Male teen Has Consensual Sex with Female Teen. He Gets 25 Years as Sex Offender, Banned from Interne

[JoeB131]

Wrong....He has to register as a sex offender. That IS harsh

He is a sex offender. No, it isn't.

He may be a registered sex offender but at least he isn't a virgin like you.

right. Is that really the best you got, EuroTrash?

 

[Steinlight]

Wrong....He has to register as a sex offender. That IS harsh

He is a sex offender. No, it isn't.

He may be a registered sex offender but at least he isn't a virgin like you.

right. Is that really the best you got, EuroTrash?

If you spent less time watching Dr.Who, maybe you could get an ugly woman to stand the sight of you, instead of you pulling your pecker all day like you do now.

 

[JoeB131]

f you spent less time watching Dr.Who, maybe you could get an ugly woman to stand the sight of you, instead of you pulling your pecker all day like you do now.

lots of chicks love Doctor Who. That's why it's been around for 50 years.

 

[RKMBrown]

Okay - so I skipped all 28 replies to this!

As far as I'm concerned, society has no business telling two (or more) people what to do sexually! Over and over again, trying to legislate morality has never, ever worked.

If she was old enough to know what it was all about and wanted it, who in the hell has the right to tell her it's bad?

Her parents?

Her parents asked the state to drop the charges

Ayup... this judge is just a POS.

 

[Idadunno]

Computer science student Zach Anderson, 19, met a girl, 17, on the "Hot or Not?" app. He was from Elkhart, Indiana. She was 20 minutes over the border in Niles, Michigan. They hooked up. Once.

But it turned out the girl was really 14. She'd lied to Anderson and also in her profile. Now Zach sits in a Michigan jail, serving 90 days. When he gets out he will be on the Sex Offender Registry for 25 years...

In this excellent South Bend Tribune article, the mom told a reporter that she didn’t just ask the judge for leniency, "we asked him to drop the case."...

Now, in addition to registering as a sex offender, Anderson will spend five years on probation, during which time he will not be allowed to live in a home where there is internet access or a smart phone. He will obviously have to change his major. And he is forbidden to talk to anyone under age 17, except his brothers....

Male Teen Has Consensual Sex with Female Teen. He Gets 25 Years as Sex Offender Banned from Internet. - Hit Run Reason.com

One problem is that this 14 year-old girl searching sex through the "Hot or Not?" app.

And the next, the young man's sentence is a true miscarriage of justice. The criminalization of the resultant act and the destruction of this young man's future is the true crime. This kid got sex offender status for making a judge sadface about kids these days.

How long the judges will be allowed to screw up people as they want?

No, the problem is he didn't ask for id. Fuck em

And what if she has fake ID?

Then he was still having sex with a minor.

The girl misrepresented herself--something many posters seem to ignore. The way some girls do that Kim Kardashian makeup thing, they look older. Granted, he should have taken the time to get to know her, even Google her and her picture to see if it showed on a Facebook page or something, but there is no crime in being a horny 19 year old or a 14 year old twit. Although, I am glad many people believe we females are naturally virtuous since it is easier getting access to potentials credit cards, house keys, cash... oh! I want a Porsche!!!!!! Jody Arias is innocent too. Let her out and take her on a date.

 

[Idadunno]

Computer science student Zach Anderson, 19, met a girl, 17, on the "Hot or Not?" app. He was from Elkhart, Indiana. She was 20 minutes over the border in Niles, Michigan. They hooked up. Once.

But it turned out the girl was really 14. She'd lied to Anderson and also in her profile. Now Zach sits in a Michigan jail, serving 90 days. When he gets out he will be on the Sex Offender Registry for 25 years...

In this excellent South Bend Tribune article, the mom told a reporter that she didn’t just ask the judge for leniency, "we asked him to drop the case."...

Now, in addition to registering as a sex offender, Anderson will spend five years on probation, during which time he will not be allowed to live in a home where there is internet access or a smart phone. He will obviously have to change his major. And he is forbidden to talk to anyone under age 17, except his brothers....

Male Teen Has Consensual Sex with Female Teen. He Gets 25 Years as Sex Offender Banned from Internet. - Hit Run Reason.com

One problem is that this 14 year-old girl searching sex through the "Hot or Not?" app.

And the next, the young man's sentence is a true miscarriage of justice. The criminalization of the resultant act and the destruction of this young man's future is the true crime. This kid got sex offender status for making a judge sadface about kids these days.

How long the judges will be allowed to screw up people as they want?

