Florida teen fights expulsion and criminal charges for same sex relationship

[njlauren]

Couple of points about this, which of course escapes the fundamentalist Christians probably behind this, who can't even read their own bible.

First of all, this isn't pedophilia, it is a statutory rape charge. Statutory rape is having sex with an under age of consent minor, but in this case, we are talking teenagers. Pedophiles are generally attracted to very young children, those pre pubescant, because they are that way; in this case, you had two people past puberty.

The other factor is ironically what conservatives have been screaming about bureaucrats, about lack of common sense and reading intent, it is like the moron at the DMV telling you you can't have a driver's license because they don't think your eyes are brown, despite having all the other paperwork.

Statory rape laws are designed to protect children from adults, because adults have special power over children, kids are wired to take authority from obvious adults or adult figures. SR71, what this would mean is that an 18 year old girl, not in that school, not in school, but working, could be charged, and rightfully so, because it is a stranger and an 'adult figure'.

In the context of the story, the older girl was 18, but she was in school, she would be a peer, not seen as an adult, and the law was not meant to deal with that. Boys have been prosecuted the same way, and it is the same cretins, it is the religious douchebags trying to enforce their morality, if they had their way any teen having sex would be put in jail..in this case, it is a double whammy.

If the law's intent is to protect children from adults, then this situation fails. In a lot of jurisdictions (I doubt in Florida, though, they are too fucking stupid) there are what are called "Romeo and Juliet' clauses, that specify if it is two students and the spread of age is within a certain limit, it doesn't apply. In this case, you have a 15 year old girl and and 18 year old girl, who are at most separated by 3 years, and in many places the law would say this is okay, because it is still two kids (given they are in school). A 15 year old dating an 18 year old high school student is not going to see that person as an adult figure, it doesn't work like that.

I hope some well off LGBT people get wind of this and the ACLU, I think they have a massive rights case in this one, to stop the religious morons from forcing their morality on others. If this goes to court, and they get experts to testify that this is not a case of statutory rape, that an 18 year old in high school is not what the law intends, that sheriff and prosecutor could face a lot of heat. I also have heard some libertarian hacker types are not very happy, and they have threatened retaliation against the younger girls family and the sheriff and prosecutor, be interesting to see what kind of dirt they find......

Calling this pedophilia or rape is idiotic, the problem is the law is being used to persecute someone in a way it was never intended, no therapist, other then maybe some drooling Christian idiot, would ever call this rape. They also might be able to get this thrown out on 14th amendment grounds, if they find out that there are 18 year old boys dating underage girls in that high school, they could move to have the charges dropped for selective enforcement, you cannot enforce laws against one group (in this case gays and lesbians) and not do it for others. Ironically, if that 15 year old girl was dating the captain of the high school football team, you can bet mom and dad would be bragging about it, the little shits.

And btw, I am a parent, so I am not talking hypothetically. Just that I am smart enough to know the difference between statutory rape and kids doing what kids do, but unfortunately these butt headed Christian types apply the same stupid, fundamentalist approach to law that they do to their bible, with the same trafic results.

 

[southern_gal]

just a thought

It is indeed terrible that these two (or at least the 18 year old) could have their lives severely impacted for what amounts to a teenage romance but what IF the older one was a boy? Happens all the time all over the U.S. The legal system will go after him with the same or possibly more intent to punish. IF the parents were to be brought into this mess that also seems wrong. I agree with a previous poster that teens will not always do the things we want or even act how we raised them to behave in a given situation. Seems like there should be a middle ground but where is it exactly? Do we want to lower the age of consent? Do we want to not make an issue of a situation when an adult is sexually active with a minor? Where do we draw that blurred line? There are so many questions that are involved in this issue. On the one hand it seems petty but on the other hand there have been many 18 year old males arrested and jailed for offenses with a consenting minor. Can we blame the legal system for being blind? Just sad all around.

 

[stickygirl]

I love to see the figures for 18yr olds being jailed for this offense. The middle ground in the UK I believe, used to be a copper going round to the house and giving the family a proper talking to - a warning. These days, the police aren't allowed to interfere because they become liable too. If the team coach knew about this and the pupils are both at school, then surely a counsellor should have intervened.... but yea, teens, especially ones blinded by love, are not always rational.
There's a world of difference between this and Steubenville ...

 

[haurni]

Statory rape laws are designed to protect children from adults, because adults have special power over children, kids are wired to take authority from obvious adults or adult figures. SR71, what this would mean is that an 18 year old girl, not in that school, not in school, but working, could be charged, and rightfully so, because it is a stranger and an 'adult figure'.

In the context of the story, the older girl was 18, but she was in school, she would be a peer, not seen as an adult, and the law was not meant to deal with that. [...]

If the law's intent is to protect children from adults, then this situation fails. In a lot of jurisdictions (I doubt in Florida, though, they are too fucking stupid) there are what are called "Romeo and Juliet' clauses, that specify if it is two students and the spread of age is within a certain limit, it doesn't apply. In this case, you have a 15 year old girl and and 18 year old girl, who are at most separated by 3 years, and in many places the law would say this is okay, because it is still two kids (given they are in school). A 15 year old dating an 18 year old high school student is not going to see that person as an adult figure, it doesn't work like that.

As I understand it, the relationship began when Kaitlyn was 18 and the younger girl was 14. At the time Kaitlyn was charged, her girlfriend was 15. From a legal standpoint, whether or not they were peers is irrelevant - it's solely the age that matters.

