What earns the title, "Sex Offender"?

A 17-year-old has sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend at a party. Without their consent, the act is videotaped. The videotape ends up in a parent's hands.

Does this boy deserve to be prosecuted?

What if the boy was 18 and still in high school? Does this warrant statutory rape?

Ultimately who does the responsibility fall upon in these situations. Is it the children involved, is it the teachers educating the children, or is it the parents who are responsible for their children's upbringing?

Are you personally raising boys or girls?! Would your perspective change if you were raising boys vs. girls?

[Laker]

If a senior boy can get inprisoned for having sex with a freshman girl...then they need to separate them in school. If kids are around each other in school and in class, then it should not be a crime for them to hook up.

[DCJenn]

I WAS a 15 yo girl having consensual sex with my 18 yo boyfriend. 'nuf said.

Jenn

I WAS a 15 yo girl having consensual sex with my 18 yo boyfriend. 'nuf said.

Jenn

Oh really...

EDIT: I guess no one liked my "To Catch a Predator" reference...sigh

[GrayMatterWife]

Re: What earns the title, "Sex Offender"?

For whatever they're worth, my thoughts in CAPS below:

A 17-year-old has sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend at a party. Without their consent, the act is videotaped. The videotape ends up in a parent's hands.

Does this boy deserve to be prosecuted?

UNDER THE STATE LAW IN EFFECT AT THE TIME (THE CASE YOU'RE REFERRING TO OCCURRED SEVERAL YEARS AGO IN GEORGIA), YES, THIS IS A PROSECUTABLE CRIME AND THE FACT THAT WINK-WINK-NOD-NOD "EVERYBODY DOES IT" IS NOT A REASON NOT TO ENFORCE THE LAW. IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE LAW, GO CHANGE IT. BUT SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT IS NOT APPROPRIATE. ORDINARILY, THIS STUFF IS NOT PROSECUTED BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF EVIDENCE AND THE FAILURE OF THE VICTIM TO PRESS CHARGES. HOWEVER, IN THIS CASE I'D GUESS THAT THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY MOST LIKELY HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO PROSECUTE, GIVEN THE OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE (A VIDEOTAPE OF THE CRIME OCCURRING). THERE'S LITTLE CHARGING AND PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION WHERE THE CRIME WAS COMMITTED ON FILM.

HOW DOES THE LAW WORK?: THE STATE LAW PROVIDED THAT SEX BETW A MAJORITY-AGED PERSON AND A PERSON UNDER 15 (I THINK IT WAS 15, MAY HAVE BEEN 16) IS RAPE, REGARDLESS OF THE UNDERAGED PERSON'S WILLINGNESS. THE LAW IRREBUTABLY PRESUMES THAT, UNDER A CERTAIN AGE, THE PERSON IS INCAPABLE OF GIVING EFFECTIVE LEGAL CONSENT. IT'S LIKE CONTRACT LAW--REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE PERSON SIGNED THE PIECE OF PAPER, THE CONTRACT ISN'T EFFECTIVE IF THE SIGNATORY WAS UNDER A CERTAIN AGE. ANYHOW, THAT'S WHY THIS KIND OF RAPE IS CALLED "STATUTORY" (THAT IS, IS RAPE AS DEFINED BY THE LAW, RATHER RAPE RESULTING FROM FORCE--WHICH, BY CONTRAST, IS CALLED "FORCIBLE RAPE").

HOWEVER, STATE LAW ALSO MAY PROVIDE AN EXCEPTION TO THE STATUTORY RAPE STATUTE. THE EXCEPTION IS SOMETIMES CALLED THE "ROMEO AND JULIET" EXCEPTION--IT PROVIDES THAT IF THE TWO INDIVIDUALS CONSENT AND CLAIM TO BE "IN LOVE" OR WHATEVER, AND IF THE UNDERAGED PERSON IS AT LEAST A CERTAIN MINIMUM AGE AND THE MAJORITY AGED PERSON IS NOT OLDER THAN A CERTAIN AGE, THEN CONSENSUAL SEX IT IS NOT STATUTORY RAPE.

HOWEVER, IN THIS CASE, THE ROMEO AND JULIET EXCEPTION APPLIED TO SEXUAL INTERCOURSE ONLY. THE SEX ACT THAT WAS VIDEOTAPED WAS FELLATIO, WHICH UNDER STATE LAW IS A FORM OF SODOMY AND CANNOT CONSTITUTE PERMISSIBLE SEX UNDER THE EXCEPTION.

What if the boy was 18 and still in high school? Does this warrant statutory rape?

DOESN'T MATTER. HE WAS MAJORITY-AGED. THE STATUTE DOES NOT PROVIDE AN EXCEPTION FOR 18-YEAR-OLDS STILL IN HIGH SCHOOL.

Ultimately who does the responsibility fall upon in these situations. Is it the children involved, is it the teachers educating the children, or is it the parents who are responsible for their children's upbringing?

WHO KNOWS. EVERYONE INVOLVED HERE SHOULD BE ASHAMED. UNDERAGED CHILDREN DRINKING, GIVING BJs ON FILM (THE VICTIM PERFORMED ORAL SEX ON TWO BOYS IN A ROW), THE PARENTS, THE BOYS RECEIVING THE ACT. BEFORE I WENT TO LAW SCHOOL, I WAS A HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER. YOU WOULD NOT BELIEVE SOME OF THE STUFF I'VE SEEN KIDS DOING, AND THE EXCUSES THEIR PARENTS GIVE FOR THE BEHAVIOR.

Are you personally raising boys or girls?!

OUR ALMOST-THREE-YEAR OLD IS A BOY.

Would your perspective change if you were raising boys vs. girls?

