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  
•       •       •

15127 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 | « | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-25 05:29:32 AM  

Radioactive Ass: tinfoil-hat maggie: And your proof that it happened that way is because of a cops affidavit, maybe? Thank goodness I've never been lied to or misled by cops before.

I'll take a signed legal document over a Facebook page or a press release any day of the week. Wouldn't you?


Just remember nothing you can say to a cop will exonerate you.
Do not talk to the police
 
2013-05-25 05:30:01 AM  

badscooter: kazikian: I don't see why we haven't built ranges into child protection laws yet. Five years seems reasonable. (ie. 18-13 ok,

College Fr (18/19)
High School Sr (18/17)
High School Jr (17/16)
High School So (16/15)
High School Fr (15/14)
8th Grade (14/13)
7th Grade (13/12)

So you're cool with a college freshman having sex with a 7th grader?


Nah, but that's just a matter of tweaking the ranges. College freshman with a ninth grader? Now we are starting to get into acceptable territory.
I realized what the problem is. Even though we're not ok with minors having sex, we only criminalize it when ONE party is a minor. So it effectively makes sex between two minors legal, and this creates a weird situation where "legal" sex becomes illegal when one party reaches adulthood, then legal once more when the other party does too. Of course, it is the way it is because we don't punish minors for something like this, but it creates a kind of "plateau" where the law is unjust. Honestly, a law that criminalized a 13 year old with a 7 year old same as an adult/minor would be far more just. Though it would be stupid in a different way. We must come up with some way from differentiating the 40 year old diddler from the 18 year old boyfriend.
 
2013-05-25 05:30:08 AM  

hardinparamedic: muck4doo: This isn't Islam. It's the death cult within Islam called Wahhabism. You see it in Saudi Arabia, you see it with Al-Qaeda, you see it with the Taliban, You see it with Hamas, You see it in Pakistan, you see it with The Egyptian Brotherhood, you see it with Abu Sayyaf. You don't see it in Turkey. You don't see it in the Balkans. You don't see it in Jordan. You don't see it in the majority of the Ummah worldwide.

Whelp. Either I'm in the wrong thread, or we've just gone FULL retard.


Facts are never full retard, but that isn't what we come to Fark for, is it?

Should we talk about Lesbians more? Sorry, saw some Muslim bashing the last few days and thought I would tie it in. My apologies.
 
2013-05-25 05:32:28 AM  

hardinparamedic: muck4doo: This isn't Islam. It's the death cult within Islam called Wahhabism. You see it in Saudi Arabia, you see it with Al-Qaeda, you see it with the Taliban, You see it with Hamas, You see it in Pakistan, you see it with The Egyptian Brotherhood, you see it with Abu Sayyaf. You don't see it in Turkey. You don't see it in the Balkans. You don't see it in Jordan. You don't see it in the majority of the Ummah worldwide.

Whelp. Either I'm in the wrong thread, or we've just gone FULL retard.


Yeah, but it lead me to look up age of consent in Islam, which lead me to a rather well-researched and explained statement that Aisha, Mohammed's youngest wife, was actually most likely 16-19 when he married her, not 8, based on dates given and the age of her older sister.
 
2013-05-25 05:34:31 AM  

muck4doo: hardinparamedic: muck4doo: This isn't Islam. It's the death cult within Islam called Wahhabism. You see it in Saudi Arabia, you see it with Al-Qaeda, you see it with the Taliban, You see it with Hamas, You see it in Pakistan, you see it with The Egyptian Brotherhood, you see it with Abu Sayyaf. You don't see it in Turkey. You don't see it in the Balkans. You don't see it in Jordan. You don't see it in the majority of the Ummah worldwide.

Whelp. Either I'm in the wrong thread, or we've just gone FULL retard.

Facts are never full retard, but that isn't what we come to Fark for, is it?

Should we talk about Lesbians more? Sorry, saw some Muslim bashing the last few days and thought I would tie it in. My apologies.


You gotta give some indication of satire, dude. That was far too real a representation of FARKers.
 
2013-05-25 05:40:55 AM  
The real tragedy will be when the 14 year-old finds herself unable to enjoy lesbian sex again, switches to boys, and gets pregnant at 16.

/yeah, maybe i been awake too long.  But there's a chance!
 
2013-05-25 05:42:27 AM  

Boojum2k: hardinparamedic: muck4doo: This isn't Islam. It's the death cult within Islam called Wahhabism. You see it in Saudi Arabia, you see it with Al-Qaeda, you see it with the Taliban, You see it with Hamas, You see it in Pakistan, you see it with The Egyptian Brotherhood, you see it with Abu Sayyaf. You don't see it in Turkey. You don't see it in the Balkans. You don't see it in Jordan. You don't see it in the majority of the Ummah worldwide.

