You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.
#11. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Jul 20, 201014Year Member
Posts: 4,926
Reputation Power: 212
Status: Offline
Joined: Jul 20, 201014Year Member
Posts: 4,926
Reputation Power: 212
Mickers wroteEducate wrote If he was 19 and was going to have sex with a 17 year old he should have knew that it was illegal anyway so he's in the wrong.
I don't understand how it is rape when she agreed to it? Shouldn't it be classed as sex with a minor?
(I live in the UK and we may have different laws.)
But yeah his life is basically ruined now.. good luck explaining that to a potential employer.
In the UK you're allowed to have sex after 16. So surely he is not in the wrong?
I thought if you were 18 you couldn't have sex with anybody under 18? I'm not sure to be honest..
Either way he should have been let off.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#12. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Feb 04, 201014Year Member
Posts: 1,439
Reputation Power: 93
Either way he was sorta in the wrong, but to get shotdown twice in one sitting, thats cruel. As for rape, i'd probably say that's a little strong in she actually consented to it.
- 1useful
- 0not useful
#13. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Nov 07, 201212Year Member
Posts: 3,732
Reputation Power: 362
Status: Offline
Joined: Nov 07, 201212Year Member
Posts: 3,732
Reputation Power: 362
I think the whole 'Not allowed on computers or for life' thing is the most severe punishment.
Most jobs today involve computers, and most employers would expect you to be able to get in contact via e-mail.
In the future things are going to become increasingly computer based. How do they expect him to be a functioning member of society if he can't even get on a computer?
I would say that goes under 'cruel and unusual' punishment, but that's just me.
I don't think it is:
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
Most jobs today involve computers, and most employers would expect you to be able to get in contact via e-mail.
In the future things are going to become increasingly computer based. How do they expect him to be a functioning member of society if he can't even get on a computer?
I would say that goes under 'cruel and unusual' punishment, but that's just me.
Miss wrote Here in the U.S., the age of consent is 18 for the most part, with a few exceptions. Unfortunately for this gentlemen, Michigan's law is 18.
I don't think it is:
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
- 4useful
- 0not useful
#14. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Jan 12, 201113Year Member
Posts: 11,617
Reputation Power: 654
Status: Offline
Joined: Jan 12, 201113Year Member
Posts: 11,617
Reputation Power: 654
ManWithNoName wrote I think the whole 'Not allowed on computers or for life' thing is the most severe punishment.
Most jobs today involve computers, and most employers would expect you to be able to get in contact via e-mail.
In the future things are going to become increasingly computer based. How do they expect him to be a functioning member of society if he can't even get on a computer?
I would say that goes under 'cruel and unusual' punishment, but that's just me.
Miss wrote Here in the U.S., the age of consent is 18 for the most part, with a few exceptions. Unfortunately for this gentlemen, Michigan's law is 18.
I don't think it is:
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
You're right.
They also don't allow the "Mistake of Age" defense.
- 2useful
- 0not useful
#15. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Nov 07, 201212Year Member
Posts: 3,732
Reputation Power: 362
Status: Offline
Joined: Nov 07, 201212Year Member
Posts: 3,732
Reputation Power: 362
Miss wroteManWithNoName wrote I think the whole 'Not allowed on computers or for life' thing is the most severe punishment.
Most jobs today involve computers, and most employers would expect you to be able to get in contact via e-mail.
In the future things are going to become increasingly computer based. How do they expect him to be a functioning member of society if he can't even get on a computer?
I would say that goes under 'cruel and unusual' punishment, but that's just me.
Miss wrote Here in the U.S., the age of consent is 18 for the most part, with a few exceptions. Unfortunately for this gentlemen, Michigan's law is 18.
I don't think it is:
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
You're right.
They also don't allow the "Mistake of Age" defense.
I was just about to get on to that. It's a pretty silly rule, but they should always look at intent.
If a law doesn't exist which is the equivalent of child neglect as opposed to child abuse if there is a mistake about age in a 'rape case' they should definitely invent one.
