If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WPBF West Palm Beach)   Lesbian teen arrested for sex with underage girlfriend refuses to take plea deal. Says she's not licked yet   (wpbf.com) divider line 1323
    More: Followup, plea deal, WPBF 25 News, sex scandals, underage, girlfriend, refuses, lesbians, teens  
•       •       •

15120 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 May 2013 at 6:11 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1323 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-25 01:07:39 AM

Farxist: runescorpio: Thats still 2 years of her life for being in a relationship that started out as legal.

No.
It was never legal.
It started when she was 18 and the other girl was 14.
Even if she were 17 , it is not legal, but it would give her a way to get off the sex offender list.


Actually, it was legal. It started when one was 14 and the other was 17. The younger turned 15, then the older turned 18. The parents of the younger girl knew about the relationship before the older girl turned 18, but couldn't stop it so they waited until they could use the law to do it for them. This is something I didn't see on this article, but I've been reading on this before it got onto fark, and I already knew all this from other articles. There is a less than 3 year gap in the relationship that started before the older girl turned 18. Even if it is illegal, it is highly arbitrary.
 
2013-05-25 01:07:56 AM

Boojum2k: ciberido: redslippers: alienated: redslippers: There was a sexual encounter where Hunt inserted her

sure. bad ancedotal evidence is bad.

Not bad anecdotal evidence. That is straight from the arrest affidavit, and is Ms. Hunt's version of events as well as the victim.

So post a link or back down.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/142642135/Kaitlyn-Hunt-Redacted-Affidavit- Re dacted


Thank you.
 
2013-05-25 01:08:10 AM

bukijin: I guess the point of contention is that when you say "having sex with an 18yr old" we are saying "being raped by an 18yr old".

If it goes to trial then the jury will be the ones to decide which statement is correct. Thanks for the discussion - wasted enough time on this already !


All the jury will decide is whether "lewd and lascivious battery" occurred.  The word "rape" will never be spoken.
 
2013-05-25 01:09:09 AM

OgreMagi: Puckmarin: Something tells me that if your parents are going to charge your girlfriend (who you obviously care about & have had a somewhat long relationship with) with statutory rape that your home life probably isn't the best.

No necessarily.  Some 21 year old asshole was diddling my 16 year old, bipolar, substance abusing stepdaughter.  Because of her mental illness, she was completely out of control.   All she wanted was to get drunk and stoned and was willing to fark anyone with a bottle of cheap bourbon or some bud.

/her mother's inability to grow a spine didn't help
//If I had gotten my hands on him, I'd probably be in prison


Yikes sorry, bi-polar is a hell of a thing to deal with and I know, no really I know.
 
2013-05-25 01:09:17 AM

WhippingBoy: Puckmarin: I suspect that's based on the statement that she gave police which is much like the statement he defendant gave the cops.  They both admitted to having sex with each other.  Why shouldn't they?  It was consensual.  The cops probably lead them to believe that no one would get in trouble if they just told the truth.

It was consensual for the 18 year old, it wasn't consensual for the 14 year old, because legally, 14 year olds cannot give consent. Why is this so hard to understand?


Because while legally that is so, it's idiotic to say a 14 year old cant give consent. Now, some can, some can't. If coercion is a factor, that's to be considered. Other factors, like power balance must be consideref. It's a complicated issue butting up against a simple law. The real point I want to make us this: we have a blanket law, where the only fair way to deal with this is on a case by case basis. In some cases an 18-14 relationship is abuse, in others it's not. But that has nil to do with age alone.
 
2013-05-25 01:09:53 AM

Radioactive Ass: Puckmarin: Statutory rape doe not equal rape. Nothing in this scenario suggests that the sex was forced or non-consensual.

The law disagrees with you. 15 will get you 20.


Because the law is wrong.
News flash: sometimes laws can be unjust!
 
2013-05-25 01:10:25 AM

BarkingUnicorn: Boojum2k: BarkingUnicorn: But 'tis better to have sex and lose it than never to have sex at all.

There we have it. The true mark of a sexual predator. You emphasize with Kate Hunt because you think she thinks the same as you "You're just a freshman, it'll be forever before you get another chance like this. It's better to have sex than not, so you should do it with me."

You've been setting off alarm bells all thread, but that's a flashing neon sign.

LOL!  The true mark of a sexual predator is that he gets a lot of sex. The only alrarm bells and neon lights are on your meds dispenser.


