Marine1: Why is "Lincoln Assassination" a tag for this?

I mean, someone was shot in the head, but they survived...

Well played, sir. Bravo. Slowclap.jpg

A couple of the pictures are meh, but yes I probably would

5 years?! Really? Ridiculous.

Maybe the farkwad wanted more and she wasn't up to it?

doglover: 22 and 17 is marriage age.

farkin' change these laws already. I don't want prosecutors who take these cases to get paid. At all. They're a frivilous waste of taxpayer money, LEOs, and judical resouces in general.

22 and 7? CRIME
22 and 17? NOT

Is it so freakin' hard to figure out!?

People like you continue to not understand -- it isn't about the age, it's about the lack of legal consent especially when a person is in a position of authority. In fact, even people who are fully legally adult can still end up in similar situations if there is any position or power involved -- if your boss says "let's date" you can legally claim rape because in many cases there is no possibility to consider it consent.

If teachers and coaches are looking at their classes as dating pools, it is pretty sick, predatory behavior.

Now, the only thing in this case it is not quite clear what "position of authority" she held over the student. I would agree it is dumb it she was only peripherally related to the school or that particular student, and it does say she wasn't a teacher or coaching the guy.

Anyway, there is absolutely no way that a kid can legally consent to an adult in a position of authority, no matter how horny they are..

Friggin' Brits. Shelbyville HS is in Shelbyville, not Indianapolis.

According to the probable cause Crafton performed sex acts on the 17-year-old student in her vehicle in this Shelbyville parking lot.



...and they say romance is dead!

isn't that what cheerleaders do when they aren't dancing for the crowd?

AverageAmericanGuy:

Or sure. But Jerry Sandusky touches a handful of boys and he's turned the bad one.

Here's one obvious difference: Jerry Sandusky is a creepy old man who couldn't get it just by asking politely.

This does not apply to "Megan Crafton, 22."

Note that the sex of the "offender" or the "victim" is not the issue: I'll bet "Megan Crafton, 22" could find willing female "victims" too.

And when I was a teenager "hustling" was popular: that consisted of (mostly, allegedly) straight boys letting gay men blow them for money. I was totally shocked when a handsome young cabdriver in Oklahoma City told me any guy who blew my 15 year old self for free was ripping me off, and that he apologized because he could only spare $15. I was dumbfounded: "Did I hear you right? You pay me to get me off?" Here I'd thought I was getting over by getting free BJs I didn't have to work, beg, pay or lie for.

Later on I met some guys who got paid by men to suck them off them and then paid a female hooker to perform the same act: that's basically getting two blowjobs for free.

Jerry Sandusky, on the other hand, appears to have used his "power" to exploit boys who were otherwise unwilling. I'll bet that, unlike me and the guys from the old neighborhood, these young guys did not go down to "the cruisy area" in tight pants and rub their bulges at cars that circled around the block.

See the difference yet?

17-year-old student...
Megan Crafton, 22...
felony charge of child seduction...
not a teacher and did not coach the student but was in a position of authority.

I'm thinking they're going to have a tough time convicting. The relevant statute is IC 35-42-4-7 (edited for relevancy):
(d) As used in this section, "child care worker" means a person who:
(2) is employed by a:
(A) school corporation;
Sure, she's a "child care worker".

(k) If a person who:
(1) is at least eighteen (18) years of age; and
(2) is:
(A) the:
(ii) child care worker for;
a child at least sixteen (16) years of age but less than eighteen (18) years of age;
engages with the child in sexual intercourse, deviate sexual conduct (as defined in IC 35-41-1-9), or any fondling or touching with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of either the child or the adult, the person commits child seduction, a Class D felony.

If I were the defense, I'd hammer on that "for". The legislature clearly intended the statute to apply to teachers in positions of authority over that student. Not teachers who may teach other students, but have no other relationship to the victim beyond the sex.

Interestingly, if the jury agrees with the above, she's off scot free. Sexual misconduct with a minor in Indiana (35-42-4-9) requires the victim to be under 16.

Dubai Vol: Lionel Mandrake:

If this woman ends up on a life-long sex offender list, the real criminals will be the DA, judge, etc.

You know that people are on sex offender registries for public urination, right?

And that "public" can mean behind a big bush in a big park with nobody else around -- except perhaps a bored cop in a bad mood who went looking for them?

She's 5 years older than him, but I'm about 19 years older than her.

I'd take me one of those Vanessa McClure's too.

WhippingBoy:

If she's easy on the eyes, an acquittal you must realize.
If she's uglier than sin, the darkest prison she must be in.

Oh come on, some of the best head I ever got was from fuglies.



But that's not an invitation for you folks to line up, really. Really!

Virtual Pariah:

No matter what your age, stop going after the under 18 crowd.

That's right, because obviously 17 years and 364 days is SO different from 18 years even.

doglover: 22 and 17 is marriage age.

farkin' change these laws already. I don't want prosecutors who take these cases to get paid. At all. They're a frivilous waste of taxpayer money, LEOs, and judical resouces in general.

22 and 7? CRIME
22 and 17? NOT

Is it so freakin' hard to figure out!?

