May 22, 2013

"Activists say authorities are unfairly targeting 18-year-old US high-school student because she is gay."

"An 18-year-old American is facing felony charges over claims that she had sexual contact with her underage, 14-year-old girlfriend...."
The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida said [Kaitlyn] Hunt was being criminalised for behaviour that "occurs every day in tens of thousands of high schools across the country, yet those other students are not facing felony convictions … and potential lifelong branding as sex offenders."
An 18-year-old with a 14-year-old is going on every day? Is this charge of anti-gay prejudice cloaking what is really a movement to lower the age of consent (or to widen the age gap covered by "Romeo and Juliet" laws)?

97 comments:

Levi Starks said...

"Oh the places we'll go"

CEO-MMP said...

It's what has been said repeatedly--gay people in many cases want special treatment because gay that's why.

But I know of (don't know him personally) a guy who's in his 30's and is a registered sex offender because he was 18 and had sex with his 15 year old girlfriend.

But that's different, because not gay that's why.

Gahrie said...

There are 30 year old men having sex with 14 year olds everyday in this country. And when the 14 year old gets pregnant, he takes her for an abortion, no questions asked.

wyo sis said...

The answer is self-control, but that's not a popular idea. So, on with the show!

Matthew Sablan said...

I guess it matters if that area has charged any heterosexuals for doing whatever exactly the two girls did. If this is the first time they're pulling out the charges, I'd be suspicious. If it isn't, then tough luck.

gerry said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
CEO-MMP said...

"I'm so horny, that's okay my will is good yeahhhhh yeah!"

Even Cobain got it man.

John Lynch said...

I don't think the ACLU is doing anyone any favors.

Paul Zrimsek said...

In Illinois they're called "Romeo and Joliet" laws.

The Drill SGT said...

She's an adult. The 14 year old is a child by most every reckoning. If it were an 18 y/o male taking sexual advantage of a child, and the parents objected, you bet the police would consider charging...

slumber_j said...

You know what should be a felony? Designing T-shirts with rainbow-filled hearts on them, that's what. And not because it's gay.

SGT Ted said...

Now she knows how straight men of 18+ years feel.

You are 18. You don't get a pass to molest 14 year old girls just because you are gay. I chased off 18 YO pantie sniffers going after my 14 YO stepdaughter. She should be happy she didn't get met at the door by an angry dad with a shotgun.

A woman is held to the same standards that a man is and suddenly its "unfair". Typical female supremacist in action.

This person thinks she should be exempt from the law because she like poon instead of penis. Throw the book at her.

Paul Zrimsek said...

The ACLU, by the way, is one of those non-political 501(c)(4) organizations that the Tea Parties are being contrasted with.

Jay said...

Oh shock; gay activists want to have the age of consent lowered because gays are more likely to engage in pedo behavior.

Astro said...

Yeah, but is it 'rape', rape?

/obligatory.

Astro said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
jacksonjay said...


Didn't the celebrated Vagina Monologues feature statutory rape as a great learning experience?

Bob Ellison said...

SGT Ted is correct. It's not mostly a gay/lesbian thing; it's mostly a woman thing.

Ann Althouse said...

"Now she knows how straight men of 18+ years feel."

But some people are going to use this as a way to say now that you understand this and you're able to get some perspective because of your empathy for the defendant -- a victim-group person -- you can see why the age-of-consent laws should be changed for everyone. Those laws can be traced to the same sex-phobic/puritanical/old-fashioned mindset that hates homosexuality.

Matthew Sablan said...

I think someone should try and argue the reverse: If people are to be treated like children longer (that is, being able to stay on their parents insurance, etc.), should the age of consent go up?

Not because anyone thinks it is a good idea, but just to be contrary.

Aridog said...

Oh, just stuff this whole idea. An 18 year old having sex, hetero or homo, with a 14 year old is criminal and deserves prosecution and registry.

Romeo and Juliet my ass...18 to 14 is the bull-crap of an older teen taking advantage of a younger teen for their sole personal gratification. It is very likely that the older teen can't get along, or on, with her peers and engage an age appropriate partner.

