Will Anthony Weiner get his 10 years in Prison?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He doesn't deserve prison for this. The girl he texted with was off a stint of pursing a teacher, and sought out Weinber.
Just like his other bims, she and her folks sold the story to a tabloid. He should have to register as a sex offender, which is life-ending for him, and ended his marriage and will mess with his custody, but prison is ridiculous.

I don't understand your point. Why doesn't he deserve prison time? I used to be a teacher. Several underage girls came on to me. That makes no difference. I was supposed to be the mature one. I would have deserved prison if I had taken any of these girls up on their offers.

If you take them up on their offer yes but weiner didnt touch the girl. He was also sexting several other older women when he flirted with this one. Also if the girl was acting like an adult drinking and sexing she is more likely to make immoral choices than an adult who does not.

You are talking about things the girl did that, you feel, make her partially responsible for Weiner's behaviour and thus, you seem to feel, that sonce she is partially responsible, Weiner doesn't deserve harsher or any punishment.

Most sexual crimes involving minors don't work on the theory of "contributory negligence" (which is reallly a concept that applies more to torts than crimes anyway). The basic understanding in the law is that minors do not have the capacity for informed consent to certain sexual behaviours. For example, possession of a naked picture of a minor is child porn whether or not the minor consented to the taking and giving of the photo, i.e. that even their apparent willing involvement cannot be read as "consent". Some crimes are "statutory" in the sense that they do not require an analysis of intent or consent. It's straight up, if you do the crime you get the time. Soliciting a minor online is such a crime.

Some sexual behaviour the law does think a minor can consent to - sex above a certain age but below age of majority as long as the partner is within 4 years. There are lots of reasons the law views this as OK. But deciding a 16 y.o. is be able to consent to sex with a 20 y.o. is far different than sexual talk between a 16 yo and a 50 yo. Legally, we say that the 50 yo is really the one in that situation who has the burden to turn away the minor, no matter how manipulative, enticing or willing. Because as a community we say that the 50 yo is capable of knowing his duty and acting on it, whereas the minor is not old enough to make rational jusgments and act on them.

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
He doesn't deserve prison for this. The girl he texted with was off a stint of pursing a teacher, and sought out Weinber.
Just like his other bims, she and her folks sold the story to a tabloid. He should have to register as a sex offender, which is life-ending for him, and ended his marriage and will mess with his custody, but prison is ridiculous.


I don't understand your point. Why doesn't he deserve prison time? I used to be a teacher. Several underage girls came on to me. That makes no difference. I was supposed to be the mature one. I would have deserved prison if I had taken any of these girls up on their offers.


If you take them up on their offer yes but weiner didnt touch the girl. He was also sexting several other older women when he flirted with this one. Also if the girl was acting like an adult drinking and sexing she is more likely to make immoral choices than an adult who does not.


You are talking about things the girl did that, you feel, make her partially responsible for Weiner's behaviour and thus, you seem to feel, that sonce she is partially responsible, Weiner doesn't deserve harsher or any punishment.

Most sexual crimes involving minors don't work on the theory of "contributory negligence" (which is reallly a concept that applies more to torts than crimes anyway). The basic understanding in the law is that minors do not have the capacity for informed consent to certain sexual behaviours. For example, possession of a naked picture of a minor is child porn whether or not the minor consented to the taking and giving of the photo, i.e. that even their apparent willing involvement cannot be read as "consent". Some crimes are "statutory" in the sense that they do not require an analysis of intent or consent. It's straight up, if you do the crime you get the time. Soliciting a minor online is such a crime.

Some sexual behaviour the law does think a minor can consent to - sex above a certain age but below age of majority as long as the partner is within 4 years. There are lots of reasons the law views this as OK. But deciding a 16 y.o. is be able to consent to sex with a 20 y.o. is far different than sexual talk between a 16 yo and a 50 yo. Legally, we say that the 50 yo is really the one in that situation who has the burden to turn away the minor, no matter how manipulative, enticing or willing. Because as a community we say that the 50 yo is capable of knowing his duty and acting on it, whereas the minor is not old enough to make rational jusgments and act on them.



