Man has consensual sex with '17' year old, now a crime

[Keyboard Warriors]

Are lies to get sex someone fundamentally different in terms of the mental capacity required than, say, lies to get chocolate or lies to stay up late or lies to get out of trouble?

Uh, yeah, when you're talking about consent to sex, they certainly are.

Essentially you've reduced decades of study about the brain development of adolescents and the impacts on their ability to make informed decisions, right down to "if they are old enough to lie for sex, they're old enough for sex".

[The Cobalt Sky]

Uh, yeah, when you're talking about consent to sex, they certainly are.

Essentially you've reduced decades of study about the brain development of adolescents and the impacts on their ability to make informed decisions, right down to "if they are old enough to lie for sex, they're old enough for sex".

SOUNDS GOOD TO ME!

(15 year old speaking)

[Dejanic]

According to court documents, the girl’s mother told the judge, “I don’t want him to be a sex offender because he really is not.” Her daughter added, “I feel nothing should happen to Zach.”

[i]But the judge condemned what he called a culture of “meet, hook-up, have sex, sayonara, totally inappropriate behavior,” according to court documents. Zach was sentenced to 90 days in jail and ordered to register as a sex offender[/i]

Lol what. So the girl and her mum both defended the dude, the girl admitted to lying, but the judge basically made a ruling because he's socially conservative as hell and is against "hook up culture". The judges personal view points on a particular subsector of culture should have nothing to do with a legal ruling.

[Infected Mushroom]

Well, if a reasonable person in the shoes of the accused would could have thought (based on the other person's representation and general physical characteristics) that the person was over the age of consent (and he testifies to that and there's no reason to doubt his credibility)... then I don't think criminal prosecutions should follow.

Because with criminal offences, there should be an element of intentionality. And where that intentionality is lacking we should VERY strongly hesitate to impute a constructive intent unless the situation clearly calls for it.

To do otherwise would be to blur the thin line between criminal offences (which are supposed to have a mens rea) and strict liability offences (generally restricted to regulatory offences, where it doesn't matter what state of mind the person was in, if he did X he gets fined).

[USS Monitor]

No, it doesn't. She was 14, thus incapable of giving consent. He had sex with her. Ergo, he had sex with her without consent.

Ergo, he raped her.
No more, no less.
There are mitigating circumstances, that's sure, but still it's rape, a crime.
The male could have had doubt, and he could have asked her for birth certificate or something: he had no doubt.
I'm pretty sure that, given the lesson he received, next time he'll have doubts

Stagnant Axon Terminal: do you realize that consent is not a joke, and consent is a central tenet in the feminist thought? Do you realize that without consent - whatever the woman is underage or drunk or both - a male is always commiting rape even when it seems she's having fun?

Who the hell asks to see a birth certificate before having sex?

If that was a normal thing people did, underage people that wanted to have sex would just get fake IDs, and then you'd have to figure out how to deal with it when someone is fooled by a fake ID.

[United States Kingdom]

1. The mother's opinion isn't irrelevant. Fact of the matter is, if another situation like this comes up, the mother has the potential to determine a case, and influence the judge's verdict. If a man had committed a horrible crime to someone, and people wanted the person that committed that crime to be dead, and undergo the death sentence, the dead victim's mother can be able to influence the case, by stating that she does not support the death sentence. That goes for the father as well. If you think that the mother's opinion is irrelevant, then in your opinion, the parents, family members of the victims in Charleston's opinion are irrelevant as well.

2. It is a free pass, since the girl isn't being punished at all. The girl was an asshole for what she did.

I don't see anything about this case that suggests deliberate entrapment. You can't punish her for not being able to give consent, something she has no choice over.

She should be punished for lying about her age, and ultimately ruining this guy's life. This guy did not deserve to have this happen to him. The girl is an asshole for lying about her age(which she did), and tricking the boy into thinking that she was above the age of consent so yeah, I don't see anything wrong with punishing the girl.