Whelp. Either I'm in the wrong thread, or we've just gone FULL retard.

Yeah, but it lead me to look up age of consent in Islam, which lead me to a rather well-researched and explained statement that Aisha, Mohammed's youngest wife, was actually most likely 16-19 when he married her, not 8, based on dates given and the age of her older sister.


Glad you are learning. Sorry, just sick of the tards that keep bashing an entire religion they don't understand. Guess who gets killed most by Wahhabist extremists? OTHER MUSLIMS. They then get blamed for being just like those who murdered them by our tards here. It just makes me sick.

I have nothing against Lesbianism, but 18 and 14 is too much an age difference at that point. You are talking someone that just graduated high school, and another that just got out of middle school. If it's wrong for a boy that age to have sex with a girl that age, it's also wrong for a girl to have sex with a girl that age.
 
2013-05-25 05:45:50 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: The real tragedy will be when the 14 year-old finds herself unable to enjoy lesbian sex again, switches to boys, and gets pregnant at 16.

/yeah, maybe i been awake too long.  But there's a chance!


Your assumption assumes that being gay is a choice. Science tells us otherwise in most people.
 
2013-05-25 05:48:35 AM  

hardinparamedic: BarkingUnicorn: The real tragedy will be when the 14 year-old finds herself unable to enjoy lesbian sex again, switches to boys, and gets pregnant at 16.

/yeah, maybe i been awake too long.  But there's a chance!

Your assumption assumes that being gay is a choice. Science tells us otherwise in most people.


It's a sliding scale, not binary, but definitely not a choice.
 
2013-05-25 05:49:57 AM  

Boojum2k: hardinparamedic: BarkingUnicorn: The real tragedy will be when the 14 year-old finds herself unable to enjoy lesbian sex again, switches to boys, and gets pregnant at 16.

/yeah, maybe i been awake too long.  But there's a chance!

Your assumption assumes that being gay is a choice. Science tells us otherwise in most people.

It's a sliding scale, not binary, but definitely not a choice.


True. Homosexuality CAN be fetishized, but that's typically found in the BDSM population.
 
2013-05-25 05:49:58 AM  

kazikian: badscooter: kazikian: I don't see why we haven't built ranges into child protection laws yet. Five years seems reasonable. (ie. 18-13 ok,

College Fr (18/19)
High School Sr (18/17)
High School Jr (17/16)
High School So (16/15)
High School Fr (15/14)
8th Grade (14/13)
7th Grade (13/12)

So you're cool with a college freshman having sex with a 7th grader?

Nah, but that's just a matter of tweaking the ranges. College freshman with a ninth grader? Now we are starting to get into acceptable territory.


a.espncdn.com
 
2013-05-25 05:52:37 AM  

WhippingBoy: Radioactive Ass: Puckmarin: Not that long ago (~100-150 years) it was pretty common for people to get married and have kids around the age of 14-16.

Not that long ago (~100-150 years) it was ok to own slaves, keep women from voting, use children for forced labor and a host of other things too. Should we go back to that as well?

Ummmm....


www.taurusarmed.net



 
2013-05-25 05:55:23 AM  

redslippers: Puckmarin: BarkingUnicorn:

And nobody was hurt until the adults got involved.


/End of thread
// End of discussion

The 14 year old's parents have caused more damage to her than having sex with an 18 year old ever could.

The parents found out because she started acting out and having emotional problems, dumbass.


She's 14 you nitwit, if she wasn't acting out and having emotional problems, THEN something would be seriously wrong.
 
2013-05-25 05:56:29 AM  

hardinparamedic: Boojum2k: hardinparamedic: BarkingUnicorn: The real tragedy will be when the 14 year-old finds herself unable to enjoy lesbian sex again, switches to boys, and gets pregnant at 16.

/yeah, maybe i been awake too long.  But there's a chance!

Your assumption assumes that being gay is a choice. Science tells us otherwise in most people.

It's a sliding scale, not binary, but definitely not a choice.

True. Homosexuality CAN be fetishized, but that's typically found in the BDSM population.


NTTAWWT. At all. Or that I have any personal knowledge of such.

/Really, I'm all about consenting adults. But let's be absolutely sure they are adult first.
 
2013-05-25 05:57:53 AM  

hardinparamedic: Let's make this purposefully clear, based on the Affidavit: The Hunt girl aided her daughter in running away from home, then had sex with her after her guardians had told her to stay away.

After she decided to tell the entire school what was going on, and get her "love" harassed ruthlessly by everyone.

After she was 18.
While the girl was still 14.


None of the stricken stuff is based on the affidavit.  Yes, Kaitlyn picked up the girl in her car after the latter left home.  Nothing in the affidavit indicates that the girl told Kate she was running away.

