indiana bill.

Firstly, he's talking about his model legislation-- the article itself is the product of egregiously dishonest splicing and juxtaposition, so much so that it's barely intelligible. The start of that quotation is him speaking about his personal belief which contrasts with what's in his model legislation because the latter is an allowance for certain sectors of the pro-life camp. I know that for sure because the previous paragraph contextualizes it by talking about how his model legislation has guidelines for rape/incest exceptions, and the quotation has him talking about why those exceptions are there in his model.

The first statement can't be taken as a statement about the upcoming Indiana bill because he outright abstains from speaking about said bill (which will be deliberated on the 25th) beyond it "providing substantial protections for the unborn".

Secondly, we were talking about Bopp and his model legislation.

For most people.

Legally, this is the case. If a child shows up pregnant because a relative impregnated them, it's statutory rape-- regardless of the literal consensuality of the act.

 

[TheBigZee]

Firstly, he's talking about his model legislation-- the article itself is the product of egregiously dishonest splicing and juxtaposition, so much so that it's barely intelligible. The start of that quotation is him speaking about his personal belief which contrasts with what's in his model legislation because the latter is an allowance for certain sectors of the pro-life camp. I know that for sure because the previous paragraph contextualizes it by talking about how his model legislation has guidelines for rape/incest exceptions, and the quotation has him talking about why those exceptions are there in his model.

The first statement can't be taken as a statement about the upcoming Indiana bill because he outright abstains from speaking about said bill (which will be deliberated on the 25th) beyond it "providing substantial protections for the unborn".

Secondly, we were talking about Bopp and his model legislation.

You're right. They added footnote 10 in the final version which includes optional phrasing with hard case exceptions. It's still up for states to choose which version, and my impression of Jim Bopp is that he'd prefer no exceptions.

Spoiler

10 It may be necessary in certain states to have additional exceptions, such as for a woman preg-
nant as a result of rape or incest. In that event, the following language is suggested:
Amended Section 11(a)(1)(C):
(C) an attending physician determines:
(i) based on reasonable medical judgment, that the abortion was necessary to
prevent the death of the pregnant woman. No abortion shall be deemed permitted under this Section
if performed on the basis of a claim or a diagnosis that the woman will engage in conduct that
would result in her death; or

This is the preferred version:

Spoiler

A. Abortions Prohibited, Except to Prevent the Death of the Pregnant Woman
We recommend that a person who causes an abortion—subject to an affirmative defense by a
physician that the abortion was necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman, with safe-
guards—should be subject to a Level 2 Felony,9 if the unborn child dies as a result thereof, or a
Level 3 Felony, if the unborn child survives.10

Jim Bopp has dozens of recorded talks if you want to know more about the guy. He won citizens united.

Legally, this is the case. If a child shows up pregnant because a relative impregnated them, it's statutory rape-- regardless of the literal consensuality of the act.

I was just explaining why you see rape/incest when people talk about abortion laws. You're right that incest is always rape. Any normal person would say a 10 year old was raped.

 

[Fomo Hoire]

Important correction: the mandated reporters did not even alert the authorities before going to the media about all of it.

Minor autism, the mandated reporters in Ohio seem to have done their job, to the point that their existence has been questioned because they didn't try to collect their 15 minutes of fame. On the Ohio side of things, the local cops were the ones to drop the ball.

On the Indiana side of things however, this statement is accurate, the mandated reporters fucked up.

Wasn't the report filed and sent to social services the 2nd of July while the abortion doctor talked about it on the 7th-10th or something like that?

Our first thread about it was on the 2nd of July, the article it's based on was published the 1st of July, and it wasn't even the IndyStar article that keeps getting referenced (so the article was presumably at least a couple hours late if we account for the time the journalists spent copying each other's work).

• Social services in Ohio were notified June 22nd
• The Indiana abortion doctor was notified of the case June 27th
• The abortion was June 30th (so we know the girl is in Indiana on that day)
• We don't know when the interview was but the story was first published July 1st, which just so happens to be a Friday when journoscum tend to publish stories that they don't want people to talk about
• The Indiana doctor made her report on June 2nd which is a very interesting day because it was a Saturday

People making fun of people who expect her to file a report on a Friday overlook that filing the report on a Saturday is weirder; either she doesn't work a normal M-F schedule so late Friday mockery doesn't apply, or she went out of her way to work overtime to submit the report after she saw the commentary. Also I assume that child services and the cops are relatively short staffed and running on maintenance mode over the weekend, kind of like how stories published Friday are doomed to die.

July 4th was a Monday, which is also interesting because people were even more checked out than usual on Friday (common day for people take off, if they have that luxury), cops were extra busy over that weekend, and staff shortages probably won't be resolved until Tuesday.