[Chessmistress]

I don't see anything about this case that suggests deliberate entrapment. You can't punish her for not being able to give consent, something she has no choice over.

She should be punished for lying about her age, and ultimately ruining this guy's life. This guy did not deserve to have this happen to him. The girl is an asshole for lying about her age(which she did), and tricking the boy into thinking that she was above the age of consent so yeah, I don't see anything wrong with punishing the girl.

The girl is too young for a punishment. Also, she was raped: even if she thinks she wasn't hurted, in fact she was hurted - that's exactly the meaning of the whole concept of consent: if you're unable to express consent due you're underage and a male abuses of you, then you're raped, and, by so, that's harmful to you.
Saying she wasn't hurted = saying she wasn't raped = saying the fact she cannot express consent doesn't matter.
Can you see the fallacy in your reasoning?

[New Benian Republic]

She should be punished for lying about her age, and ultimately ruining this guy's life. This guy did not deserve to have this happen to him. The girl is an asshole for lying about her age(which she did), and tricking the boy into thinking that she was above the age of consent so yeah, I don't see anything wrong with punishing the girl.

The girl is too young for a punishment. Also, she was raped: even if she thinks she wasn't hurted, in fact she was hurted - that's exactly the meaning of the whole concept of consent: if you're unable to express consent due you're underage and a male abuses of you, then you're raped, and, by so, that's harmful to you.
Saying she wasn't hurted = saying she wasn't raped = saying the fact she cannot express consent doesn't matter.
Can you see the fallacy in your reasoning?

People should be able to say wether or not they were raped. And please keep in mind females "abuse" children as well.

[USS Monitor]

I don't see anything about this case that suggests deliberate entrapment. You can't punish her for not being able to give consent, something she has no choice over.

She should be punished for lying about her age, and ultimately ruining this guy's life. This guy did not deserve to have this happen to him. The girl is an asshole for lying about her age(which she did), and tricking the boy into thinking that she was above the age of consent so yeah, I don't see anything wrong with punishing the girl.

I'm not really seeing the logic of saying she's not mature enough to consent to sex, but she's still mature enough to be criminally responsible for lying. Either she's mature enough to understand what she's doing or she's not.

Let's imagine a hypothetical situation where the guy was not punished because he thought she was old enough to consent. Would he be harmed in any way by this experience if he wasn't punished as a sex offender? Not really. So I don't see any logic in punishing her if you don't want to punish him.

[Imperializt Russia]

That's a rather dishonest framing, since it's pretty evident of the age range of people who inhabit a school.

I don't know what you mean. It's unlikely he'll get clearance to work in a school - that's not my opinion, that's the increased scrutiny put on people working in schools that goes above and beyond a normal background check.

He probably won't be working for the FBI, either.

I thought you were making another swipe at the "I swear she was 18" take. Since it's pretty obvious that if a person comes on to you at the school you work at, A there's a definite probability (somewhere in the region of 80%) that they're underage and B, even if they aren't that's illegal anyhow for abuse of power.

[Skaaneland Continued]

She should be punished for lying about her age, and ultimately ruining this guy's life. This guy did not deserve to have this happen to him. The girl is an asshole for lying about her age(which she did), and tricking the boy into thinking that she was above the age of consent so yeah, I don't see anything wrong with punishing the girl.

The girl is too young for a punishment. Also, she was raped: even if she thinks she wasn't hurted, in fact she was hurted - that's exactly the meaning of the whole concept of consent: if you're unable to express consent due you're underage and a male abuses of you, then you're raped, and, by so, that's harmful to you.
Saying she wasn't hurted = saying she wasn't raped = saying the fact she cannot express consent doesn't matter.
Can you see the fallacy in your reasoning?

Personally I can understand this reasoning as it doesn't apply to the perpetrator. I do however not support euthanasia for those of sky blue colours.