Based on the series of events in the Affidavit, she's lucky the DA's only charging her with statutory rape.

Like what else?  And she isn't charged with any kind of rape.  That's another loaded word that implies violence and coercion, neither of which is supported by the affidavit.

But I guess you can base a short fiction story on an affidavit.

Other sources? Maybe you have them, but when you say you're about to tell a story "based on the affidavit" and draw a conclusion "based on... the affidavit," stick to the affidavit.
 
2013-05-25 06:00:15 AM  

hardinparamedic: BarkingUnicorn: The real tragedy will be when the 14 year-old finds herself unable to enjoy lesbian sex again, switches to boys, and gets pregnant at 16.

/yeah, maybe i been awake too long.  But there's a chance!

Your assumption assumes that being gay is a choice. Science tells us otherwise in most people.


LOL!  You're assuming that the girl is gay because her first sex was gay?  REEEEALLLY???
 
2013-05-25 06:06:22 AM  

redslippers: Puckmarin: BarkingUnicorn:

And nobody was hurt until the adults got involved.


/End of thread
// End of discussion

The 14 year old's parents have caused more damage to her than having sex with an 18 year old ever could.

The parents found out because she started acting out and having emotional problems, dumbass.


14 year-olds tend to do that when you forbid them  to see the loves of their lives for no good reason.  And by "good reason," I don't mean fear of sex; I mean fear of getting knocked up.

Like I said, nobody was hurt until the adults got involved.
 
2013-05-25 06:07:55 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: Like I said, nobody was hurt until the adults got involved.


And amazingly enough, you're still wrong.
 
2013-05-25 06:09:16 AM  

Boojum2k: BarkingUnicorn: Like I said, nobody was hurt until the adults got involved.

And amazingly enough, you're still wrong.


Amazingly enough, you still got nothin' but your opinion.
 
2013-05-25 06:13:43 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: Boojum2k: BarkingUnicorn: Like I said, nobody was hurt until the adults got involved.

And amazingly enough, you're still wrong.

Amazingly enough, you still got nothin' but your opinion.


Which, fortunately for me, is backed up by the available evidence and legal case before the court. You have nothing at all except utter failure to make your case this entire night, and you've shown yourself to be a serious creeper on top of that.
 
2013-05-25 06:15:36 AM  

badscooter: kazikian: badscooter: kazikian: I don't see why we haven't built ranges into child protection laws yet. Five years seems reasonable. (ie. 18-13 ok,

College Fr (18/19)
High School Sr (18/17)
High School Jr (17/16)
High School So (16/15)
High School Fr (15/14)
8th Grade (14/13)
7th Grade (13/12)

So you're cool with a college freshman having sex with a 7th grader?

Nah, but that's just a matter of tweaking the ranges. College freshman with a ninth grader? Now we are starting to get into acceptable territory.


You would seriously arrest a college freshman in a consenting* relationship with someone four years his younger? How about a college senior and a college freshman? No way you would say that's a crime, and that's only a year less. Remember, I'm not asking you to agree with something you find objectionable, just that objectionable doesn't equal criminal.

* Don't tell me you can't consent at 14 or 15. Legally, sure, but that's bs.
 
2013-05-25 06:17:38 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: Like I said, nobody was hurt until the adults got involved.


That's presuming much on your part. If I fark a 14 year old is it not hurtful unless it is presented to the cops?
 
2013-05-25 06:58:57 AM  
*yawwwn*

How did it go last night guys?

*scans thread*

fc03.deviantart.net
 
2013-05-25 07:07:28 AM  
15 will get you 20.....heard it from the day I turned 18 all the way through college when the teenyboppers would flirt with us.


Mom and Dad should have told their Snowflake this.  If they did, we wouldn't be reading about it, amirite?
 
2013-05-25 07:12:00 AM  

kazikian: * Don't tell me you can't consent at 14 or 15. Legally, sure, but that's bs.


That's what the entire discussion has been about. Actually our position is that it is not possible for a 14 yr old to give voluntary, rational agreement (consent) to sex with an adult. There is an uneven power dynamic - the child is not empowered enough to say no - or if they say yes there will always be a suspicion that it is coerced. That is why the community has set the objective age as 16 and that's why the law says 16.

It seems that your argument is that the law is "bs".
 
2013-05-25 07:19:51 AM  

Puckmarin: Pray 4 Mojo: dlp211: 

Other than arriving at the same campus each morning... and possibly going to the same football games... Seniors and Freshman have nothing in common and are NOT in the same peer group.


Not true.

I was in high school in the early/mid-90s and I remember socializing with Freshman all the time was a senior. I think I probably even dated one, even though I was 17 at the time.  Everyone is in the same "peer group" in high school and socializing with Freshman as a Senior isn't all that uncommon.  You are in band together, belong to the same clubs, and sometimes even play on the same sports teams.