Everything* happened on the best day possible to try to allow everything to fly under the radar. I'm so fucking glad Gerson Fuentes didn't see the news and think to flee the state

*On the Indiana side of things. Ohio actually seems fine up until the part where the cops didn't do anything.

 

[⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛]

Trump’s wall would’ve prevented more shit like this happening on American soil.

lol maybe he should have tried building some wall

 

[Kiwisee]

lol maybe he should have tried building some wall

That’s a given lmao

 

[Fomo Hoire]

Well I thought today was the day he was supposed to show up in court, looks like it was actually yesterday? There are stories saying he was indicted yesterday and will be arraigned Monday.

In the process I found that Caitlin Bernard now has a GFM. It is over 300k and was started 6 days ago, approximately 2 weeks after the story first dropped. Her supporters are slow, but I guess being slow is why I don't think I've seen it in this thread yet?

Spoiler

Top contribution is 25k.

"My heart breaks for all survivors of sexual assault and abuse. I am so sad that our country is failing them when they need us most. Doctors must be able to give people the medical care they need, when and where they need it." - Dr. Caitlin Bernard

then why didn't you shame the rapist in your original interview? Or do your mandatory reporting on Thursday once the girl had entered the state?

I guess helping survivors just means give them abortions, it doesn't mean saving them and helping them escape.

July 16, 2022 by Jennifer Conti, Organizer
Thank you everyone! Dr. Bernard, and her PR & legal teams are aware of this campaign and we are working to transfer the funds to her directly ASAP.

She doesn't just have a lawyer, she has a PR team... Is that normal?

• Jessica Richter
  $100•2 d
  I heard discussion on KQED Forum today and learned of Go Fund Me there. I hope this small contribution helps Dr. Bernard and I appreciate her integrity and commitment to her patients health. It's a small thing I can do to decrease my boiling anger about the misguided and ignorant Dobbs decision for a moment.

Hmm, KQED..? Aw, I was hoping it was another forum we could spy on but it seems to be the name of a radio show. But, I guess that means the story is still getting coverage on the radio then. Hope they're covering the whole raffle side of it as well.

Archive
Recent donations

Hmm... Archive

Fuentes will next be in court Monday afternoon for an arraignment on the indictment, where he is expected to enter a plea of not guilty through his attorney.

If he's already confessed, why plead not guilty? Was the confession extracted under duress, does he need to enter not guilty first in order to get a plea deal, is he hoping to get the confession thrown out and somehow not go through a kangaroo court?

Another thunkful
I don't know where the independent got her birthday, but it seems that everyone who said he raped a 10 year old girl is wrong, she was 9 at the time.

The 27-year-old man accused of raping a 9-year-old Ohio girl, who was forced to travel to Indiana for an abortion, has been indicted on two felony rape charges by a grand jury.
Gerson Fuentes is accused of raping the victim on two occasions, once between 1 January and 11 May, and again on 12 May, according to Franklin County prosecutor G Gary Tyack.
The victim was nine years old at the time, and has since turned 10.

So now we know her birthday is someone between May 12 and June 29th.

I'm not sure the 9 year old thing makes the story much worse admittedly, it's already pretty fucked up. If it were something like a confirmed threesome that would be really wtf, but there was already speculation she's been molested for years to make her puberty happen at the younger end of the spectrum...

 

[Bob Loblaw Law Blog]

300k? the fuck

for being semi incompetent and/or a liar...one of the comments says she's courageous...for fucking what? If she didn't report the actual rape/crime...how the fuck is she courageous

 

[Blobby's Murder Knife]

That's the correct take, in a homogenous civilization natoonnstate where the people shared a common,, language, history. The multi culti mousketeers will lead us to the same ruin as the Tower of Babel.

Yes, but we don't need pedos either.

 

[Norbert the Tiger]

Yes, but we don't need pedos either.

I'm not a pedo you idiot. 34 states, Canada , all of Europe except Ireland are in the age of consent range I endorse.

 

[Agent Abe Caprine]

I'm not a pedo you idiot. 34 states, Canada , all of Europe except Ireland are in the age of consent range I endorse.

I smell a mass debate thread.

 

[derpherp2]

300k? the fuck

for being semi incompetent and/or a liar...one of the comments says she's courageous...for fucking what? If she didn't report the actual rape/crime...how the fuck is she courageous

Two possibilities:
-Bot Accounts
-People don't give a shit and the mask about it being by accident is 10000% off now so she's doing this dumb shit on purpose. So now not only is she flagrantly disobeying laws and procedures for political shit. She is actively being rewarded for it.

Good job retards.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

I smell a mass debate thread.

Ew, gross.

 

[What the shit]

I'm not a pedo you idiot. 34 states, Canada , all of Europe except Ireland are in the age of consent range I endorse.

What's the AOC you endorse again?