13 yr old MD boy arrested on assault charges

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:teenagers dare each other to do stupid things all the time. There is now evidence that their brains don't even fully develop till their 25.

They're sexually curious and exploring their boundaries..its up to the parents and the school to discipline them, not throw the heavy justice system at them.

Girls do this kind of crap all the time too just as boys. I had another girl show me her breasts when we were 12 in the swimming pool.

Somebody else missing the basic difference between "something I do with my own body" and "something I do with your body".

Again, girls do this stuff too.

Let's hold them accountable in the same style as boys. Then we'll see how the DCUM mommies like their daughters getting screwed over.

When I was four years old I kept poking the boy I liked and was disicplined by the teacher. Now I'll probably be charged for sexual harassment.

Yes, let's hold the genders to the same standards. Throw the heavy book of the law at all of them. Let's criminalize our children instead of helping them navigate society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the hysterical posters in this thread just calls for us moving to a more socially conservative society...at this rate we should just segregate the genders like what the muslim world does.

Why such an outsized solution? A basic kindergarten rule would fix this problem: keep your hands to yourself.

Great! We'll make sure no man every touches YOU.

Sounds like a good plan.

My guess is that person who keeps posting this is a loser in his mama's basement who never gets laid. He's obsessed with no one touching women since he can't even get up the nerve to talk to one IRL.

[Anonymous]

because you see toddlers all keeping hands to themselves right? you mean they are not interacting with each other? Because kindergartners understand everything fully?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, and the really bad problem is that in 75% of the cases it is minority (African American) children that this happens to. We have an immense prison population in this country. Do we need to criminalize this kind of immature adolescent conduct in the name of feminism? My sisters, I understand your concern with sexual assault, but prison is not the answer.

Nobody is sending this thirteen-year-old to prison for this.

Really? Really?

https://news.vice.com/article/kalief-browder-teen-imprisoned-at-rikers-island-for-three-years-without-trial-dies-by-suicide

Yes, really. I don't think that this case is comparable to the case you link to.

DP. That case is worst than the one currently discussed. That person was jailed without due process for three years. There was no evidence to link him to a crime and the state eventually dropped the case. Much worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breasts are included sweetie. You can't whip them out unless you are breastfeeding. Otherwise the law says CRIME!

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/maryland-pol-ariana-kelly-charged-indecent-exposure-article-1.2293544

No, the law doesn't say that. You should find a more up-to-date and reliable source for your legal information.

You should learn how to read. Because the law does INDEED say that.

Where does the law say that? Could you provide a link, please? And not a NY Daily News article about an indecent exposure charge that was later dropped because the county prosecutor said that breasts do not constitute indecent exposure.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/prosecutors-drop-trespassing-exposure-charges-against-ariana-kelly/2015/07/21/1bd74302-2f20-11e5-8353-1215475949f4_story.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't want my DDs to feel social pressure to not report an assault because they are worried that the offender will be arrested. It is not the responsibility of the victim to bear this weight.

13 is old enough to know better than to do this. I hope he is transferred to a different school so she doesn't have to see him again.

Maybe along the way you can teach your DDs that they are not victims.

Well, their uncle has suggested arming them so they won't be.

What boy is ever going to even ask your girls out? It's a death sentence if they change their minds about even kissing them.

If a boy is afraid to ask an armed girl out, maybe she should wonder what he was planning.

In plenty areas of the U.S., girls have their own guns. My cousins out west do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breasts are included sweetie. You can't whip them out unless you are breastfeeding. Otherwise the law says CRIME!

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/maryland-pol-ariana-kelly-charged-indecent-exposure-article-1.2293544

No, the law doesn't say that. You should find a more up-to-date and reliable source for your legal information.

You should learn how to read. Because the law does INDEED say that.

Where does the law say that? Could you provide a link, please? And not a NY Daily News article about an indecent exposure charge that was later dropped because the county prosecutor said that breasts do not constitute indecent exposure.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/prosecutors-drop-trespassing-exposure-charges-against-ariana-kelly/2015/07/21/1bd74302-2f20-11e5-8353-1215475949f4_story.html

It's clearly written in the link above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breasts are included sweetie. You can't whip them out unless you are breastfeeding. Otherwise the law says CRIME!

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/maryland-pol-ariana-kelly-charged-indecent-exposure-article-1.2293544

No, the law doesn't say that. You should find a more up-to-date and reliable source for your legal information.

You do know that the Maryland law enforcement have arrested and charged women for indecent exposure for exposing their breasts. Maybe you need to get up to date on the legal information and times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yeah. I'm sure if a 13 year old boy whipped his dick out infront of a girl based on a dare, the dc urban mom forum will crucify him baying for him to be charged.

Crucify him? Is that really the verb you meant to use?

In any case, showing one's genitals actually can constitute indecent exposure, whereas showing one's breasts does not.

Maryland Criminal Law Code, Section 11-107: Indecent Exposure; Correctional Services Article, Section 8-803: Indecent Exposure by an Inmate What is Prohibited?
Maryland cases describe the main elements of indecent exposure as:
The willful and intentional exposure of one’s private parts (genitals, buttocks, or [b]female breasts[u])
In a public place and
In the presence of others.

yup...let's charge all our teens.