True. When I was 13 I was sexually harassed by a 70 yr old. All he got by the liberal judge was a restraining order which was kind of hard to follow considering he was a next door neighbor! The judge just excused him as feeling he was too old and that his culture (asian) was different and that they didn't allow that here. However when I was sexually harassed I wore a thick sweater and high waist jeans. The 16 yr old girl in this case dressed sexy and asked weiner to skype with her after finding out about his sexting scandal with pornstar sydney leathers and flirted with him. Now he gets 20 years without never touching her and her provoking him. Correct me if i'm wrong but that just doesn't make sense despite what the weirdo system dictates is legal or not.

Don't forget that Weiner is a serial on-line predator; this same behavior:

-cost him his congressional seat,
-cost him a near-certain win as mayor of NYC, and
-cost the USA HRC as president.

And he reached a plea deal on "friendly" (ie - overwhelmingly democrat) territory; the AUSA had no room within the law to cut Weiner any further breaks.

He brought all of this on himself; don't pity him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He doesn't deserve prison for this. The girl he texted with was off a stint of pursing a teacher, and sought out Weinber.
Just like his other bims, she and her folks sold the story to a tabloid. He should have to register as a sex offender, which is life-ending for him, and ended his marriage and will mess with his custody, but prison is ridiculous.

I don't understand your point. Why doesn't he deserve prison time? I used to be a teacher. Several underage girls came on to me. That makes no difference. I was supposed to be the mature one. I would have deserved prison if I had taken any of these girls up on their offers.

If you take them up on their offer yes but weiner didnt touch the girl. He was also sexting several other older women when he flirted with this one. Also if the girl was acting like an adult drinking and sexing she is more likely to make immoral choices than an adult who does not.

You are talking about things the girl did that, you feel, make her partially responsible for Weiner's behaviour and thus, you seem to feel, that sonce she is partially responsible, Weiner doesn't deserve harsher or any punishment.

Most sexual crimes involving minors don't work on the theory of "contributory negligence" (which is reallly a concept that applies more to torts than crimes anyway). The basic understanding in the law is that minors do not have the capacity for informed consent to certain sexual behaviours. For example, possession of a naked picture of a minor is child porn whether or not the minor consented to the taking and giving of the photo, i.e. that even their apparent willing involvement cannot be read as "consent". Some crimes are "statutory" in the sense that they do not require an analysis of intent or consent. It's straight up, if you do the crime you get the time. Soliciting a minor online is such a crime.

Some sexual behaviour the law does think a minor can consent to - sex above a certain age but below age of majority as long as the partner is within 4 years. There are lots of reasons the law views this as OK. But deciding a 16 y.o. is be able to consent to sex with a 20 y.o. is far different than sexual talk between a 16 yo and a 50 yo. Legally, we say that the 50 yo is really the one in that situation who has the burden to turn away the minor, no matter how manipulative, enticing or willing. Because as a community we say that the 50 yo is capable of knowing his duty and acting on it, whereas the minor is not old enough to make rational jusgments and act on them.

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
He doesn't deserve prison for this. The girl he texted with was off a stint of pursing a teacher, and sought out Weinber.
Just like his other bims, she and her folks sold the story to a tabloid. He should have to register as a sex offender, which is life-ending for him, and ended his marriage and will mess with his custody, but prison is ridiculous.


I don't understand your point. Why doesn't he deserve prison time? I used to be a teacher. Several underage girls came on to me. That makes no difference. I was supposed to be the mature one. I would have deserved prison if I had taken any of these girls up on their offers.


If you take them up on their offer yes but weiner didnt touch the girl. He was also sexting several other older women when he flirted with this one. Also if the girl was acting like an adult drinking and sexing she is more likely to make immoral choices than an adult who does not.


You are talking about things the girl did that, you feel, make her partially responsible for Weiner's behaviour and thus, you seem to feel, that sonce she is partially responsible, Weiner doesn't deserve harsher or any punishment.

Most sexual crimes involving minors don't work on the theory of "contributory negligence" (which is reallly a concept that applies more to torts than crimes anyway). The basic understanding in the law is that minors do not have the capacity for informed consent to certain sexual behaviours. For example, possession of a naked picture of a minor is child porn whether or not the minor consented to the taking and giving of the photo, i.e. that even their apparent willing involvement cannot be read as "consent". Some crimes are "statutory" in the sense that they do not require an analysis of intent or consent. It's straight up, if you do the crime you get the time. Soliciting a minor online is such a crime.