I notice the 14 year olds' parents don't seem to think the "consensual" idea is so great. What is the point of an "age of consent" again?



TMink said...

So the idea is that is perfectly OK for an 18 year old to seduce a 14 year old (likely virgin) as long as they are lesbian or a boy scout?

Just wanted to make sure I understood the premise here.

Trey

LilyBart said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
m stone said...

behaviour that "occurs every day in tens of thousands of high schools across the country..."

Really?

TMink said...

Althouse, the laws protecting young teens from legal adults are good laws. If those good laws are based in Christian Theology then score another point for Christian ethics.

Trey

Bob Ellison said...

Ann Althouse said "But some people are going to use this as a way to say now that you understand this and you're able to get some perspective because of your empathy for the defendant..."

White American men don't think that way. We have almost no connection with victim sociology. We have been trained.

El Pollo Raylan said...

Criminalizing may be going too far is it still OK to mock the 18 year old? That's quite an age disparity: 18 and 14.

Look at the past: in the 1950s such pairings were often innocuous, and often led to marriages. Even the whiff of sexual couple were mock in heterosexuals, for example, Matthew McConaughey's character Wooderson in "Dazed And Confused:"
I get older and they stay the same age.

That was mockery. Why not in this case?

El Pollo Raylan said...

What a pathetic dad the father is. When I was 18, my dad wasn't out there in the media encouraging me to screw 14 year-olds. He would have expressed shame, not pride.

cubanbob said...

"Now she knows how straight men of 18+ years feel."

But some people are going to use this as a way to say now that you understand this and you're able to get some perspective because of your empathy for the defendant -- a victim-group person -- you can see why the age-of-consent laws should be changed for everyone. Those laws can be traced to the same sex-phobic/puritanical/old-fashioned mindset that hates homosexuality."

Somewhere in their is an an equal application of the law argument.

Mitchell the Bat said...

The youngster won't get pregnant and is unlikely to get a disease.

So what if great lesbo sex is going to spoil her such that no man will ever measure up?

Same goes for "Nymphomaniac" by Lars von Trier, in the sidebar.

Everybody! Get as much as you possibly can!!!

Enjoy the decline, motherfuckers!

Aridog said...

The article says ...

... advocates say older high schoolers dating their younger counterparts is an innocuous, everyday occurrence that is not prosecuted ...

Dating is not intimate sexual encounters....and when it involves that, the age of consent laws apply. Some not getting caught is not a justification for changing the law. Enforce it whenever apprehension is made.

"It's horrible. For my daughter's sexual preferences, she's getting two felony charges. It could possibly ruin her future," he said. .... Prosecutors have offered a plea deal to Hunt that would allow her to avoid registering as a sex offender if she pleads guilty to lesser charges of child abuse.

In other words, this is 100% bull crap for publicity.

Skyler said...

If an 18 year old man were to be having carnal relations with a 14 year old girl, we wouldn't even have this conversation. He would be in jail for a very long time and no one would shed a tear.

Some lesbians appear to think that their predatory natures are immune from the law.

bpm4532 said...

If an 18 year old male was having sexual relations with a 14 year old female, we would be proceeding with rape charges. It doesn't matter if it was an 18 year old female and a 14 year old male. It doesn't matter if it was same sex relations with a 14 year old.

Now if the defense attorney can point to a systematic exception for 18 year old males and 14 year old females, then he's got a case.

Civil Sense said...

Well, I'm not terribly happy about two high-school students having sex. That said, an 18-year old and a 14-year old who are both in high school doesn't seem that age inappropriate to me. I remember seniors dating freshmen when I was in high school, and it was no big deal.

The fact that this will likely cause her to have a criminal record and perhaps make her a sex offender shows that the law is a ass. No high school student, male or female, should be classified as a sex offender for merely having sex with a freshman in high school.

rhhardin said...

Nothing will work until the myth of the innocent child dies out.

Leland said...

But some people are going to use this as a way to say now that you understand this and you're able to get some perspective because of your empathy for the defendant -- a victim-group person -- you can see why the age-of-consent laws should be changed for everyone.