Here's the statute:

800.04 Lewd or lascivious offenses committed upon or in the presence of persons less than 16 years of age.—
(4) LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS BATTERY.—A person who:
(a) Engages in sexual activity with a person 12 years of age or older but less than 16 years of age; or
(b) Encourages, forces, or entices any person less than 16 years of age to engage in sadomasochistic abuse, sexual bestiality, prostitution, or any other act involving sexual activity commits lewd or lascivious battery, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

'Sexual activity' here is defined as 'the oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another or the anal or vaginal penetration of another by any other object'. So if one party is under 16, it appears that 'lewd & lascivious battery' is an offence regardless of the age of the other party. 'Lewd & lascivious molestation' is a lesser charge (not involving penetration or genital-genital contact) that allows an 18-year-old and a 16-year-old to grope each other in Florida, but if either party is under 16 it's still a crime.

I rather suspect that the truth is what others have said - the parents of the younger girl can't accept that their daughter might be gay and have decided to 'protect' her in this manner. I hate to say it, but I also think that if Kaitlyn had been an 18-year-old guy dating a 14-year-old then the parents would still have had reason to be concerned, i.e. I don't think it's a LGBT issue on the face of it (though maybe the younger girl's parents would have been okay with it if Kaitlyn had been a male football player - who knows?). I do fault the parents of the younger girl for not bringing the issue up with Kaitlyn's parents, and with Kaitlyn's parents for not advising her that an intimate relationship with someone 3-4 years her junior might not be a good idea. However, if all they've been doing is kissing, the crime of 'lewd & lascivious battery' doesn't apply - if the court can't prove that they at least groped each other ('lewd & lascivious molestation') then the case might be dismissed.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I wonder how many 18 year old men have been similarly charged in her area? According to the ACLU -- none.

 

[soflabbwlvr]

I wonder how many 18 year old men have been similarly charged in her area? According to the ACLU -- none.

In that area? Maybe. But it does happen, and the results can be devastating. Emily Bazelon mentioned a few in her Slate article today. Bazelon. She wrote:

It’s hard for me to see how you can take the homophobia out of this case. And if Hunt truly was having a consensual relationship, then these proposed sentences seem out of whack—and that applies to two years of house arrest as well as the sex offender registry. I’m struck, though, by the stark contrast between the support for Kaitlyn Hunt and the denunciation of various 17- and 18-year-old boys who have been charged with sex crimes because of their relationships, or encounters, with 15- or 14-year-old girls. Is this case really so different because its about two girls? Or does it reveal a larger problem with charging older teenagers for having sex with younger ones?

Compare Hunt to Genarlow Wilson, convicted at 17 of child molestation for having oral sex with a 15-year-old girl at a New Year’s party. Or consider the case of Marcus Dwayne Dixon, prosecuted when he was an 18-year-old high school football star for raping a 15-year-old girl who said he’d forced her to lose her virginity. The jury found Dixon not guilty of rape, but convicted him of statutory rape: The girl was underage, and she and Dixon had sex. Both Wilson and Dixon got mandatory 10-year sentences, and each served two years before the Georgia Supreme Court struck down the punishment as “grossly disproportionate” to the crime.

As a father of teenage girls, I can tell you that I would not tolerate ANYONE of any age or either sex having a sexual relationship with my underage daughters. The issue has come up, and it was dealt with appropriately.

 

[stickygirl]

As a father of teenage girls, I can tell you that I would not tolerate ANYONE of any age or either sex having a sexual relationship with my underage daughters. The issue has come up, and it was dealt with appropriately.

I'm sure any respectable parent would have the same outlook as you and I agree that Kate is being treated every bit as harshly as the boys you mention. That doesn't make it fair and it doesn't make it a good use of law.
What sticks in my throat is that the younger girls' parents knew about the relationship but did nothing ( so far as we're being told ) to stop it until they could get the state to take legal action on their behalf. This wasn't a quick fling - those two girls had an ongoing relationship then suddenly Bam! the police come knocking at the door. Both sets of parents are to blame - and don't say they didn't know because Kate had been kicked out of the school team, but they still did nothing.

BTW - not ranting at you ... just ranting! and thank you for posting

 

[Stella_Omega]

In that area? Maybe. But it does happen, and the results can be devastating. Emily Bazelon mentioned a few in her Slate article today. Bazelon. She wrote:




As a father of teenage girls, I can tell you that I would not tolerate ANYONE of any age or either sex having a sexual relationship with my underage daughters. The issue has come up, and it was dealt with appropriately.

I would not take you for a hypocrite, so I sincerely hope that when you say "teenage daughters" you mean girls from the ages of say 12 to maybe 15 or 16. After that, your job as their father is to encourage them to take charge of their own sexuality, understand themselves, own who they are-- in any capacity that might turn out to be-- and never again allow any man to dictate the terms of their sexuality.

Not even daddy.

 

[soflabbwlvr]

I'm sure any respectable parent would have the same outlook as you and I agree that Kate is being treated every bit as harshly as the boys you mention. That doesn't make it fair and it doesn't make it a good use of law.
What sticks in my throat is that the younger girls' parents knew about the relationship but did nothing ( so far as we're being told ) to stop it until they could get the state to take legal action on their behalf. This wasn't a quick fling - those two girls had an ongoing relationship then suddenly Bam! the police come knocking at the door. Both sets of parents are to blame - and don't say they didn't know because Kate had been kicked out of the school team, but they still did nothing.

