17 year old gets 10 years for having sex with 15 year old

If I lived in Georgia nine years ago, I'd be nine years into my ten year sentence, and a couple of other girls I knew would have just gotten out, having spent a decade behind bars because of me.

:shk:

That's so messed up. Thank God I wasn't unlucky enough to have grown up in Georgia.

Consensual sex between people just a couple of years apart should not be a crime, at the very most it should be a misdemeanor.

If states want to make underage sex a misdemeanor to discourage youngsters, fine (not that it will work, but it will make some folks feel like they're doing the right thing), but a FELONY?! That's ludicrous. Glad it was changed. The governor, Sonny Perdue, should take it upon himself to do something about the situation with this young man.

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Consensual sex between people just a couple of years apart should not be a crime, at the very most it should be a misdemeanor.

Does that include sex between a 13 year old and an eleven year old? What if the eleven year old is your daughter? While I agree that the boy got a raw deal, maybe he'll learn to exercise a little self control next time.

Originally posted by bluecruiser
While I agree that the boy got a raw deal, maybe he'll learn to exercise a little self control next time.

I imagine 2 years in prison has taught him THAT lesson.

I'll add that even if it were my daughter..I would think 10 years was a bit harsh.
Of course, There is the fact that it was the female that instigated the situation.
Life without a cell phone for that young lady,

I think that I remember seeing this on Oprah. I think, if I remember right, the girl was white. Remember, this is Georgia we are talking about.

I don't like the looks of this.The "exaggerating" enforcement of the law is really starting to become common(whether it's a little or a lot)
IMO anyways.

Not old enough to vote, join the military, or drink alcohol.

And yet senetenced for a mandatory 10 years.




All laws should have a "sunset" provision that makes the local, state, or federal government have to vote again in ten years to keep a law valid.

These kind of archaic laws should not be enforced at all. I'm curious how many people have actually been convicted of this. I'm also reminded of a similar case in oregon where IIRC a 16 year old male was convicted of statuatory rape of a 14 year old female, even though the mother of the female and the 14 year old consented.

These types of cases make us look like a third world country.

utterly sickening... You know both of these people were underaged. why should he be punished and not the girl as well?? I signed the petition

Does that include sex between a 13 year old and an eleven year old? What if the eleven year old is your daughter?

Yes and no, respectively.

If I had daughters, I wouldn't let them out of my sight except for school and other supervised activities, until they were at least 16.

No freakin' way am I going to be oblivious to the fact that my eleven year old is hanging out unsupervised with some thirteen year old boy. You'd have to blind me in my sleep to slip that one past me (even then I'd smell him and go in for the kill).

I'd be the stereotypical shotgun-wielding crazy dad; without a doubt the boys would fear me, and rightly so. They think they're so slick until they realize I'm in the bushes with nightvision goggles and a super soaker filled with wolverine musk, watching them throw pebbles at the second story window.



It's the job of the parents to protect their children from inappropriate advances and adult situations, it's not the responsibility of the state.

Rape is one thing. The law needs to be involved to keep violence from erupting. But consensual sex is quite a different story.

Why is it the responsibility of the law to dissuade teenage boys from going after younger girls, when it's clearly the responsibility of the parents of those teenage girls. Seriously, have we become so pathetic we can't do anything for ourselves in this country? We call the cops when there's a boy in our little girl's room?



As Chef on South Park says, there's a time and a place for everything, and it's called college.

[edit on 25-1-2007 by WyrdeOne]

Originally posted by LeftBehind
I'm curious how many people have actually been convicted of this.

Yeah I'm also curious about that.I bet that number would go up,along with other "exaggerating" convictions.
Although some might think these enforcements are necessary.Are we looking at a small preview of something BIG?

Or it could be because of irresponsibilities.

oh yeah i signed the petition,I believe 2 years in prison is already enough.

[edit on 26-1-2007 by tormentor]

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Why is it the responsibility of the law to dissuade teenage boys from going after younger girls, when it's clearly the responsibility of the parents of those teenage girls.

