13 yr old MD boy arrested on assault charges

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine that your wife comes home and says that a male coworker stuck his tongue in her mouth on a dare from a friend. Their boss suspends him for a week without pay. Is that good enough for you? It'll teach him a lesson, right? The other male employees should be deterred by seeing how he was punished? Why would you and your wife still be upset? No need to get the police involved.

What is the relevance to a 13 year old child?

Does the age of the victim (14) mean that she deserves less justice?

Maybe we should have a sliding scale of victimhood cause "boys will be boys" after all...

You're probably hoping she'll just forget about the whole thing over time anyway? And she's not anyone's wife yet, so it's not like some man should feel violated.

We don't base punishment on the age of the victim, we base it on the age of the offender and the offender's cognitive abilities and maturity. I don't know what you are going on about with "boys will be boys" and "she'll forget." Frankly, you sound a little deranged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes -- sexual assault is unacceptable. But why can't a suspension deliver that message? Why can't his parents? Why jail?

Jail? It's unlikely that a juvenile assault charge would land him in jail.

It's also not a "sexual assault" it is a "physical assault"... legally... it is second degree assault.

[Anonymous]

I think there should be some sort of in between. He didn't just run up and buss this girl on the cheek, he grabbed her shirt and put his tongue in her mouth!

It kind of sounds like one of those situations where he got hyped up and took this way too far. But I don't think he should go to jail - not sure how I even feel about charges. Maybe some type of mandated long term counseling, including appropriate sexual behavior, not being swayed by the crowd, etc?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine that your wife comes home and says that a male coworker stuck his tongue in her mouth on a dare from a friend. Their boss suspends him for a week without pay. Is that good enough for you? It'll teach him a lesson, right? The other male employees should be deterred by seeing how he was punished? Why would you and your wife still be upset? No need to get the police involved.

What is the relevance to a 13 year old child?

Does the age of the victim (14) mean that she deserves less justice?

Maybe we should have a sliding scale of victimhood cause "boys will be boys" after all...

You're probably hoping she'll just forget about the whole thing over time anyway? And she's not anyone's wife yet, so it's not like some man should feel violated.

We don't base punishment on the age of the victim, we base it on the age of the offender and the offender's cognitive abilities and maturity. I don't know what you are going on about with "boys will be boys" and "she'll forget." Frankly, you sound a little deranged.

Different poster here: Apparently those that feel the kid should have a permanent record and criminal conviction over this, seem to also think that those of us who don't think the punishment needs to be so severe to damage him in many aspects for LIFE are saying that he doesn't deserve any punishment. No one has ever said that boys will be boys, this was harmless, she'll just forget it, etc. What we're saying is if a kid with the cognitive abilities of a 13 year old does something stupid that like this, he SHOULD be punished but not in a way that will haunt him from here on out. Would you want him to have to register as a sex offender for life over this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine that your wife comes home and says that a male coworker stuck his tongue in her mouth on a dare from a friend. Their boss suspends him for a week without pay. Is that good enough for you? It'll teach him a lesson, right? The other male employees should be deterred by seeing how he was punished? Why would you and your wife still be upset? No need to get the police involved.

What is the relevance to a 13 year old child?

Does the age of the victim (14) mean that she deserves less justice?

Maybe we should have a sliding scale of victimhood cause "boys will be boys" after all...

You're probably hoping she'll just forget about the whole thing over time anyway? And she's not anyone's wife yet, so it's not like some man should feel violated.

We don't base punishment on the age of the victim, we base it on the age of the offender and the offender's cognitive abilities and maturity. I don't know what you are going on about with "boys will be boys" and "she'll forget." Frankly, you sound a little deranged.

Different poster here: Apparently those that feel the kid should have a permanent record and criminal conviction over this, seem to also think that those of us who don't think the punishment needs to be so severe to damage him in many aspects for LIFE are saying that he doesn't deserve any punishment. No one has ever said that boys will be boys, this was harmless, she'll just forget it, etc. What we're saying is if a kid with the cognitive abilities of a 13 year old does something stupid that like this, he SHOULD be punished but not in a way that will haunt him from here on out. Would you want him to have to register as a sex offender for life over this?