Huh?

So if you recognize that 18 yr old males are held to a law; that recognition some how means you have empathy for a female defendant being held to the same law?

If we were to say Jody Arias now knows what it is like for a male to kill his girlfriend, would that suggest we have empathy for Jody Arias?

Perhaps if this alleged lesbian rapist or Jody Arias had previous empathy for male assailants, they wouldn't think their gender or sexuality would get them off. Is that not the empathy being suggested?

Freeman Hunt said...

So really the ACLU is objecting because the state isn't unfairly giving the 18-year-old lesbian a pass with the law.

Aridog said...

What Skyler said...that is the standard here.

Why is being lesbian any different? Why would being gay be any different? 18 year olds fucking or muff diving on 14 year olds is not innocuous.

The twit has an offer of a plea bargain that lets her off of the registry requirement. That's reasonable I suppose. She wasn't bright enough to realize her behavior wasn't acceptable after repeated censures.

But this isn't really about that, is it? This is all about being exonerated after a crime is committed and apparently admitted...to de-criminalize something. F that.

X said...

she should run for mayor of New York.

Freeman Hunt said...

Is this supposed to be more understandable than an 18-year-old male and a 14-year-old female? Are we expected to have more sympathy? I don't.

jr565 said...

Many a young man has been snared by this law, so why not a lesbian?
But I'm sure she could get the morning after pill at 14 and not even have to notify her parents.
Old enough to stop a pregnancy but not old enough to copulate?

Patrick said...

Wait, I thought they wanted equality? Guess not.

Eustace Chilke said...

It's underhanded special pleading and tiresome bullshit on that account but if they'll do for heteros whatever they do for their sacred cow I can go with it.

Aridog said...

Civil Sense said...

No high school student, male or female, should be classified as a sex offender for merely having sex with a freshman in high school.

Raise any daughters? You find an 18 year old guy Schtupping your 14 year old daughter and you'd be okay with that? It is no different for a lesbian doing so in a manner of speaking. Why is a prosecution under the law now cause to change said law(s)?

AJ Lynch said...

Activists is a word only used to describe libruls. Ever notice that Professor?

Tank said...

In my area, one reason we have separate middle and high schools is to keep the older guys away from the younger girls.

Lyssa said...

Civil Sense said: I remember seniors dating freshmen when I was in high school, and it was no big deal.

I remember it happening in my high school, too, but I disagree that it wasn't a big deal. I definitely saw 14 year old freshmen falling in way too hard and deep for a fellow she was wasn't mature enough to say no (or wait, or let's use protection) to. Give it another year's maturity, some more time in high school and getting used to the new environment, things are better, but 14 is really young.

(I would agree that the offender shouldn't be a sex offender for life or anything, but he or she still definitely needs to face some strict sanctions.)

Curious George said...

"Paul Zrimsek said...
In Illinois they're called "Romeoville and Joliet" laws."

FIFY. You were so close!

BarrySanders20 said...

The lesbian perp's name is K.Hunt?

MadisonMan said...

I agree with Civil Sense -- this is a story as old as the hills -- Senior dating freshman. Freshman's parents go apesh*t, with the added twist of a same-sex kid throwing their world out of kilter.

Prosecuting your child's boyfriend/girlfriend is never a way to change your child's mind.

edutcher said...

OK, we've had the Polyamory Is OK post, the Incest Isn't Really Icky post, now we've got the Pederasty Happens Every Day post.

Mr Justice Scalia, Senator Santorum, please pick up any of the white courtesy telephones.

Astro said...

I'm a bit surprised by the comments at the bottom of The Guardian article. There are a lot of people who seemed to think that what took place was just 'kissing', based on published comments about a recorded phone call. Of course, the phone call comments didn't say what part of the anatomy was being kissed, nor did it say what other activity took place in the bathroom or elsewhere.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

Just another example of the gays wanting special treatment.

If this was a white hetero male in the same circumstance you would hear crickets.

Whats good for the gander is good for the fabulous goose.

One of those quaint concepts called equality in the eyes of the law.

Aridog said...

MadisonMan said...