Some sexual behaviour the law does think a minor can consent to - sex above a certain age but below age of majority as long as the partner is within 4 years. There are lots of reasons the law views this as OK. But deciding a 16 y.o. is be able to consent to sex with a 20 y.o. is far different than sexual talk between a 16 yo and a 50 yo. Legally, we say that the 50 yo is really the one in that situation who has the burden to turn away the minor, no matter how manipulative, enticing or willing. Because as a community we say that the 50 yo is capable of knowing his duty and acting on it, whereas the minor is not old enough to make rational jusgments and act on them.



True. When I was 13 I was sexually harassed by a 70 yr old. All he got by the liberal judge was a restraining order which was kind of hard to follow considering he was a next door neighbor! The judge just excused him as feeling he was too old and that his culture (asian) was different and that they didn't allow that here. However when I was sexually harassed I wore a thick sweater and high waist jeans. The 16 yr old girl in this case dressed sexy and asked weiner to skype with her after finding out about his sexting scandal with pornstar sydney leathers and flirted with him. Now he gets 20 years without never touching her and her provoking him. Correct me if i'm wrong but that just doesn't make sense despite what the weirdo system dictates is legal or not.

Don't forget that Weiner is a serial on-line predator; this same behavior:

-cost him his congressional seat,
-cost him a near-certain win as mayor of NYC, and
-cost the USA HRC as president.

And he reached a plea deal on "friendly" (ie - overwhelmingly democrat) territory; the AUSA had no room within the law to cut Weiner any further breaks.

He brought all of this on himself; don't pity him.

Exactly. Chuck Schumer must feel like a fool for helping Anthony Weiner Head early on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He doesn't deserve prison for this. The girl he texted with was off a stint of pursing a teacher, and sought out Weinber.
Just like his other bims, she and her folks sold the story to a tabloid. He should have to register as a sex offender, which is life-ending for him, and ended his marriage and will mess with his custody, but prison is ridiculous.

I don't understand your point. Why doesn't he deserve prison time? I used to be a teacher. Several underage girls came on to me. That makes no difference. I was supposed to be the mature one. I would have deserved prison if I had taken any of these girls up on their offers.

If you take them up on their offer yes but weiner didnt touch the girl. He was also sexting several other older women when he flirted with this one. Also if the girl was acting like an adult drinking and sexing she is more likely to make immoral choices than an adult who does not.

You are talking about things the girl did that, you feel, make her partially responsible for Weiner's behaviour and thus, you seem to feel, that sonce she is partially responsible, Weiner doesn't deserve harsher or any punishment.

Most sexual crimes involving minors don't work on the theory of "contributory negligence" (which is reallly a concept that applies more to torts than crimes anyway). The basic understanding in the law is that minors do not have the capacity for informed consent to certain sexual behaviours. For example, possession of a naked picture of a minor is child porn whether or not the minor consented to the taking and giving of the photo, i.e. that even their apparent willing involvement cannot be read as "consent". Some crimes are "statutory" in the sense that they do not require an analysis of intent or consent. It's straight up, if you do the crime you get the time. Soliciting a minor online is such a crime.

Some sexual behaviour the law does think a minor can consent to - sex above a certain age but below age of majority as long as the partner is within 4 years. There are lots of reasons the law views this as OK. But deciding a 16 y.o. is be able to consent to sex with a 20 y.o. is far different than sexual talk between a 16 yo and a 50 yo. Legally, we say that the 50 yo is really the one in that situation who has the burden to turn away the minor, no matter how manipulative, enticing or willing. Because as a community we say that the 50 yo is capable of knowing his duty and acting on it, whereas the minor is not old enough to make rational jusgments and act on them.

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
He doesn't deserve prison for this. The girl he texted with was off a stint of pursing a teacher, and sought out Weinber.
Just like his other bims, she and her folks sold the story to a tabloid. He should have to register as a sex offender, which is life-ending for him, and ended his marriage and will mess with his custody, but prison is ridiculous.


I don't understand your point. Why doesn't he deserve prison time? I used to be a teacher. Several underage girls came on to me. That makes no difference. I was supposed to be the mature one. I would have deserved prison if I had taken any of these girls up on their offers.


If you take them up on their offer yes but weiner didnt touch the girl. He was also sexting several other older women when he flirted with this one. Also if the girl was acting like an adult drinking and sexing she is more likely to make immoral choices than an adult who does not.


You are talking about things the girl did that, you feel, make her partially responsible for Weiner's behaviour and thus, you seem to feel, that sonce she is partially responsible, Weiner doesn't deserve harsher or any punishment.