I would think the whole peer thing would vary a lot; size of the highschool, grade structure and geographic distribution of any feeder schools, etc.  I was pretty clueless in HS myself, but I'd be surprised if there weren't SOME social mixing between seniors and freshman.  Yeah, there were cliques that wouldn't talk to outsiders even in their own grade, but they weren't universal.
 
2013-05-25 07:41:04 AM  
Then sometimes these things can go the other way.  I work with a guy who's son. when he was 17, started dating a 14 year old.  She lives in Minneapolis and he lives in Atlanta.  They've been dating about 3 years now and he flies back and forth all the time. (We work for an airline so we all fly free). He stays in their home when he goes there and sometimes she flies down here to Atlanta. The parents on both side support them both and because no one gets angry and they all seem to be decent people, no one freaks out and cries rape. When she graduates high school they plan to get married. So this stuff can happen, even though it's technically illegal, it all depends on the people involved.  Personally, I'm happy for them and hope they have a nice life together.
 
2013-05-25 07:44:08 AM  

redslippers: Tommy Moo: redslippers: bukijin: To all that say that the law is just an arbitrary standard - that's all a law can ever be.

But the intent is simple: a 14 yr old is not capable of consenting to sex with an 18 yr old because of the uneven power dynamic.

Exactly. Perfectly stated.

I don't know. The problem with the law is that there's no grey area, but in the real world there is. There are age gaps where it starts to get kinda creepy and maybe sorta inappropriate, but to the law, you are either guilty as sin or pure as the driven snow. Over 20 with a 14 year old and I'd say lock her up, and I'd dare anyone to try to make it about homophobia. But at the same time, if this was 17/14 I don't think anyone would care. The power balance in their relationship didn't suddenly, dramatically shift on the day this girl turned 18.

That is where parenting comes in. The law has to delineate something, and this is a hell of a sight better than an unenforceable law on the books that reads "If everybody is creeped out, it's illegal". Or that leaves prosecution solely up to the discretion of the parents.

The law in Florida us clear that under 18 is jail bait. And if you are under a specific age, under 16 is jail bait. All teenagers know this law. In Indian River, it is actually taught in health class.

This law stands to protect kids with parents who don't care enough to, as well as provide teeth for parents to protect their children.

And you'd be hard pressed to find a parent of a fourteen year old girl who thinks this is "no big deal".


Right, but I'm saying the punishments don't have to be so binary. There could be a sliding scale for sentencing based on age gaps, with ranges available for juries or judges to massage a sentence in one direction or another for mitigating or aggravating circumstances.
 
2013-05-25 08:14:17 AM  

redslippers: Puckmarin: redslippers:
Uhm, no. Kids that age are not making decisions that would affect the rest of their lives. They chose electives, clothing and hair with guidelines, and sports. Beyond that kids that age make few decisions of consequence because they are children, and anybody who spends 10 minutes with a kid that age would not classify them as anything but children.

Really?  So the decision that I made to actually apply myself at school instead of being lazy had no effect on the rest of my life?  The hard work that I decided to do had no effect?  How about all of the volunteer work that I decided to do?  At 14 I knew full well that the decisions I was making would affect the rest of my life.

Following the rules and applying yourself in school, which a lot of kids do, is hardly the same as making adult decisions. It's what kids are expected and taught to do. The ones who do aren't performing above. The ones who don't are performing below. And doing a good high on your Spanish report and eturning your work in on time is hardly comparable to making complex decisions that affect your physical, mental, and emotional well-being.


But on their 18th birthday burn them at the stake right?
 
2013-05-25 08:29:03 AM  

bukijin: kazikian: * Don't tell me you can't consent at 14 or 15. Legally, sure, but that's bs.

That's what the entire discussion has been about. Actually our position is that it is not possible for a 14 yr old to give voluntary, rational agreement (consent) to sex with an adult. There is an uneven power dynamic - the child is not empowered enough to say no - or if they say yes there will always be a suspicion that it is coerced. That is why the community has set the objective age as 16 and that's why the law says 16.

It seems that your argument is that the law is "bs".


Yeah, this particular law is bs. So are many other laws. We should be working to change that.
 
2013-05-25 08:35:10 AM  
Oh one more thing that no one has brought up. We've tried kids as young as 11 as adults! If you can comprehend murder, you can comprehend sex. Of course, really it's about our society's quest for blood in the guide of justice. Same as this case. Why is if that whenever something bad happens, someone must pay? Sometimes, the punishment does more harm than the original crime to society as a whole. Again, whether you approve of 14 year olds being sexually active is irrelevant. The question is, do you really think society is well-served by throwing this girl in jail? Two wrongs don't make a right.
 
