Seriously?

[MysticCat]

Originally posted by GeekyPenguin
Touching certainly can constitute sexual assault. Between 7 and 14 kids may be able to be held liable for their actions. Without knowing the facts I can't say more, but I do think there's no reason to think there isn't a chance she wasn't sexually assualted.

Touching might constitute sexual assault ifthe touching is sexual in nature and depending on the local law. The report gives no details as to the nature of what was happening other than that the boys were huddled around the girl and that "touching" was involved. So leaving aside the question of whether boys 6-8 can have the requisite mens rea for sexualized touching, there is nothing in the report that could tell us one way or another what actually happened or if it would fit a definition of sexual assault.

That said, the website of the Missouri General Assembly has Missouri statutes, and according to it, Missouri Revised Statute 566-040 says "A person commits the crime of sexual assault if he has sexual intercourse with another person knowing that he does so without that person's consent." The entire chapter on sexual offenses can be seen here -- I'm not seeing anything that would make mere touching constitute sexual assault in Missouri, but admittedly I may not be looking in the right places.

[GeekyPenguin]

Originally posted by KSig RC
You do think there isn't a reason to think there isn't a chance she wasn't sexually assaulted?

LOL - dude you have to be in the middle of exams, because that sentence is brutal (although I agree with your point, as I think I laid out) . . .

WOW. Um. I just finished exams yesterday so we're just going to say that that was Mr. Leinenkugel talking.

*goes back to bed*

[Kimmie1913]

Here is the article from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Some of the details here were reported on my local news in Baltimore. My assertions that the attack was sexual was based on the tv story not the CNN article.

The two boys who got the lesser punishment kissed the girl, a district official said. Other boys held her down. Authorities were trying to determine the extent of the sexual contact. The victim's great-aunt said that based on her conversations with the girl and with her own son, who was at the school that day, she believed the boys were trying to poke their fingers into her and that the girl was fighting to keep her underpants on.

Full article here

My local news reported that the girl's statement was that they were trying to pull off her underwear and were trying to "poke her with their privates." The report was clear that this was not just a gang of kids that happened to be boys picking on another kid that happened to be a girl. Our children are being exposed to more and more sexual content at younger and younger ages. Children replicate and repeat what they see and hear. I have friends who are elementary school teachers who have been sexually propositioned by third, second and even first graders. Believe it or not, it happens.

[33girl]

Kimmie1913 - thanks for the additional info.

[Kimmie1913]

Originally posted by MysticCat81
Touching might constitute sexual assault ifthe touching is sexual in nature and depending on the local law. The report gives no details as to the nature of what was happening other than that the boys were huddled around the girl and that "touching" was involved. So leaving aside the question of whether boys 6-8 can have the requisite mens rea for sexualized touching, there is nothing in the report that could tell us one way or another what actually happened or if it would fit a definition of sexual assault.

That said, the website of the Missouri General Assembly has Missouri statutes, and according to it, Missouri Revised Statute 566-040 says "A person commits the crime of sexual assault if he has sexual intercourse with another person knowing that he does so without that person's consent." The entire chapter on sexual offenses can be seen here -- I'm not seeing anything that would make mere touching constitute sexual assault in Missouri, but admittedly I may not be looking in the right places.

I think most of the posters were using sexual assault colloquially rather than as a legal term of art. Using the link you provided, it would appear that the appropriate crime in Missouri would be first degree child molestation "A person commits the crime of child molestation in the first degree if he or she subjects another person who is less than fourteen years of age to sexual contact." Sexual contact is defined as "any touching of another person with the genitals or any touching of the genitals or anus of another person, or the breast of a female person, or such touching through the clothing, for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire of any person." Based on the local news report it may have been attempted molestation. The issue, I am sure, will be whether the purpose was for arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of the attackers.

[KSig RC]

Originally posted by Kimmie1913
The issue, I am sure, will be whether the purpose was for arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of the attackers.

I think this is the issue on a more general level as well (or is at least related), not simply in terms of the actual construction of the laws of Missouri - good posts though, thanks for the info.

[MysticCat]

Originally posted by Kimmie1913
The issue, I am sure, will be whether the purpose was for arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of the attackers.

I agree, with the additional issue of whether a 6-8 year-old boy can act for sexual gratification.

As for the colloquial use of the term, I think you're right, but the press was also using it, which I think creates potential problems down the road, if no where else but public perception and understanding. I mean, look how quickly this thread went to the list of sexual offenders.

[valkyrie]

Aren't kids hitting puberty at younger ages than ever before?

[Kimmie1913]

Originally posted by MysticCat81
I agree, with the additional issue of whether a 6-8 year-old boy can act for sexual gratification.

As for the colloquial use of the term, I think you're right, but the press was also using it, which I think creates potential problems down the road, if no where else but public perception and understanding. I mean, look how quickly this thread went to the list of sexual offenders.

Oh I absolutely agree. I think the press often does a poor job of that. They have the opportunity to educate and miss it. I am sure that if the appropriate charge is child molestation the offender would still be a registered sex offender.

[33girl]

Originally posted by valkyrie
Aren't kids hitting puberty at younger ages than ever before?

Yes, because they're fatter or because of better nutrition (I've heard both opinions).

[KSig RC]

Originally posted by valkyrie
Aren't kids hitting puberty at younger ages than ever before?

The age ranges here are six to eight . . .

[valkyrie]

Originally posted by KSig RC
The age ranges here are six to eight . . .

I'll be such a hoot when girls are getting pregnant at age four and kids and their parents are in high school together! Family bonding!

[AGDee]

After working in child/adolescent psych for 13 years, and adding on my experiences as the parent of a 10 year old boy:

1) I would hope that the boys who were involved (and also the girl, more obviously) would receive psychiatric treatment rather than end up in a criminal system. I've met and talked to thousands of kids who were sexually abused and 99% of those who inflicted sexual assault/molestation/abuse (whatever term you prefer) had been sexually abused by an adult in some form. That's how they learned it. I've been out of the field for 6 years and our society has become even more sexualized since that time, so that percentage may have gone down some, because some kids are probably exposed to more, even if they weren't sexually assaulted themselves. My point is, at that age, it's more likely to be a psychological issue than a criminal issue. AND, even if it is a criminal issue, at that age, most kids can be turned around. Unless they are a budding sociopath, but even that can be evaluated and determined by a good psychiatrist and/or therapist.

2) My son, even at age 6, when in the shower, giggled when accidentally stimulated and said things like "that tickles and feels really funny" and things like that. It's pretty typical for 4 year old boys to "discover" themselves and they're often caught touching those private parts. They don't have the exact same reaction, obviously, as a teenager, but the nerves are there and it registers as pleasure.

3) If they've seen it done (porn, movies, internet, whatever) or had it done to them, they may still try to do it, even they aren't physiologically capable of it.