Most sexual crimes involving minors don't work on the theory of "contributory negligence" (which is reallly a concept that applies more to torts than crimes anyway). The basic understanding in the law is that minors do not have the capacity for informed consent to certain sexual behaviours. For example, possession of a naked picture of a minor is child porn whether or not the minor consented to the taking and giving of the photo, i.e. that even their apparent willing involvement cannot be read as "consent". Some crimes are "statutory" in the sense that they do not require an analysis of intent or consent. It's straight up, if you do the crime you get the time. Soliciting a minor online is such a crime.

Some sexual behaviour the law does think a minor can consent to - sex above a certain age but below age of majority as long as the partner is within 4 years. There are lots of reasons the law views this as OK. But deciding a 16 y.o. is be able to consent to sex with a 20 y.o. is far different than sexual talk between a 16 yo and a 50 yo. Legally, we say that the 50 yo is really the one in that situation who has the burden to turn away the minor, no matter how manipulative, enticing or willing. Because as a community we say that the 50 yo is capable of knowing his duty and acting on it, whereas the minor is not old enough to make rational jusgments and act on them.



True. When I was 13 I was sexually harassed by a 70 yr old. All he got by the liberal judge was a restraining order which was kind of hard to follow considering he was a next door neighbor! The judge just excused him as feeling he was too old and that his culture (asian) was different and that they didn't allow that here. However when I was sexually harassed I wore a thick sweater and high waist jeans. The 16 yr old girl in this case dressed sexy and asked weiner to skype with her after finding out about his sexting scandal with pornstar sydney leathers and flirted with him. Now he gets 20 years without never touching her and her provoking him. Correct me if i'm wrong but that just doesn't make sense despite what the weirdo system dictates is legal or not.

Don't forget that Weiner is a serial on-line predator; this same behavior:

-cost him his congressional seat,
-cost him a near-certain win as mayor of NYC, and
-cost the USA HRC as president.

And he reached a plea deal on "friendly" (ie - overwhelmingly democrat) territory; the AUSA had no room within the law to cut Weiner any further breaks.

He brought all of this on himself; don't pity him.

Exactly. Chuck Schumer must feel like a fool for helping Anthony Weiner Head early on.

The above describes about every man online. Weiner was flirting with women of all ages. I also don't think it cost the USA HRC as president. That was hillary's own doing and the DNC.

[Anonymous]

Weiner was sentenced to 21 months in prison.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/09/25/judgement-day-has-arrived-anthony-weiner-sexting-scandal/699157001/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Weiner was sentenced to 21 months in prison.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/09/25/judgement-day-has-arrived-anthony-weiner-sexting-scandal/699157001/

Nearly 2 years for sexting seems like a lot. This guy got out of jail in 6 weeks for DUI's that resulted in the death of a minor.

http://www.gazette.net/stories/041608/montnew195536_32402.shtml

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Weiner was sentenced to 21 months in prison.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/09/25/judgement-day-has-arrived-anthony-weiner-sexting-scandal/699157001/

Nearly 2 years for sexting seems like a lot. This guy got out of jail in 6 weeks for DUI's that resulted in the death of a minor.

http://www.gazette.net/stories/041608/montnew195536_32402.shtml

That guy should have served a hell of lot more time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Weiner was sentenced to 21 months in prison.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/09/25/judgement-day-has-arrived-anthony-weiner-sexting-scandal/699157001/

Nearly 2 years for sexting seems like a lot. This guy got out of jail in 6 weeks for DUI's that resulted in the death of a minor.

http://www.gazette.net/stories/041608/montnew195536_32402.shtml

That guy should have served a hell of lot more time.

Yes, he should have. And Brock Turner should have served more than 6 months for brutal rape. But these things happen sometimes when rich white defendants are involved.

[Anonymous]

That's crazy. I'm sorry for his family, and even for him. He wasn't a "predator." She sought him out, DM'd him, with the goal of a book. The others likewise reached out to him and were all adults. this girl was a girl, but also pursued her teachers, and now, fame. Her parents are beyond despicable. But anyway - the narrative everyone will use now is that he practically raped a bunch of little girls and that is not what happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That's crazy. I'm sorry for his family, and even for him. He wasn't a "predator." She sought him out, DM'd him, with the goal of a book. The others likewise reached out to him and were all adults. this girl was a girl, but also pursued her teachers, and now, fame. Her parents are beyond despicable. But anyway - the narrative everyone will use now is that he practically raped a bunch of little girls and that is not what happened.