BTW - not ranting at you ... just ranting! and thank you for posting

Until everyone has presented their side of the story, I wouldn't be too sure that I knew exactly what happened. Facts are often amorphous, especially in the early stages of a story. From my own experience, it sometimes takes the threat of legal action action to alter behavior. Sometimes it takes more than the mere threat. When my fifteen year old daughter told us she had sex with a seventeen year old boy, I confronted the boy and told him in no uncertain terms that he was to stay away from my daughter or I would obtain a restraining order and have him prosecuted for statutory rape. I got a call the next day from his mother promising that he would never see her again. And he didn't. Did I overreact? Maybe. Would I do it again under identical circumstances? Absolutely.

Bazelon presents the issue as perhaps being what do we do when older teens have sex with younger teens. I'm not sure I would put it that way. In Florida, the age of consent is 16. Do we say it's OK for seventeen and 18 year olds to have sex with 15 year olds, but not at 19? What about 20? I think we could all agree that a 30 year old should be punished, so where exactly do you draw the line? For me, 18 makes sense as a matter of criminal law. It is a difficult issue, complicated in this case by sexual preference. That shouldn't make a difference, and from a a legal standpoint you can construct a case entirely without reference to gender or preference. But realistically, it is an issue.

I would not take you for a hypocrite, so I sincerely hope that when you say "teenage daughters" you mean girls from the ages of say 12 to maybe 15 or 16. After that, your job as their father is to encourage them to take charge of their own sexuality, understand themselves, own who they are-- in any capacity that might turn out to be-- and never again allow any man to dictate the terms of their sexuality.

Not even daddy.

I view my daughters as sexually off limits to everyone up to the age of 18. After that, I hope they have learned enough from us to make responsible choices about who and when and why, and to always use protection under any circumstances. Seventeen we considered a gray area, where we counseled against sexual activity but fully expected it to happen, and we emphasized intelligence and caution, over absolute chastity.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Your daughter had sex at fifteen, but you considered her sexually inactive anyway?

I wonder how much she kept from you. I don't assume she lied to you, and maybe she was perfectly happy sublimating her body's needs for another three years.

I do not know why you don't see an issue of two teens having sex with each other as anything else. The older one is 18. She is not 21, she is not 30. There are very few people who have not achieved full adulthood by 30-- very few who have at 18.

 

[njlauren]

It is indeed terrible that these two (or at least the 18 year old) could have their lives severely impacted for what amounts to a teenage romance but what IF the older one was a boy? Happens all the time all over the U.S. The legal system will go after him with the same or possibly more intent to punish. IF the parents were to be brought into this mess that also seems wrong. I agree with a previous poster that teens will not always do the things we want or even act how we raised them to behave in a given situation. Seems like there should be a middle ground but where is it exactly? Do we want to lower the age of consent? Do we want to not make an issue of a situation when an adult is sexually active with a minor? Where do we draw that blurred line? There are so many questions that are involved in this issue. On the one hand it seems petty but on the other hand there have been many 18 year old males arrested and jailed for offenses with a consenting minor. Can we blame the legal system for being blind? Just sad all around.

It actually isn't that hard. First of all, the fact that they started dating when the older girl was under 18 right off the bat should have this thrown out, that at the time they started the relationship they were both under age.

Secondly, and more important, context. The 18 year old was a fellow student in high school, not a stranger, not a working adult and that is crucial to this case. Statutory rape laws were designed to protect underage children from predation by adults, and the age of majority (18) is but one measure of that, the other thing is who a child sees as an adult. The idea that 18=adult, period, is stupid, because it is operating without context. A number of states have laws that specifically put in limitation on statutory rape, for example, that if the underage person and the older person are within a certain number of years of each other, it is not considered rape. It would be very different for an 18 year old college student to be having sex with a 15 year old student, then an 18 year old high school student. It is why the Romeo and Juiliet clauses exist, because they recognize several factors in what constitutes an adult figure.

The law is all about context; kill someone who is attacking you, invaded your home, it is self defense; kill someone running away from you and you could be charged with murder, context is always present. What we see is the laws being used by Christian douchebags to enforce their stupid morality, they just can't resist using it like a club. The key factor in a case like this is harm, and if they really want to know, they should ask experts, not a prosecutor who graduated from the he hung me high school of law and joe billy bob the sheriff of butt fuck ville..among other things, this was an ongoing relationship that started when both were underage, right then and there the law should say no problem. What is a 16 year old and a 14 year old start dating (legal), they grow up, and the 16 year old is 18, the 14 year ld turns 16..do you arrest them, when they started having sex long before the older one was 18? Is it suddenly rape when it wasn't before?

Our laws have to go on what experts say, not what illiterate baboons trying to enforce Christian morality on people say. This isn't about protecting children, it is about using the law as a club to enforce their morality, pure and simple.

 

[njlauren]

In that area? Maybe. But it does happen, and the results can be devastating. Emily Bazelon mentioned a few in her Slate article today. Bazelon. She wrote:




As a father of teenage girls, I can tell you that I would not tolerate ANYONE of any age or either sex having a sexual relationship with my underage daughters. The issue has come up, and it was dealt with appropriately.

Really? So you would put them in jail if let's say a 15 year old girl has sex with a 15 year old daughter? Or woud you simply try and prevent it from happening? Teens are having sex, and using statutory rape laws that may very well not be applicable to enforce personal morality is idiotic. We can live with our heads in the sand and pretend like teen sex doesn't happen, but using the law to destroy another person to enforce morality is wrong as well. What did you do? Threaten the boy?