Prosecuting your child's boyfriend/girlfriend is never a way to change your child's mind.

Oh bull crap...I did it, twice and it damn sure changed some minds. There can be more to 18/14 year old relationships than sex, and far more serious and dangerous felonies involved, depending upon the 18 year old's activities on which he brings his 14 year old BFF along. The sex is part of the link, or seduction, to get the 14 year old to go along.

All this wishy washy innocence theory is bull crap. Period.

CEO-MMP said...

I like the new profile picture, Freeman.

sinz52 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
sinz52 said...

Two centuries ago, this relationship would not have been considered a problem as far as age is concerned. (The lesbian nature of it would have been scandalous though.)

Parents often married off their daughters as soon as they felt their daughters were old enough. Child brides were not uncommon. In the 18th century, some girls got married at age 13.

The legal age of consent to sexual relations was much lower than it is today. In the 19th century in the state of Delaware, the legal age of consent was: Seven. The legal age of consent in Florida was: Ten.

http://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/primary-sources/24

I believe that the main reason why the age of consent got raised to its present levels was to get the child prostitutes off the streets. Child prostitution was also common in the 18th and 19th centuries.

And if you go back further in time, you find marriages taking place at quite early ages.

The prophet Mohammed is said to have married his favorite wife, Aisha, when she was only nine years old. According to legend, Aisha was so young that she brought her dolls with her on her wedding night.

A young person should be able to have sex when he or she is sufficiently mature. But you can't measure maturity with a calendar. It's a state of mind. I know some 20 year olds who are immature.

richard mcenroe said...

Once gay was "normalized," how long did you think it would be before pedophilia followed?

Marie said...

I strongly disapprove of anyone in high school having sex (with anyone of any age) and my disapproval isn't going to stop anyone other than my own kids and maybe not even them. Criminalizing inadvisable behavior does nothing except put more people in prison or, as in this case, put more people on the sex offender registry. Depending on how the SOR works where this happened, when this young woman is 50 the SOR will still list her victim as 14.

Would I be upset if my 14 y/o had consensual sex with an 18 y/o? You better believe I would be. But I'd be upset that he/she had sex at all, more than I'd be upset that the partner was four years older. I'm not sure at what point the age difference would be the part that makes me angrier.

While I think no one should be on the SOR, I see no reason to treat this 18 y/o girl any differently from the way an 18 y/o boy would be treated. There are plenty of gay men already on the registry, after all. Treating her as some kind of fragile flower because she's a lesbian is contrary to the current push to recognize gays and lesbians as "just like" everyone else.

MisterBuddwing said...

Just another example of the gays wanting special treatment.

If this was a white hetero male in the same circumstance you would hear crickets.


Which, I believe, is exactly what the gay rights supporters are arguing.

(So, then, who's getting the special treatment?)

edutcher said...

sinz52 said...

Two centuries ago, this relationship would not have been considered a problem as far as age is concerned. (The lesbian nature of it would have been scandalous though.)

Parents often married off their daughters as soon as they felt their daughters were old enough. Child brides were not uncommon. In the 18th century, some girls got married at age 13.


Kit Carson's second wife, one of the Jaramillos of New Mexico, was married at 13.

As soon as they could have kids.

SGT Ted said...

Those laws can be traced to the same sex-phobic/puritanical/old-fashioned mindset that hates homosexuality.

Only if you ignore reality. Even male gay rights groups have denounced NAMBLA.

The "anti-gay discrimination" charge is laughable on its face, because plenty of young men have gone to jail for having sex with 14 YO girls. But, suddenly when a female is the perv, we're supposed to toss out the law?

This shows its also part of the general feminist supremacist line that they not be held to the same standards as men, because its "unfair".

And yes, this may very well be an attempt to use the "bigot" card to lower the age of consent so that lesbians can have sexual access to underage girls. This is the female NAMBLA in action.

SGT Ted said...

And as a once 18 YO male that had the hots for an underage girl, but didn't act on it because of the law, I have ZERO fucking sympathy for any perv trying to game themselves some underage pussy by crying "discrimination".

