tso-d_chris 0 #51 October 1, 2005 QuoteThere is a distinction between the two. If a 19 year old boinks a 15 year old, that's statutory rape so to speak. BUT, a 40 year old man having sex with a 14 year old is pedophilia. What makes the distinction? the larger age difference of the "partners" or the age of the minor? I was under the impression that it was pedophilia if the minor was pre-pubescent, while it was statutory rape if the minor was physically an adult. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lisamariewillbe 1 #52 October 1, 2005 statutory rape is a person who above the age of consent has sex with someone who is by law not old enough to consent. However, often times as the minor grows older, the sexual attraction still remains past when the child is no longer a child pedophile is when the sexual interest is toward children, either prepubescent or at the beginning of puberty and it is something that remains a sexual attraction often times through there life. some say that the age difference needs to be greater then 5 years to be considered a pedophile, the sexual interest is the primary one, that is, exclusively or mainly toward children and it rarely changes.Sudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycop 0 #53 October 1, 2005 Dude, I ain't gonna 'splain this if ya ain't gonna understand. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #54 October 1, 2005 QuoteDude, I ain't gonna 'splain this if ya ain't gonna understand. Umm, Dude, That has got to be the worst reason I have ever heard for not explaining something. I could not tell from your explanation whether the difference was due to age 14 vs age 15, or whether it was from age 19 vs. age 40. I apologize for not wanting to remain ignorant about the difference. You claimed to be an authority; I sought clarifying information. Is that really such a bad thing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycop 0 #55 October 1, 2005 You'd have to ask a mental health professional the clinical definition. Lisamaries explaination is pretty close. Again, in most states the law makes allowances for what most people would call "youthful indiscretions," where the victim is normally no more than 5 years older than the victim. In my state the age of consent is 16, and the felony threshold for a felony offense is less than 14, with the offender being over 18. The penalty increases if the victim is less than 12, regardless of the age of the offender. I thought that I was pretty clear, if not then there is your clarification. "or whether it was from age 19 vs. age 40." In the case of a 4O year having sexual relations with a 19 year old, those usally end up with a letter starting "Dear Penthouse, I thought I'd never write a letter like this but,............" "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skymedic 0 #56 October 1, 2005 QuoteUmm, Dude, That has got to be the worst reason I have ever heard for not explaining something. No...just typical cop reasoning... Marc otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycop 0 #57 October 1, 2005 Coming from a foundation-saver, that doesn't surprise me................. Oh yea, my dad can beat up your dad!!! "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
somethinelse 0 #58 October 2, 2005 he's computer tech guy in between jobs right now... NO IDEA how this all got started tho. Reason I care at all about him is he is family. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
somethinelse 0 #59 October 2, 2005 this is relly a crappy thing to have someone you know do to anybody, ya know? We are very privately trying to deal withthe horrible fall out right now. Only three in the family know, and I am the one trying to hold it all together for them all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #60 October 2, 2005 It is a shitty thing to have happen. You can't hold it together for your whole family, though. Hope you don't wear yourself out trying.... Peace~ linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
somethinelse 0 #61 October 2, 2005 Trying to be objective. The 80's were wild for me but I did finally get myself straightened out...So I understand the nature of obsessions and addictions. I just need to get some perspective and find out the details to sort out what been going on and the real nature of what all this crap is that this dude has gotten himself wrapped up in. But YES I KNOW this is really bad. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #62 October 2, 2005 I can't really put my finger on it, but there's something about this type of bust that makes me uneasy. Maybe it's because I've never had any dealings with sexual predators and I don't have any real attachment to kids--I don't know. One thing that I definitely do *not* like about situations where kids are victimized for real over the internet is that I don't think I have ever heard of the parents being held accountable. For example, when a parent screams that their kids were "exposed" to porn on the internet and talk about banning porn on the internet, I think they should first explain why they give their kids free reign in an environment that they KNOW includes material not suitable for minors. Are there any police stings where police act as online sexual predators and then contact the parents of the kid who they have set up a meet with? I can agree that any adult who tries to set up a meet for sex with a child is really screwed up and needs to be stopped BUT it seems to me they are only part of the equation and parental negligence is another part. BTW, I am in no way trying to suggest that sexual predators shouldn't be prosecuted. Any thoughts? Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lisamariewillbe 1 #63 October 2, 2005 QuoteOne thing that I definitely do *not* like about situations where kids are victimized for real over the internet is that I don't think I have ever heard of the parents being held accountable. For example, when a parent screams that their kids were "exposed" to porn on the internet and talk about banning porn on the internet, I think they should first explain why they give their kids free reign in an environment that they KNOW includes material not suitable for minors. I agree, to often now, parents use computers , television and video games as a babysitter. However, when it would come to a pre-teen or a teen in a chat room, you can not always stop that type of action. As far as a child seeing porn and such by going to websites, yes theres programs to stop that, but unless the parent is over the childs shoulder all the time he/she could strike up relationships via chat without the parents even knowing. Compare this to when I was a child, I snuck out of the house after my parents were asleep, to go hang out with my boyfriend. My parents to this day still never knew, didnt mean they were bad parents. Equate that to a young teen who is online .... a parent can not be there all the time. So they meet people online who are not what they seem or out for no good. And its not like we can take computers away, hell my 1st grader has homework where he has to use the web. Generally the software that keeps porn off the internet does not stop chat platforms. Were also talking about an adult luring a child for sexual gain. It is much different then the little group of boys who snuck into dads underware drawer to look at boobies. Sometimes the parents find out to late, sometimes they may never find out. QuoteAre there any police stings where police act as online sexual predators and then contact the parents of the kid who they have set up a meet with? Whats that mean? Do you mean that the parent of the child is ratted out by the police that they were using the internet for this sort of thing? I believe they are notified. I agree with you to an extent, however, depending on the circumstances I do not feel that a parent is negligent when a child is lured into sex via the internet by an adult. If that were the case I think everyones parents would have been considered negligent, think of everything you did as a child, that you didnt get caught .... now think about this generation that has the same abilities as we did as children but with technology.Sudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #64 October 3, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhat should we all be expecting to happen to him? Jail, hopefully. Oh, thats just the beginning if he's guilty. - He'll get an education out of it....he'll be learning about beltloops and guys named Bubba.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cloudseeker2001 0 #65 October 3, 2005 QuoteMy girld friend just turn 18 and I'm 23 *** So you were 21 and she was 16? I'm guessing the intellectual interaction was quite a challenge for you and is probably what the relationship is based on? You should be proud! "Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance, others mean and rueful of the western dream" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Channman 2 #66 October 3, 2005 >...he was 21 and "she" was 35 posing as a 13 year old girl. There will be a long record of there conversation in print. On top of that they will take possession of his computer and look at all the web sites he as visited among other things, as well as other printed material in his possession i.e. porno mags. If he was inclinded to visit and hook up with a 35 year old officer posing as a 13 year old girl, the dude is going to see time, and will have his picture posted on the Sex Offenders Web site for all to see for the rest of is life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #67 October 3, 2005 QuoteBut it's not illegal for the cops to wait to be hit on. All they need to do is log into the chatroom, name themself JrHighCheerleader and wait for the propositions to come in. And apparently it is that easy. It is that easy indeed. Just log in a chat with a girl´s name, add to that name the number 14,15,16 or 17, and you will see how much attention from pathetic people you get. QuoteSomeone that sets up a meeting with a declared minor - wtf were they thinking? Though if he gets arrrested right away, what is he actually charged with? It's not illegal to meet someone underage, is it? Exactly, unless he actually does something there is not much they can charge him with. But i don´t like the other option either which would be to charge him for something that he has not actually done and he has been lured into it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #68 October 3, 2005 Quotewell thats all good , wait till he commits the crime on a real minor. That way, that child or all those children (they dont always get caught on the first try or two) can live their life in SHAME, and hey thats if they even GET to live their life. Some minors NEVER come back from meeting their predator... go figure I understand that this is a sensitive subject for you, it is for everybody as well. Many of us know victims of sexual abuses and you are right, most of them are affected negatively for the rest of their life. But do you think that the solution would be to lure people into doing it so they can be arrested? It would be like putting a wallet in the floor and arresting the first one to get it. Or sending emails with porno pictures of pre-teens and arrest those who does not erase it right away. There is no easy solution, but i would be more comfortable with the police screening chat rooms, rather than participating and incite people to commit a crime. