White Woman Sentenced To 10 Years For Sex With Friend's 12-Year-Old Son

[Dream59]

Now you know of one...


Arizona Penal Code:

A. Age of Consent/ Voluntary Sex Between Minors

Children under 15 years of age are unable to consent to sexual conduct regardless of the age of the defendant. Individuals who are at least 15 years of age and less than 18 years of age are unable to consent to sexual conduct unless the defendant is: (1)less than 19 years of age or still attending high school and (2) no more than 2 years older than the victim.

Definition of Offenses

Sexual abuse: Sexual contact with someone less than 15 years of age if the sexual contact involves only the female breast where the defendant is not the victim’s spouse.

Molestation of a child: Sexual contact, except sexual contact with the female breast, with someone less than 15 years of age.

Sexual conduct with a minor: Sexual intercourse or oral sexual contact with someone less than 15 years of age where the defendant is not the victim’s spouse.

Sexual intercourse or oral sexual contact with someone at least 15 years of age and less than 18 years of age where the defendant is at least 19 years of age, not attending high school, at least 2 years older than the victim, and not the victim’s spouse.

And another...

California Penal Code

A. Statutory Rape—Criminal Offenses

An individual less than 18 years of age is unable to consent to sexual intercourse unless he or she is married to the defendant.

Definition of Offenses

Unlawful sexual intercourse: Sexual intercourse with someone less than 18 years of age where the defendant is not the victim’s spouse.

Unlawful oral copulation: Oral copulation with someone less than 18 years of age.

Lewd or lascivious acts upon a child: Committing lewd or lascivious acts with or upon someone less than 14 years of age.

Committing lewd or lascivious acts with or upon someone at least 14 years of age and less than 16 years of age where the defendant is at least 10 years older than the victim.

Sexual penetration: Engaging in the act of sexual penetration with someone less than 14 years of age where the defendant is more than 10 years older than the victim.

There are plenty more. And there are cases where both parties have been charged. I don't have access to Lexus-Nexus and I don't feel like looking them up anyway. But I presume you get the point.

Interestingly, there are references to "the female breast" in the Arizona Code. Shouldn't the "male breast" be equally sacrosanct by your standards?

I do not believe that either would be charged if both were 12 years old. That would be pretty damn silly, though I would not argue the point that some idiot had charged both. As for the breast. The female breast is considered a sexual organ, while the male breast is not. I will leave it to you to decide if this is correct or not. Though we rarely agree on anything but jokes, you are not an idiot.

 

[cowslinger64]

Yeah; it's illegal for a reason. A number of reasons. Really stupid ones, just like the Sodomy and Miscegenation Laws that were considered reasonable until quite recently.

Well, of course you should get 20 years in prison for eating your wife's pussy in private! Everyone knows that! The preacher said so! (As he probed with his tongue at the annoying pubic hair stuck between his teeth.)

"A generation ago sex in Western culture struggled under the yoke of Victorian repression.... In the name of religion heavy prohibitions were laid upon sexual life with a force that threatened the security of family structure and kept women from achieving status.

A misreading of the gospels declared a natural function sin and put in its place the perversion of masochism. The development of biological science, together with the rise of psychoanalysis, gradually restored some measure of respectability to sex in our society.

Indeed repression has given way to emphasis, reflected in a compulsive desire on the part of youth to go as far as possible (E. Sapir, 1928). The apparent overvaluation of sex, however, is somewhat spurious. It does not represent an elevation of sex as a biological impulse or of the erotic as an art.

The frantic quality that characterizes a great deal of sexual expression [and REpression] in our society is symptomatic of underlying ego-insecurity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

Please, PLEASE exercise your ability to think and stop devouring the shit they tell you is chocolate mousse. Form your own values as you see fit, BUT LEAVE OTHER PEOPLE ALONE.

Just to make sure... my comment was that incest is a vile disgusting act, ESPECIALLY with underage children. If you are trying to convince me otherwise, you are totally wasting your breath...and you are fucked in the head too.