2013-05-25 08:36:30 AM  

OregonVet: *yawwwn*

How did it go last night guys?

*scans thread*


You never seen a consent laws thread before? They all go this way.
 
2013-05-25 08:41:38 AM  

muck4doo: BarkingUnicorn: Like I said, nobody was hurt until the adults got involved.

That's presuming much on your part. If I fark a 14 year old is it not hurtful unless it is presented to the cops?


It's not hurtful unless the 14 year old says it is. Not the 14 year old's patents, not her teachers, not the world at large; WHEN. SHE. SAYS. SO. How is this so complicated?

And, remember, I advocated age range limits, not a free-for-all. Are you 18? 19? No? Then the application of the law I propose would be identical in your hypothetical case as it is now. What IS the problem?
 
2013-05-25 08:44:49 AM  

Tommy Moo: redslippers: Tommy Moo: redslippers: bukijin: To all that say that the law is just an arbitrary standard - that's all a law can ever be.

But the intent is simple: a 14 yr old is not capable of consenting to sex with an 18 yr old because of the uneven power dynamic.

Exactly. Perfectly stated.

I don't know. The problem with the law is that there's no grey area, but in the real world there is. There are age gaps where it starts to get kinda creepy and maybe sorta inappropriate, but to the law, you are either guilty as sin or pure as the driven snow. Over 20 with a 14 year old and I'd say lock her up, and I'd dare anyone to try to make it about homophobia. But at the same time, if this was 17/14 I don't think anyone would care. The power balance in their relationship didn't suddenly, dramatically shift on the day this girl turned 18.

That is where parenting comes in. The law has to delineate something, and this is a hell of a sight better than an unenforceable law on the books that reads "If everybody is creeped out, it's illegal". Or that leaves prosecution solely up to the discretion of the parents.

The law in Florida us clear that under 18 is jail bait. And if you are under a specific age, under 16 is jail bait. All teenagers know this law. In Indian River, it is actually taught in health class.

This law stands to protect kids with parents who don't care enough to, as well as provide teeth for parents to protect their children.

And you'd be hard pressed to find a parent of a fourteen year old girl who thinks this is "no big deal".

Right, but I'm saying the punishments don't have to be so binary. There could be a sliding scale for sentencing based on age gaps, with ranges available for juries or judges to massage a sentence in one direction or another for mitigating or aggravating circumstances.


Ok. Wow. That is perfectly said. Age ranges? Check! Mitigating circumstances considered? Check! Laws applied on a case-by-case basis? Check! Sensible punishments? Check!

And a note on the last one: I don't even necessarily think this girl should get off Scott-free. Give her some community service if need be. Find some middle ground. Anything.
 
2013-05-25 09:05:36 AM  

mithras_angel: lotus: An 18 year old and a 14 year old. I don't understand what the discussion is about. Seems like that was a pretty sweet plea deal.

Because it started as a relationship between a 17 year old and a 14 year old.

Then the older girl turned 18, and the 14 year old's parents waited several months, and ~then~ filed reports with police.


It wouldn't surprise me if the younger girl's parents weren't trying to pray the gay away, as well.


Seems like that's the narrative they're pushing for, but not what actually happened. You've been suckered.
 
2013-05-25 09:06:33 AM  

IamAwake: Ahem...

794.05Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.-

(1)A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.So...as long as they simply say they're not eating each other out, it's...perfectly legal.  They can tussle around in bed, make out, do everything...so long as they don't do any carpet munching (or, so long as they say they aren't doing any...).  That seems like a pretty easy way to win this, really...as lesbians, they are actually at a bit of an advantage in the situation.  Simply going on dates, kissing, making out, that sort of thing?  Not illegal.


Wait, it says oral, anal or vaginal penetration by or union with the sexual organ of an
 
2013-05-25 09:14:09 AM  

IamAwake: Ahem...

794.05Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.-

(1)A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.So...as long as they simply say they're not eating each other out, it's...perfectly legal.  They can tussle around in bed, make out, do everything...so long as they don't do any carpet munching (or, so long as they say they aren't doing any...).  That seems like a pretty easy way to win this, really...as lesbians, they are actually at a bit of an advantage in the situation.  Simply going on dates, kissing, making out, that sort of thing?  Not illegal.


"sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another

Wait, scissoring is union with the sexual organ of another, but oral requires analysis of commas to determine that oral union with the sexual organ of another is covered. And neither manual stimulation nor fingering is covered at all. They might be able to swing this on that alone.
 
2013-05-25 09:17:41 AM  

Skirl Hutsenreiter: IamAwake: Ahem...