While this is off track, have you read what you even posted? You're quoting a statute about indecent exposure by an INMATE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Girls do this kind of shit all the time, but never get called out for it.

Some women want such a double standard. No man should ever touch you.

Really? where do girls do this all the time. I teach in a middle school. Gave for over a dozen years. Taught specials courses in summer camps for twenty years. I've never seen a girl grab a boy and French kiss him against his will.

My DH had the most popular girl in school show him her boobies on a dare from her classmates after school when they were 13.

I guess by today's standards she's a sexual offender too.

Are you a 12 year old? WTF.

Oh here comes the grammar vernacular slang nazi.

Redundant (vernacular and slang) + the word "boobies" is neither vernacular nor slang. (Who would say that boobies is slang for breasts?) It is odd coming from an assumed adult. Do you use that word in conversation with others? Do you boobie feed your babies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yeah. I'm sure if a 13 year old boy whipped his dick out infront of a girl based on a dare, the dc urban mom forum will crucify him baying for him to be charged.

Crucify him? Is that really the verb you meant to use?

In any case, showing one's genitals actually can constitute indecent exposure, whereas showing one's breasts does not.

Maryland Criminal Law Code, Section 11-107: Indecent Exposure; Correctional Services Article, Section 8-803: Indecent Exposure by an Inmate What is Prohibited?
Maryland cases describe the main elements of indecent exposure as:
The willful and intentional exposure of one’s private parts (genitals, buttocks, or [b]female breasts[u])
In a public place and
In the presence of others.

yup...let's charge all our teens.

While this is off track, have you read what you even posted? You're quoting a statute about indecent exposure by an INMATE.

Keep reading old wise one. Somebody posted a link to a MD Delegate being charged with indecent exposure for flashing her husband. She was outside her home and not in Jessup. Shit happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Keep reading old wise one. Somebody posted a link to a MD Delegate being charged with indecent exposure for flashing her husband. She was outside her home and not in Jessup. Shit happens.

And then happened next? THE PROSECUTOR DROPPED THE CHARGE BECAUSE BREASTS DON'T CONSTITUTE INDECENT EXPOSURE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yeah. I'm sure if a 13 year old boy whipped his dick out infront of a girl based on a dare, the dc urban mom forum will crucify him baying for him to be charged.

Crucify him? Is that really the verb you meant to use?

In any case, showing one's genitals actually can constitute indecent exposure, whereas showing one's breasts does not.

Maryland Criminal Law Code, Section 11-107: Indecent Exposure; Correctional Services Article, Section 8-803: Indecent Exposure by an Inmate What is Prohibited?
Maryland cases describe the main elements of indecent exposure as:
The willful and intentional exposure of one’s private parts (genitals, buttocks, or [b]female breasts[u])
In a public place and
In the presence of others.

yup...let's charge all our teens.

While this is off track, have you read what you even posted? You're quoting a statute about indecent exposure by an INMATE.

Keep reading old wise one. Somebody posted a link to a MD Delegate being charged with indecent exposure for flashing her husband. She was outside her home and not in Jessup. Shit happens.

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about YOU (oh, wise one) quoting a statute that is completely irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Keep reading old wise one. Somebody posted a link to a MD Delegate being charged with indecent exposure for flashing her husband. She was outside her home and not in Jessup. Shit happens.

And then happened next? THE PROSECUTOR DROPPED THE CHARGE BECAUSE BREASTS DON'T CONSTITUTE INDECENT EXPOSURE.

Yeah, not what happened.


http://naturistaction.org/StatesFrames/State_Laws_Frames/Maryland_Laws/body_maryland_laws.html

(d) Sexual conduct.- "Sexual conduct" means:

(1) human masturbation;
(2) sexual intercourse; or
(3) whether alone or with another individual or animal, any touching of or contact with:

(i) the genitals, buttocks, or pubic areas of an individual; or
(ii) breasts of a female individual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yeah. I'm sure if a 13 year old boy whipped his dick out infront of a girl based on a dare, the dc urban mom forum will crucify him baying for him to be charged.

Crucify him? Is that really the verb you meant to use?

In any case, showing one's genitals actually can constitute indecent exposure, whereas showing one's breasts does not.

Maryland Criminal Law Code, Section 11-107: Indecent Exposure; Correctional Services Article, Section 8-803: Indecent Exposure by an Inmate What is Prohibited?
Maryland cases describe the main elements of indecent exposure as:
The willful and intentional exposure of one’s private parts (genitals, buttocks, or [b]female breasts[u])
In a public place and
In the presence of others.

yup...let's charge all our teens.

While this is off track, have you read what you even posted? You're quoting a statute about indecent exposure by an INMATE.

Keep reading old wise one. Somebody posted a link to a MD Delegate being charged with indecent exposure for flashing her husband. She was outside her home and not in Jessup. Shit happens.

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about YOU (oh, wise one) quoting a statute that is completely irrelevant.

I didn't quote the statute, but in defense of the person that did BFD. Maybe s/he is not an attorney familiar with statutes, but was correct on the facts that in MD one can be charged and convicted for exposing one's breast. It matters not that the SAO in Montgomery County chooses to ignore the statute when the SAO in Washington or Garrett County would not. It's a criminal offense in the state of Maryland.