18 Year Old Girl Facing Felony for Dating 15 Year Old Girl

[Grave_n_idle]

This wasn't forcible sexual behavior. This was consensual sexual behavior between 2 individuals who are dating, and one of the individuals is less than 3 years younger than the other. They are both high school students, high school students aren't exactly naive about sex. It is surprising to me that people want to try to equate this to forcible sexual behavior or pedophilia and say it should be punished as such, because the alleged victim is not some naive young kid and was not exploited to do anything against her will.

The problem isn't the age gap - the problem is whether the younger one is old enough to consent with the older one.

Hint: she's not.

If you have ever engaged in sexual behavior with someone 2 years and some months younger than you or even younger, yet you are condemning this girl, then you are a hypocrite.

Only if the person you had sex with was a minor.

Like I said, the problem isn't the age gap.

[Cosara]

This wasn't forcible sexual behavior. This was consensual sexual behavior between 2 individuals who are dating, and one of the individuals is less than 3 years younger than the other. They are both high school students, high school students aren't exactly naive about sex. It is surprising to me that people want to try to equate this to forcible sexual behavior or pedophilia and say it should be punished as such, because the alleged victim is not some naive young kid and was not exploited to do anything against her will. If you have ever engaged in sexual behavior with someone 2 years and some months younger than you or even younger, yet you are condemning this girl, then you are a hypocrite.

(-: <---------- Girl 1

_________________ <------------ Age of Consent


(-: <--------- Girl 2



If girl 1 has sex with girl 2 (who is below the age of consent) that is statutory rape because Girl 2 is below the age of consent and therefor cannot legally give consent.

[Northern Dominus]

Don't forget, the Republican types are more than willing to compromise their principles if it will result in a hardship for someone with whom they disagree. Witness, e.g., the Ken Starr prosecution of Bill Clinton, which exposed minors to hours of discussion of sex, oral sex, and the like, which ordinarily, the Republican types don't believe anyone under 18 needs to even know about unless their parents are the ones imparting said knowledge.

External inconsistency, also known as "hypocrisy," is no stranger to Republican types. We could also reference the Republican legislators who loudly and vehemently opposed any sort of equal rights for homosexuals, yet themselves engaged in homosexual activities, but I hardly think it's necessary.

Indeed, but its always fun to watch them squirm and try to weasel around it when their hypocrisy is uncovered, and pointed out for all to see. I imagine its not that different from those dreams where one walks into class either totally naked or only wearing their underwear.

No, Romeo and Juliet laws apply if you have sex with someone between 14 and 17 and are less than 4 years apart in age. Also, it doesn't prevent felony charges, it just prevents sex offender registry (really, I think it should prevent both because... seriously?).

^this.

To build upon this, I have a question for anyone gnashing their teeth at the older girl, deriding her as sick or twisted: what if she were a boy? Would this still be a big issue in your mind?

[Ibwa]

If she wants to have a lesbian lover, why should we deny her that? What gives us that right, we should congradulate(fuck my spelling) her for bieng happy.

[Questers]

The utility of statutory rape laws is extremely obvious to anyone not caught up in "gay people should be allowed to do whatever they want" beliefs.

[Cosara]

Indeed, but its always fun to watch them squirm and try to weasel around it when their hypocrisy is uncovered, and pointed out for all to see. I imagine its not that different from those dreams where one walks into class either totally naked or only wearing their underwear.



^this.

To build upon this, I have a question for anyone gnashing their teeth at the older girl, deriding her as sick or twisted: what if she were a boy? Would this still be a big issue in your mind?

Yes.

[Grave_n_idle]

If she wants to have a lesbian lover, why should we deny her that? What gives us that right, we should congradulate(fuck my spelling) her for bieng happy.

The problem isn't that she's a lesbian.

Just like it wasn't the age gap.

The problem is that one of the participants is a minor.