794.05Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.-

(1)A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.So...as long as they simply say they're not eating each other out, it's...perfectly legal.  They can tussle around in bed, make out, do everything...so long as they don't do any carpet munching (or, so long as they say they aren't doing any...).  That seems like a pretty easy way to win this, really...as lesbians, they are actually at a bit of an advantage in the situation.  Simply going on dates, kissing, making out, that sort of thing?  Not illegal.

"sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another

Wait, scissoring is union with the sexual organ of another, but oral requires analysis of commas to determine that oral union with the sexual organ of another is covered. And neither manual stimulation nor fingering is covered at all. They might be able to swing this on that alone.


Wait... 24 years of age or older with a minor 16, 17. Not only this not applicable to the case, it actually means the sort of range laws I've suggested are already partly on the books. I would just modify them.
 
2013-05-25 09:21:48 AM  

kazikian: Oh one more thing that no one has brought up. We've tried kids as young as 11 as adults! If you can comprehend murder, you can comprehend sex. Of course, really it's about our society's quest for blood in the guide of justice. Same as this case. Why is if that whenever something bad happens, someone must pay? Sometimes, the punishment does more harm than the original crime to society as a whole. Again, whether you approve of 14 year olds being sexually active is irrelevant. The question is, do you really think society is well-served by throwing this girl in jail? Two wrongs don't make a right.


Not really. But then again states treat Pediatric Sociopaths like Criminals rather than mental patients. But that's an argument for another issue.
 
2013-05-25 09:22:35 AM  
Yeah I would have taken a plea deal. Have fun trying to get a job anywhere save from the tobacco superstore with a big fat sex offender label.
 
2013-05-25 09:36:53 AM  

TheGregiss: Yeah I would have taken a plea deal. Have fun trying to get a job anywhere save from the tobacco superstore with a big fat sex offender label.


They really need to have different levels of sex offender that are federally defined.
 
2013-05-25 09:41:26 AM  

kazikian: Yeah, this particular law is bs


Yeah you said that a few times, but you have to give a reason. Your position is fairly extreme I think - at least in Western countries. We are saying that sex with a child isn't consensual - can't be consensual - due to the fact that they aren't mature enough or equal enough to an adult to be able to say no. And sex that isn't consensual is rape.  Do you have a response to that argument ?

kazikian: I don't even necessarily think this girl should get off Scott-free. Give her some community service if need be. Find some middle ground. Anything.


They did. Despite the facts of the case (as far as we know) and that it is clearly a criminal act they offered her a very generous plea bargain which she refused.


Tommy Moo: Right, but I'm saying the punishments don't have to be so binary. There could be a sliding scale for sentencing based on age gaps, with ranges available for juries or judges to massage a sentence in one direction or another for mitigating or aggravating circumstances.


There is. It's called the criminal justice system. The people who make the laws are not the ones who decide on guilt or innocence and these are not the ones who determine punishment.
 
2013-05-25 09:43:58 AM  
I live in this town and know people who teach at that school. Rumor has it that regardless of how they feel about the law no one is shedding any tears for the girl. She is a constant discipline problem and frequently suspended,including once for keying a teacher's car.

Also if this had been boy girl same age the result would've been the same.the lesbian issue is a red herring.
 
2013-05-25 10:00:51 AM  

bukijin: kazikian: Yeah, this particular law is bs

Yeah you said that a few times, but you have to give a reason. Your position is fairly extreme I think - at least in Western countries. We are saying that sex with a child isn't consensual - can't be consensual - due to the fact that they aren't mature enough or equal enough to an adult to be able to say no. And sex that isn't consensual is rape.  Do you have a response to that argument ?

kazikian: I don't even necessarily think this girl should get off Scott-free. Give her some community service if need be. Find some middle ground. Anything.

They did. Despite the facts of the case (as far as we know) and that it is clearly a criminal act they offered her a very generous plea bargain which she refused.


Tommy Moo: Right, but I'm saying the punishments don't have to be so binary. There could be a sliding scale for sentencing based on age gaps, with ranges available for juries or judges to massage a sentence in one direction or another for mitigating or aggravating circumstances.

There is. It's called the criminal justice system. The people who make the laws are not the ones who decide on guilt or innocence and these are not the ones who determine punishment.