I love the rant tho, as though you have any idea what my beliefs or values are.

 

[jacktar48]

I do not believe that either would be charged if both were 12 years old. That would be pretty damn silly, though I would not argue the point that some idiot had charged both. As for the breast. The female breast is considered a sexual organ, while the male breast is not. I will leave it to you to decide if this is correct or not. Though we rarely agree on anything but jokes, you are not an idiot.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but if you're interested in my thought process, here's a legal analysis:

1. Given: the female breast is defined as a "sexual organ"

2. Given: the male breast is not so defined

3. Given: any gender must be treated absolutely equally in any matter under the law

4: Contraindication: 1 & 2 indicate that the genders are not equal in attributes affecting criminal conduct. A male can be convicted of feeling a female breast, but a female cannot be convicted of feeling a male breast.

5: Resolution: The Court can either:
A. Fake it. Pretend the genders are equal in culpability by black-letter law.
B. Use common sense. But be aware that this can cost you your Judge Job. And you could even be disbarred, which would really suck.

You see what I'm thinking, here? I know what the law says, and how it can be interpreted, but at some point there is going to be manifest injustice, mostly to women, unless there is some tacit acknowledgment that men and women are identical in every respect.

As for not believing that they would be charged, it's not likely they would be, unless someone's parents want to make a huge issue out of it. If they do -- someone is going to get charged, maybe both. The girl will likely get probation and the boy may be sent to Juvenile (Kiddy Prison with school books) until he's 18. But I've only read one case and I doubt there are many more out there.

But anyway, my closing argument: For this rather minor example, and other more persuasive ones, my personal opinion is that men and women are NOT created equal and cannot be fairly treated in identical fashion under the law.

Abortion laws, for example: Only women are culpable for aborting themselves. Men can have all the abortions they want, and nobody is going to say anything. And there are people who have both sets of working equipment...what about them? Unequal all around.

So I use all of this, and other things, to form the opinion that it is unjust to sentence this woman the same way as one would a man under similar circumstances.

Nor do I believe she did. A man would have got 40 years, I imagine. Maybe more if there were multiple counts.

But I still think her sentence was excessive. Supervised probation with mandatory psychotherapy might be in order, because it's pretty clear she's a nut-case.

People seem to think: "Oh, ten years! That's nothing!"

Please consider that this is a large chunk of your life that is being taken from you. Maybe even all of it if some other whacko decides to waste you. It's horrible in there. I've toured three prisons, and they SUCK! I believe I would rather die than be confined there.

Like a zoo-animal, only not so nice because no one throws you peanuts.

 

[DooleyDarter]

Pulease,,, tell me which one of you guys in here wasnt spanking the monkey at 12, thinking about your moms friends, teachers, or the check out gal at the supermarket.

 

[jacktar48]

Just to make sure... my comment was that incest is a vile disgusting act, ESPECIALLY with underage children. If you are trying to convince me otherwise, you are totally wasting your breath...and you are fucked in the head too.

I love the rant tho, as though you have any idea what my beliefs or values are.

I'm afraid there is a misunderstanding somewhere. I wasn't referring to incest in any way. The case we are discussing has nothing to do with incest. I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I was in any way defending that practice, because I wouldn't. There are valid physiological reasons why it should not be done, both for the individual and for society.

No, I don't. I didn't want to give the impression that I assumed I did. Sorry if I did.

 

[cowslinger64]

I know it's illegal. That's the reason for this thread. However, it is normal for a pubescent male to want to fuck any female he can and that even includes his sisters, although that is also illegal. That's just human nature.

I don't know about dolphins.

Of course thats a buncha bullshit. FUCKED IN THE HEAD pubescent males is what you shoulda said. It's illegal for a reason.

I'm afraid there is a misunderstanding somewhere. I wasn't referring to incest in any way. The case we are discussing has nothing to do with incest. I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I was in any way defending that practice, because I wouldn't. There are valid physiological reasons why it should not be done, both for the individual and for society.