If you are worried about your teen daughters having sex, then the best answer is talk to them and hopefully instill in them the knowledge to make the right choices. I am not a big fan of teen sex, for a lot of reasons, but unlike the religious right, who love to pretend there was a golden age where teens didn't have sex, everyone was a virgin when they got married and so forth, it goes on, and it pretty high numbers, and using the law as morality police is dead wrong. I read that in this case the older girl was not 18 when it started, that could be wrong..more importantly, I think the law needs to be revised to take into consideration the difference in ages, how close they are. If the age of consent is 17, and an 18 year old high school senior has sex with a 16 year old, it is akin to a 16 year old having sex with a 16 year old, not a 21 year old. I am sure florida statutes are written like that, and I am sure down in the hookworm belt a 16 year old boy can be prosecuted for having sex with a 15 year old girl, selectively deciding who is underage.....

The intent of these laws is to protect children from being coerced into sex by an adult, that is the reason they were written, they aren't to stop teens from having sex or using the law to help parents who are pissed their kids are having sex, and as such, we need better to define who an underage person sees as being an adult. Like I said, in some states, this would not have been prosecutable under the so called Romeo and Juliet laws. Unfortunately, a lot of these laws were written, not by mental health experts, but legislators who take their law from the bible and 'community standards', which is bad law.

 

[njlauren]

Until everyone has presented their side of the story, I wouldn't be too sure that I knew exactly what happened. Facts are often amorphous, especially in the early stages of a story. From my own experience, it sometimes takes the threat of legal action action to alter behavior. Sometimes it takes more than the mere threat. When my fifteen year old daughter told us she had sex with a seventeen year old boy, I confronted the boy and told him in no uncertain terms that he was to stay away from my daughter or I would obtain a restraining order and have him prosecuted for statutory rape. I got a call the next day from his mother promising that he would never see her again. And he didn't. Did I overreact? Maybe. Would I do it again under identical circumstances? Absolutely.

Bazelon presents the issue as perhaps being what do we do when older teens have sex with younger teens. I'm not sure I would put it that way. In Florida, the age of consent is 16. Do we say it's OK for seventeen and 18 year olds to have sex with 15 year olds, but not at 19? What about 20? I think we could all agree that a 30 year old should be punished, so where exactly do you draw the line? For me, 18 makes sense as a matter of criminal law. It is a difficult issue, complicated in this case by sexual preference. That shouldn't make a difference, and from a a legal standpoint you can construct a case entirely without reference to gender or preference. But realistically, it is an issue.



I view my daughters as sexually off limits to everyone up to the age of 18. After that, I hope they have learned enough from us to make responsible choices about who and when and why, and to always use protection under any circumstances. Seventeen we considered a gray area, where we counseled against sexual activity but fully expected it to happen, and we emphasized intelligence and caution, over absolute chastity.

It isn't all that hard, states have done it, and here is how it is done:

1)If an underage girl i.e under the age of consent, has sex, if

-the other person is under the age of consent as well, no prosecution

2)If one of the people is over the age of consent and the other isn't, it is not prosecuted if the older person is younger then 18

3)If the older person is 18, the other person is under the age of consent, and the 18 year old is in high school as is the younger person, they are considered to be peers, not adult/child.

The key factor with age of consent is about consenting to have sex with an adult, it was never meant for two minors, despite what the droolers think (I don't think a 17 year old boy and a 15 year old girl should be illegal, the spread of age is too close). The key here is who is seen as an adult, and I doubt 14 or 15 year olds see a high school student of any age as an adult figure; on the other hand, an 18 year old who has graduated school, is not a student, would be seen as one. It is why experts should be making these decisions, based on science, not on mores, not on religion or what legislators think.

Among other things, that 17 year old or this girl will be treated like chester the molestor, the 35 year old man who has sex with a 15 year old. It it is two teens who are in school, within a certain spread of ages, it should not be criminalized, it is wrong to ruin young people's lives like that for something that bears little resemblance to real rape. The mutants in Steubenville sexually assaulted a drunk girl, there wasn't even the chance of it being consensual, and it wasn't statutory rape, it was rape, period.

 

[soflabbwlvr]

Your daughter had sex at fifteen, but you considered her sexually inactive anyway?

I wonder how much she kept from you. I don't assume she lied to you, and maybe she was perfectly happy sublimating her body's needs for another three years.

I do not know why you don't see an issue of two teens having sex with each other as anything else. The older one is 18. She is not 21, she is not 30. There are very few people who have not achieved full adulthood by 30-- very few who have at 18.

No Stella, I did not mean to imply that her virginity was magically restored. But she was uncomfortable enough with what happened to come to us with it, she stopped seeing that kid, and we had no further incidents. Whether anything else happened afterward, I really don't know. Teens can be deceptive when they want to be.

Whether she was "sublimating her body's needs" or not choosing not to fulfill some boy's needs is something we may never know. But whatever her physical needs may have been, she was not ready emotionally for what happened, and that's why she came to us.

You're right that Hunt was 18 at the time. But the other girl was only 14. That's a huge difference in terms of experience and emotional maturity. And if you are OK with an 18 year old legally having sex with a 14 year old, then where exactly would you draw the line? 20? 25? 30? What if the other girl was 13? Is that still OK?

 

[soflabbwlvr]

Really? So you would put them in jail if let's say a 15 year old girl has sex with a 15 year old daughter? Or woud you simply try and prevent it from happening? Teens are having sex, and using statutory rape laws that may very well not be applicable to enforce personal morality is idiotic. We can live with our heads in the sand and pretend like teen sex doesn't happen, but using the law to destroy another person to enforce morality is wrong as well. What did you do? Threaten the boy?