I THINK I WOULD BE EQUALLY ASHAMED, ANGRY, AND DISAPPOINTED IF MY SON ALLOWED A GIRL TO DO THIS TO HIM UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES AS I WOULD BE IF MY DAUGHTER CHOSE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE BEHAVIOR. I WOULD BE DEVASTED THAT I'D RAISED A BOY WHO THOUGHT THAT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS KIND OF BEHAVIOR. AS A LAWYER, I WOULD BE DEVASTATED TO KNOW THAT HE COULD BE CRIMINALLY CHARGED. HOWEVER, I WOULD DO EVERYTHING IN MY POWER TO HAVE GOTTEN HIM PLEADED OUT TO AN OFFENSE THAT WOULD NOT HAVE CARRRIED THE SEXUAL PREDATOR CLASSIFICATION. HOW ABOUT PLEADING HIM OUT TO SIMPLE ASSAULT? ON THE OTHER HAND, IF THE VICTIM HAS BEEN MY DAUGHTER AND ADMITTED THAT SHE PERFORMED THE ACT WILLINGLY, I DO NOT THINK I WOULD ENCOURAGE HER TO PRESS CHARGES (ALTHOUGH I WOULD NOT "PROHIBIT" IT--SHE'S THE VICTIM, SO IT'S UTLIMATELY HER CHOICE). RATHER, I WOULD FOCUS ON GETTING HER SOME IMMEDIATE HELP WITH HER SELF-ESTEEM AND PERSONAL ISSUES. I GET HER SOME HELP SO SHE DOESN'T MAKE SUCH POOR CHOICES NEXT TIME.

I KNOW PEOPLE MIGHT DISAGREE WITH ME AND SAY THAT I SHOULD 100% ENCOURAGE HER TO PURSUE LEGAL RECOURSE (PRESS CHARGES). HOWEVER, STATUTORY RAPE IS A PRETTY ANTIQUATED LAW, DERIVED FROM THE CONCEPT THAT WOMEN (INCLUDING DAUGHTERS) ARE MEN'S PROPERTY AND MUST BE PROTECTED FROM DEVALUATION (IN THIS CASE, "DE-FLOWERING"). THE LAW COMES FROM A TIME WHEN WOMEN WEREN'T SEEN AS BEING ABLE TO MAKE COMPETENT CHOICES. I DON'T REALLY WANT TO TEACH MY DAUGHTER THAT BEING FEMALE MEANS SHE'S GOT AN EXCUSE FOR HER CHOICES AND THAT SHE CAN BLAME BAD DECISIONS ON THE FACT THAT SHE'S YOUNG. I MEAN, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD, IF UNDERAGED WOMEN WANT THE RIGHT TO OBTAIN BIRTH CONTROL WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT AND TO OBTAIN ABORTIONS WITHOUT PARENT CONSENT, WE MUST EXPECT OUR DAUGHTERS TO NOT THEN TURN AROUND AND RELY THE FACT THAT THEY ARE UNDERAGED AS A BASIS FOR CLAIMING THAT THE SEX WAS NOT CONSENSUAL. EITHER A 15-YEAR-OLD GIRL IS OLD ENOUGH TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR HER REPRODUCTIVE CHOICES OR SHE'S NOT, BUT I THINK IT IS AGAINST WOMEN'S INTERESTS TO BE ABLE TO "HAVE IT BOTH WAYS" UNDER THE LAW, BASED ON WHATEVER'S CONVENIENT GIVEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

[GrayMatterWife]

I WAS a 15 yo girl having consensual sex with my 18 yo boyfriend. 'nuf said.

Jenn

Yep. Me, too.

[PrincessFiona]

I WAS a 15 yo girl having consensual sex with my 18 yo boyfriend. 'nuf said.

Jenn

Yep. Me, too.

I am not ready to hear this...where is the sticking both fingers in her ears smiley? I can barely get through the 11 year old phase. :thud:


Back to the post at hand....I am not sure of what the age gap should be...but...two consensual teen-agers is surely not what the law intended?

kris

[GrayMatterWife]

I WAS a 15 yo girl having consensual sex with my 18 yo boyfriend. 'nuf said.

Jenn

Yep. Me, too.

I am not ready to hear this...where is the sticking both fingers in her ears smiley? I can barely get through the 11 year old phase. :thud:


Back to the post at hand....I am not sure of what the age gap should be...but...two consensual teen-agers is surely not what the law intended?

kris

Oh, boy...I don't envy you. I was probably considered really loose ("fast"? "slutty"? what do they call "easy" now?) back in the late-80s with BJs and other sex at 15 with mulitple partners (NOT at one time or in one night!!--I can't believe kids do that now!!) Nowadays, BJs aren't even considered "sex" by the kids and are often recreational group fun at parties. And, in a nongroup context, BJs are considered pretty standard and "appropriate" girlfriend/boyfriend interaction.

Seriously, you would not believe what my students did and I personally caught them doing. I once walked in on two male students, one fellating the other. Made for an interesting office referral sheet description.

[diggitydot]

It depends on the specific state, but several states have the requirement for the contact to be considered a crime that the older person must be of majority age AND at least a minimum of 4 years older than the younger involved party.

Sorry, but I don't see two stupid teenagers committing consensual sex acts with each other as "abuse". Dumb, potentially dangerous, asking for trouble, poor choice? Definitely. But not abuse. Abuse is an adult preying on and manipulating children for the adult's sexual gratification. (Just for clarification, I'm using the term "adult" to mean any person over the age of majority and a minimum of 4 years older than the other party.)

And, if it makes any differences to anyone, I have two girls and a boy. No, my opinions wouldn't change depending on the gender of my kids.