[Northern Dominus]

To build upon this, I have a question for anyone gnashing their teeth at the older girl, deriding her as sick or twisted: what if she were a boy? Would this still be a big issue in your mind?

Yes.

So you'd be just as eager to send the theoretical 18 year old boy away for his "unseemly" relationship with a 16 year old girl as you would the 18 year old girl, correct?

[Cosara]

If she wants to have a lesbian lover, why should we deny her that? What gives us that right, we should congradulate(fuck my spelling) her for bieng happy.

The problem isn't that she's a lesbian.

Just like it wasn't the age gap.

The problem is that one of the participants is a minor.

And that the other is an adult.

[Mirkana]

The real problem with age of consent laws is that people can and do have sexual desires before they are considered old enough to consent to sexual behavior. I'm starting to think that blanket age of consent laws may not be such a good thing. Instead, this sort of situation should trigger an investigation to determine if the accused actually abused the other person, or if the relationship was genuinely romantic. The most important factor would be the testimony of the supposed victim, combined with testimony from experts on child sexual abuse. I'm not denying that a child might lie to protect their abuser, but I don't think we should automatically assume that if the "victim" defends the accuser, it is because they have been manipulated or brainwashed. I'm no expert, but I imagine that someone with experience in these matters could tell the difference. Remember that our justice system is based on "innocent until proven guilty". And when it comes down to it, I would rather see a guilty man go free than an innocent convicted.

[Grave_n_idle]

To build upon this, I have a question for anyone gnashing their teeth at the older girl, deriding her as sick or twisted: what if she were a boy? Would this still be a big issue in your mind?

Sex with a minor is sex with a minor, regardless of the sex of the minor, or their lover.

[Cosara]

Yes.

So you'd be just as eager to send the theoretical 18 year old boy away for his "unseemly" relationship with a 16 year old girl as you would the 18 year old girl, correct?

Pretty much.

[Sophian]

This wasn't forcible sexual behavior. This was consensual sexual behavior between 2 individuals who are dating, and one of the individuals is less than 3 years younger than the other. They are both high school students, high school students aren't exactly naive about sex. It is surprising to me that people want to try to equate this to forcible sexual behavior or pedophilia and say it should be punished as such, because the alleged victim is not some naive young kid and was not exploited to do anything against her will. If you have ever engaged in sexual behavior with someone 2 years and some months younger than you or even younger, yet you are condemning this girl, then you are a hypocrite.

It's called "statutory rape" for a reason, the reason being that the law says no one under a certain age may have sex, regardless of their consent or the lack of exploitation or force.

Okay, but laws are intended to punish people for unethical and immoral behavior like theft, harming a person or their property, and violating someone free will. The accused didn't steal anything, harm anyone or their property, or violate anyone's free will. The accused continued to engage in a romantic relationship with someone they go to high school with after their 18th birthday. Does that really seem like a truly terrible offense that deserves punishment, and a lifetime as a registered sex offender? Being a felon and a registered sex offender will negatively influence her employment and educational advancement for the rest of her life. It just seems like tax payer money could be used to punish real criminals, real rapists, and people who actually committed crimes that harmed people, as opposed to locking up an 18 year old for continuing to date someone less than 3 years younger than her. I don't think the accused did anything immoral. There are laws against marijuana use, and there are laws against kids opening a lemonade stand without the proper licensing, but it doesn't necessarily mean that using marijuana or opening a lemonade stand without first paying off Uncle Sam's cronies is immoral and warrants punishment even though the law might dictate such.

[Grave_n_idle]

The real problem with age of consent laws is that people can and do have sexual desires before they are considered old enough to consent to sexual behavior.

That's not a problem.

There's no judgement on desire - only on acting on it.

[Lengleland]

Homophobia my arse.

She was too young and deserves her punishment.