I didn't say you were an effective one, but you've got the manipulative wording down pat.
 
2013-05-25 01:10:31 AM

bigwf2007: Puckmarin: WhippingBoy: Puckmarin: bukijin: Actually I suspect that the 14yr old wasn't as "willing" as many here think.

Explain.  What gives you that idea?

Apparently she's now in intensive therapy.

Ever think that might be because of the way her parents reacted to this whole affair?

Something tells me that if your parents are going to charge your girlfriend (who you obviously care about & have had a somewhat long relationship with) with statutory rape that your home life probably isn't the best.

Two months is a long relationship?


bigwf2007: Two months is a long relationship?


It is if you're Kim Basinger and Mickey Rourke.

Desire. Infatuation. Obsession.
 
2013-05-25 01:10:37 AM

Puckmarin: TheWhoppah: Maybe she rejected the offer because she WANTS to go to prison?

No, she rejected the plea deal because she thinks she can leverage gay rights and feminists groups to come to her defense.  The problem is that in the eyes of the law she's a child molester/statutory rapist and those groups probably aren't going to want to touch her with a 10 foot pole.

Personally, I don't think what she did was wrong because they were both students in high school.  The situation would be different if she was 18 and out of school...

On the other hand, had she been male there's no doubt in my mind that most people wouldn't think twice about throwing her in jail to rot.  Based on that fact alone I think she needs to be punished in some way.


Why would it be different if she was out of school? She's still be the same age and maturity.
 
2013-05-25 01:10:59 AM

muck4doo: Puckmarin: muck4doo: Puckmarin: I'm 35 and I have a 19 year old f*ck buddy.  That's a 16 year old age difference.  I'm technically old enough to be her father.  There's nothing wrong with this scenario legally or morally.

We are freaking out when two people with a 4 year age difference had sex because one of them happened to be past an arbitrary age that was set years ago by people who know nothing about the two girls having sex with each other.  How is that fair?

Yes, we already know you are all for child molesting if the 13 year old or whatever looks like they want it. Listen, go back to your sick little world of molesting the kids is okay.

No.  I'm not advocating for molesting children.  I'd advocating for giving teenagers the right to choose what they do with their bodies and who they have sex with.  I'm also stating that statutory rape laws are stupid because they are all based around an arbitrary age set by people who have no insight on the individual situation.

No, you are advocating adults be allowed what they want to do with kids bodies, and treat the kids like they are adults for your own personal perverted ideals.


See, people like you just won't get it. And yet I'm sure you're in favor of decriminalizing marijuana.
 
2013-05-25 01:11:06 AM

bigwf2007: Puckmarin: WhippingBoy: Puckmarin: bukijin: Actually I suspect that the 14yr old wasn't as "willing" as many here think.

Explain.  What gives you that idea?

Apparently she's now in intensive therapy.

Ever think that might be because of the way her parents reacted to this whole affair?

Something tells me that if your parents are going to charge your girlfriend (who you obviously care about & have had a somewhat long relationship with) with statutory rape that your home life probably isn't the best.

Two months is a long relationship?


Never got to high school, did you?
 
2013-05-25 01:11:14 AM
I dont know how they could prosecute this - where is the evidence for a sexual encounter? presumably neither party involved is inclined to describe what they did in private... and without any taped or dna evidence, how can they prove anything?
 
2013-05-25 01:11:31 AM

kazikian: muck4doo: redslippers: kazikian: I don't see why we haven't built ranges into child protection laws yet. Five years seems reasonable. (ie. 18-13 ok, 18-12 not, 22-17 ok, 23-17 no). Or if we were really going to reform the system we might make onset of puberty the cut-off since that's really the defining moment. But how would you go about standardizing that, I dunno. No one wants medical tests to get involved.

You do realize that the onset of puberty can, and is with increasing regularity, as young as 5 or 6, with onset of menses as early as 7 years old?

So no, onset of puberty is in no way a defining hallmark of readiness for sex.

You are all sounding like you want "grass on the field" laws, and that is wrong on a multitude of levels.

13 and 14 year olds are CHILDREN.

Voted for "Smart". I can't believe there are idiots here trying to defend adults having sex with 14 year olds.

