Really?

In some cases that age difference could be a junior dating a sophomore. That was pretty common if I remember correctly.

I wonder how many people we all know that could have been found to be sex offenders if they were prosecuted to the letter of the law . . in some states anyway. How many of our parents?

Remember that statutory is definined differently from state to state.

Keep in mind that if he had intercourse with her it would have been a misdemeanor, it was the fact that she blew him (oral sex for you prudish people) that made him it a felony and gave him ten years.

Damn! Talk about poison blow jobs, every time she sucks a cock she ruins a life worse than a freaking venereal disease. Sh's like a plague vector! I wonder if they nickname her like Typhoid Mary . . what could we call her that would be an equivalent nickname? Might be another thread topic.

I wonder how many others that were not videotaped that she blew in her career as a ruiner of lives and stealer of souls?

Yes, really.

This is the case I was talking about in the earlier post. It's pretty similar to whats going on with this kid here.


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1998/...ain23051.shtml

Yah, you and pika2001 are right about that. I was being glib.

And I was referring more to antiquated sex laws, like the oral sex thing than racism per se.

It's the sentencing differential that's the real point people around the country are making, not whether or not both whites and blacks are arrested and sentenced for statutory rape. Of course, many of us know firsthand that race can also factor into whether or not someone is accused and reported for forcible rape and statutory rape--but that's not the topic.

The issue with Wilson (what starang21 posted) may just be GA's archaic statutory rape law--which was later altered to not include oral sex but that doesn't help Wilson because it isn't retroactive. Are they telling us there was no other alternative than to declare him a child molestor? :rolleyes:

Frankly. I don't think they (prosecutors, judges, and legislators) really care.

And thats a truly awful thing.

Because there is nothing special about the guy in jail. He is not some horrible person. That could have happened, or could happen, to any of us . .

And that is truly terrifying.

Victims don't get to decide if they want to press charges most of the time - once you call the police and file a report, it's up to the prosecutor's office to decide if they want to charge or not.

Gotcha. Does that apply to all kinds of crime?

That’s not how you spell America. Wait never mind I see what you did there. Well played…

I agree. If you were to survey all males who while in high school had sex with a girl as young as 15 while being 17, you'd end up with at least a 1:10 result (maybe higher?).

You're absolutely right -- whenever we try to legislate morality, such absurd results are often produced.

so he should get 10 years because some 15 year old girl was a willing participant in group sex?

and the tape showed she was servicing people like a gas station.

willingly.

more like 1/5.

It was my feeling that some states have started changing their definitions of statutory rape, but I could be wrong. In CT, the penal code says that the person has to be between 13-16, and the other party is more than two years older; however, there is a distinction made for people "in authority," whether in a professional, academic or volunteer capacity.

There are a lot of stories like this that don't get attention, and it's awful that this guy has this on his record now.

I'll agree that 10 years may be a little overboard, but yeah, he should have gone to jail, absolutely. She's 15, I really don't care if she was a willing participant. Just because she is willing doesn't make it right. The fact that they were on camera boozing it up and chiefing the herb didn't help much either I would imagine (of course neither did the fact that it was a full on gangbang).

No.

am i the only one who thinks the parents need some sort of reprimand? No one here is innocent.

Parents are the key to most things like this.

Why?

The law isn't equally applied. There is no perfect judicial system that goes strictly by the sentencing guidelines with no leeway given based on extralegal factors (Max Weber would call such a perfect system "formal rational"). Instead, we still have a degree of prosecutorial and judicial discretion for most cases. This allows for extralegal factors like social class, age, gender, and race to reduce the potential for this to happen to "any of us."

True, and unfortunately, even when they tried sentencing guidelines, it turned out to be a failure (federal sentencing guidelines which turned out to be a mess).

Definitely. There's a ton of research on sentencing guidelines and the pros and cons of them.

hijack/
So on one hand there's a need to consider extralegal factors, for example, society doesn't want tons of primary caregivers removed from the home. On the other hand there's a tendency for these extralegal factors to be used as a bias, such as women who serve as drug mules being used as the "fall guy" for general deterrence.

Has a caveman PM'd you about your signature yet?

/hijack

To believe he should go to jail means you believe that anyone who sleeps with any 15-year-old should go to jail, which would take out a pretty huge chunk of the teen population. Throughout human history 15-year-olds have always had sex and they always will; exceptional contexts of our current society have made it suddenly immoral. I personally advocate abstinence, so I would appeal to 15-year-olds themselves to make that decision, not for the criminal justice system to waste its resources locking up their classmate partners.