My argument is simple. It's ludicrous to have the same sentencing guidelines for an 18 year old in relationship as for a 30 or 50 or 70 year old who actively and forcibly rapes children. And there are tons of cases between those two extremes. Sure, the plea bargain offers two years house arrest, but even that is too much and further it entails an accusation of guilt. Would you confess to a crime you didn't commit just to save your skin? But more egregiously. The maximum sentence is 15 years in prison. The very existence of that possibility is a perversion of justice.
Next the issue of consent: believe it or not, there are many shades of abuse, from bad choices to mild coercion, to coerced rape, to real forcible rape. Perhaps you disagree, but I think that verbally forced rape is far less severe than physically forced rape. And simply talking someone into having sex isn't rape at all. My most contentious point would be that children absolutely can give consent. It varies dramatically from child to child, and I wouldn't suggest they all know exactly what they're doing. But if we think kids can commit murder, if we're ok with advertising to kids, if we let them shoot guns at fricking four years old.... Kids are not that dumb, either. I remember being a kid. If I was in a relationship at 14, I know I would not have consented to sex. But guess what, tha would have been MY decision, not one imposed upon me by society!
And finally the worst thing is the arbitrary 18 year old mark where everything changed to adulthood. Legally, a one year old can apparantly make decisions at the same level as a 17 year old. Really? Who's crazy enough to believe that? Our justice system is messed up, in just about every sphere from consent laws, to drug laws, to murder laws. Millions of non-violent offenders are in jail. The prison system is run for profit. European nations laugh at us behind our backs. Do you really want America to be a police state? Because this is just one tiny piece of that overall picture. And don't think I'm changing the subject. One bad law does not destroy a nation. A thousand bad laws just might. And that is why you should be outraged. Honestly what more can I say?
 
2013-05-25 10:26:43 AM  

Valis992000: I live in this town and know people who teach at that school. Rumor has it that regardless of how they feel about the law no one is shedding any tears for the girl. She is a constant discipline problem and frequently suspended,including once for keying a teacher's car.

Also if this had been boy girl same age the result would've been the same.the lesbian issue is a red herring.


Give the look in her eyes in every single photo we've seen so far of her I'd believe that.
 
2013-05-25 10:34:07 AM  

redslippers: dlp211: redslippers: dlp211: This is stupid, and so are the laws around HS/teenage/young adult relationships.  Girl shouldn't be charged with anything.  If this was a guy he shouldn't be charged with anything.  Seniors date freshman all the time and guess what, teenagers have sex.

Seniors do not date freshman "all the time". And yes, there should be laws on the books to prevent older, more mature kids from having sexual encounters with kids who are not old enough to drive a car, let alone determine whether or not they are ready to have sex.

When is the last time you had a conversation with a fourteen year old girl? My daughter is very mature for her age. She gets good grades, talks to me about things going on socially, boys, even told me openly that she is a little confused about her sexuality and thinks she may be a lesbian. She is incredibly smart, and for her age, very well reasoned. But she isn't old enough to decide whether or not to have sex. And an older person, boy or girl, who is a legal adult, should have no interest in a fourteen year old. The vast majority of these situations are predatory. There is a grossly uneven power dynamic between the parties and the younger is at a significant disadvantage. The law recognizes this, and the law is there because society recognizes this.


Sorry to bust your bubble, but seniors date freshman all the time, more specifically, senior boys date freshman girls, and this isn't even new, this has been going on since at least my grandparents generation.  This wasn't someone in college dating a freshman in high school.  This was a senior dating a freshman.  They were a part of the same peer group.

They were not "part of the same peer group". How much time have you spent around teenagers lately? How much time immersed in a high school? It is scandalous for a senior to date a freshman. These girls were not buddies all along, they JUST MET. Seniors and freshmen do not share classes, they do not haunt the same social circles, ...


A girl who was a Freshman on the same Varsity basketball team as the Senior? So, yeah, peers.
 
2013-05-25 10:38:08 AM  
Ohhh... my head... what hit me...
 
2013-05-25 10:39:07 AM  

kazikian: Perhaps you disagree, but I think that verbally forced rape is far less severe than physically forced rape. And simply talking someone into having sex isn't rape at all.


That's not what society thinks. But really it depends what the victim thinks and how it affects their life. If force is used or even talking someone into doing something they don't want to then that isn't sex it becomes abuse. The thing about children below the age of consent (defined as 16) is that they don't have the means to resist such force or even such persuasion. So they are simply an object for another's gratification ?

kazikian: Would you confess to a crime you didn't commit just to save your skin?


That she committed the crime (as defined by the law obviously) isn't in dispute. She also admitted it more than once. I doubt I would commit the crime, but if I did and I was caught - then yes I believe I would confess to mitgate my sentence (which also protects the victim from having to be dragged through the court process).

kazikian: The maximum sentence is 15 years in prison. The very existence of that possibility is a perversion of justice.


Of course sentencing guidelines have to be given. You quoted the maximum - what is the minimum ? How can sentencing guidelines be a perversion of justice ? But I do believe that what the 18 yr old did was wrong and needs some kind of punishment (if found guilty) - but I don't think anyone including the authorities involved would suggest that 15yrs is appropriate. The plea bargain offered seems fair to me.

kazikian: the worst thing is the arbitrary 18 year old mark where everything changed to adulthood.