Do you realize that the definition of adult and child is highly subjective? Why is there a magical line at 18, as if someone matures a decade over their birthday? Am I defending an adult having sex with a child? If that adult is 18 and the child is 14, fark yes I'm defending that. If the adult is 60 and the child is 8, hell no. The problem is that it's very difficult to draw the line. Is 22-16 ok? 23-18? 20-16? 18-14? These are borderline cases, and everyone will have a different opinion. But I think everyone will agree that these laws were not meant to stop consensual relationships. Of course now, you can say anyone under 18 can't consent. And again, we have a point for debate, because while legally true we all know that in some cases that's bullshiat. Think back to your mid-teens; would you have defended a law that tells you who you can and can't fark? Would you have obeyed such a law?


Or, you can agree on a date of 18 or 21  to give the most assurance that the person has matured, or act like a personal judge should tell you that 11 or 12 is old enough so you can rape little girls. Don't give me that shiat about how you or someone else should be judges if the little girl is old enough for sex in pre-teen or early teen years. I can't believe there are douches on fark who defend this shiat.
 
2013-05-25 01:11:33 AM

Internet Meme Rogers: tinfoil-hat maggie: Internet Meme Rogers: redslippers: Fourteen year olds are still children. They are children just figuring out how to deal with periods and excited about their first crush. Their breasts are still developing. They are still children, just wearing bras and learning how to be responsible enough to make it to class on time. They aren't ready for sex.

That's a pretty vast and rather stupid generalization.

He or she is out to protect their precious snowflake. Let them believe it will keep their 14 yr old from having this problem.

I believe they said their 17 year old is just now becoming sexually active because she's 'ready'. Thus, you see, she is a good girl and not a slut and sets the standard for the behavior of all other young women.


Said that as well, mentioned younger kids earlier I believe.
 
2013-05-25 01:12:14 AM

Descartes: I'm a big believer in equal rights.... if a 18 year old boy had been having sex with my 14 year old daughter, I'd had pressed charges too.  Boy, girl, don't matter, leave your adult hormones away from my underage daughter.


It would only be equal rights if that's actually what happened. There is a less than three year gap between the two girls, there was never a time when one girl was 18 and the other 14.

This is how it went:

Older was 17, younger was 14.
Older was 17, younger turned 15.
Older turned 18, younger girl's parents went after older girl for a relationship they already knew about but disapproved of, using the law.
 
2013-05-25 01:12:25 AM

chatikh: Actually, it was legal. It started when one was 14 and the other was 17


geek-news.mtv.com
geek-news.mtv.com
geek-news.mtv.com
 
2013-05-25 01:12:55 AM

bigwf2007: Puckmarin: WhippingBoy: Puckmarin: bukijin: Actually I suspect that the 14yr old wasn't as "willing" as many here think.

Explain.  What gives you that idea?

Apparently she's now in intensive therapy.

Ever think that might be because of the way her parents reacted to this whole affair?

Something tells me that if your parents are going to charge your girlfriend (who you obviously care about & have had a somewhat long relationship with) with statutory rape that your home life probably isn't the best.

Two months is a long relationship?


You really weren't a teen that dated were you? Come on fess up.
 
2013-05-25 01:13:05 AM

WhippingBoy: redslippers: kazikian: I don't see why we haven't built ranges into child protection laws yet. Five years seems reasonable. (ie. 18-13 ok, 18-12 not, 22-17 ok, 23-17 no). Or if we were really going to reform the system we might make onset of puberty the cut-off since that's really the defining moment. But how would you go about standardizing that, I dunno. No one wants medical tests to get involved.

You do realize that the onset of puberty can, and is with increasing regularity, as young as 5 or 6, with onset of menses as early as 7 years old?

So no, onset of puberty is in no way a defining hallmark of readiness for sex.

You are all sounding like you want "grass on the field" laws, and that is wrong on a multitude of levels.

13 and 14 year olds are CHILDREN.

Old enough to pee, good enough for me, amirite?


No, no, and no. See, this is the core of this bullshiat. Arguing for reform if stupid laws is immediately made equivalent to wanting to fark little kids. And this is why we'll never fix these laws. Anyone who tried will just be branded a pedophile by his opponents and forced to slink away.
 
2013-05-25 01:13:26 AM

chatikh: Farxist: runescorpio: Thats still 2 years of her life for being in a relationship that started out as legal.

No.
It was never legal.
It started when she was 18 and the other girl was 14.
Even if she were 17 , it is not legal, but it would give her a way to get off the sex offender list.