Did you attend the court proceeding?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Weiner was sentenced to 21 months in prison.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/09/25/judgement-day-has-arrived-anthony-weiner-sexting-scandal/699157001/

Nearly 2 years for sexting seems like a lot. This guy got out of jail in 6 weeks for DUI's that resulted in the death of a minor.

http://www.gazette.net/stories/041608/montnew195536_32402.shtml

That guy should have served a hell of lot more time.

Yes, he should have. And Brock Turner should have served more than 6 months for brutal rape. But these things happen sometimes when rich white defendants are involved.

I think Weiner will likely serve 3 months tops

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's crazy. I'm sorry for his family, and even for him. He wasn't a "predator." She sought him out, DM'd him, with the goal of a book. The others likewise reached out to him and were all adults. this girl was a girl, but also pursued her teachers, and now, fame. Her parents are beyond despicable. But anyway - the narrative everyone will use now is that he practically raped a bunch of little girls and that is not what happened.

Did you attend the court proceeding?

Nope. But all of this was not only reported, but stated publicly by the girl and her dad. If you think on this climate any other teens went unnoticed by the DA or unreported by the press, I've got a bridge for sale.


Here's her I Am Important!!! fame whoring from the fall:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/davidmack/heres-an-open-letter-to-james-comey?utm_term=.dtrdD79kZ#.bp5rEK3L6

Here's the first fame grab, with daughter and daddy side by side, including a letter where she indicates she's pursued men before:

https://www.google.com/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3790824/amp/Anthony-Weiner-carried-months-long-online-sexual-relationship-troubled-15-year-old-girl-telling-hard-asking-dress-school-girl-outfits-pressing-engage-rape-fantasies.html

Here she is on camera bragging about what she did, for a paid interview:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.insideedition.com/headlines/25440-teen-sexted-by-anthony-weiner-reveals-shamed-lawmakers-disgusting-messages-your-body-is-insane/amp

My parents wouldn't have pimped me out or supported me being self-aggrandizing after this kind of crap.

[Anonymous]

Seems like an appropriate sentence.

I will never forget June, 2011 when media people like Joan Walsh were defending him before he admitted he was lying, but nearly every Democratic party member in Congress was so happy that he might soon be gone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I now have more respect for Huma, now that she's FINALLY divorcing the scumbag Anthony Weiner.

NY Post reported that she waited to file the divorce papers until the judge accepted his plea deal. As long as they were married she couldn't be forced to testify at his trial. That's calculating.

She's a cold, tough bitch. And luckily free at last.

THis is about his behavior and you're just oozing with the misogyny? Lovely.

Jackass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He doesn't deserve prison for this. The girl he texted with was off a stint of pursing a teacher, and sought out Weinber.
Just like his other bims, she and her folks sold the story to a tabloid. He should have to register as a sex offender, which is life-ending for him, and ended his marriage and will mess with his custody, but prison is ridiculous.

I don't understand your point. Why doesn't he deserve prison time? I used to be a teacher. Several underage girls came on to me. That makes no difference. I was supposed to be the mature one. I would have deserved prison if I had taken any of these girls up on their offers.

If you take them up on their offer yes but weiner didnt touch the girl. He was also sexting several other older women when he flirted with this one. Also if the girl was acting like an adult drinking and sexing she is more likely to make immoral choices than an adult who does not.

You are talking about things the girl did that, you feel, make her partially responsible for Weiner's behaviour and thus, you seem to feel, that sonce she is partially responsible, Weiner doesn't deserve harsher or any punishment.

Most sexual crimes involving minors don't work on the theory of "contributory negligence" (which is reallly a concept that applies more to torts than crimes anyway). The basic understanding in the law is that minors do not have the capacity for informed consent to certain sexual behaviours. For example, possession of a naked picture of a minor is child porn whether or not the minor consented to the taking and giving of the photo, i.e. that even their apparent willing involvement cannot be read as "consent". Some crimes are "statutory" in the sense that they do not require an analysis of intent or consent. It's straight up, if you do the crime you get the time. Soliciting a minor online is such a crime.

