[YOUTUBE]LPFTquH48e4[/YOUTUBE] With individual states exercising their means to determine what constitutes legal sexual intercourse within minimal requirements, it can be considered a perplexing issue. The federal government doesn't have a legal number itself due to states' rights. I ask you all the following: - Should we allow the states to determine what the minimum requirement of consent laws are? Or do you feel that there should be a national number for all 50 states? - If you feel that there should be a national number, what would be the minimum in your opinion? And why?
Well that's how we're treated. When R.Kelly sexually molested those girls on tape a few years back absolutely nothing happened. There was this attitude that all of the girls including the 14 year old who got peed on wanted it and knew what they were doing. If they had pretty little white girls that were all 17 turning 18 the next day they would have burned his house down to get to him and hung his ass on his own property. There are two seperate rules for black kids and white kids. Black kids are hypersexualized beast who to fuck all day every day from the age of 5 and white children are pristibe porcelain dolls who don't think about sex until their wedding night or the very least college.
Yes it should be national. If you are 18, you can't date someone younger than 3(maybe 2) years. do the same thing for the rest until you hit 21. The reality is it will not happen. too many states with their own version of what qualifies as an adult despite the fact that you don't stop developing until mid 20's.
It depends on the school officials personal regulations. Some would not care as long as it's not an abusive relationship, whereas some would set a limit by a certain number of years. So, if a senior who is 18 want to date a 15 year old, it all would depend on the schools and moreover the parents of that minor. This leads to something else altogether: Parents of underage children can override the law by allowing the two parties to be together if they will it. A guy in my high school was turning 17 years old and he was involved with a 12 year old girl during that time. All of my friends I hung with, thought the idea wasn't great at all. However, the girl's family actually allowed it because they felt that they were in good arms. And besides, they saw five years apart as no big deal. He almost gotten arrested and put in jail a year after when he was caught in public with her, but her parents actually said that it's fine.
Facts are very very important in determining a particular legal outcome. Certain crimes don't require that the victim report the crime. Knowledge of the crime alone is sufficient to result in a party being charged with a crime. People can't over-ride the law. The law or statutes stand on their own and are prosecuted by the local jurisdiction. Your friend was a lucky man only because of how the statutes are written in Louisiana, if that is the jurisdiction. If it is then you should be aware that the statute defines the crime as occurring if the victim is 12 and the offender is 17, rather than turning 17. Each state is very distinct in defining the crime of statutory rape. Obviously, the ages are so close, proof becomes important. So, it would be possible for the charge to be brought if the ages are right on the border, but the people could lie about their ages at the time that sex between them first occurred. So, he might have gotten a pass.
That is very true. But even facts can be swayed to someone else's personal view favor, especially when you have strong persuasive lawyers and connections, which I think the girl's family had.
I would be the first person to agree that the scales of justice have been tilted against black people throughout the history of this country. But, I think that the example of R Kelly is a bad example for a couple of reasons. I think that prosecutors love high profile cases because that's how they make their political bones. So, I believe there would be a big push against him. Just look what they did to Wesley Snipes. He got a harsher sentence than those who dimed him out. Please remember that R. Kelly was charged with pornography, not rape. So, the standards of the crime rested on proving the authenticity of the tape, among any other issues. R. Kelly had the $$'s to spread around to dilute the prosecution, and he got lucky. As long as he doesn't pull an OJ and repeat it again... In other regards, I agree with you, and since the "jury of our peers" often doesn't resemble us, but has biases based on the media, upbringing, on and on, then you often get an unjust result. Also, don't think that judges don't bring those same attitudes to their jobs too. Their rulings on everything from pre-trial motions to objections to how the jury is charged at the conclusion of the case, can affect the outcome.
In general I agree with you, as the R. Kelly case. However, the distinction is that the finding of guilt is not subjective like in the case of R. Kelly. The determination of guilt is based on a very objective standard for a reason, because they don't want offenders to have wiggle room if the victim is of a certain age. So the standard is whether they meet age requirements, pure and simple. Lack of knowledge of victim's age is not important. The fact that she had previous sexual history is not important. Age and commission of the act are the only factors.
Well, I never stated that there was a lack of knowledge on both parties in the statement I've given. In fact, all parties, including the parents were fully aware of them being in a relationship despite a five year age discrepancy and being in their teens. The laws regarding the legal age of consent refers to those who are 18 and over. In the state of Louisiana, the legal age of consent is 17. It means anyone over the age of 18 can engage in sexual intercourse without prosecution with anyone as low as 17. Beyond that, it's up to individuals - schools, parents, etc. Now regarding the incident, he was still 17 at the time and was two months closer to his birthday. That's the confusion there.
Most of what you have said is factually incorrect, regarding the law of consent, the statute in Louisiana and the fact that knowledge plays any role at all. My point was to let you know the distinction in the law regarding knowledge, as an aside, and in an attempt to explain, which obviously was lost. Just so that you are aware, consent, has many definitions, and you must put the term in the proper context to understand it's meaning. Where it regards, statutory rape, consent means the age at which a person is assumed to have the ability give consent to the act of intercourse, not to be confused any other forms of consent. I can think of nothing more appropriate to say about your statement of parents and teachers being able to set the law in this case, except that it's unfortunate that you have this belief. But, it is pure fantasy none the less. I have copied the statute below so that you can see it for yourself. It should be self-explanatory... Felony carnal knowledge of a juvenile is sexual intercourse with consent between (1) someone age 19 or older and someone between age 12 and 17 or (2) someone age 17 or older and someone between age 12 and 15. Misdemeanor carnal knowledge of a juvenile is sexual intercourse with consent between someone age 17 to 19 and someone age 15 to 17 when the difference in their ages is greater than two years.
Ah, thank you for the actual information. But the part I've underlined seems a wee bit confusing. Why two separate accounts when felony carnal knowledge could be of a single circumstance?
Many states attempt to punish older offenders more than younger offenders. Consideration is also given to the age difference between the parties. It seems that Louisiana draws a line at the age of 16 for consent of the minor. So, if the minor is less than 16 and older than 12, the guy can be as young as 17 and still be charged with the crime. If the offender is older than 19, then the minor can be as old 17, and it's still chargeable as a crime. These statutes can be a be unwieldy for people who aren't familiar with them. So, no problem. You can thank the legislative body of your state for the wording. It's often as much a political process as it is about effective laws to control behaviors. In any case, I hope that it's clearer now.