What a bunch of feminist horseshit excuse making.

Colonel Angus said...

If they're having sex, its statutory rape. Just like if it was an 18 year old boy and a 14 year old girl.

What is the issue again?

Krumhorn said...

In the Game Of Thrones, apparently you can marry a girl as soon as her "flower has bloomed".

MisterBuddwing said...

If they're having sex, its statutory rape. Just like if it was an 18 year old boy and a 14 year old girl.

What is the issue again?


Whether those 18-year-old "boys" are being called out every single time, most of the time, some of the time, or hardly ever, and whether the 18-year-old "girl" in this case is being held to a higher standard.

(For the record, yes, I call it statutory rape.)

SGT Ted said...

Oh so because Kit Carson married a 13 YO over a century ago, its OK for 18 YO to bang 14 YOs today?

Right.

I also had a 18 YO son that was hot enough that he had 14 YO girls chasing him for sex. All of them were immature hormonal head cases that were at war with their moms or parents. ALL OF THEM.

None of these girls was even remotely equipped to handle the issues involving a sexual relationship. They were in the relationship for all the wrong reasons.

Chances are, this 14 YO lesbian girl is just like that, seeking inappropriate comfort by having sex with an adult because she is having puberty and parent problems.

Leland said...

Others have brought up something that I think should be discussed: Sex Offender's Registry. It's not this case brings any particular nuance to it, other than another 18 year old that will be labeled for life.

I've heard of too many situations in which the SOR is unreasonable. Probably the worse for me was a married couple for 20 years, and counting, in which the husband was convicted of statutory rape with his wife. They had to move several times because of his registry. That's absurd. I can see that as being absurd for this 18 year old lesbian, in time.

For a suggestion, how about for under 21 offenders, if you make it through a probation through age 25, you can come off the list. I say probation rather than convicted of a second crime, because probation is a bit more strict.

Lipperman said...

In the Arrest Affidavit
it says that 18-year old Kaitlyn was asked if she knew it was wrong to have sex with the 14-year old. Kaitlyn answered that she did not think about it because the 14-year old acted older. Classic!
The younger girl also ran away from home, and claims she spent the night at Kaitlyn's dad's house, where they had oral sex, and inserted fingers and a vibrator in each other's vaginas.

So this isn't just about kissing.
This is about sex with penetration, including the exchange of bodily fluids. No different than straight or male-on-male sex.
The cops should also investigate Kaitlyn's dad Steve. Did he know there was a minor in his house, unbeknownst to her parents, and that his adult daughter was assaulting her?

Aridog said...

Leland said...

It's not this case brings any particular nuance to it, other than another 18 year old that will be labeled for life.

Not if she is half smart and takes the deal the prosecutors have offered...which does not require SOR.

It is in fact similar to what you propose for under 21 YOA offenders...and that is a subject worth exploring. There are other felony statutes that make similar provisions for under 21 offenders and record cleansing.

However...her "advocates" do not want the plea, even if it is the best for the 18 year old girl, they want exoneration based upon some alleged others who get away with it, blah blah...for their own agendas. Great logic that...I've tried it with traffic cops vis a vis red lights, didn't work there either.

SGT Ted said...

The problem with the sex offender registry is that non-sexual offenses will land you on it. Drank too much beer and cant make it to the bathroom and get caught peeing in an alley and you go right on the registry. THATS what makes it stupid.

18 is 18 though and growing up, there was never any exception to underage sex simply because they were both in school that I can recall. Turning 18 meant the rules just changed, whether you were in school or not.

The consequences are well known, these are old laws.

I am suppose to feel sorry for peoples criminal actions following them around, when I was obeying the law precisely because I took the risks to heart and refrained from banging young things? I don't think so. When I turned 18, I started dating only those over 18. Others need to grow the F up or face the law.

There is nothing new about statutory rape laws and any man that got that particular speech from their parents once he turned 18 can attest to it.

18 YO girls are not exempt from this law, nor are they if they happen to be lesbians.



Curious George said...

"Lipperman said...
The cops should also investigate Kaitlyn's dad Steve. Did he know there was a minor in his house, unbeknownst to her parents, and that his adult daughter was assaulting her?"