If you are worried about your teen daughters having sex, then the best answer is talk to them and hopefully instill in them the knowledge to make the right choices. I am not a big fan of teen sex, for a lot of reasons, but unlike the religious right, who love to pretend there was a golden age where teens didn't have sex, everyone was a virgin when they got married and so forth, it goes on, and it pretty high numbers, and using the law as morality police is dead wrong. I read that in this case the older girl was not 18 when it started, that could be wrong..more importantly, I think the law needs to be revised to take into consideration the difference in ages, how close they are. If the age of consent is 17, and an 18 year old high school senior has sex with a 16 year old, it is akin to a 16 year old having sex with a 16 year old, not a 21 year old. I am sure florida statutes are written like that, and I am sure down in the hookworm belt a 16 year old boy can be prosecuted for having sex with a 15 year old girl, selectively deciding who is underage.....

The intent of these laws is to protect children from being coerced into sex by an adult, that is the reason they were written, they aren't to stop teens from having sex or using the law to help parents who are pissed their kids are having sex, and as such, we need better to define who an underage person sees as being an adult. Like I said, in some states, this would not have been prosecutable under the so called Romeo and Juliet laws. Unfortunately, a lot of these laws were written, not by mental health experts, but legislators who take their law from the bible and 'community standards', which is bad law.

No, I would not have attempted to put a 15 year old boy in jail, but that wasn't the case. He was 17, and if it happened again I certainly would have pursued all legal remedies.

As far as two teens under the age of consent, I'm not in favor of that, either, at least when it comes to my children. I set forth my reasoning below. And even though the age of consent laws may not be applicable, I would have no problem obtaining a restraining order if necessary. I would do it in a heartbeat.

The difficulty I referred to earlier is the fact that consent laws vary from state to state. Some states make teen on teen sex a felony, others a misdemeanor. Consent itself is a slippery concept when coupled with age and emotional maturity. When you throw in sexual identity, well, that mucks things up even more. That's why I have my own personal bright line test.

 

[Stella_Omega]

No Stella, I did not mean to imply that her virginity was magically restored. But she was uncomfortable enough with what happened to come to us with it, she stopped seeing that kid, and we had no further incidents. Whether anything else happened afterward, I really don't know. Teens can be deceptive when they want to be.

Whether she was "sublimating her body's needs" or not choosing not to fulfill some boy's needs is something we may never know. But whatever her physical needs may have been, she was not ready emotionally for what happened, and that's why she came to us.

See-- I figured that you really know what you are talking about! That is very supportive, and very much in line with what we DO want to teach our kids.

You're right that Hunt was 18 at the time. But the other girl was only 14. That's a huge difference in terms of experience and emotional maturity. And if you are OK with an 18 year old legally having sex with a 14 year old, then where exactly would you draw the line? 20? 25? 30? What if the other girl was 13? Is that still OK?

Worth asking. I don't know the answers, actually. At 18, I fell in love with a 16 year old, and I do not think I was any more emotionally experienced than she was-- although I was physically experienced, I'd been fucking like a weasel for two years by that time.

But the problem with this particular case-- this case in particular-- the case at hand before us-- is that there are many other instances in this same school-- but the couples are het, and the local authorities don't feel the need to arrest those boys.

Only the girl.

 

[Dazzle1]

Just a question and it's serious, if this was a hetrosexual relationship and Kate was Kevin would this not be a clear case of stauatory rape.?

 

[Stella_Omega]

Just a question and it's serious, if this was a hetrosexual relationship and Kate was Kevin would this not be a clear case of stauatory rape.?

Yes, but the case would not have been prosecuted. That's the problem.

 

[Wolfman1982]

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liber...ame-sex-relationship-14-year-old-refuses-plea

18 Year-Old Facing Felony Charges for Same-Sex Relationship with 14 Year-Old Refuses Plea Deal, Heads to Court

Critics charge anti-gay bias is fueling the charges.
May 25, 2013 |



Kaitlyn Hunt, the 18-year-old high school senior facing felony charges over a same-sex relationship with a 14-year-old freshman classmate, has refused a plea deal that would have labeled her a sex offender and placed her under house arrest for two years. Hunt’s parents, citing that the relationship was consensual, had requested Florida prosecutors reduce the charges to a misdemeanor, but their request was denied by the state.

Hunt’s lawyer Julia Graves explained the decision to go to court in a statement: “This is a situation of two teenagers who happen to be of the same sex involved in a relationship. If this case involved a boy and girl, there would be no media attention to this case … If this incident occurred 108 days earlier when she was 17, we wouldn’t even be here.”

The case has generated considerable public attention, with many advocates arguing that anti-gay bias is fueling the charges. On Friday, Slate’s Emily Bazelon acknowledged why the parents of a 14-year-old would be wary of an 18-year-old partner while also recognizing the apparent role of homophobia in the case. She went on to note how Hunt’s ordeal raises additional legal and ethical questions about defining consent between high school students and the selective enforcement of statutory rape statutes more broadly:

Compare Hunt to Genarlow Wilson, convicted at 17 of child molestation for having oral sex with a 15-year-old girl at a New Year’s party. Or consider the case of Marcus Dwayne Dixon, prosecuted when he was an 18-year-old high school football star for raping a 15-year-old girl who said he’d forced her to lose her virginity. The jury found Dixon not guilty of rape, but convicted him of statutory rape: The girl was underage, and she and Dixon had sex. Both Wilson and Dixon got mandatory 10-year sentences, and each served two years before the Georgia Supreme Court struck down the punishment as “grossly disproportionate” to the crime.

