We need to change the sex offender laws

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our priority as a society is to protect children. A 19 year old is an adult and a 14 year old is a child. A 14 year old is incapable of giving legal consent. We protect children by making it illegal for adults to have sex with them because children cannot give consent.

I am completely for protecting children through age of consent laws.

Yes, but the "child" knowingly misrepresented herself. Some how or another that needs to come into play in situations like this. The girl LIED. She knowingly and willingly had sex with him, but he's on the sex offenders list and his life is ruined. What about her? She played a part in ruining someone's life. This wasn't an "oops".. she lied.

It doesn't matter. Children sometimes lie and may seem to give consent but these laws are written because our society has made the decision to protect children. That's part of the point of statutory rape laws. In the context of this law, a 14 year old is a minor child who falls under the protection of the law. A 19 year old is an adult and breaks the law when he has sex with a 14 year old minor child.

Yes, you keep telling us what the "law" says. Many of us feel the law, in this instance, is wrong. In fact, the girl and her mother believe it is wrong. She knowingly and willingly deceived another person do that she could gave sex with him (he wasn't the only person trolling fir a partner here) and his life is ruined because she lied. Thus not an instance where an adult with full knowledge chose yo gave sex with a minor--clearly statutory rape. This is a case where the male believed them both to be consenting adults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our priority as a society is to protect children. A 19 year old is an adult and a 14 year old is a child. A 14 year old is incapable of giving legal consent. We protect children by making it illegal for adults to have sex with them because children cannot give consent.

I am completely for protecting children through age of consent laws.

Yes, but the "child" knowingly misrepresented herself. Some how or another that needs to come into play in situations like this. The girl LIED. She knowingly and willingly had sex with him, but he's on the sex offenders list and his life is ruined. What about her? She played a part in ruining someone's life. This wasn't an "oops".. she lied.

It doesn't matter. Children sometimes lie and may seem to give consent but these laws are written because our society has made the decision to protect children. That's part of the point of statutory rape laws. In the context of this law, a 14 year old is a minor child who falls under the protection of the law. A 19 year old is an adult and breaks the law when he has sex with a 14 year old minor child.

Yes, you keep telling us what the "law" says. Many of us feel the law, in this instance, is wrong. In fact, the girl and her mother believe it is wrong. She knowingly and willingly deceived another person do that she could gave sex with him (he wasn't the only person trolling fir a partner here) and his life is ruined because she lied. Thus not an instance where an adult with full knowledge chose yo gave sex with a minor--clearly statutory rape. This is a case where the male believed them both to be consenting adults.

In addition, there is an Act in Michigan for 1st time offenders that lessen the penalties but the judge chose not to impose them, even though, clearly the 17 yo had not intent on having sex with a 14 yo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Yes, you keep telling us what the "law" says. Many of us feel the law, in this instance, is wrong. In fact, the girl and her mother believe it is wrong. She knowingly and willingly deceived another person do that she could gave sex with him (he wasn't the only person trolling fir a partner here) and his life is ruined because she lied. Thus not an instance where an adult with full knowledge chose yo gave sex with a minor--clearly statutory rape. This is a case where the male believed them both to be consenting adults.

No. His life is ruined because he

1. had sex with a 14-year-old
2. got an incompetent judge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Yes, you keep telling us what the "law" says. Many of us feel the law, in this instance, is wrong. In fact, the girl and her mother believe it is wrong. She knowingly and willingly deceived another person do that she could gave sex with him (he wasn't the only person trolling fir a partner here) and his life is ruined because she lied. Thus not an instance where an adult with full knowledge chose yo gave sex with a minor--clearly statutory rape. This is a case where the male believed them both to be consenting adults.

No. His life is ruined because he

1. had sex with a 14-year-old
2. got an incompetent judge.

You think he would have had sex with a 14-yo if she had not lied and said she was 14?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Yes, you keep telling us what the "law" says. Many of us feel the law, in this instance, is wrong. In fact, the girl and her mother believe it is wrong. She knowingly and willingly deceived another person do that she could gave sex with him (he wasn't the only person trolling fir a partner here) and his life is ruined because she lied. Thus not an instance where an adult with full knowledge chose yo gave sex with a minor--clearly statutory rape. This is a case where the male believed them both to be consenting adults.

No. His life is ruined because he

1. had sex with a 14-year-old
2. got an incompetent judge.

You think he would have had sex with a 14-yo if she had not lied and said she was 14?

No. But so what? That's not what ruined his life. What ruined his life was breaking the law by having sex with a 14-year-old, which is illegal for a 19-year-old. There is no exception in the Indiana statutory rape laws where it's legal to have sex with a 14-year-old if the 14-year-old told you that they were 16. If you think that there should be such an exception, work to change the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Yes, you keep telling us what the "law" says. Many of us feel the law, in this instance, is wrong. In fact, the girl and her mother believe it is wrong. She knowingly and willingly deceived another person do that she could gave sex with him (he wasn't the only person trolling fir a partner here) and his life is ruined because she lied. Thus not an instance where an adult with full knowledge chose yo gave sex with a minor--clearly statutory rape. This is a case where the male believed them both to be consenting adults.