That's attributed to the "protect the children" movement of the 19th and 20th centuries. It started off as a moral movement and then became political and state-monitored.

If we were looking way back in the history of THIS country (since we're not taking an across-continent approach) we'd find that children were once considered little adults who could do, and be treated as, people twice their age.

What's the middle ground? Should society advocate children having sex or not and should age dynamics matter? If we do advocate it and age doesn't matter, should they then be able to drive, drink, and do other stuff that requires a level of reasoning. Then we have to wonder if the gov't should legislate this type of stuff.

I agree with you here. But society has safety cushions for everything else. We could go around speaking against drunk driving but without the legislation people would be more able to do whatever the hell they choose. Morality and legality.

Oh come on, are you serious? Please tell me you aren't going to compare what was socially acceptable in the 1600s and 1700s to today's time. Hell, forget the sex, lets just let 13, 14, and 15 year olds marry, have kids....sounds great. While we're at it, lets reinstate burning at the stake and stoning.
Once again, this guy was on videotape, in a gangbang, smoking pot and boozing it up. Some of you people almost act like this is just fine, normal behavior. Immoral is an understatement. The guy should have gone to jail...though, probably not for 10 years. Acting like this is some injustice because of the criminal justice system is ridiculous.

if that's the case, then the jails would be full. this happens way more than you'd think. the verdict and the punishment are incredibly overboard for the "crime"

Maybe in your community. Also, it happening more than we might think wouldn't be an excuse, its a reason for action.

i doubt that. this happens all over the country.

But some lame changed the thread title. :(

AmeriKKKa.

I just noticed that as well.

I'm surprised that the Edit message on the bottom of the post didn't show up.

It had to have been one of the mods.

I've said twice that 10 years is harsh........should he have gone to jail. Yes.

.....and i'm sorry, but just because you think it happens all over the place doesn't make it any better or serve as any form of acceptable excuse. Certainly doesn't happen anywhere that I have lived.

A mod had also deleted my previous post pointing out the thread title change.

AmeriKKKa.

I was being sarcastic.

Starang, things like that do happen all over the country. However, its not commonplace or accepted anywhere I've ever lived.

I figured that after the fact.

Yes, I am serious. And yes, I do make connections between what is socially acceptable across time and cultures.

I absolutely did not say that our ethics ought to resemble the ethics of any other time or place. Nor did I say that the behavior was good. I plainly said that I advocate abstinence.

I did say that 15-year-olds in every place and in every time have been sexually active, demonstrating that the activity isn't likely to stop according to our new morals.

You needn't convince me that the act was immoral. Not everything immoral equals prison time. I think that imprisoning highschoolers for sleeping with each other is pointless and a waste of resources, including the resource of their potential.

Considering what was happening on the tape......I think he deserved it. 10 years? No. That is too much. But some prison time was warranted. This, to me, wasn't the same thing as a two highschoolers highschoolers having sex behind closed doors.

America! America! God shed His grace on thee...
 

Did anyone else read where he was sexually active at 13. Ummm, ewww? 13 year old boys are gross, and I felt that way when I was 13.

It's one thing to actually do this stuff, quite another to videotape it. He would be in college today playing football if it wasn't videotaped. 10 years is ri-freaking-diculous for getting a hummer from some HS ho, but not to have any sort of sanctioning at all is just as reproachable.

How much of this is related to the "athletes are gods" mentality that is so common in public high schools? To actually think that this behavior is okay, cute, and fine to videotape shows a whole hell of a lot of arrogance on the part of the dude and his friends.

I wonder how many black baby-daddies the "victim" has now...:eek:

I don't think any prison time was warrented as both girls in the story seem to have been consensually participating in activities.

Now there is a line where consent becomes null and void if she is too wasted to give consent. But come on. they were all peers, it was a party. none of it IMO was intentionally malicious. Edgy, sure. But so what?

He did not deserve prison time, the branding of being a child molester, and I am disgusted that the GA judicial system has treated him so completely unfairly. It disgusts me, frankly.

Thats interesting... What do you think the outcome would have been if all people involved where 22? And since when is "raping" your peers ok? Doesn't most cases of date rape happen at parties between peers?