Does it matter that Wilson and Dixon are black? That the girl in Dixon’s case was white? That after their convictions, the Georgia legislature made consensual sex between teenagers a misdemeanor? My point is that it’s so hard to know which older teenagers are predatory and which are in love, or at least fond of each other, with younger teenagers who love or like them back. Kaitlyn Hunt’s parents are understandably complaining about selective prosecution. They are absolutely right that most of the time no one calls the cops when a high school senior has sex with a freshman. But if the uneven enforcement of statutory rape laws is a problem, then it’s also a problem for the rare boy who gets caught in a prosecutor’s web.

 

[njlauren]

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liber...ame-sex-relationship-14-year-old-refuses-plea

18 Year-Old Facing Felony Charges for Same-Sex Relationship with 14 Year-Old Refuses Plea Deal, Heads to Court

Critics charge anti-gay bias is fueling the charges.
May 25, 2013 |



Kaitlyn Hunt, the 18-year-old high school senior facing felony charges over a same-sex relationship with a 14-year-old freshman classmate, has refused a plea deal that would have labeled her a sex offender and placed her under house arrest for two years. Hunt’s parents, citing that the relationship was consensual, had requested Florida prosecutors reduce the charges to a misdemeanor, but their request was denied by the state.

Hunt’s lawyer Julia Graves explained the decision to go to court in a statement: “This is a situation of two teenagers who happen to be of the same sex involved in a relationship. If this case involved a boy and girl, there would be no media attention to this case … If this incident occurred 108 days earlier when she was 17, we wouldn’t even be here.”

The case has generated considerable public attention, with many advocates arguing that anti-gay bias is fueling the charges. On Friday, Slate’s Emily Bazelon acknowledged why the parents of a 14-year-old would be wary of an 18-year-old partner while also recognizing the apparent role of homophobia in the case. She went on to note how Hunt’s ordeal raises additional legal and ethical questions about defining consent between high school students and the selective enforcement of statutory rape statutes more broadly:

Compare Hunt to Genarlow Wilson, convicted at 17 of child molestation for having oral sex with a 15-year-old girl at a New Year’s party. Or consider the case of Marcus Dwayne Dixon, prosecuted when he was an 18-year-old high school football star for raping a 15-year-old girl who said he’d forced her to lose her virginity. The jury found Dixon not guilty of rape, but convicted him of statutory rape: The girl was underage, and she and Dixon had sex. Both Wilson and Dixon got mandatory 10-year sentences, and each served two years before the Georgia Supreme Court struck down the punishment as “grossly disproportionate” to the crime.

Does it matter that Wilson and Dixon are black? That the girl in Dixon’s case was white? That after their convictions, the Georgia legislature made consensual sex between teenagers a misdemeanor? My point is that it’s so hard to know which older teenagers are predatory and which are in love, or at least fond of each other, with younger teenagers who love or like them back. Kaitlyn Hunt’s parents are understandably complaining about selective prosecution. They are absolutely right that most of the time no one calls the cops when a high school senior has sex with a freshman. But if the uneven enforcement of statutory rape laws is a problem, then it’s also a problem for the rare boy who gets caught in a prosecutor’s web.

It raises a lot of questions that should be answered. First of all, if they find out that the law routinely looks the other way with 18 year olds with underage students if it is heterosexual, then they have a 14th amendment case right there, you cannot prosecute one without the other.

The other problem is using statutory rape, like where a 17 year old has sex with a 15 year old. The age of consent is not some magic number, it represents an attempt to decide when a teen can decide to have sex with someone, and the key idea was at 15 a child had grown enough that they can say no to an adult, and that is key. If the purpose is to prevent teen sex, based on some idiotic Christian morality, then it should not be part of the law, period.

These laws need to be rethought, though the religious right will fight tooth and nail. The real question here is who will be seen as an adult by someone under age? Will a 14 year old see an 18 year old fellow student as an adult? With a 15 year old see a 17 year old as an adult, given they are only a couple of years apart? I doubt it, and I am almost 100% certain professionals would agree.

The age of consent was there to protect a 15 year old from let's say a 20 or 21 year old, not going to school with them.

It would be pretty easy to decide it, it doesn't take rocket science to figure this out.

1)If they are within x years of each other (let's use 2 years), it is unlikely the younger will see the older as an adult figure. so a 17 year old with a 15 year old would not be statutory rape, because the 15 year old would not see a 17 year old as an adult.

2)If they are both in school, let's say high school, then maybe we should have a clause that says if they are not within 2 years, but are in the same level of schooling (high school let's say), then it is unlikely the older kid would be seen as an adult.

So if an 18 year old who isn't in high school has sex with a 15 year old (they have graduated let's say) then it is rape, because they are now out of school and will be seen as an adult.

Yes, the gradations are murky, but for example, a 19 year old would be out of the picture more than likely. A 13 year old would be out of the picture, because 13 year olds generally are not in high school, and if they are, then the spread may come into play here, or maybe set a lower boundary and say if the child is younger than 14, it is automatic...

The point is this should be decided by experts.