No, I don't. I didn't want to give the impression that I assumed I did. Sorry if I did.

My response was to that guy and his ridiculous post.

No problemo.

 

[jacktar48]

Pulease,,, tell me which one of you guys in here wasnt spanking the monkey at 12, thinking about your moms friends, teachers, or the check out gal at the supermarket.

I was in love with my Spanish teacher when I was 13. (I was slow. )

She was maybe 22 and hot as a two-dollar pistol. Very petite with long blonde hair. Just looked, and smelled...edible. Miss Rosenberg.

She had this little red dress she used to wear about once every two weeks. It was cut high, but below the top button there was this teardrop shaped cutout, and if you got in exactly the right position when she bent over her desk you could see the tops of her TITTIES!

And I don't think she was wearing any BRAW!

Now if anyone wondered what 12-year old boys think about, consider that this extremely vivid memory had stuck with me for over 50 years.

I'm sure there's a point there somewhere.

 

[DooleyDarter]

I was in love with my Spanish teacher when I was 13. (I was slow. )

She was maybe 22 and hot as a two-dollar pistol. Very petite with long blonde hair. Just looked, and smelled...edible. Miss Rosenberg.

She had this little red dress she used to wear about once every two weeks. It was cut high, but below the top button there was this teardrop shaped cutout, and if you got in exactly the right position when she bent over her desk you could see the tops of her TITTIES!

And I don't think she was wearing any BRAW!

Now if anyone wondered what 12-year old boys think about, consider that this extremely vivid memory had stuck with me for over 50 years.

I'm sure there's a point there somewhere.

Eggxactly... When I was 15 I babysat for my moms best friend across the street, they had two young kids. She was going to meet her hubby out some where and I arrived while she was getting ready. She walked out into the living room in her bra and panties to check herself out in a mirror that was supposedly better than the one in her bedroom.. I was whacking to that for months

 

[jacktar48]

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...red-the-effects-early-exposure-sexual-content



This barely scratches the surface.

I notice my earlier question has been ignored. How many of you who claim no harm is done have kids or helped raise any kids? My guess is you don't and haven't. All it takes is a little familiarity with raising children to know that a 12-yr old boy can't handle the emotional impact of sex at that age.

In my personal case, I never had a daughter, but I do have a son. I remember I first noticed the girls drooling over him when he was six. Including post-pubescent teenage girls and all the way up to old ladies.

He was a beautiful child and at about 12 he was a long, lanky Cherokee/Filipino with beautiful long hair. So, you know...what are you going to do? Be realistic or hide your head in the sand? (I'm not going to get into any more personal details. It doesn't matter. I'm just answering your question.)

 

[jacktar48]

Eggxactly... When I was 15 I babysat for my moms best friend across the street, they had two young kids. She was going to meet her hubby out some where and I arrived while she was getting ready. She walked out into the living room in her bra and panties to check herself out in a mirror that was supposedly better than the one in her bedroom.. I was whacking to that for months

I wouldn't be surprised if she got a little tingle herself thinking about you doing that.

But to maintain the thread, do you feel that you would have been damaged in any way, if maybe the next time she did that, she forgot the bra and panties?

And maybe the next time she catches you peeking, and pretends to be mad, but then sees your throbbing bone tenting your pants, and she gives it a little tweak and suggests that she could help you with that problem if you wanted to come over sometime when no one else was home.

You about shit your pants; in fact you came in your pants, and after you thought about it for awhile you sneaked out of your bedroom one night and you went over there, and one thing led to another...

Would you have been physically or emotionally damaged thereafter?

 

[DooleyDarter]

I wouldn't be surprised if she got a little tingle herself thinking about you doing that.

But to maintain the thread, do you feel that you would have been damaged in any way, if maybe the next time she did that, she forgot the bra and panties?

And maybe the next time she catches you peeking, and pretends to be mad, but then sees your throbbing bone tenting your pants, and she gives it a little tweak and suggests that she could help you with that problem if you wanted to come over sometime when no one else was home.