Some sexual behaviour the law does think a minor can consent to - sex above a certain age but below age of majority as long as the partner is within 4 years. There are lots of reasons the law views this as OK. But deciding a 16 y.o. is be able to consent to sex with a 20 y.o. is far different than sexual talk between a 16 yo and a 50 yo. Legally, we say that the 50 yo is really the one in that situation who has the burden to turn away the minor, no matter how manipulative, enticing or willing. Because as a community we say that the 50 yo is capable of knowing his duty and acting on it, whereas the minor is not old enough to make rational jusgments and act on them.

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
He doesn't deserve prison for this. The girl he texted with was off a stint of pursing a teacher, and sought out Weinber.
Just like his other bims, she and her folks sold the story to a tabloid. He should have to register as a sex offender, which is life-ending for him, and ended his marriage and will mess with his custody, but prison is ridiculous.


I don't understand your point. Why doesn't he deserve prison time? I used to be a teacher. Several underage girls came on to me. That makes no difference. I was supposed to be the mature one. I would have deserved prison if I had taken any of these girls up on their offers.


If you take them up on their offer yes but weiner didnt touch the girl. He was also sexting several other older women when he flirted with this one. Also if the girl was acting like an adult drinking and sexing she is more likely to make immoral choices than an adult who does not.


You are talking about things the girl did that, you feel, make her partially responsible for Weiner's behaviour and thus, you seem to feel, that sonce she is partially responsible, Weiner doesn't deserve harsher or any punishment.

Most sexual crimes involving minors don't work on the theory of "contributory negligence" (which is reallly a concept that applies more to torts than crimes anyway). The basic understanding in the law is that minors do not have the capacity for informed consent to certain sexual behaviours. For example, possession of a naked picture of a minor is child porn whether or not the minor consented to the taking and giving of the photo, i.e. that even their apparent willing involvement cannot be read as "consent". Some crimes are "statutory" in the sense that they do not require an analysis of intent or consent. It's straight up, if you do the crime you get the time. Soliciting a minor online is such a crime.

Some sexual behaviour the law does think a minor can consent to - sex above a certain age but below age of majority as long as the partner is within 4 years. There are lots of reasons the law views this as OK. But deciding a 16 y.o. is be able to consent to sex with a 20 y.o. is far different than sexual talk between a 16 yo and a 50 yo. Legally, we say that the 50 yo is really the one in that situation who has the burden to turn away the minor, no matter how manipulative, enticing or willing. Because as a community we say that the 50 yo is capable of knowing his duty and acting on it, whereas the minor is not old enough to make rational jusgments and act on them.



True. When I was 13 I was sexually harassed by a 70 yr old. All he got by the liberal judge was a restraining order which was kind of hard to follow considering he was a next door neighbor! The judge just excused him as feeling he was too old and that his culture (asian) was different and that they didn't allow that here. However when I was sexually harassed I wore a thick sweater and high waist jeans. The 16 yr old girl in this case dressed sexy and asked weiner to skype with her after finding out about his sexting scandal with pornstar sydney leathers and flirted with him. Now he gets 20 years without never touching her and her provoking him. Correct me if i'm wrong but that just doesn't make sense despite what the weirdo system dictates is legal or not.

Don't forget that Weiner is a serial on-line predator; this same behavior:

-cost him his congressional seat,
-cost him a near-certain win as mayor of NYC, and
-cost the USA HRC as president.

And he reached a plea deal on "friendly" (ie - overwhelmingly democrat) territory; the AUSA had no room within the law to cut Weiner any further breaks.

He brought all of this on himself; don't pity him.

Exactly. Chuck Schumer must feel like a fool for helping Anthony Weiner Head early on.

Chuck should publicly apologize for defending his friend, Anthony.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He doesn't deserve prison for this. The girl he texted with was off a stint of pursing a teacher, and sought out Weinber.
Just like his other bims, she and her folks sold the story to a tabloid. He should have to register as a sex offender, which is life-ending for him, and ended his marriage and will mess with his custody, but prison is ridiculous.

I don't understand your point. Why doesn't he deserve prison time? I used to be a teacher. Several underage girls came on to me. That makes no difference. I was supposed to be the mature one. I would have deserved prison if I had taken any of these girls up on their offers.

If you take them up on their offer yes but weiner didnt touch the girl. He was also sexting several other older women when he flirted with this one. Also if the girl was acting like an adult drinking and sexing she is more likely to make immoral choices than an adult who does not.