I have no problem with the parents of the 14 year old being upset their daughter is with an 18 year old, I have no problem with the parents talking to the older gals parents and saying cool it, that is a parent's right and responsibility, I respect that, and with the poster on here with his 15 year old daughter, that is his right. What I object to is using statutory rape laws to punish kids in school for having sex, especially because the parents don't like the kid...as has been noted, in more then a few cases down in the boll weevil belt, 17 year old boys who happened to be black were prosecuted for statutory rape because their sex parthers were white and their parents were crackers and didn't like the thought of their daughter having sex with N,,,,,,, In this case, the jerkwad parents were upset their daughter might be gay, and decided to use the law to punish the older girl because she was one of them dirty queers, and that is wrong, and of course the legal establishment in WalMart land went along with it,because they are just as biased. Hopefully saner heads will weigh in on this, maybe the ACLU will get involved, because it is highly likely that at the very least, they aren't prosecuting boys for doing this. I would bet a bushel of bucks that if the older student were the captain of the football team, dear old parents would be oh so pleased their daughter was chosen, and if they didn't like it, they would do what they should do, talk to the boy and his parents, not try and get them sentenced for rape.

We need rational laws on sex, based on psychology, and we can't use the law to do parents jobs for them; if you don't like who your son or daughter is dating, then act like an adult and a human being, but I guess being "Christian" these days means being a malicious scumbag. I can only hope the names of the parents come out and that someone puts pressure on anyone dumb enough to employ them, because if they send an 18 year old girl up on felony charges that will dog her the rest of her life, they deserve whatever misery they can get.

BTW, before feeling any sympathy for the parents, they probably also if they knew what any of us were into would be finding out ways to make our lives miserable, too; born against Christians, which they reputedly are, are not exactly kind to anyone.

 

[stickygirl]

I know this might sound like I'm weighing in with the cons but when I was 14 the sixth-form students (17/18 yr olds ) seemed much, much older than me: the girls were like grown up women to my eyes. Seen from a later perspective ( I'm 21 now ) then of course you know that 18 yr olds are pretty naive ... and 21 yr olds are still immature in the eyes of many! So if you're looking at psychology then younger children are impressionable but if it were a clear cut thing then why would different countries have such a variation in legal ages for sex? In the UK the legal age is 16 and that seems about right to me.
Isn't it the case in the USA you need to be 21 to buy drink, but you can drive a car at 16? If the age definitions are fuzzy, with the age of consent for sex anywhere between 14 and 18, then the laws governing them need to be equally flexible.

My gripe here remains that it was the parents who should have advised both girls of the consequences. The younger girls parents should have said "If you don't stop seeing this girl, the police will arrest her and she'll go to jail." Did they say that? It wouldn't appear so. Instead the parents warned her a couple of times, then agreed between themselves "Right - we'll teach that other girl a lesson."

I'm shocked to find myself quoting Tony Blair "People are entitled to think that homosexuality is wrong, but they are not entitled to use the criminal law to force that view upon others... A society that has learned, over time, racial and sexual equality can surely come to terms with equality of sexuality."

 

[njlauren]

It is tangled and can be difficult to determine, it is why professionals need to be involved. Often ages of consent are based in factors other than reality, based in morality or other judgements rather than legal definitions of harm. From my days in high school, I did look up at the older kids as seeming so much older, but I dont think I looked at them as I would an adult or a teacher, for example, and that is the key to this.

More importantly, I think the law, even if we assume let's say a 17 or 18 year old with a 15 year old is some form of coercion, should be treated differently than an adult with the same thing. I am sure someone will point to steubenville as an example, but even there they made an exception, the boys were tried as juveniles, not adults. It is very different for a 21 year old to have sex with a 14 or 15 year old, then a 17 year old, and at worst the penalties should be different. Charging a 17 year old who had sex with a 15 year old girl as a felony is absolutely idiotic, branding them as a sex offender is absolutely idiotic when there is zero sign of being forced.

I think more importantly that if they find that the law routinely looks the other way with boys doing this, then it is obvious bias at play, and there should be civil rights law bought here. This is like enforcing rules still on the books about wearing gloves on Sunday, or blasphemy, that are being used as a club to enforce religious morality. If in fact experts say that an 18 year old girl with a 14 year old is statutory rape, then it better be applied uniformly, which it isn't, I can guarantee you that. And as far as the younger girls parents go, they just lend more fuel to the fire that Christians, especially Born Again Christians, are a bunch of mean, stupid, trash, who should be vilified and made fun of even more than they are. Christians claim they are a loving bunch, that they are out to lead good lives, what this shows is simply they are mean and cruel people who will use their faith as a hammer. As a parent, I can understand her parents being upset at someone so young in a sexual relationship, but in their case, they are using the law as a cudgel because they hate gays, think that if their daughter got into a relationship with a girl, it must be the 'devil's work', she must have been 'induced into the lifestyle', because that is just as stupid as most born again Christians are, they believe that drivel.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I am sure someone will point to steubenville as an example, but even there they made an exception, the boys were tried as juveniles, not adults

Well yeah, but that was only a gang rape. It wasn;t like they were going to want to see their victim again.

Not a longer, more loving relationship, which as we know is horrifying and probably criminal.

I hate what has happened to this country.

 

[klippert]

Sad how a narative out ways facts

http://www.examiner.com/article/flo...nd-criminal-charges-for-same-sex-relationship

Most high school seniors are excitedly preparing to put on their cap and gown and looking forward to the future right now. Kaitlyn Hunt, 18, is instead fighting bigotry and hoping she won’t be forced to go to jail instead of college. Her crime? Dating another student – a female student. Kaitlyn’s family took her story public on May 17th, via Facebook.