No, but suspension is too little. This isn't a school level matter any more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Different poster here: Apparently those that feel the kid should have a permanent record and criminal conviction over this, seem to also think that those of us who don't think the punishment needs to be so severe to damage him in many aspects for LIFE are saying that he doesn't deserve any punishment. No one has ever said that boys will be boys, this was harmless, she'll just forget it, etc. What we're saying is if a kid with the cognitive abilities of a 13 year old does something stupid that like this, he SHOULD be punished but not in a way that will haunt him from here on out. Would you want him to have to register as a sex offender for life over this?

You're making it sound like he's getting charged as an adult with sexual assault. Whereas he's actually getting charged as a juvenile with just plain assault.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do I think he needs a criminal juvenile record so for his lifetime he has to answer yes, he has been charged with a crime, whenever he fills out a job application, even 30 years from now? No. And yes, I have a daughter.

The job applications don't ask whether a person has ever been charged with a crime. They ask whether a person has been convicted of a crime. And yes, I support banning this question from job applications.

http://www.nelp.org/publication/ban-the-box-fair-chance-hiring-state-and-local-guide/

NP. Some places of employment ask "if you have ever been arrested". That question should disappear entirely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Juveniles are charged with a "delinquent act." Adults are charged with a "crime." The processes are different and juvenile charges cannot be held against an adult later in life.

NP. Well that is definitely not true. Have you ever practiced criminal law in the juvenile courts. I have. In Florida at least, if a person is charged as an adult at anytime, the courts can go back three years into the juvenile record for inclusion in the computation of a crime. Therefore, if this action was committed in Florida and the boy committed no other crime until he turned 16 and committed a misdemeanor petty theft and charged as an adult or juvenile, the sexual assault is included as a prior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Juveniles are charged with a "delinquent act." Adults are charged with a "crime." The processes are different and juvenile charges cannot be held against an adult later in life.

"Held against?" That's not correct. They can certainly be used as a basis to deny a job, deny certain admissions to schools or even to obtain a license late (law license, medical license, drivers license.)

No, they can't. Juvenile records are automatically sealed in Maryland upon termination of the court's jurisdiction. You don't have to petition for it. And then they are destroyed after 12 years. When employers run a record check, it does not show up. And, if you get your record expunged, then it's actually a criminal offense for an employer or a school to fire you, not hire you, or not admit you to the school, solely due to the expunged charges.

Wrong on so many levels.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Imagine that your wife comes home and says that a male coworker stuck his tongue in her mouth on a dare from a friend. Their boss suspends him for a week without pay. Is that good enough for you? It'll teach him a lesson, right? The other male employees should be deterred by seeing how he was punished? Why would you and your wife still be upset? No need to get the police involved.

I hope you understand that a 13 year old boy's brain along with reasoning has not fully developed. How sweet of you to compare a 13 year old preteen to a grown ass man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes -- sexual assault is unacceptable. But why can't a suspension deliver that message? Why can't his parents? Why jail?

Jail? It's unlikely that a juvenile assault charge would land him in jail.

Of course not jail. But, it could land him in a juvenile detention center, which is equivalent to jail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Juveniles are charged with a "delinquent act." Adults are charged with a "crime." The processes are different and juvenile charges cannot be held against an adult later in life.

NP. Well that is definitely not true. Have you ever practiced criminal law in the juvenile courts. I have. In Florida at least, if a person is charged as an adult at anytime, the courts can go back three years into the juvenile record for inclusion in the computation of a crime. Therefore, if this action was committed in Florida and the boy committed no other crime until he turned 16 and committed a misdemeanor petty theft and charged as an adult or juvenile, the sexual assault is included as a prior.

So the thirteen-year-old shouldn't be charged with assault (not sexual assault; just plain assault) now because if he goes on to commit a misdemeanor (like petty theft) when he is sixteen and is charged as an adult, then the assault he committed as a thirteen-year-old would be part of the misdemeanor proceedings?

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Juveniles are charged with a "delinquent act." Adults are charged with a "crime." The processes are different and juvenile charges cannot be held against an adult later in life.

"Held against?" That's not correct. They can certainly be used as a basis to deny a job, deny certain admissions to schools or even to obtain a license late (law license, medical license, drivers license.)

No, they can't. Juvenile records are automatically sealed in Maryland upon termination of the court's jurisdiction. You don't have to petition for it. And then they are destroyed after 12 years. When employers run a record check, it does not show up. And, if you get your record expunged, then it's actually a criminal offense for an employer or a school to fire you, not hire you, or not admit you to the school, solely due to the expunged charges.

Wrong on so many levels.

No it's not wrong. It's in Maryalnd code. The Criminal Procedure article. Look it up.