Actually, it was legal. It started when one was 14 and the other was 17. The younger turned 15, then the older turned 18. The parents of the younger girl knew about the relationship before the older girl turned 18, but couldn't stop it so they waited until they could use the law to do it for them. This is something I didn't see on this article, but I've been reading on this before it got onto fark, and I already knew all this from other articles. There is a less than 3 year gap in the relationship that started before the older girl turned 18. Even if it is illegal, it is highly arbitrary.


Hey, I found Kelley Hunt Smith's fark handle!
 
2013-05-25 01:13:46 AM

coffemonster: I dont know how they could prosecute this - where is the evidence for a sexual encounter? presumably neither party involved is inclined to describe what they did in private... and without any taped or dna evidence, how can they prove anything?


Ms. Hunt described what they did in private on several occasions.
 
2013-05-25 01:14:04 AM

Radioactive Ass: tinfoil-hat maggie: Lot's of these things are not like the other, Am I right or what?

The. "She was willing therefore it shouldn't be statutory rape" argument is just as dumb as the "She was asking for it because of how she was dressed therefore it's not rape" argument. I was just pointing it out.


How are these even remotely similar?
 
2013-05-25 01:14:12 AM

chatikh: Farxist: runescorpio: Thats still 2 years of her life for being in a relationship that started out as legal.

No.
It was never legal.
It started when she was 18 and the other girl was 14.
Even if she were 17 , it is not legal, but it would give her a way to get off the sex offender list.

Actually, it was legal. It started when one was 14 and the other was 17. The younger turned 15, then the older turned 18. The parents of the younger girl knew about the relationship before the older girl turned 18, but couldn't stop it so they waited until they could use the law to do it for them. This is something I didn't see on this article, but I've been reading on this before it got onto fark, and I already knew all this from other articles. There is a less than 3 year gap in the relationship that started before the older girl turned 18. Even if it is illegal, it is highly arbitrary.


The statute under which she is charged has been posted verbatim in this thread at least four times.  It does not require that the offender be over the age of 18.  Kaitlyn's birthday is irrelevant.
 
2013-05-25 01:14:21 AM
redslippers:

Fourteen year olds are still children. They are children just figuring out how to deal with periods and excited about their first crush. Their breasts are still developing. They are still children, just wearing bras and learning how to be responsible enough to make it to class on time. They aren't ready for sex.

Are you farking joking? I began developing breasts at 10 and got my period at 11. I was more than ready for sex when I was 14, which is why I actively went out and got laid on New Year's Eve 1987. I briefly went out with an 18-year-old later that year. He had a cool car but an unfortunate odour problem.

It depends on the 14-year-old. I was ready for experimentation, others weren't. Perhaps this kid was.
 
2013-05-25 01:14:31 AM

carrion_luggage: Sounds like she was called on the carpet for this one. That being said, I've got a munch she'll make the rug decision.


She should clam up.
 
2013-05-25 01:15:33 AM

chatikh: Descartes: I'm a big believer in equal rights.... if a 18 year old boy had been having sex with my 14 year old daughter, I'd had pressed charges too.  Boy, girl, don't matter, leave your adult hormones away from my underage daughter.

It would only be equal rights if that's actually what happened. There is a less than three year gap between the two girls, there was never a time when one girl was 18 and the other 14.

This is how it went:

Older was 17, younger was 14.
Older was 17, younger turned 15.
Older turned 18, younger girl's parents went after older girl for a relationship they already knew about but disapproved of, using the law.


Yep, that's how it went.  Parents didn't realize that they didn't have to wait until Kaitlyn turned 18.
 
2013-05-25 01:15:39 AM
There are really two roots to this whole thing (imo):

1.  Overszealous DAs and PR addicted politicians have succeeded in criminalizing at least half of the behaviors and activities that teens regularly engage in.

2.  A massive assumption that a person who is even one second under the age of 18, or some other magical number, is completely incapable of making conscious choices.  Therefore, any behavior undertaken by these teens (see #1) is immediately a probable crime.
 
2013-05-25 01:15:39 AM

Radioactive Ass: Puckmarin: I'm 35 and I have a 19 year old f*ck buddy.  That's a 16 year old age difference.  I'm technically old enough to be her father.  There's nothing wrong with this scenario legally or morally.

We are freaking out when two people with a 4 year age difference had sex because one of them happened to be past an arbitrary age that was set years ago by people who know nothing about the two girls having sex with each other.  How is that fair?