Hunt was a highly respected student at Florida’s Sebastian River High School with good grades and participation in cheerleading, basketball and chorus. She was even voted “most school spirit.”

All of that changed when she started dating a fellow student, a girl she met on the basketball team, at the beginning of the school year.

According to Kaitlyn’s father, Steven R. Hunt, Jr., the relationship caused waves at the school from the start. His daughter was dropped from the basketball team because the coach feared a same-sex relationship would bring unwanted “drama.”

Then the family was shocked and devastated when police came to their home in February to arrest Kaitlyn. She was charged with two felony counts of lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12 – 16 years of age.

Kaitlyn was 17 when the relationship began, but right after she turned 18, her 15-year-old girlfriend's parents pressed charges. Hunt’s mother, Kelley Hunt Smith, says the other set of parents have made it their mission to destroy her daughter’s life, all because they can’t accept that their child was in a same sex relationship.

The girl’s family petitioned the school board and got Katilyn expelled from school, weeks before graduation. This decision was made in spite of a judge declaring she could continue to attend school as long as she didn’t have contact with the girl.

The heartache for the Hunt family continues even with Kaitlyn forced out of the school. Steven said their younger child is also a student at Sebastian River High School and is forced to see words like “criminal,” “rapist” and “child abuser” written about her sister on the bathroom walls at school, despite his repeated request that the school to do something about it.

Kaitlyn has been offered a plea deal of house arrest for two years, plus a year of probation. This would delay her entering the next phase of her life and stay on her permanent adult record, limiting her career choices.

Her parents say all of this is because she fell in love with another girl and that girl’s parents couldn’t handle it. They are urging the public to step up to “stop the hate, free Kate” by signing a petition they will present to the Indian River County State Attorney’s Office. Click here to sign. You can also learn more about Kaitlyn Hunt’s story on the Free Kate Facebook page.

This article reminds me of one of the first head-shaking incidents so long ago. Where it was a young man, getting a prison sentence (of 20 years) because he blew another young man. The hypocrisy is insane, both in this incident and the old incident I am thinking.

This article is wrong...Katilyn she was 17 when they met, 18 when they hooked up in a school bathroom stall....I feel for this girl. I really do. BUT, There are more facts to this, and it's not just "Puppy Love". Kaitlyn isn't the victim here...the minor is...

The popular narrative, as circulated by the legacy media. But as with many such narratives, this one starts to unravel as soon as the actual facts are accessed. The New York Times, long the nation's gay paper, has in either, a fit of absence of mind or nostalgia for classic journalistic practice published the actual arrest report. A cursory glimpse reveals that Ms. Hunt was eighteen in her first encounter with the younger girl, and not a minor at all. The girl's parents did not "wait" to spring the police on her. That first encounter took place in the romantic confines of a stall in a girl's school bathroom. The younger girl then ran away from home and\crashed, as we used to say, with Ms. Hunt (whether the two girls planned this together remains speculation, though it seems likely)

Now, there's plenty here to cause any normal parent to want to unleash the full force of the law. But the most egregious is the fact that the juvenile girl was a virgin when she encountered Ms. Hunt. In other words, the girl was deflowered by Kaitlyn's Whee! machine. At this point, religious fanaticism of any sort becomes irrelevant, taking a back seat to the natural fury generated by protective instinct. Ms. Hunt is fortunate that she's only facing the criminal justice system.
It also becomes impossible to deny that Ms. Hunt, for all her charm, is a sexual predator. A capable lawyer would have jumped at that plea deal. Why didn't this occur?

A likely explanation is that Hunt is being advised by the gay community. Why gays would want consent laws overthrown is not in question. Youth is a commodity in the gay world, a pearl of great price. For gays, both male and female, it's the younger the better. Skeptics should recall Kevin Jennings, Obama's "bullying" czar, expressing shock when it was pointed out that he himself had broken the law by not reporting that an older man was sexually exploiting a student under his guardianship. The idea never occurred to him.


Police arrested her on charges of "lewd and lascivious battery" on a minor child. Although offered a relatively mild plea bargain, she turned it down, and is now facing fifteen years of postgraduate lesbian studies as a guest of the state of Florida.

A major irony lies in the fact that this is taking place in Florida, long the Western world's pedophile capital. At times it seems that every other week the Sunshine state produces news of one more rape, murder, or ravaging of a child. Who can forget the surveillance tape showing eleven-year-old Carlie Brucia being dragged off to her death by a crack addict?

As for Kaitlyn Hunt herself, the most wrenching part of the arrest report deals with records of a phone call in which her fourteen-year-old inamorata begs for reassurance that she actually means something to Hunt, that she's not simply a throwaway sex toy. Words like these have always gone a long way to instill a sense of responsibility, compassion, and decency in oversexed boys, transforming them into companions worthy of mature women. We can hope they do the same for Ms. Hunt. She's certainly not going to learn it from the gay world.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/05/kaitlin_hunt_gay_heroine.html#ixz

Bitch about equal rights....Equal rights under the law!!! again, for media outlets,
lack of facts makes the story go round. Travon Martin ring any bells. Those pesky police reports and phone records get in the way

reminds you of a guy that is sent to jail for 20, just because he's blowing a young guy....tell me how old was the 'YOUNG GUY"... by any chance was the older MAN cursing minors. I'm trying too guess what your consent laws would look like.. Proud member of NAMBL

 

[Stella_Omega]

The problem here is that the locals tolerate the same behavior from young men.