It isn't arbitrary. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/arbitrary?s=t ) The law is a result of negotiation and compromise and applies to everyone. It is in fact the opposite of arbitrary. A law must define permissible and non-permissible behaviors as exactly as possible to avoid arbitrary decisions. However, it is up to the courts to interpret and apply the law and of course the jury to determine guilt.

kazikian: Legally, a one year old can apparantly make decisions at the same level as a 17 year old.


That is ridiculous. What age does the law allow a child to be at home alone ? What age can you start to drive ? What age can you drink alcohol ? What age can you consent to sex ? These ages depend on the laws that have been negotiated.

kazikian: Our justice system is messed up, in just about every sphere from consent laws, to drug laws, to murder laws. Millions of non-violent offenders are in jail. The prison system is run for profit. European nations laugh at us behind our backs. Do you really want America to be a police state? Because this is just one tiny piece of that overall picture. And don't think I'm changing the subject. One bad law does not destroy a nation. A thousand bad laws just might. And that is why you should be outraged.


You have to give arguments for these contentions. Just stating them isn't enough. I think the USA has one of the best justice systems in the world. The reason I think this is that the laws are made by democratically elected representatives. There is a seperation of the legislature and the justice systems. Guilt is determined by an impartial jury of peers. People accused of crimes have the right to trial, legal representation, being able to face their accuser, the presumption of innocence (etc.) Why should I be outraged ?

kazikian: Honestly what more can I say?

That sex should be between consenting adults. Not between children and adults.
 
2013-05-25 10:52:05 AM  

bukijin: kazikian: Perhaps you disagree, but I think that verbally forced rape is far less severe than physically forced rape. And simply talking someone into having sex isn't rape at all.

That's not what society thinks. But really it depends what the victim thinks and how it affects their life. If force is used or even talking someone into doing something they don't want to then that isn't sex it becomes abuse. The thing about children below the age of consent (defined as 16) is that they don't have the means to resist such force or even such persuasion. So they are simply an object for another's gratification ?

kazikian: Would you confess to a crime you didn't commit just to save your skin?

That she committed the crime (as defined by the law obviously) isn't in dispute. She also admitted it more than once. I doubt I would commit the crime, but if I did and I was caught - then yes I believe I would confess to mitgate my sentence (which also protects the victim from having to be dragged through the court process).

kazikian: The maximum sentence is 15 years in prison. The very existence of that possibility is a perversion of justice.

Of course sentencing guidelines have to be given. You quoted the maximum - what is the minimum ? How can sentencing guidelines be a perversion of justice ? But I do believe that what the 18 yr old did was wrong and needs some kind of punishment (if found guilty) - but I don't think anyone including the authorities involved would suggest that 15yrs is appropriate. The plea bargain offered seems fair to me.

kazikian: the worst thing is the arbitrary 18 year old mark where everything changed to adulthood.

It isn't arbitrary. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/arbitrary?s=t ) The law is a result of negotiation and compromise and applies to everyone. It is in fact the opposite of arbitrary. A law must define permissible and non-permissible behaviors as exactly as possible to avoid arbitrary decisions. However, it is up to the courts to interpret and apply the law and of course the jury to determine guilt.

kazikian: Legally, a one year old can apparantly make decisions at the same level as a 17 year old.

That is ridiculous. What age does the law allow a child to be at home alone ? What age can you start to drive ? What age can you drink alcohol ? What age can you consent to sex ? These ages depend on the laws that have been negotiated.

kazikian: Our justice system is messed up, in just about every sphere from consent laws, to drug laws, to murder laws. Millions of non-violent offenders are in jail. The prison system is run for profit. European nations laugh at us behind our backs. Do you really want America to be a police state? Because this is just one tiny piece of that overall picture. And don't think I'm changing the subject. One bad law does not destroy a nation. A thousand bad laws just might. And that is why you should be outraged.

You have to give arguments for these contentions. Just stating them isn't enough. I think the USA has one of the best justice systems in the world. The reason I think this is that the laws are made by democratically elected representatives. There is a seperation of the legislature and the justice systems. Guilt is determined by an impartial jury of peers. People accused of crimes have the right to trial, legal representation, being able to face their accuser, the presumption of innocence (etc.) Why should I be outraged ?

kazikian: Honestly what more can I say?
That sex should be between consenting adults. Not between children and adults.


http://letterstoconservativeparents.wordpress.com/2012/05/23/mom-dad-t here-is-a-big-problem-with-americas-justice-system/
 
2013-05-25 10:59:36 AM  
Man - you didn't answer any of my points - only linked to another website. That's not an argument. Do you expect me to refute the entire website ?

Let's get down to basics here.

Is sex ok between children and adults ?
Is a 14 yr old an adult ?
 
Displayed 50 of 1323 comments

First | « | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report