Ahhh. Now it's clear. You like 'em young. Well currently you're within the law. But what if you were 5 years younger. Are you saying that the 30 year old you should have been able to fark 14 year olds? If yes why. If no why.


It's so easy to make personal attacks, isn't it? I don't know about Puckmarin, but I prefer older ladies. For the same reason that I prefer fair and reasonable laws: maturity.
 
2013-05-25 01:15:40 AM

kazikian: muck4doo: Puckmarin: muck4doo: Puckmarin: I'm 35 and I have a 19 year old f*ck buddy.  That's a 16 year old age difference.  I'm technically old enough to be her father.  There's nothing wrong with this scenario legally or morally.

We are freaking out when two people with a 4 year age difference had sex because one of them happened to be past an arbitrary age that was set years ago by people who know nothing about the two girls having sex with each other.  How is that fair?

Yes, we already know you are all for child molesting if the 13 year old or whatever looks like they want it. Listen, go back to your sick little world of molesting the kids is okay.

No.  I'm not advocating for molesting children.  I'd advocating for giving teenagers the right to choose what they do with their bodies and who they have sex with.  I'm also stating that statutory rape laws are stupid because they are all based around an arbitrary age set by people who have no insight on the individual situation.

No, you are advocating adults be allowed what they want to do with kids bodies, and treat the kids like they are adults for your own personal perverted ideals.

See, people like you just won't get it. And yet I'm sure you're in favor of decriminalizing marijuana.


Decriminalizing marijuana is the same exact thing as decriminalizing statutory rape from your idiotic expression.

Please come back when you have an intelligent view to express.
 
2013-05-25 01:16:00 AM

muck4doo: Just a general rule of thumb that many seem to forget. What is the youngest age you should be messing with? Divide your age in half, and add seven years. Watch the laws in your state. If you are 40, you shouldn't be bothering with those younger than 27 seriously.


Maybe as a general guideline but I wouldn't take it as a hard and fast rule.  I'm been the younger half of a pairing that broke that "rule" and I don't feel I was taken advantage of at all.  (Note:  I was over 18 at the time.)  We've been married 25 years now.

On the other hand she's definitely a young-at-heart and looks 20 years her junior while I had quite a problem with relationships as I found my peers immature.  Fate put us in close proximity, eventually we recognized the impossible wasn't.

Mock26: Got a better and practical way to test on a regular basis every single person within a certain age group to determine who is mature enough to do any given number of activities and who is not?


I think we could do a lot better than just using age as a line.  Why don't we take a page from the DMV and have farking licenses.  Instead of a test of the law it would be a test of knowledge of sex, specifically including how people try to manipulate others into sex.  The practical would be to go out and buy a condom and put it on an anatomically correct model which then clamps down on the base and inflates it--if you put a hole in it you fail.
 
2013-05-25 01:16:19 AM

tinfoil-hat maggie: Boojum2k: tinfoil-hat maggie: Internet Meme Rogers: redslippers: Fourteen year olds are still children. They are children just figuring out how to deal with periods and excited about their first crush. Their breasts are still developing. They are still children, just wearing bras and learning how to be responsible enough to make it to class on time. They aren't ready for sex.

That's a pretty vast and rather stupid generalization.

He or she is out to protect their precious snowflake. Let them believe it will keep their 14 yr old from having this problem.

I know someone with a very intelligent and mature daughter who happens to be 15 now. Her behavior is exactly as I have stated before, she will not have sex with someone, or even be in a situation where that might be implied, if it will put them in legal danger, and she is fully aware of the risks of any sexual relationship. She's a damnsight more mature than the Kate defenders in this thread.

Too many people in this thread are equating throbbing hormones with maturity. They are not the same, and that is the reason for legal ages of consent amongst teenagers.

I know you believe that, and good job if you've taught your kid to be safe and all, and as I have said I'm not saying it's right for an 18 yr old to be with a 14 yr old but it can and does happen. What happens after that (whether they be male or female shouldn't mater but) varies widely on who the parents are.


Yeah, the girl I speak of is a pretty rare sort, and so is her mother. I'm putting them in charge in event of zombie apocalypse.
From all the signs in the Hunt case though, Kate sounds like a distaff counterpart to a senior jock, deciding to get some easy piece off a freshman girl. I'm not a huge fan of the manipulative sort, and given the outright lies and distortions her parents have been spreading in the media, I think it's a safe assumption it's a family trait.
 