[Pyravia]

Personally I think this is bullshit, what private citizen was against him in court? No-one! It was a misunderstanding and now this kid is a sex offender for 25 more years, this is complete and utter bullshit.

[Ifreann]

Personally I think this is bullshit, what private citizen was against him in court?

A prosecuting attorney of the state of Michigan.

[Esternial]

I don't think it's particularly fair that the judge takes out his resentment towards this "hook-up culture" on this guy. Sounds highly unprofessional.

Legally, rape did occur, but the statements from the girl and her parents should count for something. What kind of a poor judge are you if you're incapable of taking into account extenuating circumstances and base your ruling on "society and culture". Seems like a pathetic excuse to convict someone.

I think some investigation should be done into this weird judge.

[Gauthier]

I don't think it's particularly fair that the judge takes out his resentment towards this "hook-up culture" on this guy. Sounds highly unprofessional.

Legally, rape did occur, but the statements from the girl and her parents should count for something. What kind of a poor judge are you if you're incapable of taking into account extenuating circumstances and base your ruling on "society and culture". Seems like a pathetic excuse to convict someone.

I think some investigation should be done into this weird judge.

And then investigation reveals he's been doing hookups himself, or worse.

[Esternial]

I don't think it's particularly fair that the judge takes out his resentment towards this "hook-up culture" on this guy. Sounds highly unprofessional.

Legally, rape did occur, but the statements from the girl and her parents should count for something. What kind of a poor judge are you if you're incapable of taking into account extenuating circumstances and base your ruling on "society and culture". Seems like a pathetic excuse to convict someone.

I think some investigation should be done into this weird judge.

And then investigation reveals he's been doing hookups himself, or worse.

Or failing, which could possibly explain the hate towards this dirty hookup culture that doesn't want him in it.

[Ifreann]

And then investigation reveals he's been doing hookups himself, or worse.

Or failing, which could possibly explain the hate towards this dirty hookup culture that doesn't want him in it.

Hell hath no fury like a Grindr user whose messages all go ignored.

[Gravlen]

I don't think it's particularly fair that the judge takes out his resentment towards this "hook-up culture" on this guy. Sounds highly unprofessional.

Legally, rape did occur, but the statements from the girl and her parents should count for something. What kind of a poor judge are you if you're incapable of taking into account extenuating circumstances and base your ruling on "society and culture". Seems like a pathetic excuse to convict someone.

I think some investigation should be done into this weird judge.

The reason for conviction was that the guy pled guilty. Nothing untowards about that in and by itself.

[Ethel mermania]

I don't think it's particularly fair that the judge takes out his resentment towards this "hook-up culture" on this guy. Sounds highly unprofessional.

Legally, rape did occur, but the statements from the girl and her parents should count for something. What kind of a poor judge are you if you're incapable of taking into account extenuating circumstances and base your ruling on "society and culture". Seems like a pathetic excuse to convict someone.

I think some investigation should be done into this weird judge.

The reason for conviction was that the guy pled guilty. Nothing untowards about that in and by itself.

I am ok with the concept of statutory rape, I am ok with the plea deal worked out. I just think the judge went overboard.

[Esternial]

I don't think it's particularly fair that the judge takes out his resentment towards this "hook-up culture" on this guy. Sounds highly unprofessional.

Legally, rape did occur, but the statements from the girl and her parents should count for something. What kind of a poor judge are you if you're incapable of taking into account extenuating circumstances and base your ruling on "society and culture". Seems like a pathetic excuse to convict someone.

I think some investigation should be done into this weird judge.

The reason for conviction was that the guy pled guilty. Nothing untowards about that in and by itself.

I should rephrase: punishment was inevitable, but it seemed unfair to convict someone with this particular punishment considering the circumstances. Some of the restrictions he's received and being forced to register as a sex offender really screw up his life for what is strictly not just his own fault. People like this or not what the sex offender list is for.