No. His life is ruined because he

1. had sex with a 14-year-old
2. got an incompetent judge.

You think he would have had sex with a 14-yo if she had not lied and said she was 14?

No. But so what? That's not what ruined his life. What ruined his life was breaking the law by having sex with a 14-year-old, which is illegal for a 19-year-old. There is no exception in the Indiana statutory rape laws where it's legal to have sex with a 14-year-old if the 14-year-old told you that they were 16. If you think that there should be such an exception, work to change the law.

He did not "intend" to have sex with a 14 year old. The 14 year old misrepresented (i.e., lied) her age. He is being held accountable for relying on her lies about her age and imho that is just wrong. I know drum loves to hate men, but this young man did not intend to "rape" anyone. He believed he was engaging in consensual sex. The messed up little bitch lied and ruined his life---and no I am not a man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The laws need to get with the times. A 14 year old should not be able to play a part in destroying someone's life and walk away without a consequence. A 14 year old knows lying is wrong.

Do you want to change the laws to make it illegal for people to lie? Or just illegal for minors to lie? Or just illegal for 14-year-olds to lie about their age to people who, if they choose to have sex with the 14-year-old, would be committing statutory rape?

Here's how to avoid having your life destroyed by a 14-year-old who lied about their age: only have sex with people who you know are of age. Also, don't believe everything people say about themselves on line.

Exactly.
This 19 year old man should have been very aware of how careful someone his age needs to be about avoiding this kind of situation with an underage minor. I have known many young adults who talk about avoiding underage kids for this reason; they might say it in a joking way, but they know about it. I know families who have discussed this with their young people when they turn 18. Just asking someone you've only met on the internet their age is simply not good enough. He was five years older than this girl, he should have known better.

Maybe he doesn't deserve to be listed on the registry for 25 years, but he does deserve consequences for his reckless behavior. A 19 year old young man should not walk away scot free from having sex with a 14 year minor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: He did not "intend" to have sex with a 14 year old. The 14 year old misrepresented (i.e., lied) her age. He is being held accountable for relying on her lies about her age and imho that is just wrong. I know drum loves to hate men, but this young man did not intend to "rape" anyone. He believed he was engaging in consensual sex. The messed up little bitch lied and ruined his life---and no I am not a man.

Nonetheless, that's what he did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: He did not "intend" to have sex with a 14 year old. The 14 year old misrepresented (i.e., lied) her age. He is being held accountable for relying on her lies about her age and imho that is just wrong. I know drum loves to hate men, but this young man did not intend to "rape" anyone. He believed he was engaging in consensual sex. The messed up little bitch lied and ruined his life---and no I am not a man.

Nonetheless, that's what he did.

yes, he did, so he deserves to be punished, but not be on the sex offender's list because he is not a child predator. I'm female, btw, and I think there are many women here who feel the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Yes, you keep telling us what the "law" says. Many of us feel the law, in this instance, is wrong. In fact, the girl and her mother believe it is wrong. She knowingly and willingly deceived another person do that she could gave sex with him (he wasn't the only person trolling fir a partner here) and his life is ruined because she lied. Thus not an instance where an adult with full knowledge chose yo gave sex with a minor--clearly statutory rape. This is a case where the male believed them both to be consenting adults.

No. His life is ruined because he

1. had sex with a 14-year-old
2. got an incompetent judge.

You think he would have had sex with a 14-yo if she had not lied and said she was 14?

No. But so what? That's not what ruined his life. What ruined his life was breaking the law by having sex with a 14-year-old, which is illegal for a 19-year-old. There is no exception in the Indiana statutory rape laws where it's legal to have sex with a 14-year-old if the 14-year-old told you that they were 16. If you think that there should be such an exception, work to change the law.

I don't need to change the law. Michigan has laws and acts in place that would have protected the boy from such a harsh punishment. The judge chose not to follow those guidelines. I think the judge was wrong. Are you saying that you believe the judge was correct in treating the boy this harshly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Yes, you keep telling us what the "law" says. Many of us feel the law, in this instance, is wrong. In fact, the girl and her mother believe it is wrong. She knowingly and willingly deceived another person do that she could gave sex with him (he wasn't the only person trolling fir a partner here) and his life is ruined because she lied. Thus not an instance where an adult with full knowledge chose yo gave sex with a minor--clearly statutory rape. This is a case where the male believed them both to be consenting adults.

No. His life is ruined because he

1. had sex with a 14-year-old
2. got an incompetent judge.