2013-05-25 01:16:28 AM

steerforth: redslippers:

Fourteen year olds are still children. They are children just figuring out how to deal with periods and excited about their first crush. Their breasts are still developing. They are still children, just wearing bras and learning how to be responsible enough to make it to class on time. They aren't ready for sex.

Are you farking joking? I began developing breasts at 10 and got my period at 11. I was more than ready for sex when I was 14, which is why I actively went out and got laid on New Year's Eve 1987. I briefly went out with an 18-year-old later that year. He had a cool car but an unfortunate odour problem.

It depends on the 14-year-old. I was ready for experimentation, others weren't. Perhaps this kid was.


I also began developing breasts at 10 and got my period at 11. Which is strange, because i'm a guy.
 
2013-05-25 01:16:32 AM

Pray 4 Mojo: While we're on the subject... does anybody know the statute of limitations for sexual assault of a minor in the State of Texas?

Just curious...


I don't think sexual assault is ever legal...
 
2013-05-25 01:16:39 AM

ciberido: Rev. Skarekroe: Until the stroke of midnight on your 18th birthday, you are a child and completely incapable of making any sexual decisions.

It's science.

No, it's recognizing the need to draw the line SOMEWHERE.


Then draw a line that moves and bends.
 
2013-05-25 01:17:09 AM

carrion_luggage: Sounds like she was called on the carpet for this one. That being said, I've got a munch she'll make the rug decision.


Carpet puns are obsolete, aren't they?  Don't girls start getting Brazilians with their first periods now?
 
2013-05-25 01:17:43 AM

muck4doo: Hey guys! I'm sure according to Puckmarin you guys would all have a problem with an 18 year old guy sticking his dick in your 15 year old daughter, but a lesbian sticking her tongue in your 14 year old shouldn't be a problem at all. Unless you are racist.

/Get a clue.
//Child molesting is child molesting



Except that this is clearly NOT a case of child molestation.  The 14 year old willingly engaged in sexual activity with someone she was dating.  She gave what you would call "enthusiastic consent."
 
2013-05-25 01:17:59 AM

BarkingUnicorn: redslippers:


13 and 14 year olds are CHILDREN.

The argument for the status quo never gets beyond this utterly meaningless stage.


Because when the very nature of the argument makes it so so easy to brand your opponent a pedo, why wouldn't you?
 
2013-05-25 01:19:14 AM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: There are really two roots to this whole thing (imo):

1.  Overszealous DAs and PR addicted politicians have succeeded in criminalizing at least half of the behaviors and activities that teens regularly engage in.

2.  A massive assumption that a person who is even one second under the age of 18, or some other magical number, is completely incapable of making conscious choices.  Therefore, any behavior undertaken by these teens (see #1) is immediately a probable crime.


Number 2 is related to parents' desire to control their kids.  Quite few would like to extend the age of consent to 30 or more.
 
2013-05-25 01:19:41 AM

chatikh: Descartes: I'm a big believer in equal rights.... if a 18 year old boy had been having sex with my 14 year old daughter, I'd had pressed charges too.  Boy, girl, don't matter, leave your adult hormones away from my underage daughter.

It would only be equal rights if that's actually what happened. There is a less than three year gap between the two girls, there was never a time when one girl was 18 and the other 14.

This is how it went:

Older was 17, younger was 14.
Older was 17, younger turned 15.
Older turned 18, younger girl's parents went after older girl for a relationship they already knew about but disapproved of, using the law.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/142642135/Kaitlyn-Hunt-Redacted-Affidavit- Re dacted

liveforfilms.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-05-25 01:19:47 AM

Puckmarin: muck4doo: Hey guys! I'm sure according to Puckmarin you guys would all have a problem with an 18 year old guy sticking his dick in your 15 year old daughter, but a lesbian sticking her tongue in your 14 year old shouldn't be a problem at all. Unless you are racist.

/Get a clue.
//Child molesting is child molesting


Except that this is clearly NOT a case of child molestation.  The 14 year old willingly engaged in sexual activity with someone she was dating.  She gave what you would call "enthusiastic consent."


That's what all child molesters say. "She wanted it"
 
2013-05-25 01:19:59 AM

ciberido: skozlaw: Ah, yes. The magical ages of 16, then 18, then 21 where you suddenly become responsible enough to engage in behaviors that were completely out of the question the day before.