That rainbow heart tee shirt will be a hit in the joint.

mariner said...

Skyler,
Some lesbians appear to think that their predatory natures are immune from the law.

Unfortunately they're probably right.

SGT Ted said...

Her defense amount to little more than "Boo-hoo, you're picking on me because I'm a lesbo." cloaked in legalese.

As to her claim that her victim "acted older" why, thast the tried and true claim of all the male child humpers.

Even Cheech and Chong made fun of statutory rapists in their comedy back in the 70s.

Perv Dude:"How was I supposed to know she was 13? She looked 15!"

Judge: "Bailiff, whack his Peepee!"

fivewheels said...

I just want to numerically add my voice to those who suspect that the lesbian issue takes a back seat to the woman issue. Just another woman demanding to be less accountable than a man.

Col Mustard said...

In most states the age of consent is 16 (30). In many states the crime of having sex with a person under the age of consent is mitigated by the difference in ages.

High school girls may not be 'ready' for sex but the culture they live in has sexualized them to the max.

My son, son-in-law and best friend are all high school teachers and claim many female students (including freshman) are overtly sexual in word and dress. They dare not counsel any lest they be 'accused' of 'noticing'.

FWIW, I am acquainted with a 15-year-old girl who's in a girl/girl relationship with someone a couple of years older (16 is the age of consent here). I asked her once what her motivation was and she said, "Sex is cool but getting pregnant sucks." Pretty sensible.

n.n said...

The 18-year-old is guilty of statutory rape with a hate crime enhancement. If we have thought crimes at all, then they should be applied equally. The 14-year-old is neither capable of offering consent or knowing her sexual "orientation". The 18-year-old acted to corrupt the minor by forcing her to engage in homosexual behavior. The 18-year-old has committed a crime against the individual, society, and humanity.

SOJO said...

I thought she was 15? (Other articles).

There is a three year rule in a many states so that someone dating a fellow high school student doesn't suddenly go to jail when they turn 18.

MisterBuddwing said...

The 18-year-old is guilty of statutory rape with a hate crime enhancement. If we have thought crimes at all, then they should be applied equally.

But are they?

Cedarford said...

n.n said...
The 18-year-old is guilty of statutory rape with a hate crime enhancement. If we have thought crimes at all, then they should be applied equally. The 14-year-old is neither capable of offering consent or knowing her sexual "orientation". The 18-year-old acted to corrupt the minor by forcing her to engage in homosexual behavior. The 18-year-old has committed a crime against the individual, society, and humanity.


====================
Bullshit with "crimes against humanity" spew.
Age of consent is cultural.

Most civilized countries started with age of menstruation - then some crept up based on 19th Century Victorian and such moral crusades to get rid of child prostitution and gays with their equivalent "rent boys".

Age of consent in most of Europe, East Asia, Latin America is 14-15 still. Age in Muzzie countries is 18, on the other hand....
With the US, Russia, Canada, UK, Australia, the Indian Subcontinent (the Victorian influence) the leading "age of 16 is minimum save for Romeo and Juliet waivers" proponents.
Most US states raised their ages, but half had 12-15 as OK (backed by shotgun weddings) up until the 70s and the "Sexual Revolution".

There is no universally recognized global standard for heterosexual intercourse. Half the world still criminalizes homo sex, with serious punishment inc. death for chickenhawks in Muzzie lands.
And of course, the world still says there is no age of consent for bestiality, no matter what the age of the sheep or dog, etc..




jr565 said...

sinz52 wrote:
A young person should be able to have sex when he or she is sufficiently mature. But you can't measure maturity with a calendar. It's a state of mind. I know some 20 year olds who are immature.

Are you on the board at NAMBLA or something?

Mary Beth said...

The day before she was arrested, police and the younger girl's parents secretly recorded a phone conversation in which the two girls discussed kissing in the school bathroom, said Hunt's father, Steve Hunt.

Isn't that illegal? I think Florida requires both parties of the phone conversation know that they are being recorded.

jr565 said...