You are talking about things the girl did that, you feel, make her partially responsible for Weiner's behaviour and thus, you seem to feel, that sonce she is partially responsible, Weiner doesn't deserve harsher or any punishment.

Most sexual crimes involving minors don't work on the theory of "contributory negligence" (which is reallly a concept that applies more to torts than crimes anyway). The basic understanding in the law is that minors do not have the capacity for informed consent to certain sexual behaviours. For example, possession of a naked picture of a minor is child porn whether or not the minor consented to the taking and giving of the photo, i.e. that even their apparent willing involvement cannot be read as "consent". Some crimes are "statutory" in the sense that they do not require an analysis of intent or consent. It's straight up, if you do the crime you get the time. Soliciting a minor online is such a crime.

Some sexual behaviour the law does think a minor can consent to - sex above a certain age but below age of majority as long as the partner is within 4 years. There are lots of reasons the law views this as OK. But deciding a 16 y.o. is be able to consent to sex with a 20 y.o. is far different than sexual talk between a 16 yo and a 50 yo. Legally, we say that the 50 yo is really the one in that situation who has the burden to turn away the minor, no matter how manipulative, enticing or willing. Because as a community we say that the 50 yo is capable of knowing his duty and acting on it, whereas the minor is not old enough to make rational jusgments and act on them.

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
He doesn't deserve prison for this. The girl he texted with was off a stint of pursing a teacher, and sought out Weinber.
Just like his other bims, she and her folks sold the story to a tabloid. He should have to register as a sex offender, which is life-ending for him, and ended his marriage and will mess with his custody, but prison is ridiculous.


I don't understand your point. Why doesn't he deserve prison time? I used to be a teacher. Several underage girls came on to me. That makes no difference. I was supposed to be the mature one. I would have deserved prison if I had taken any of these girls up on their offers.


If you take them up on their offer yes but weiner didnt touch the girl. He was also sexting several other older women when he flirted with this one. Also if the girl was acting like an adult drinking and sexing she is more likely to make immoral choices than an adult who does not.


You are talking about things the girl did that, you feel, make her partially responsible for Weiner's behaviour and thus, you seem to feel, that sonce she is partially responsible, Weiner doesn't deserve harsher or any punishment.

Most sexual crimes involving minors don't work on the theory of "contributory negligence" (which is reallly a concept that applies more to torts than crimes anyway). The basic understanding in the law is that minors do not have the capacity for informed consent to certain sexual behaviours. For example, possession of a naked picture of a minor is child porn whether or not the minor consented to the taking and giving of the photo, i.e. that even their apparent willing involvement cannot be read as "consent". Some crimes are "statutory" in the sense that they do not require an analysis of intent or consent. It's straight up, if you do the crime you get the time. Soliciting a minor online is such a crime.

Some sexual behaviour the law does think a minor can consent to - sex above a certain age but below age of majority as long as the partner is within 4 years. There are lots of reasons the law views this as OK. But deciding a 16 y.o. is be able to consent to sex with a 20 y.o. is far different than sexual talk between a 16 yo and a 50 yo. Legally, we say that the 50 yo is really the one in that situation who has the burden to turn away the minor, no matter how manipulative, enticing or willing. Because as a community we say that the 50 yo is capable of knowing his duty and acting on it, whereas the minor is not old enough to make rational jusgments and act on them.



True. When I was 13 I was sexually harassed by a 70 yr old. All he got by the liberal judge was a restraining order which was kind of hard to follow considering he was a next door neighbor! The judge just excused him as feeling he was too old and that his culture (asian) was different and that they didn't allow that here. However when I was sexually harassed I wore a thick sweater and high waist jeans. The 16 yr old girl in this case dressed sexy and asked weiner to skype with her after finding out about his sexting scandal with pornstar sydney leathers and flirted with him. Now he gets 20 years without never touching her and her provoking him. Correct me if i'm wrong but that just doesn't make sense despite what the weirdo system dictates is legal or not.

Don't forget that Weiner is a serial on-line predator; this same behavior:

-cost him his congressional seat,
-cost him a near-certain win as mayor of NYC, and
-cost the USA HRC as president.

And he reached a plea deal on "friendly" (ie - overwhelmingly democrat) territory; the AUSA had no room within the law to cut Weiner any further breaks.

He brought all of this on himself; don't pity him.

shows just how strong these types of compulsive urges can be