/ if you have to place an arbitrary age limit on your law to enforce it, it probably shouldn't be a law

So you believe that 3-year-olds should be allowed to drive?  Or have you not thought through the logical consequences of your assertion?


Disingenuous rebuttal award goes to you! Who here is talking about 3 year olds?
 
2013-05-25 01:20:39 AM

Mellotiger: Pray 4 Mojo: While we're on the subject... does anybody know the statute of limitations for sexual assault of a minor in the State of Texas?

Just curious...

I don't think sexual assault is ever legal...


Disregard this idiocy, my brain short-circuited. As a tiger, I'm lucky I can even type.
 
2013-05-25 01:20:43 AM

kazikian: Because while legally that is so, it's idiotic to say a 14 year old cant give consent. Now, some can, some can't. If coercion is a factor, that's to be considered. Other factors, like power balance must be consideref. It's a complicated issue butting up against a simple law. The real point I want to make us this: we have a blanket law, where the only fair way to deal with this is on a case by case basis. In some cases an 18-14 relationship is abuse, in others it's not. But that has nil to do with age alone.


Couldn't have said it better myself.
 
2013-05-25 01:21:12 AM

WhippingBoy: steerforth: redslippers:

Fourteen year olds are still children. They are children just figuring out how to deal with periods and excited about their first crush. Their breasts are still developing. They are still children, just wearing bras and learning how to be responsible enough to make it to class on time. They aren't ready for sex.

Are you farking joking? I began developing breasts at 10 and got my period at 11. I was more than ready for sex when I was 14, which is why I actively went out and got laid on New Year's Eve 1987. I briefly went out with an 18-year-old later that year. He had a cool car but an unfortunate odour problem.

It depends on the 14-year-old. I was ready for experimentation, others weren't. Perhaps this kid was.

I also began developing breasts at 10 and got my period at 11. Which is strange, because i'm a guy.


Your friendly family physician can help with that problem.
 
2013-05-25 01:21:16 AM

jayphat: dlp211: jayphat: dlp211: BarkingUnicorn: dlp211: You want to prevent your daughter from seeing the other girl fine, but don't go ruining peoples lives because they happened to go to the same school.

And how shall parents prevent kids who attend the same school from seeing each other?  Restraining order that forces one girl to switch schools?

So instead let's throw one in jail.  If you are that hell bent on being a dick of a parent, figure it out and be a parent, you are just going to destroy your relationship with your kid.

You do realize the 18 got the 14 year old to run away, right? What are you supposed to do at that point but get the law involved?

OMG a 14 year old ran away because that has never happened in the history of teenagers.

A 14 year old ran away with a legal adult and performed sex acts on one another. You don't see a problem there?


Either you're talking about an entirely different case, or a 17-year-old is a legal adult. Because in this case, there was never a time when one girl was 14 and the other was 18. The article is cleverly worded so that people who don't know this story already, like most people commenting on this thread, are getting very confused on the details. The article says the girl was 14 when the relationship started. It doesn't mention that the older girl was 17 at this time. It doesn't mention that the younger girl turned 15 before the older girl turned 18.

Read about this on another site, it's ridiculous how much they leave out. I first read this story on Theblaze.com (Which is highly conservative and has left out details to make things seem worse than they are to their conservative readers) and I still got more details on this story than from this article. The Blaze article also came out before this one, so there's really no excuse.
 
2013-05-25 01:21:45 AM

kazikian: ciberido: skozlaw: Ah, yes. The magical ages of 16, then 18, then 21 where you suddenly become responsible enough to engage in behaviors that were completely out of the question the day before.

/ if you have to place an arbitrary age limit on your law to enforce it, it probably shouldn't be a law

So you believe that 3-year-olds should be allowed to drive?  Or have you not thought through the logical consequences of your assertion?

Disingenuous rebuttal award goes to you! Who here is talking about 3 year olds?


I am. If a three year old gives consent, who am i to question?
 
2013-05-25 01:22:02 AM

chatikh: Actually, it was legal. It started when one was 14 and the other was 17. The younger turned 15, then the older turned 18. The parents of the younger girl knew about the relationship before the older girl turned 18, but couldn't stop it so they waited until they could use the law to do it for them. This is something I didn't see on this article, but I've been reading on this before it got onto fark, and I already knew all this from other articles. There is a less than 3 year gap in the relationship that started before the older girl turned 18. Even if it is illegal, it is highly arbitrary.