This doesn't address your point, but I'd also like to add that rape charges should be more diversified, depending on the circumstances. It would allow more serious cases to be punished more harshly while cases like these can be treated separately, with a less serious punishment.

He's a sex offender, yes, but I feel like the list shouldn't just be a "one size fits all" kind of deal - at least that's the impression I got from such a harsh punishment.

[BK117B2]

She should be punished for lying about her age, and ultimately ruining this guy's life. This guy did not deserve to have this happen to him. The girl is an asshole for lying about her age(which she did), and tricking the boy into thinking that she was above the age of consent so yeah, I don't see anything wrong with punishing the girl.

The girl is too young for a punishment. Also, she was raped: even if she thinks she wasn't hurted, in fact she was hurted - that's exactly the meaning of the whole concept of consent: if you're unable to express consent due you're underage and a male abuses of you, then you're raped, and, by so, that's harmful to you.
Saying she wasn't hurted = saying she wasn't raped = saying the fact she cannot express consent doesn't matter.
Can you see the fallacy in your reasoning?

Under American law she is certainly old enough for punishment.

[Esternial]

The girl is too young for a punishment. Also, she was raped: even if she thinks she wasn't hurted, in fact she was hurted - that's exactly the meaning of the whole concept of consent: if you're unable to express consent due you're underage and a male abuses of you, then you're raped, and, by so, that's harmful to you.
Saying she wasn't hurted = saying she wasn't raped = saying the fact she cannot express consent doesn't matter.
Can you see the fallacy in your reasoning?

Under American law she is certainly old enough for punishment.

If anything, she should be punished with some of the restrictions that the guy's experiencing from being on the sex offender's list.

"Forbidden from owning a smart phone or using the Internet"

Since she also used this App to consciously lie to this man, the girl should no longer be permitted to access it - and since the state is willing to go as far as to ban the guy from access to computers, smartphones and internet altogether, I feel that should apply to this girl, too.

[Solitan]

I don't live in America, and I find this ridiculous.

She signed up for the adult section.

She told him she was 17.

She may have even looked older than she was, this is getting more and more common actually. As people are living longer, they end up appearing older than they actually are. I'm only 17 but my height means I've been mistaken for 19 and even 20 before. (16 is the age of consent in my country FYI.)

He believed her, and why not? The app is a dating app, it isn't a one time meet and f*ck scenario. The whole point of these dating apps is to find a relationship. If he saw her profile and such and started chatting, he would very rightly presume that she was also looking for a longer-lasting relationship than just a one time fling.

Therefore, he would have no real reason to doubt her claim of being 17, despite the fact she wasn't.

Also, being added to the sex offenders list for a consensual act with someone who clearly knew what she was doing, is so idiotic that words cannot express (sorry words, but there are just some things you cannot do).

He is now living under a label which other people live with, and many of these other people were probably in a similar situation to Zach. Meanwhile, actual sex-offenders who have committed rape, sexual harassment or other forms of sexual crimes are placed under the EXACT same label as him.

So, if he applies for a job, and they check his record, it won't say "Broke the law unknowingly and unwillingly after being misled by a false profile into believing a 14 year old girl was actually 17 and engaging in sexual activity with said individual", it will just say "sex offender", an umbrella term for all sorts of different people, many of which have nothing in common except that label.

That system, is utter bullshit.

[Skaaneland Continued]

Will you ever listen?

[Imperializt Russia]

Under American law she is certainly old enough for punishment.

If anything, she should be punished with some of the restrictions that the guy's experiencing from being on the sex offender's list.

"Forbidden from owning a smart phone or using the Internet"

Since she also used this App to consciously lie to this man, the girl should no longer be permitted to access it - and since the state is willing to go as far as to ban the guy from access to computers, smartphones and internet altogether, I feel that should apply to this girl, too.

Well, "forbidden from owning a smart phone or using the internet" basically makes finding work impossible before considering the giant "HELLO I AM A SEX OFFENDER" nametag stapled to his forehead.
How long does that restriction last?