You about shit your pants, but after you thought about it for awhile you sneaked out of your bedroom one night and you went over there, and one think led to another...

Would you have been physically or emotionally damaged thereafter?

I would have been , and was, one happy little shit

 

[Wanderer0327]

Pulease,,, tell me which one of you guys in here wasnt spanking the monkey at 12, thinking about your moms friends, teachers, or the check out gal at the supermarket.

Big difference in masturbation and intercourse, no? And masturbation is the normal, natural first move for children from a nonsexual being into a sexual being.

 

[DooleyDarter]

Big difference in masturbation and intercourse, no? And masturbation is the normal, natural first move for children from a nonsexual being into a sexual being.

Sorry but you are being PC, lumping 12 year old boys and girls into the same group.

 

[jacktar48]

Big difference in masturbation and intercourse, no? And masturbation is the normal, natural first move for children from a nonsexual being into a sexual being.

Yes, of course, if you want to be realistic and logical, which you apparently do.

But there's a problem in that the old Victorian mindset is still lurking back there, and there was that unfortunate thing Jesus said about "looking upon a woman to lust upon her is just as bad as adultery, for you have already committed adultery with her in your heart."

It definitely has an effect. And not a nice one.

I saw a newspaper article in Singapore. The crime report, which is always rather slim. And you have to recognize the race bias involved too, but in one case a 19-yr old Malay kid snatched an old lady's purse on the street and got caught in the act. They flogged him half to death and he got 20 years, no time off. They're tough on crime in Singapore.

The next case was a 55-year old Chinese man who had admitted to molesting a 9-year old boy, repeatedly and over a substantial period of time. He got six months probation.

BIG difference in attitude there, obviously. Locals didn't find it at all surprising when I pointed it out to them. Seemed fair to them, apparently. (I didn't meet any Malays I could converse with. So that's the Chinese side.)

So who's to say which attitude is "right?"

Personally, I would have shot the Chinese guy. Just a visceral reaction, though. Maybe I'm missing something.

 

[RjThoughts]

You hebephiles must stop before you make total fools of yourselves.

If you're under the age of consent, whether you're male or female, you're still treated as the same.

 

[Wanderer0327]

Sorry but you are being PC, lumping 12 year old boys and girls into the same group.

Any kids of your own? I mean, raising any kids of your own? Don't bother answering because it is obvious you haven't got a clue on raising children. At 12 you're not seeing a discernible difference in psychological development of boys and girls as pertains to sex. Once you get into the 15-16 yr old range you do, but those three to four intervening years are critical to the mental and emotional development of a child independent of gender-identity.

BTW, I provided evidence from PsychologyToday previously in this thread to support my position. What have you and the other people (and I struggle with using that term in the context of this discussion) provided but anecdotes and appeals to emotion/libido? An argument is undermined when one chooses to support it using logical fallacies.

And I absolutely hate the term "politically correct." Check its origins going back to Trotsky, Stalin and Mao for more insight into my loathing of the term... or don't. It matters not to me. But understand I don't do anything because it is "politically correct."

 

[Wanderer0327]

You hebephiles must stop before you make total fools of yourselves.

Rj, that ship has already sailed.

 

[magicalmoments]

Regardless of whether or not he enjoyed the sex, it is not right. Many victims of molestation by a close family member or friend of the family will tell you that they derive pleasure from it. It's one of the reasons that it stays secret for so long, because the victim doubts whether or not he or she was victimized or was a willing participant. Just becaus someone gets excited by what someone does to them doesn't make it okay. A child shouldn't be sexually abused by an adult. It is abuse evenif his dick gets hard. If he was playing with a girl his age it's no big deal, IMO. But because the woman is so much older, is the friend of his mother, probably has some power over him mentally and chose to have sex with this boy who isn't capable of fully consenting to sex with an adult it moves into the realm of abuse. I suppose one could compare it to a therapist having sex with a patient. It's not okay and consent is not possible.

He was a minor. Any time an adult has sex with a minor it is abuse, pure and simple, she got what she deserved.