[Ibwa]

The utility of statutory rape laws is extremely obvious to anyone not caught up in "gay people should be allowed to do whatever they want" beliefs.

in the name of love, go die in a hole. What does age really have to do with this besides adults thinking that every teen is stupid and doesnt kno what they really want?
come on, if you found you soulmate at 13 and hade to wait 5 years before you could do anything about it without fear of everyone close to you acting like a self rightchous know it all, how would you feel?

[The Lost Souls]

I don't know what to say... But she was underage and the other was older. No exceptions to the law.

[Grave_n_idle]

The utility of statutory rape laws is extremely obvious to anyone not caught up in "gay people should be allowed to do whatever they want" beliefs.

in the name of love, go die in a hole. What does age really have to do with this besides adults thinking that every teen is stupid and doesnt kno what they really want?
come on, if you found you soulmate at 13 and hade to wait 5 years before you could do anything about it without fear of everyone close to you acting like a self rightchous know it all, how would you feel?

Sad.

But not imprisoned.

Your point?

[Diblonia]

http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2013/05/florida-teen-fighting-criminal-charges-for-same-sex-relationship/

A Florida high school senior is facing two years of house arrest, probation and a lifetime as a registered sex offender after engaging in a same-sex relationship with another student.

Kaitlyn Hunt, 18, a senior at Sebastian River High School in Sebastian, Fla., has been charged with two felony counts of “lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12 – 16 years of age” stemming from her sexual relationship with a 15-year-old girl, according to arrest records.

“She had a mutual consenting relationship with her girlfriend who is three years younger, and her parents had her arrested,” according to Kaitlyn’s mother, Kelley Hunt Smith. According to Smith, the two girls started dating when her daughter was 17. Hunt turned 18 on August 14, 2012.

“This is about two teenage high school girls who were dating, and both consenting,” Smith told LGBTQ Nation on Saturday. “They are out to destroy my daughter, because they feel like she ‘made’ their daughter gay.”

Douchebag vindictive homophobic parents + broken laws governing consent = another young person's life ruined.

Good, serves them right.

[Northern Dominus]

So you'd be just as eager to send the theoretical 18 year old boy away for his "unseemly" relationship with a 16 year old girl as you would the 18 year old girl, correct?

Pretty much.

Pretty much? I detect a bit of moral objection in another sense there, which is what I would ask the parents in this case as to why they're objecting specifically.

[Ibwa]

in the name of love, go die in a hole. What does age really have to do with this besides adults thinking that every teen is stupid and doesnt kno what they really want?
come on, if you found you soulmate at 13 and hade to wait 5 years before you could do anything about it without fear of everyone close to you acting like a self rightchous know it all, how would you feel?

Sad.

But not imprisoned.

Your point?

the statitory rape law goes against freedom, wether you like it or not love can exist in kids under 18. In fact I think thas when a person has the most love is 18 and under. after that the real world comes beconing.

[Farnhamia]

It's called "statutory rape" for a reason, the reason being that the law says no one under a certain age may have sex, regardless of their consent or the lack of exploitation or force.

Okay, but laws are intended to punish people for unethical and immoral behavior like theft, harming a person or their property, and violating someone free will. The accused didn't steal anything, harm anyone or their property, or violate anyone's free will. The accused continued to engage in a romantic relationship with someone they go to high school with after their 18th birthday. Does that really seem like a truly terrible offense that deserves punishment, and a lifetime as a registered sex offender? Being a felon and a registered sex offender will negatively influence her employment and educational advancement for the rest of her life. It just seems like tax payer money could be used to punish real criminals, real rapists, and people who actually committed crimes that harmed people, as opposed to locking up an 18 year old for continuing to date someone less than 3 years younger than her. I don't think the accused did anything immoral. There are laws against marijuana use, and there are laws against kids opening a lemonade stand without the proper licensing, but it doesn't necessarily mean that using marijuana or opening a lemonade stand without first paying off Uncle Sam's cronies is immoral and warrants punishment even though the law might dictate such.

We're not talking about immorality. Well, I'm not. Frankly, the crime in my eyes is the 18 y/o's stupidity in thinking there wouldn't be any consequences. Seriously, you live in friggin' Florida and the other girl's father is a cop. Come on.