I have struck out the parts that are untrue. You are going on old (and wrong) information that the mother of the 18 year old was saying in a failed attempt to protect her daughter by spinning it early and often. The police report is available and this is what it says in a nutshell:

The girls were 14 and 18 respectively when they first had any type of sex.
There were two separate sexual encounters in a school bathroom involving finger penetration the first one was in late November.
The 14 year old was coerced to "Run away" for the night in early January in order to have more "Intimate" relations that included oral sex and a vibrator.
The parents of the 14 year old had asked the parents of the 18 year old to step in and break it up at least twice before the running away took place.
The police set up a phone call between the two and has the 18 year old on tape admitting to the sexual encounters.
The 18 year old was mirandized and admitted to the sexual encounters after that.

At no time was the 18 year old "17" when this started. She turned 18 in August. The mother lied and apparently was trying to spin this as innocent teenagers and then played the gay card (by calling the 14 year olds parents homophobic and fundies) as the reason for the charges even though the 14 year olds parents first tried to settle it early on in the relationship between parents without the law being involved.

You were lied to and you fell for it hook, line and sinker.
 
2013-05-25 01:22:20 AM

WhippingBoy: Puckmarin: muck4doo: Hey guys! I'm sure according to Puckmarin you guys would all have a problem with an 18 year old guy sticking his dick in your 15 year old daughter, but a lesbian sticking her tongue in your 14 year old shouldn't be a problem at all. Unless you are racist.

/Get a clue.
//Child molesting is child molesting


Except that this is clearly NOT a case of child molestation.  The 14 year old willingly engaged in sexual activity with someone she was dating.  She gave what you would call "enthusiastic consent."

That's what all child molesters say. "She wanted it"


In this case she clearly did.  Your argument is invalid.  It was invalid the moment you tried to brand the 18 year old as a child molester.
 
2013-05-25 01:22:55 AM
It's interesting that the posters in this thread who are obviously women have related either that they were fully aware, able to, and did consent to sex around the age of 14, or that they felt not ready at that age and chose to wait until they were older. I have yet to see one say they were children incapable of making that decision for themselves.
 
2013-05-25 01:23:32 AM

Puckmarin: muck4doo: Hey guys! I'm sure according to Puckmarin you guys would all have a problem with an 18 year old guy sticking his dick in your 15 year old daughter, but a lesbian sticking her tongue in your 14 year old shouldn't be a problem at all. Unless you are racist.

/Get a clue.
//Child molesting is child molesting


Except that this is clearly NOT a case of child molestation.  The 14 year old willingly engaged in sexual activity with someone she was dating.  She gave what you would call "enthusiastic consent."


So I can bang your 13 year old sister as long as she is willing? Everything should be fine if I gave her the Coke and tequila and she wanted it? The funny thing is you will think the stupid things you are posting are still intelligent somehow.
 
2013-05-25 01:23:40 AM

chatikh: jayphat: dlp211: jayphat: dlp211: BarkingUnicorn: dlp211: You want to prevent your daughter from seeing the other girl fine, but don't go ruining peoples lives because they happened to go to the same school.

And how shall parents prevent kids who attend the same school from seeing each other?  Restraining order that forces one girl to switch schools?

So instead let's throw one in jail.  If you are that hell bent on being a dick of a parent, figure it out and be a parent, you are just going to destroy your relationship with your kid.

You do realize the 18 got the 14 year old to run away, right? What are you supposed to do at that point but get the law involved?

OMG a 14 year old ran away because that has never happened in the history of teenagers.

A 14 year old ran away with a legal adult and performed sex acts on one another. You don't see a problem there?

Either you're talking about an entirely different case, or a 17-year-old is a legal adult. Because in this case, there was never a time when one girl was 14 and the other was 18. The article is cleverly worded so that people who don't know this story already, like most people commenting on this thread, are getting very confused on the details. The article says the girl was 14 when the relationship started. It doesn't mention that the older girl was 17 at this time. It doesn't mention that the younger girl turned 15 before the older girl turned 18.

Read about this on another site, it's ridiculous how much they leave out. I first read this story on Theblaze.com (Which is highly conservative and has left out details to make things seem worse than they are to their conservative readers) and I still got more details on this story than from this article. The Blaze article also came out before this one, so there's really no excuse.


Yup, trollin hard.  Dont worry bro, you got me, I'm mad
 
Displayed 50 of 1323 comments

First | « | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report