It wasn't the judge so much as the kid's lawyer who let him plead guilty. A guilty plea carries an automatic sentence. Now, the lawyer is trying to undo the damage he did by appealing it, which would take it before a new judge, who will most likely grant a new trial, which could put the case back in front of the original judge. If the kid said he did not know the girl was 14, pleading guilty says he did know. His lawyer screwed him better than she did.

 

[Stan Fan]

Okay - so I skipped all 28 replies to this!

As far as I'm concerned, society has no business telling two (or more) people what to do sexually! Over and over again, trying to legislate morality has never, ever worked.

If she was old enough to know what it was all about and wanted it, who in the hell has the right to tell her it's bad?

Her parents?

Her parents asked the state to drop the charges

Ayup... this judge is just a POS.

The girls parents are not lawyers so I doubt if they even understood the law. They should have been prosecuted for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The sitting judge - arguably with knowledge of the law, ruled against any pleas by them to drop the charges and let a 19-year old sex offender walk with a no-harm, no foul. Terrible parents. Michigan law has specific penalties for sex with minors, particularly one as young as 14, whether she is promiscuous or not, and Mistake - not knowing she was underage - and Intent - not deliberately trying to have sex with a minor, both are not allowed as defenses under Michigan law.

Once convicted, automatically his name goes on the sexual predator list, also Michigan law. Girl is not old enough, even if she "tricked" the guy into having sex with her - law doesn't recognize anything she did because she is below the age of consent. Soliciting sex with minor's via social media - electronic media - is a separate crime in Michigan also - and since intent and mistake are not permitted as defenses (otherwise every rapist would use them as defenses), the guy gets what he deserved, and the judge made that clear in stating the law, and enforcing the sentence. Dude stepped on his XXX and pays the price. Sex with a 14-year old - sick.

Way too many Alpha male dawg's posting on this board about the no-harm, no foul, girl is at fault idea. putting their legal expertise and "opinions" on record, which have no veracity when it comes to the written Statutory Rape laws of the State of Michigan. I cite the judge and his decision over the dawg's anyday, apparently you guys' moral standards are from the animal house level here, and think you can have sex with Freshmen High School girls. With that attitude, I would have all of you on a sexual predator list, because your written words reflect predatory sexual attentions against children to be just fine. Ugly..............

 

[RKMBrown]

Okay - so I skipped all 28 replies to this!

As far as I'm concerned, society has no business telling two (or more) people what to do sexually! Over and over again, trying to legislate morality has never, ever worked.

If she was old enough to know what it was all about and wanted it, who in the hell has the right to tell her it's bad?

Her parents?

Her parents asked the state to drop the charges

Ayup... this judge is just a POS.

The girls parents are not lawyers so I doubt if they even understood the law. They should have been prosecuted for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The sitting judge - arguably with knowledge of the law, ruled against any pleas by them to drop the charges and let a 19-year old sex offender walk with a no-harm, no foul. Terrible parents. Michigan law has specific penalties for sex with minors, particularly one as young as 14, whether she is promiscuous or not, and Mistake - not knowing she was underage - and Intent - not deliberately trying to have sex with a minor, both are not allowed as defenses under Michigan law.

Once convicted, automatically his name goes on the sexual predator list, also Michigan law. Girl is not old enough, even if she "tricked" the guy into having sex with her - law doesn't recognize anything she did because she is below the age of consent. Soliciting sex with minor's via social media - electronic media - is a separate crime in Michigan also - and since intent and mistake are not permitted as defenses (otherwise every rapist would use them as defenses), the guy gets what he deserved, and the judge made that clear in stating the law, and enforcing the sentence. Dude stepped on his XXX and pays the price. Sex with a 14-year old - sick.

Way too many Alpha male dawg's posting on this board about the no-harm, no foul, girl is at fault idea. putting their legal expertise and "opinions" on record, which have no veracity when it comes to the written Statutory Rape laws of the State of Michigan. I cite the judge and his decision over the dawg's anyday, apparently you guys' moral standards are from the animal house level here, and think you can have sex with Freshmen High School girls. With that attitude, I would have all of you on a sexual predator list, because your written words reflect predatory sexual attentions against children to be just fine. Ugly..............

You're a POS. I hope to god that someone tricks your ass into doing something illegal and then you get locked up.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Wrong....He has to register as a sex offender. That IS harsh

He is a sex offender. No, it isn't.

Old thread. Discussion over.
You're wrong....But I will remind you next time of your far right wing Morals Police commentary next time you circle the wagons around a philandering liberal

 

[thereisnospoon]

Okay - so I skipped all 28 replies to this!

As far as I'm concerned, society has no business telling two (or more) people what to do sexually! Over and over again, trying to legislate morality has never, ever worked.

If she was old enough to know what it was all about and wanted it, who in the hell has the right to tell her it's bad?