22 and 17 is not a crime in Indiana (age of consent there is 16). Having sex with a student who is under the age of 18 while an employee of an Indiana school, though, that's illegal.

This case is maybe borderline since the authority relationship isn't terribly close, sure, but the law in general isn't overall a bad thing, hitting a student while you work at a school is on par with using your position as the manager in an office building to convince the secretary to bang you.

AverageAmericanGuy: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x286]

This kind of stuff wouldn't happen in Springfield.

Came for The Simpsons jokes.

Leaving satisfied.

... of course, that said, no 22 year old should be coaching high school kids. I mean, seriously. I know of a guy who was (properly) acquitted for this exact same crime, and yeah, he did it.

stuffer: So dude gets a bj in parking lot, then goes and tells police without getting laid? I would have kept my mouth shut gotten some. I wonder what he was thinking.

Who knows, but it's not that hard to come up with a realistic scenario where this kid going to the police makes a lot of sense. (Or at least her bosses at the school, who would have had the police on the phone immediately.)

Remember that one crazy 22-year-old you knew when you were 22? She made terrible life decisions, was out of control sexually, and was basically just obviously messed up? The one who came on to your loser ass like a ton of bricks, did things in bed that made you whimper with shame, got weirdly aggressive, then weirdly angry, then spent two weeks sobbing, then farked your brother, then you didn't hear from her for six months, then she called you up asking for bus fare to Orlando? In other words, the one who was responsible for three of the best and 38 of the worst days of your life?

Okay. So maybe she gets a job as a cheerleading coach. And maybe a little while after that awesome night in the car, this 17-year-old got a glimpse of something so messed up that it wasn't worth another BJ. She might have gotten violent, stalkerish, might have been trying to blackmail him, who knows.

Jim_Callahan: Having sex with a student who is under the age of 18 while an employee of an Indiana school, though, that's illegal.

It's arguable... That's one reading (which is clearly the prosecutor's reading), but I'd say it's narrower. The legislature didn't intend for that statute to apply to, say, the 19 year old superintendant's assistant secretary who farks the 17 year old senior. If they did, they wouldn't have included the language that the perpetrator must be a child care worker for the victim. Instead, they would have just said "child care worker; and engages in..." Since every word in a statute must be read to be intentional, that "for" must limit the sentence.

The One True TheDavid: Virtual Pariah:

No matter what your age, stop going after the under 18 crowd.

That's right, because obviously 17 years and 364 days is SO different from 18 years even.

Only in the eyes of the law.
You know it's BS and I know it's BS. But it is what it is.

qualtrough: So the one time "Hottie" could have been appropriately used, it wasn't. Interesting.

Theaetetus: If I were the defense, I'd hammer on that "for". The legislature clearly intended the statute to apply to teachers in positions of authority over that student. Not teachers who may teach other students, but have no other relationship to the victim beyond the sex.

Interestingly, if the jury agrees with the above, she's off scot free. Sexual misconduct with a minor in Indiana (35-42-4-9) requires the victim to be under 16.

Reverse Cowgirl?

Virtual Pariah: The One True TheDavid: Virtual Pariah:

No matter what your age, stop going after the under 18 crowd.

That's right, because obviously 17 years and 364 days is SO different from 18 years even.

Only in the eyes of the law.
You know it's BS and I know it's BS. But it is what it is.

A bright line rule may be BS, but it's much more pragmatic than a vague "we'll decide if your actions are criminal or not, and we won't tell you until after you've done them."

And now boys and girls, it's time to play "Which Golden Bear did she suck off?"
I'm going with the guy in the back row, second from the left.

varmitydog: And now boys and girls, it's time to play "Which Golden Bear did she suck off?"

Tony_Pepperoni:

I always find it weird when women go for younger men at that age, though.

Why? Would you at 22 turn down a 17 year old? Willingly, without a pang of "Oh but for 4 months and two weeks!" or something?

He was a 17 year old basketball player. Whether he was any good on the court or not he had to be better formed than a lot of males from puberty to infinity. Are hot young women not allowed to lust like "normal" people?

AFAICT she did nothing wrong. He, OTOH, sounds like a disgrace to Maledom.

He turned her in?!?

semiotix: stuffer: So dude gets a bj in parking lot, then goes and tells police without getting laid? I would have kept my mouth shut gotten some. I wonder what he was thinking.

Who knows, but it's not that hard to come up with a realistic scenario where this kid going to the police makes a lot of sense. (Or at least her bosses at the school, who would have had the police on the phone immediately.)

Remember that one crazy 22-year-old you knew when you were 22? She made terrible life decisions, was out of control sexually, and was basically just obviously messed up? The one who came on to your loser ass like a ton of bricks, did things in bed that made you whimper with shame, got weirdly aggressive, then weirdly angry, then spent two weeks sobbing, then farked your brother, then you didn't hear from her for six months, then she called you up asking for bus fare to Orlando? In other words, the one who was responsible for three of the best and 38 of the worst days of your life?