You think he would have had sex with a 14-yo if she had not lied and said she was 14?

No. But so what? That's not what ruined his life. What ruined his life was breaking the law by having sex with a 14-year-old, which is illegal for a 19-year-old. There is no exception in the Indiana statutory rape laws where it's legal to have sex with a 14-year-old if the 14-year-old told you that they were 16. If you think that there should be such an exception, work to change the law.

I don't need to change the law. Michigan has laws and acts in place that would have protected the boy from such a harsh punishment. The judge chose not to follow those guidelines. I think the judge was wrong. Are you saying that you believe the judge was correct in treating the boy this harshly?

So, in other words, what ruined the man's life (he's 19, he's not a boy) is the judge failing to follow the guidelines.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: He did not "intend" to have sex with a 14 year old. The 14 year old misrepresented (i.e., lied) her age. He is being held accountable for relying on her lies about her age and imho that is just wrong. I know drum loves to hate men, but this young man did not intend to "rape" anyone. He believed he was engaging in consensual sex. The messed up little bitch lied and ruined his life---and no I am not a man.

Nonetheless, that's what he did.

yes, he did, so he deserves to be punished, but not be on the sex offender's list because he is not a child predator. I'm female, btw, and I think there are many women here who feel the same.

No, but he is a sex offender. Statutory rape is a sex offense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Yes, you keep telling us what the "law" says. Many of us feel the law, in this instance, is wrong. In fact, the girl and her mother believe it is wrong. She knowingly and willingly deceived another person do that she could gave sex with him (he wasn't the only person trolling fir a partner here) and his life is ruined because she lied. Thus not an instance where an adult with full knowledge chose yo gave sex with a minor--clearly statutory rape. This is a case where the male believed them both to be consenting adults.

No. His life is ruined because he

1. had sex with a 14-year-old
2. got an incompetent judge.

You think he would have had sex with a 14-yo if she had not lied and said she was 14?

No. But so what? That's not what ruined his life. What ruined his life was breaking the law by having sex with a 14-year-old, which is illegal for a 19-year-old. There is no exception in the Indiana statutory rape laws where it's legal to have sex with a 14-year-old if the 14-year-old told you that they were 16. If you think that there should be such an exception, work to change the law.

I don't need to change the law. Michigan has laws and acts in place that would have protected the boy from such a harsh punishment. The judge chose not to follow those guidelines. I think the judge was wrong. Are you saying that you believe the judge was correct in treating the boy this harshly?

There was no "boy" involved in this case. There was a 19 year old adult male who had sex with a 14 year old minor female child. That action falls under the definition of statutory rape in that state.

It looks like the first time offender program you mention is one the judge "can" use, but is not required to use, depending on the facts before him. Maybe the judge has information about the case that we, the good folks on the internet, do not have. Not every fact about a case is made public, and it looks like the information available in the media is being put forth by the family of the young man, who obviously have reason to present only the facts that put their son in the best light possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Yes, you keep telling us what the "law" says. Many of us feel the law, in this instance, is wrong. In fact, the girl and her mother believe it is wrong. She knowingly and willingly deceived another person do that she could gave sex with him (he wasn't the only person trolling fir a partner here) and his life is ruined because she lied. Thus not an instance where an adult with full knowledge chose yo gave sex with a minor--clearly statutory rape. This is a case where the male believed them both to be consenting adults.

No. His life is ruined because he

1. had sex with a 14-year-old
2. got an incompetent judge.

You think he would have had sex with a 14-yo if she had not lied and said she was 14?

No. But so what? That's not what ruined his life. What ruined his life was breaking the law by having sex with a 14-year-old, which is illegal for a 19-year-old. There is no exception in the Indiana statutory rape laws where it's legal to have sex with a 14-year-old if the 14-year-old told you that they were 16. If you think that there should be such an exception, work to change the law.

I don't need to change the law. Michigan has laws and acts in place that would have protected the boy from such a harsh punishment. The judge chose not to follow those guidelines. I think the judge was wrong. Are you saying that you believe the judge was correct in treating the boy this harshly?

There was no "boy" involved in this case. There was a 19 year old adult male who had sex with a 14 year old minor female child. That action falls under the definition of statutory rape in that state.

It looks like the first time offender program you mention is one the judge "can" use, but is not required to use, depending on the facts before him. Maybe the judge has information about the case that we, the good folks on the internet, do not have. Not every fact about a case is made public, and it looks like the information available in the media is being put forth by the family of the young man, who obviously have reason to present only the facts that put their son in the best light possible.

The judge does not believe in 1 night stands.

That seems to be part of our culture now — meet, hook up, have sex, sayonara. Totally inappropriate behavior. There is no excuse for this whatsoever.”

[jsteele]

Since this thread was cross-posted, please continue the discussion in the other thread:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/490525.page