[Caecuser]

I've seen some mature fifteen year old teenagers better at making decisions that some twenty year olds. Age above a certain limit is not necessarily required for people to make informed decisions. Also, what happens when you suddenly turn eighteen? Do you magically receive the ability to give consent? What about the day before that, you're incapable of making any choices for your whole life before that?

[Evraim]

They could, but would they? How many nine-year-olds who have sexual intercourse with 50-year-olds would say afterward that they consented to it? And in the unlikely event that they do say that, I don't think I have the right to tell them "no, you're stupid so I know your own mind better than you do."

I'm quite certain something similar has happened in the past - though, most likely, the nine year old lacked the ability to give consent in a meaningful way. I find your refusal to pass judgment on the actions of your fellows within society somewhat perturbing, though I imagine you have similar sentiments about my willingness to pass judgment on the aforementioned individuals.

I oppose the segregation of children from adults in general; it is a very widespread problem, in just about every non-sexual aspect of life. In fact, I think that the forcefully-imposed segregation of children, and even teenagers, from "adult society" is a very significant cause of the disparity of "social capital and authority" that you mention. There is a significant power imbalance between adults and children precisely because children live their entire young lives tightly controlled and regimented by adults, separated from adult society rather than integrated with it. The power imbalance largely (though admittedly not completely) exists because adults actively maintain it. Nearly all of our social institutions are designed to exclude children; I think that's a problem.

I would disagree. The disparity between the levels of social capital and authority held by children and adults respectively has some basis in the psychological, physical, and behavioral differences between children and adults. In fact, as adolescents grow older, the gap narrows considerably on its own without implementing drastic reforms to the entire social order. One reason for this is that adults, having been alive longer, generally have more time to hone their own abilities and to accumulate prestige and wealth. This means that adults, as a general rule, have more power than children do, and that any relationship between an adult and a child is then necessarily coercive and unequal.

Testing would be an improvement over the current system, I think, though it would come with its own set of serious problems. I personally am not inclined to forcefully override a person's expressed will, even if I do think they're stupid; it's inconsistent with my morality.

I would have no problem with testing. The other alternative you proposed, however, is unacceptable because it presumes that people are on an equal playing field. It would do little to impact the abuse of children either.

[Dakini]

Sauce?

The statute linked to before doesn't contain an age requirement for the perpretrator.

(4) LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS BATTERY.—A person who:
(a) Engages in sexual activity with a person 12 years of age or older but less than 16 years of age; or
(b) Encourages, forces, or entices any person less than 16 years of age to engage in sadomasochistic abuse, sexual bestiality, prostitution, or any other act involving sexual activity

commits lewd or lascivious battery, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

"A person who" "engages in sexual activity with a person [...] less than 16 years of age" - It is not said that the person has to be an adult, over 18 years etc. So a person below 18 years can be engaged in a criminal act by having sex with someone below the age of 16.

Indeed, the alleged perpretrator may even be below the age of 16. One lawyer uses this as an example on his website:

A reoccurring problem in Lewd and Lascivious Battery cases is when the accused is also under the age of 16; as the law does not provide for any defense when the participants are close in age.

Example: If a 12 year-old were to have sex with a 14 year-old, either child or both could be prosecuted for the offense.

Instead, proximity in age can only be used as a mitigating circumstance to seek a downward departure from Florida's sentencing guidelines.

If it was illegal before, why didn't the 15 year old's parents call the police before? Instead they waited until the older girl was 18 and then did it (because that's when it became illegal).

Or because they wanted to hit the girl extra hard, waiting until she would be tried as an adult in the adult Criminal Justice System instead of the Juvenile Justice System, where the focus is on rehabilitating juveniles rather than punishing them.

The law is still really goddamned stupid.

I mean, I'm not like "omg, teenagers should go out having sex" but this is still pretty dumb.