It should be the responsibility of the parents of the teenage boys too. I think the law is protecting the young girls because those parents are not doing their job. And you can't protect you daughter 24/7. Our neighbor's friend's 12 year old daughter got pregnant when she skipped school to have consentual sex with her (secret relationship) sixteen year old boyfriend.

That goes without saying.

If parents were more involved in the lives of their children, and had the trust and respect of their children, there would be a whole Hell of a lot fewer instances like the one you describe.

Why?

Because both the girl and the boy would have confided in their parents, gotten sound advice, and altered their behavior appropriately.

I read somewhere that working parents spend just twenty minutes a day, on average, in direct contact with their teenage kids. Compare that to an average of 2-3 hours on the computer or watching television (in some cases quite a lot more, 5+ hours_, 6 hours in school, 8-10 hours sleeping, and so on.

It's no wonder parents don't know how to deal with their kids - they don't even know their kids!

I understand how hard it is to work full-time and still have enough hours in the day for everything else, but parents have to sacrifice everything for their children. You have to essentially give up your own life until they mature enough to be self-sufficient, so figure at least a decade and a half.

It's no easy thing...

But the consequences of failure are severe, we see them everyday. :shk:

This makes me think-if the irresponsibilities go up then the enforcements of laws(exaggerated or not) would go up.
Yet what's causing people to go irresponsible?the media?who controls the media?
If this is a mass manipulation,then i think it's working.Lets try to counter that!

[edit on 26-1-2007 by tormentor]

[edit on 26-1-2007 by tormentor]

Originally posted by LostSailor
GOOD LORD!!!

Thank God almighty I didn't go to high school in Georgia... I'd probably have gotten sentenced to death!

You and me both dude.

Shock Horror! teenagers having sex...mobilize the National Guard!

What a ludicrous story. Unless there's more to it than we're being told, the girl is related to the D.A or the judge or something.?


tormentor...good point, I could be wrong but I was under the impression that Exagerated Enforcement of the Law was the norm in some parts of the US? Not all, obviously some states are different than others.

Giving someone multiple life sentences for example, I've never understood that and find it a little odd. It's not like you have nine lives like a cat.

Mind you I'm sure we have some idiotic laws here in Australia too.

Back to the original topic

Thats wrong, hes not a paedo or sexual predator. Its just normal behaviour. This is exactly what the UK police chief was on about when he said there should be more lenient sentences for cases like this.

As others have pointed out, you can kill people and be out several years earlier than this.

It's funny (strange). I'm 58 now, but remember back in the day when getting involved in baseball (our euphemism for getting it on in the back seat), that getting your hand involved below the ribcage was almost heaven and called getting to third base. Hitting a home run didn't happen very often, although one could only pray for it.

Girls who "went all the way" were really considered sluts and spoken of accordingly by the boys. The laws were horrible hard on us poor kids. Here in Missouri, lawful oral sex, even between consenting, married adults, carried very heavy penalties if they were caught. Girls who "went all the way" and got pregnant were dropped from school roles, and often disappeared to their aunt's house in Vermont until they graduated (had the baby), and were often scorned and looked down on in the community.

Still ... Even back in those ancient days, we knew the laws, or had a good idea of how severe they were. And acted, at least facilely, like they were respected. It's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Right or wrong, that is the bottom line. The boy, and the girl, both, realizing what the laws were, probably should have not been having oral sex in a place where someone was running around with a video camera. That shows disdain for the law and lack of respect for themselves, and a major lack of a sense of COMMERCIALISM. Really ... there are people who get paid good money to make videos like that, and child porn still carries a very heavy penalty here in the bible belt.

Before anyone beats on me for being a fuddy-duddy, or an old fart ... I'm not for that particular law (glad it's changed now), and if you don't like a law then you need to do one of two things, either campaign to get the law changed (a little late for this young man), or be very circumspect in that which you do, and how you do it, that may be illegal, while you are doing it.

If it is against the law, and you get caught, even though it may be a minor infraction, there will always be a judge, a prosecutor, or a cop out there who doesn't mind ensuring that you do the max if your caught. And you are responsible for your compliance or at least your appearance of compliance with said laws.

