Controversial same-sex case

[CountDeMoney]

Of course the small wrinkle is whether or not this got taken to the police was because of gender. And I think that's what is causing this to be a news story.

I don't know;  I think if her parents found out about her boning an 18 year old guy, they probably would've done the same thing.

[dps]

Of course the small wrinkle is whether or not this got taken to the police was because of gender. And I think that's what is causing this to be a news story.

I don't know;  I think if her parents found out about her boning an 18 year old guy, they probably would've done the same thing.

Some parents would whether the 18 year old was a guy or not, some wouldn't either way, for some it would make a difference, and for some it would just come down to whether or not they liked the 18 year old on an individual basis.  From a legal POV, though, I don't think their motives for going to the authorities should be relavent.

[Admiral Yi]

Is there any age limit on who a 17 year old can fuck?

[ulmont]

Is there any age limit on who a 17 year old can fuck?

Depends on the state.  In a fair number of places (including, inter alia, the state of Georgia), the answer would be yes, say, "nothing below 16."

[Siege]

that was rape and pedophilia.
Death penalty!!111

[Berkut]

This would really piss me off if I was gay, and active in trying to promote gay rights and fight against homophobia.


Not that this girl is being prosecuted, but that her supporters are trying to make this about her sexual preference, rather than her actions, which were clearly a crime.


The idiotic claim of the dumbfuck right is always that gay people want EXTRA rights. Which is just stupid of course....except now here is a perfect example where in fact the gay community is demanding that this case be treated differently because the alleged perpetrator is gay. The facts are very clear here - people are prosecuted all the time for rape in cases like this where the accused is straight. NOT prosecturing this girl in the same fashion would clearly be making an exception for her based on her sexual preference.


This is *exactly* what the dumbass right claims gays want - extra rights for being gay. The difference between this and 99.99% of the other times it is claimed, is that they are actually right this time.

[OttoVonBismarck]

My standard on these laws is basically, "could the two people have attended the same high school at the same time?" (assuming a standard grade 9-12 high school and normal age persons in those grades). If so, then I think it probably shouldn't be illegal for them to have sex. But this kind of is right on the limit it would seem, as you typically turn 18 during senior year or right after and typically turn 15 some time in your 9th grade year. In terms of age difference laws it's a mild example of the "American justice system" even pedophile-states like Canada have age of consent at 14, so this would be close to illegal there. But obviously these are simple statutes, and the girl is clearly in violation of the statute and it has nothing to do with her being a homosexual. Not sure why she believes she'll get better than all the other people prosecuted under these laws.

[garbon]

This would really piss me off if I was gay, and active in trying to promote gay rights and fight against homophobia.


Not that this girl is being prosecuted, but that her supporters are trying to make this about her sexual preference, rather than her actions, which were clearly a crime.


The idiotic claim of the dumbfuck right is always that gay people want EXTRA rights. Which is just stupid of course....except now here is a perfect example where in fact the gay community is demanding that this case be treated differently because the alleged perpetrator is gay. The facts are very clear here - people are prosecuted all the time for rape in cases like this where the accused is straight. NOT prosecturing this girl in the same fashion would clearly be making an exception for her based on her sexual preference.


This is *exactly* what the dumbass right claims gays want - extra rights for being gay. The difference between this and 99.99% of the other times it is claimed, is that they are actually right this time.

To be honest, I don't think most people care about that. After all, there are always fringe cases that those on the far right can point to if they try enough.

That said, I do agree that it seems off that this is supposed to be viewed as an important gay issue. Her parents should work in PR.

[Barrister]

My standard on these laws is basically, "could the two people have attended the same high school at the same time?" (assuming a standard grade 9-12 high school and normal age persons in those grades). If so, then I think it probably shouldn't be illegal for them to have sex. But this kind of is right on the limit it would seem, as you typically turn 18 during senior year or right after and typically turn 15 some time in your 9th grade year. In terms of age difference laws it's a mild example of the "American justice system" even pedophile-states like Canada have age of consent at 14, so this would be close to illegal there. But obviously these are simple statutes, and the girl is clearly in violation of the statute and it has nothing to do with her being a homosexual. Not sure why she believes she'll get better than all the other people prosecuted under these laws.

thankfully we raised the age of consent to 16, and there is a 2 year 'close in age' exception.  So the original story would still be a crime (albeit not one that would get you 15 years in jail).

[alfred russel]

That said, I do agree that it seems off that this is supposed to be viewed as an important gay issue. Her parents should work in PR.

Probably certain media outlets are giving the effort an assist...If you desperately want to keep in the news cycle a high school lesbian sex story with a cute blonde at the center, the gay rights angle gives the story some cover to stay there for reasons other than titillation.

[Valmy]

thankfully we raised the age of consent to 16, and there is a 2 year 'close in age' exception.  So the original story would still be a crime (albeit not one that would get you 15 years in jail).

This is the reason these cases get me so furious.  It is not that this probably should not be a crime of some sort but the penalties are just off the charts draconian.

[DGuller]

thankfully we raised the age of consent to 16, and there is a 2 year 'close in age' exception.  So the original story would still be a crime (albeit not one that would get you 15 years in jail).

This is the reason these cases get me so furious.  It is not that this probably should not be a crime of some sort but the penalties are just off the charts draconian.

You can say that about prison sentence for almost every crime.  It's hard for Americans to appreciate just how utterly out of line prison sentences are for most crimes here, because that's all they've known.  It also doesn't help that once you get a prison record, you're pretty much barred from employment in a lot of fields, especially if you're a "convicted sex offender".

[derspiess]

Some parents would whether the 18 year old was a guy or not, some wouldn't either way, for some it would make a difference, and for some it would just come down to whether or not they liked the 18 year old on an individual basis.  From a legal POV, though, I don't think their motives for going to the authorities should be relavent.

Ditto.

[OttoVonBismarck]

I've actually in the past, amongst family of mine that the criminal justice system should have some sort of uniform code that all states follow. The States can control implementation and actual exercising of local police power, but I don't see what compelling societal interest there is for me raping and murdering someone in West Virginia and being sent to prison for 25 years and doing the same in Virginia and being sentenced to death. Some States have shockingly lax punishments for serious, serious crimes. I bring up West Virginia because it borders Virginia and I've heard of several cases that boggle the mind where the defendant gets a light sentence for a horrific crime.

The whole sentencing regime is just screwed up, at the Federal and State level. Federal law punishes drug possession far too harshly and with no judicial discretion allowed, many States do the same.

Generally I'm opposed to the European model you seem in some places where you can't get a life sentence. I think for a category of crimes the basic sentence should always be life (murder, rape, serious assaults that cause life long, debilitating injuries) and then I think the rest of your crimes should require mild sentences in lower security prisons for "mild" violent crimes and non-violent crimes should carry no prison term except when they involve people who are serially committing such crimes and have spurned multiple chances to correct their behavior.

[DGuller]

Life sentence for rape?  That's another area where US criminal code hasn't quite caught up to civilized world.  Yes, rape is bad, and it's traumatic to the victim, but at the end of the day the victim can move on with their life, unlike the murder victims.  If the legal system equates rape to murder, then what's the incentive to keep the rape victim alive?