 

[Dream59]

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but if you're interested in my thought process, here's a legal analysis:

1. Given: the female breast is defined as a "sexual organ"

2. Given: the male breast is not so defined

3. Given: any gender must be treated absolutely equally in any matter under the law

4: Contraindication: 1 & 2 indicate that the genders are not equal in attributes affecting criminal conduct. A male can be convicted of feeling a female breast, but a female cannot be convicted of feeling a male breast.

5: Resolution: The Court can either:
A. Fake it. Pretend the genders are equal in culpability by black-letter law.
B. Use common sense. But be aware that this can cost you your Judge Job. And you could even be disbarred, which would really suck.

You see what I'm thinking, here? I know what the law says, and how it can be interpreted, but at some point there is going to be manifest injustice, mostly to women, unless there is some tacit acknowledgment that men and women are identical in every respect.

As for not believing that they would be charged, it's not likely they would be, unless someone's parents want to make a huge issue out of it. If they do -- someone is going to get charged, maybe both. The girl will likely get probation and the boy may be sent to Juvenile (Kiddy Prison with school books) until he's 18. But I've only read one case and I doubt there are many more out there.

But anyway, my closing argument: For this rather minor example, and other more persuasive ones, my personal opinion is that men and women are NOT created equal and cannot be fairly treated in identical fashion under the law.

Abortion laws, for example: Only women are culpable for aborting themselves. Men can have all the abortions they want, and nobody is going to say anything. And there are people who have both sets of working equipment...what about them? Unequal all around.

So I use all of this, and other things, to form the opinion that it is unjust to sentence this woman the same way as one would a man under similar circumstances.

Nor do I believe she did. A man would have got 40 years, I imagine. Maybe more if there were multiple counts.

But I still think her sentence was excessive. Supervised probation with mandatory psychotherapy might be in order, because it's pretty clear she's a nut-case.

People seem to think: "Oh, ten years! That's nothing!"

Please consider that this is a large chunk of your life that is being taken from you. Maybe even all of it if some other whacko decides to waste you. It's horrible in there. I've toured three prisons, and they SUCK! I believe I would rather die than be confined there.

Like a zoo-animal, only not so nice because no one throws you peanuts.

I see your thought process, and here is what I think. Men and women are NOT the same physically. This does not meant that they are not equally culpable under the law for the same offense. Thus a male breast not being a sex organ, there is no law against touching it without permission in most cases. But in situations where things ARE equal, which is where the law comes in, they should get similar sentences in similar cases. All cases do not present the same facts and should be allowed to have discretion in sentencing. In this case the woman should get the same sentence a man would have received in my opinion.

 

[jacktar48]

I see your thought process, and here is what I think. Men and women are NOT the same physically. This does not meant that they are not equally culpable under the law for the same offense. Thus a male breast not being a sex organ, there is no law against touching it without permission in most cases. But in situations where things ARE equal, which is where the law comes in, they should get similar sentences in similar cases. All cases do not present the same facts and should be allowed to have discretion in sentencing. In this case the woman should get the same sentence a man would have received in my opinion.

Man gets 90 days for having sex with 13-year-old

A 20-year-old Cheviot man was sentenced Thursday to 90 days behind bars after pleading guilty to having sex with a minor.

Ralph Hollandsworth pled guilty to one count of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor.

Hollandsworth has already served 45 days of the sentence, but was also sentenced to three years probation and must register as a Tier 2 sex offender for the next 25 years.

A Tier 2 sex offender must register every six months. If Hollandsworth violates his probation, he will have to serve 18 months in prison.

Adam Kiefaber, akiefaber@cincinnati.com

Hollandsworth admitted to having sex with the 13-year-old girl, but said he thought she was 14.

The case came from Ohio and the sentence was apparently the product of a plea-bargain.

The other one was in Florida. I was under the impression that it went to trial, but I don't know for sure.

 

[Sean]

Hollandsworth admitted to having sex with the 13-year-old girl, but said he thought she was 14.
.

That was his mitigation? WTF?