You can say all you want about the appearance of racism (he black, she white), or any other apparent inequality (he doing time, she let loose), but until a law is changed, it is still the law, and it is subject to enforcement (rightly or wrongly) at the pleasure of the court.

Maybe if her folk(s) had known what she was on about, they might have counseled mightily against that action, or taught her enough to respect and fear the law (a hold over from when I was a kid), or at least be smart enough not to do that which you don't want to be caught doing, in a more private or safer place.

Edited twice by me, because my spell checker was wrong.
[edit on 26-1-2007 by sigung86]

[edit on 26-1-2007 by sigung86]

at least he did something to get done for, while others do not have to do anything. i bet he looks back over every second of that time.

there are worse stories out there.

Originally posted by JBurns
I had a similar situation like this one time.

My partner and I were responding to a 10-52 (dispute in progress). Five minutes away from the scene we get another call (and are told to divert from the 10-52 to the new one). Immediately we knew it had to be serious for them to divert us. The dispatcher notified us that we had a probable 10-34 in progress (assault).

Upon arriving at the scene, we noticed a male (who was 16 years of age), and a female (who was 13 years of age). The male was clearly beaten up, and the girl (who claimed he hit her first) had no marks on her. I charged her with domestic battery & disorderly conduct. I was at first inclined to release the male after making a statement, however, during the course of his statement, the guy was actually stupid enough to write (not in these exact words) "the altercation began while we were having sex." As soon as I read that, I informed the kid that I was required to charge him because having sex with a 13 year old is clearly illegal. I was at intitially going to charge him with statutory rape, however, after interviewing the girl, I learned that the entire encounter was completely consentual. In the end I believe I charged him with the lesser crime of unlawful conduct with a minor. The male's charge was eventually dropped entirely by the prosecuter, and the female ended up with simple battery (disorderly was dropped).

Anyhow, the point to this story, I don't believe it should be considered "rape" if both of the parties are freely engaging in the act.

AT LAST!! Spoken like someone with a full head of brains! I have to take my hat off to you! Only an fool would agree he got what he deserved! I mean really - he was at school - a babe seduced him!! HELL YEAH!! I would give it too her too!!! Damn straight!

Originally posted by Nygdan
He broke the law and comited statutory rape on a minor. He belongs in jail. It doesn't matter that he was young when it happened.

In Pennsylvania, the age of consent is 14. Does this mean that it'd be acceptable for an 17 year old to have sex with a 13 year old?

These kinds of laws need to have an arbitrary age cut off, and it has to be stuck to, otherwise, there's no point to the law.

He was 17 and she was 15 .. in your example of PA he would be innocent of any crime.

I see a problem with this crime ... if oral sex is illegal in the great state of GA then why is the receiver the only one being charged. Wouldn't she be guilty of providing the oral sex? If he gave her oral sex would there be no crime?? It would be interesting to see exactly how the crime is written.

I don't know the laws of Georgia well but it definitely doesn't seem fair for a 17 year old to be locked up for 10 years with no parole possibility due to a consentual encounter in which the "victim" says she initiated.

Here in the golden state it is technically illegal for anyone under the age of 18 (there is no age of consent in Calif) to have sex. So in a technical sense if both parties are under 18 and have a consentual encounter then they both have commited statutory rape. It's simply not a report that is taken. Of course you'll always have the rape cases that might be more of a don't want to get into trouble with mom and dad situation.

Originally posted by bluecruiser

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Consensual sex between people just a couple of years apart should not be a crime, at the very most it should be a misdemeanor.

Does that include sex between a 13 year old and an eleven year old? What if the eleven year old is your daughter? While I agree that the boy got a raw deal, maybe he'll learn to exercise a little self control next time.

So is the age the deciding factor? Or the gender? If the girl was 17 and the boy 15 ... would the boy still be the "problem"?

The article stated the girls came to the guys party ... brought alcohol and drugs and instigated the sexual acts. The girl and her mom agreed to these facts. If there was a crime that was violated who is the culprit?

I signed the petition! Hell why should I? I am in South Africa! BUT HEY - I believe it was consensual and the dude did not take advantage of her – she initiated.

Let him free!! Let him free!!