Okay. So maybe she gets a job as a cheerleading coach. And maybe a little while after that awesome night in the car, this 17-year-old got a glimpse of something so messed up that it wasn't worth another BJ. She might have gotten violent, stalkerish, might have been trying to blackmail him, who knows.

Hey, you know my ex!

Ok, a few things.
1) a "cheerleading coach" is not a position of authority to anyone but a cheerleader. She didn't coach him. If a PTA single-mom decides to frak a 17 year old graduating senior, is she going to jail because she was in a "position of authority"? What about the school janitor? The Crossing guard? The president of the student-council?
2) It was 5 years age difference. My last lady was 10 years younger than me. Yeah, I used my position of authority to seduce her, that's what folks with means do. Arrest me for banging a 30 year old. I dare you.
3) What kind of horse-crap douche 17 year old man would go to the cops after that hottie beejed him? A moron, that is who. Did she use her teeth too much or something? Was she a spitter not a swallower? What exactly is his problem?
4) The age of consent in most states is 16 or lower. The man she blew was clearly older than that. I dont' see the crime.
5) If she has to register as a sex-offender, and still wants a man, I'm more than happy to volunteer to keep her happy and satisfied for a long long time. And, I dont' mind teeth!

deltersmelter: Ok, a few things.
1) a "cheerleading coach" is not a position of authority to anyone but a cheerleader. She didn't coach him. If a PTA single-mom decides to frak a 17 year old graduating senior, is she going to jail because she was in a "position of authority"? What about the school janitor? The Crossing guard? The president of the student-council?
The term "position of authority" is in TFA; it's not in the statute. The law defines a "child care worker" as a school employee, or a person:
"(A) affiliated with a:
(i) school corporation;
(ii) charter school;
(iii) nonpublic school; or
(iv) special education cooperative;
attended by a child who is the victim of a crime under this chapter, regardless of how or whether the person is compensated;
(B) in a position of trust in relation to a child who attends the school or cooperative;
(C) engaged in the provision of care or supervision to a child who attends the school or cooperative; and
(D) at least four (4) years older than the child who is the victim of a crime under this chapter.

jabelar:


Anyway, there is absolutely no way that a kid can legally consent to an adult in a position of authority, no matter how horny they are..

Strictly speaking, that's a very stupid way to view things.

Consider this: in the USA until the early 20th century all women were legally minors compared to all men. A 23 year old guy could marry a 40 year old lady and she would be unable to exercise the normal rights and prerogatives of adulthood unless he agreed. He was clearly in a position of authority over her. Therefore she could not consent to "marital relations" with her husband no matter how horny she was, right?

Art the same time, it was not considered perverted for a 40 year old man to marry a 16 year old woman. Back then 16 was prime breeding age (and for many women it still is). Young unmarried women would compete to catch the eye of the established widower.

Who's zoomin' who often depends on who's involved. There are no hard and fast rules applicable to everybody all the time.

So: those legally adult men who picked my teenaged self up from the "cruisy areas" where I'd stood rubbing my bulge at the cars that circled around and who paid me to give me a BJ were exploiting me, right? How mean of them! Oh how could they!

"Wake up, sheeple!"

I'm not trying to sound crude when I say this, but I'd f#ck the dogshiat out of that teacher, consensually.

Alphax:

She's 5 years older than him, but I'm about 19 years older than her.

She's welcome to exploit me even though I'm 49. Of course she can clearly get better, but I sure can't.

But she's a farking cheerleader after all.

The One True TheDavid: And when I was a teenager "hustling" was popular: that consisted of (mostly, allegedly) straight boys letting gay men blow them for money.

LOL news flash: if you "let" another guy have oral sex on you, you're gay.

varmitydog: [www.shelbycs.org image 512x340]

And now boys and girls, it's time to play "Which Golden Bear did she suck off?"
I'm going with the guy in the back row, second from the left.

Nahh, not the skinny one. She was 22, had been to college, cheered enough to be a coach, and so was probably into the whole jock-physique thing. Assuming that she is not a wierdo who is into into very young men, the only baller in the pic that meets that criteria is the second from the right.

If she were a wierdo, then it is the semi-retard baller (probably the kid that sits the bench and washed the other jock-straps, orally) who is first from the left in the front row.

semiotix:


Okay. So maybe she gets a job as a cheerleading coach. And maybe a little while after that awesome night in the car, this 17-year-old got a glimpse of something so messed up that it wasn't worth another BJ. She might have gotten violent, stalkerish, might have been trying to blackmail him, who knows.

Or maybe he wanted more, or again, or asked for a "loan," and she turned him down. So he turned her in for "revenge." Frankly I think that's more likely.

In my day I knew some crazy women who weren't worth another BJ -- but none worth ruining their frigging lives over. Unless she used deadly weapons and inescapable chains that's just plain overkill.

Even if the guy's gay it's not a major crime. So you don't get in her car and pull down your jeans again; how hard is that?

Hey young d00ds, if you can't treat these older women right then don't let them blow you.

Maybe they'll eventually get frustrated enough to it on fugly antique farts like me who'll be flat-out grateful.

I know it's been said many times before, but I still have to ask....

Where were these nympho hottie teachers when I was in school?

I feel like I was robbed of a full education!