Bullshit with "crimes against humanity" spew.
Age of consent is cultural.

Most civilized countries started with age of menstruation - then some crept up based on 19th Century Victorian and such moral crusades to get rid of child prostitution and gays with their equivalent "rent boys".

If the discussion were about being able to bed girls who had yet to menstruate, couldn't you make the exact same argument? THat the idea that you have to wait for the age of menstruation is a cultural norm?
WHich would mean that you should be allowed to have sex with girls, (as opposed to women).

Marie said...

Are you on the board at NAMBLA or something?

Ah. So this is what gets pulled out in discussions about sex...the equivalent of the racism dog whistle. Or whatever. It's meant to shut people up.

Nobody on here is advocating for NAMBLA. Discussing the pros and cons of current law is not the same as saying that ten-year-old boys love sex with 40-year-old men.

Rabel said...

I'm OK with this as long as the 14 year old child lesbians are required to use the blunt tips when scissoring.

Safety first!

gutless said...

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the, er, goose.

gutless said...

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the, er, goose.

Methadras said...

The dubious nature is that the parents of the 15 year old waited until the older girl turned 18.

damikesc said...

The dubious nature is that the parents of the 15 year old waited until the older girl turned 18.

Happens to heteros. Don't see why gays should be immune to laws.

n.n said...

Cedarford:

There were two crimes committed: statutory rape and a hate crime.

As for crime against humanity, you're the individual who is pro-abortion/choice, right? Your position is that a human life has selective value throughout its evolution from conception to grave. That discrimination based on age or stage of development is acceptable.

Do you always adhere to arbitrary standards?

There is no universal standard for almost anything. Even the principles of evolution, and the natural order generally, are subject to interpretation when they are deemed inconvenient. What's your point?

As for cultural standards, or their corruption thereof, you are making the case for not accommodating the peculiar demands of minority populations.

Sam L. said...

Under age is under age, no matter who or what you are.

n.n said...

MisterBuddwing:

No, they are not and that's the point. From slavery to discrimination, and from redistributive change to "diversity," which are generally favored by a selective rule of law, this is a cause of corruption and development of prejudice. It is their intention to manufacture exploitable issues based on selective standards.

Lipperman said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lipperman said...

‪Methadras‬ said...
The dubious nature is that the parents of the 15 year old waited until the older girl turned 18.


Not true. The affidavit states that the relationship began in November of 2012. Kaitlyn's DOB is 8-14-94, so she was 18 at the time.
On February 16th of this year, the day of Kaitlyn's arrest, the younger girl was still 14.

Leland said...

Aridog,
I agree, she should consider the plea bargain. In fact, I meant to make that point about her option to avoid the SOR. I'm for fighting for your innocence, but I doubt that's the case here. She's fighting for some nullification that will get her lawyer fame and her a life long sentence.

And Sgt Ted; I forgot about the public nudity = sexual offense issues as well. Reminds of the woman who claimed the naked man in his own kitchen getting coffee in the morning was assaulting her children that cut through his yard. Had he been convicted, that would be a sexual crime.

Baron Zemo said...

They should treat her exactly the same way they would an 18 year old man banging a 14 year old girl.


That's what equal rights is all about.

unbekannte said...

http://www.cotwa.info/2013/05/false-accuser-who-sent-innocent-young.html

"A follow-up to a story we've followed closely. Elizabeth Coast pleaded guilty yesterday to making a false sexual assault report that led to the conviction and imprisonment of an innocent man. Johnathon Montgomery spent four years in prison for a sexual assault that never happened.


[Elizabeth] Coast falsely claimed that [Johnathan] Montgomery molested her in 2000 when he was just 14-years-old and she was 10. Mr. Montgomery denied the allegations, but in 2008 a judge convicted him of aggravated sexual battery and other charges based solely on his accuser's story. He was sentenced to 7½ years in prison. Coast finally recanted her story last year and was charged with perjury."

Maybe this explains some of the outcry against the 18 yo. A male falsely accused of a sex crime gets prison. This woman, after committing what seems to be a sex crime, should get a pass because she is a woman.