Nervous_Dog Posted July 7, 2007 Report Share Posted July 7, 2007 Yet bush can pardon Libby? Too bad the kid was a donation making republican Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted July 7, 2007 Report Share Posted July 7, 2007 http://www.avert.org/aofconsent.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YimSiam Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 Thanks YimSiam, but why make it 11? The girl is 15. If she were 11, I'm 100% the posts on here would have been hang the SOB if he were 17 when it happened. Are you making no distinction between someone 11 and someone 15 who is in high school? No one would want their 15 y.o. daughter engaging in consenual act, some wouldn't want their legal age daughter to as well. A lot of states have a 2 year difference in age rule. So that two kids playing doctor won't go to jail. I use 11 to highlight that the cut-off from the perspective of the state is 18, and that anyone below that is considered to have the same lack of capacity to give consent. The key is not at what point we find the act offensive personally, it's what the law says is okay and what it says is not okay. The issue that's more complicated to me is why she's not considered to be raping him - and my pretty uncertain guess is twofold: first, rape in Georgia is defined as penetration of the mouth, vagina or anus, and she didn't penetrate any part of him. And two, there's perhaps a difference between age of consent and age at which one may be legally liable for criminal activity - so while in the case of the victim, it's all about the age of consent, yet for the perpetrator, the standard is not whether he could consent, but rather whether he could form criminal intent. It's probably all explained in Flashermac's most likely useful link, which I haven't yet clicked through on - you'd understand if you had the same speed connection I do over here... cheers, YimSiam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YimSiam Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 Thanks YimSiam, but why make it 11? The girl is 15. If she were 11, I'm 100% the posts on here would have been hang the SOB if he were 17 when it happened. Are you making no distinction between someone 11 and someone 15 who is in high school? No one would want their 15 y.o. daughter engaging in consenual act, some wouldn't want their legal age daughter to as well. A lot of states have a 2 year difference in age rule. So that two kids playing doctor won't go to jail. I use 11 to highlight that the cut-off from the perspective of the state is 18, and that anyone below that is considered to have the same lack of capacity to give consent. The key is not at what point we find the act offensive personally, it's what the law says is okay and what it says is not okay. The issue that's more complicated to me is why she's not considered to be raping him - and my pretty uncertain guess is twofold: first, rape in Georgia is defined as penetration of the mouth, vagina or anus, and she didn't penetrate any part of him. And two, there's perhaps a difference between age of consent and age at which one may be legally liable for criminal activity - so while in the case of the victim, it's all about the age of consent, yet for the perpetrator, the standard is not whether he could consent, but rather whether he could form criminal intent. It's probably all explained in Flashermac's most likely useful link, which I haven't yet clicked through on - you'd understand if you had the same speed connection I do over here... Anyway, I don't disagree that the state probably prosecuted and sentenced in a way that reflected racial/racist considerations, and that when a law is later changed, it seems reasonable enough to review those cases incarcerated under the prior law. cheers, YimSiam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 9, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 But my argument is this. First there are lots crmes that the police don't report or prosecutors take to trial for a number of reasons. Crimes they would win in court. Is it your opinion that this 'crime' was right to be prosecuted? And you find the sentence just? If you're saying police and prosecutors should arrest and prosecute ALL crimes no matter how minor, then so be it. If not, then why should this one fall under the ones that should be prosecuted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sayjann Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 good sense Steve........ this 'crime' has not hurt anyone,just because it happens to fall in the grey area of age and suchlike does not make it the crime of the Century IMO. OK,i don't remember offhand the age of consent in different US States but what would happen if...... a Girl from North Dakota performs oral sex on a Guy while visiting South Dakota. in her home State she might be of legal age and therefore thought she was doing no wrong. would the Southies crucify her date for what she did?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 9, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 unfortunatley (or fortunately depending on your side of the issue) the law of the state which the 'crime' occured would take precedence and ignorance of the local laws is no defense as well. There is statutory rape in the context of the law that goes on in High Schools by the thousands each year as you have 18 year old seniors dating 17 and 16 y.o. classmates, usually with the consent of the parents who would then be a contributing to the 'rape' legally. The 18 y.o.'s are adults in the eyes of the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sayjann Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 'and ignorance of the local laws is no defense as well' that would certainly be a problem for someone like me. in the UK the sex issue is uniform.......16 Years for Hetrosexual sex. but if as a Brit i had sex with a 16 or 17 Y.O. Girl in certain states i would be branded a sex criminal. but 5 Miles up the road and across the State Line i would have done nothing wrong as the age limit might be different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 When I was a uni student it was in the news about some 20-ish guys who had been charged with rape in Southern Cal after they went to a brothel. Seems one of the hookers had lied about her age and was only 15. The cops found out who had shagged her and arrested the guys for statutory rape -- and they had paid a pro for it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YimSiam Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Well, well, seems the Supreme Court found this cruel and unusual and grossly disproportionate to the crime... Justice is served? At least he's out of prison, though you've got to imagine those are a few years that will dog the guy for the rest of his now badly-damaged life... http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/26/us/26cnd-georgia.html?ei=5087&em=&en=5338ce085ff64b09&ex=1193544000&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1193440228-8RAUa6ZagTsAuyauRFLxYg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.