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lisamariewillbe 1 #69 October 3, 2005 QuoteBut do you think that the solution would be to lure people into doing it so they can be arrested? I dont think it is considered luring, when all that is done is an adult takes on the persona of a child and waits until they are preyed upon. Were adults , I cant lure anyone into anything. People need to be responsible for their own actions. If the predator isnt arrested by the "child" he/ she convinced to meet, then the predator most likely got another victim instead. QuoteIt would be like putting a wallet in the floor and arresting the first one to get it. You cant compare the two. A normal person does not look upon children as sexual creatures and it would not compute in their mind to have relations with a child. Picking up a wallet, and intending to have sex with a minor are different things. QuoteThere is no easy solution, but i would be more comfortable with the police screening chat rooms, rather than participating and incite people to commit a crime They do screen them, and when they find a potential predator, they do their job. The gather evidence, and depending on the evidence they can then go to the D.A. and either arrest the person or not. All I know is that as a mother, if anyone looked at my children in a way that a predator does, I would do anything to protect them and avenge them. Granted two wrongs dont make a right but when it comes to kids, I would spend my life in jail if that is what it took.Sudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miked10270 0 #70 October 3, 2005 Quote You would not even face a problem over here in Germany if you date her when she's 16. She can marry you at 16, if she likes (and her parents agree. If she's pregnant, most parents will agree Tongue) and with 18 yrs, she can do what she wants. Marry and/or vote. That's how it is in Arkansas too. 16 is the "age of consent." Once you're 16 you can have sex with whomever you want. BUT when you're 15 yrs, 6 months, having sex with an 18 y/o is illegal. linz Just for info... http://www.avert.org/aofconsent.htm Incidentally, the "Age of Consent" is also 16 years in Scotland - and there is a statutory defence available in certain circumatances for a person under 25 years having sex with a 14-16 year old. Mike Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #71 October 3, 2005 QuoteIncidentally, the "Age of Consent" is also 16 years in Scotland - and there is a statutory defence available in certain circumatances for a person under 25 years having sex with a 14-16 year old. Yes - that they honestly believed at the time that they had sex that the other party was above 16. ie: if a 24 year old has sex with a 15 year old while honestly believing them to be at least 16 they will not be guilty of an offence. The law does not recognize that proviso for older offenders and the crime becomes one of strict liability, nor does it extend to minors younger than 14. Whether or not the belief is honestly held is a matter for the jury. The same rules apply in the rest of Britain. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #72 October 3, 2005 Given the large number of people posing as someone they are not on internet sites and chat rooms, I fail to see how operations like this can be used as evidence of a felony. Just because someone says they're 16 or 13 or whatever doesn't mean anyone with even half a brain actually believes that.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #73 October 3, 2005 QuoteJust because someone says they're 16 or 13 or whatever doesn't mean anyone with even half a brain actually believes that. Are you saying that those that fall for it shouldn't be incarcerated because they are stupid? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #74 October 3, 2005 I think he's drawing from my response and suggesting that there is perhaps a defense out there for those who are caught in this sort of sting. If they honestly believe that the party they had been chatting to was actually an adult merely pretending to be a child then they would not be guilty of soliciting sex with a minor as they would have honestly believed they were soliciting an adult. Whether or not that belief was honestly held I would presume would be a matter for the jury and probably the most difficult element of any subsequent trial... but it would be a point the prosecution would have to address. This all depends on the drafting of the law though – it may be one of strict liability in some instances, I don't know. If the law requires a mental element to the crime though it is possible that such a defence would have merit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #75 October 3, 2005 QuoteI can't really put my finger on it, but there's something about this type of bust that makes me uneasy. I agree. Take the emotionally-charged kid stuff out of it and it just doesn't sit right. I just don't like the idea of cops enticing and then busting. Hey wanna but an 8-ball? Maybe! You're busted. Speed limit 55. 10ft later, 35mph. Busted. Ever talk to anybody about doing something illegal? Yeah. Busted.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
