Sanilac County Prosecutor addresses controversy over Custody Battle of known Rapist

SANDUSKY, MI – The Sanilac County Prosecutors Office has been the subject of numerous media stories concerning the paternity actions of a man who raped a woman when she was 12-years-old and she became pregnant and ended up giving birth to a baby boy.

The Sanilac County Prosecutors Office states that paternity action was initiated by the Michigan Department of Human Services in July of 2017. It was the result of a twenty one year old woman who requested financial assistance and as a condition of receiving that assistance was advised  by MDHS that she was required to cooperate with pursuing paternity and support for her minor child.

The woman then went to the Sanilac County Prosecutor’s Office and completed and signed a paternity questionnaire in which she disclosed the alleged father’s name and address.  She further signed an agreement to cooperate with pursuing paternity and signed a statement authorizing the disclosure of her address.

The alleged father, Christopher Mirasolo, of Brown City, was contacted and given a copy of the complaint for paternity. He indicated that he would discuss the matter with an attorney. He later returned on August 16th, 2017, and requested a DNA test. Subsequently, all parties were tested, which determined that Mr. Mirasolo was the father of the boy.

A standard order that is used in all paternity cases was prepared and was given to Mr. Mirasolo, who indicated he would have it reviewed by his attorney. Later, Mr. Mirasolo returned with the order, signed by him, and he consented to its entry by the court. The Prosecutor’s Office also signed the order, as is their standard procedure. The order was then referred to the Friend of the Court on September 21st, 2017. On September 22nd the order was signed by the Court. The order further awarded the mother sole custody of the boy.

While the mother did request that the father not receive visitation, the order stated:

“Parenting time shall be as the parties agree. If they are unable to agree, either party may file a motion.”

The order is clear that, if the mother does not want the father to have visitation, she does not have to provide it.

The Sanilac County Prosecutor’s Office first received an appearance from Ms. Rebecca Kiessling the mother’s attorney, on September 28th, which was after the order had already been entered into by the Court. On October 6th, Ms. Kiessling filed a motion with the court to modify the order.

Based on the above facts, the Prosecutor’s Office wants to make the following points:

  1. The case was initiated by the mother asking for financial assistance from the MDHS;
  2. MDHS referred her to the Prosecutor’s Office to initiate a paternity action;
  3. Mr. Mirasolo never requested any determination of paternity, visitation, or custody; and
  4. also stated previously, the mother was not ordered to provide any visitation of any kind.

Further, it has been reported that Mr. Mirasolo has stipulated to the entry of an order agreeing to pay child support, but waiving all other rights to the child, which, if true, the Prosecutor’s Office fully supports.

Finally, as a result of this case, the Prosecutor’s Office will be conducting an internal review of policies and procedures as to how these matters are handled and will be making changes as deemed appropriate.

It would now seem that much of what attorney Rebecca Kiessling told the Detroit News and other media was incorrect based on the information that the Sanilac County Prosecutor’s Office released today.