 

[jacktar48]

That was his mitigation? WTF?

Nightmare scenario: Picture yourself as his lawyer...

Actually it's probably significant because in many states the penalty is more severe if the victim is younger than 14.

But damn; if he was going to lie he might as well have said he thought she was 18.

Not that it would matter, usually. This is a "strict liability" crime and it doesn't matter what you knew. It only matters that you did it.

 

[Dream59]

Nightmare scenario: Picture yourself as his lawyer...

Actually it's probably significant because in many states the penalty is more severe if the victim is younger than 14.

But damn; if he was going to lie he might as well have said he thought she was 18.

Not that it would matter, usually. This is a "strict liability" crime and it doesn't matter what you knew. It only matters that you did it.

You got that right. There was a case, I think in Oklahoma, where a man picked a girl up in a bar had sex with her and was successfully prosecuted for having sex with a minor. I would have made the same assumption that he did, that if someone is drinking in a bar they must be at least 21. It did not help him at trial. Miscarriage of justice in my opinion.

 

[Boxlicker101]

In Ohio, 13 or 14 wouldn't make any difference since he was 20.

Ohio

The age of consent in Ohio is 16 as specified by Section 2907.04 of the Ohio Revised Code. However, there exists a close-in-age exception where a minor 13 or older can consent to sex as long as their partner is less than 18 years old.
2907.04 Unlawful sexual conduct with minor. (A) No person who is eighteen years of age or older shall engage in sexual conduct with another, who is not the spouse of the offender, when the offender knows the other person is thirteen years of age or older but less than sixteen years of age, or the offender is reckless in that regard. {§ 2907.04}.
It is illegal for a person of any age to have sex with a child beneath 13 years of age who they are not married to.
2907.02 (A) 1. No person shall engage in sexual conduct with another who is not the spouse of the offender or who is the spouse of the offender but is living separate and apart from the offender when any of the following applies...
(b) the other is person is less than thirteen years of age, whether or not the offender knows the age of the other person {§ 2907.02}.

However, the preceding statute, Section 2907.03, specifies that sexual conduct between anyone under 18 and a teacher, administrator, or coach of the school they attend, a cleric, or other person in authority, is punishable as a felony of the third degree.
2907.03 Sexual battery. (A) No person shall engage in sexual conduct with another, not the spouse of the offender, when any of the following apply: (5) The offender is the other person’s natural or adoptive parent, or a stepparent, or guardian, custodian, or person in loco parentis of the other person.(7) The offender is a teacher, administrator, coach, or other person in authority employed by or serving in a school for which the state board of education prescribes minimum standards pursuant to division (D) of section 3301.07 of the Revised Code, the other person is enrolled in or attends that school, and the offender is not enrolled in and does not attend that school.(8) The other person is a minor, the offender is a teacher, administrator, coach, or other person in authority employed by or serving in an institution of higher education, and the other person is enrolled in or attends that institution.(9) The other person is a minor, and the offender is the other person’s athletic or other type of coach, is the other person’s instructor, is the leader of a scouting troop of which the other person is a member, or is a person with temporary or occasional disciplinary control over the other person.(12) The other person is a minor, the offender is a cleric, and the other person is a member of, or attends, the church or congregation served by the cleric. {§ 2907.03}
{§ 2907.03}

Ohio law also contains a rule against importuning, which means a perpetrator of any age sexually soliciting a minor over the internet if the minor is under the age of 13, or in the case of a perpetrator 18 years of age or older, sexually soliciting any minor who is under the age of 16. {§ 2907.07}

 

[Boxlicker101]

You got that right. There was a case, I think in Oklahoma, where a man picked a girl up in a bar had sex with her and was successfully prosecuted for having sex with a minor. I would have made the same assumption that he did, that if someone is drinking in a bar they must be at least 21. It did not help him at trial. Miscarriage of justice in my opinion.

I wonder what, if anything was done about the bar owner or bartender for serving somebody that young. If she had a fake ID card, everybody should have been let off.