The recent California case of People v. Hernandez brings into
question the validity of the rule that mistake as to the age of the
female is no defense. The defendant was charged with statutory rape.s
During the trial the defendant attempted to present evidence that he
had a reasonable good faith belief the girl was over eighteen years
old. The trial court's refusal to allow the introduction of this evidence
was the sole grounds for appeal. The Supreme Court of California
in a unanimous decision held that it was improper to exclude
this offer of proof. The conviction was reversed, and the sixty-eight
year old precedent of People v. Ratz9 was overruled. The basis for the
decision was the application of the defense of mistake of fact to the
crime of statutory rape. "[I]f he participates in a mutual act of sexual
intercourse, believing his partner to be beyond the age of consent, with
reasonable grounds for such belief, where is his criminal intent?"' 0
"[I]n the absence of a legislative direction otherwise, a charge of statutory
rape is defensible wherein a criminal intent is lacking."" The
court, feeling that the previous decisions in California did not give
proper emphasis to intent, reasserted the necessity and importance of
establishing intent.
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
question the validity of the rule that mistake as to the age of the
female is no defense. The defendant was charged with statutory rape.s
During the trial the defendant attempted to present evidence that he
had a reasonable good faith belief the girl was over eighteen years
old. The trial court's refusal to allow the introduction of this evidence
was the sole grounds for appeal. The Supreme Court of California
in a unanimous decision held that it was improper to exclude
this offer of proof. The conviction was reversed, and the sixty-eight
year old precedent of People v. Ratz9 was overruled. The basis for the
decision was the application of the defense of mistake of fact to the
crime of statutory rape. "[I]f he participates in a mutual act of sexual
intercourse, believing his partner to be beyond the age of consent, with
reasonable grounds for such belief, where is his criminal intent?"' 0
"[I]n the absence of a legislative direction otherwise, a charge of statutory
rape is defensible wherein a criminal intent is lacking."" The
court, feeling that the previous decisions in California did not give
proper emphasis to intent, reasserted the necessity and importance of
establishing intent.
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
So we know that other states are doing this, Michigan just needs to catch up.
Last edited by ProfessorNobody ; edited 1 time in total
- 1useful
- 0not useful
#16. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Feb 04, 201014Year Member
Posts: 1,439
Reputation Power: 93
So basically, don't forget to ask for ID before sleeping someone otherwise you're gonna get **** over by the law, if she's actually under age. I believe there should be some sort of defense for someone making this mistake. It's stupid..
- 4useful
- 0not useful
#17. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Jan 09, 201410Year Member
Posts: 5,409
Reputation Power: 735
Status: Offline
Joined: Jan 09, 201410Year Member
Posts: 5,409
Reputation Power: 735
Got to feel bad for him they both went in it together now his life is pretty much over.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#18. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 18, 201113Year Member
Posts: 3,025
Reputation Power: 134
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 18, 201113Year Member
Posts: 3,025
Reputation Power: 134
WizKhxlifa wroteMickers wroteThat is exactly what I was thinking.. Hmm.Educate wrote If he was 19 and was going to have sex with a 17 year old he should have knew that it was illegal anyway so he's in the wrong.
I don't understand how it is rape when she agreed to it? Shouldn't it be classed as sex with a minor?
(I live in the UK and we may have different laws.)
But yeah his life is basically ruined now.. good luck explaining that to a potential employer.
In the UK you're allowed to have sex after 16. So surely he is not in the wrong?
Age of consent in Texas, USA is 17. He could've been 40 and her 17 but, in Texas, it would've been legal unless it was actual Rape. However, in this case, it should've went towards him. He was on an adult site. Shouldn't be charged for that. Most 14 y/o girls look about that age either way, you know.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#19. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Jan 09, 201311Year Member
Posts: 1,444
Reputation Power: 74
Status: Offline
Joined: Jan 09, 201311Year Member
Posts: 1,444
Reputation Power: 74
#20. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 30, 201212Year Member
Posts: 5,468
Reputation Power: 245
I totally understand being strict when it comes to the age of consent, but this is a ridiculous story. After what the girl and mom said, it should have been determined there that the charges should be dropped. If anyone in this story needs some type of punishment (and I hope it remains a small one), it is the girl. Terrible story.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.