Her parents?

Her parents asked the state to drop the charges

Ayup... this judge is just a POS.

The girls parents are not lawyers so I doubt if they even understood the law. They should have been prosecuted for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The sitting judge - arguably with knowledge of the law, ruled against any pleas by them to drop the charges and let a 19-year old sex offender walk with a no-harm, no foul. Terrible parents. Michigan law has specific penalties for sex with minors, particularly one as young as 14, whether she is promiscuous or not, and Mistake - not knowing she was underage - and Intent - not deliberately trying to have sex with a minor, both are not allowed as defenses under Michigan law.

Once convicted, automatically his name goes on the sexual predator list, also Michigan law. Girl is not old enough, even if she "tricked" the guy into having sex with her - law doesn't recognize anything she did because she is below the age of consent. Soliciting sex with minor's via social media - electronic media - is a separate crime in Michigan also - and since intent and mistake are not permitted as defenses (otherwise every rapist would use them as defenses), the guy gets what he deserved, and the judge made that clear in stating the law, and enforcing the sentence. Dude stepped on his XXX and pays the price. Sex with a 14-year old - sick.

Way too many Alpha male dawg's posting on this board about the no-harm, no foul, girl is at fault idea. putting their legal expertise and "opinions" on record, which have no veracity when it comes to the written Statutory Rape laws of the State of Michigan. I cite the judge and his decision over the dawg's anyday, apparently you guys' moral standards are from the animal house level here, and think you can have sex with Freshmen High School girls. With that attitude, I would have all of you on a sexual predator list, because your written words reflect predatory sexual attentions against children to be just fine. Ugly..............

I think this may wind up as a test case. One in which the actualy law is addressed and perhaps adjusted.
These laws were written many decades ago when those under a certain age were far less sophisticated and far less exposed to the real world than they are now.
Heck there are incidents now where girls are making false allegations of sexual misconduct against male teachers because of low /failing grades.
These girls are becoming more and more predatory. They use their sexuality and their far too early puberty as a weapon.
The laws have to be changed to reflect some semblance of common sense.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Okay - so I skipped all 28 replies to this!

As far as I'm concerned, society has no business telling two (or more) people what to do sexually! Over and over again, trying to legislate morality has never, ever worked.

If she was old enough to know what it was all about and wanted it, who in the hell has the right to tell her it's bad?

Her parents?

Her parents asked the state to drop the charges

Yeah. I think it may be perhaps they believe a lawsuit is on its way...Against THEM.

 

[Stan Fan]

Okay - so I skipped all 28 replies to this!

As far as I'm concerned, society has no business telling two (or more) people what to do sexually! Over and over again, trying to legislate morality has never, ever worked.

If she was old enough to know what it was all about and wanted it, who in the hell has the right to tell her it's bad?

Her parents?

Her parents asked the state to drop the charges

Ayup... this judge is just a POS.

The girls parents are not lawyers so I doubt if they even understood the law. They should have been prosecuted for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The sitting judge - arguably with knowledge of the law, ruled against any pleas by them to drop the charges and let a 19-year old sex offender walk with a no-harm, no foul. Terrible parents. Michigan law has specific penalties for sex with minors, particularly one as young as 14, whether she is promiscuous or not, and Mistake - not knowing she was underage - and Intent - not deliberately trying to have sex with a minor, both are not allowed as defenses under Michigan law.

Once convicted, automatically his name goes on the sexual predator list, also Michigan law. Girl is not old enough, even if she "tricked" the guy into having sex with her - law doesn't recognize anything she did because she is below the age of consent. Soliciting sex with minor's via social media - electronic media - is a separate crime in Michigan also - and since intent and mistake are not permitted as defenses (otherwise every rapist would use them as defenses), the guy gets what he deserved, and the judge made that clear in stating the law, and enforcing the sentence. Dude stepped on his XXX and pays the price. Sex with a 14-year old - sick.

Way too many Alpha male dawg's posting on this board about the no-harm, no foul, girl is at fault idea. putting their legal expertise and "opinions" on record, which have no veracity when it comes to the written Statutory Rape laws of the State of Michigan. I cite the judge and his decision over the dawg's anyday, apparently you guys' moral standards are from the animal house level here, and think you can have sex with Freshmen High School girls. With that attitude, I would have all of you on a sexual predator list, because your written words reflect predatory sexual attentions against children to be just fine. Ugly..............

I think this may wind up as a test case. One in which the actualy law is addressed and perhaps adjusted.
These laws were written many decades ago when those under a certain age were far less sophisticated and far less exposed to the real world than they are now.
Heck there are incidents now where girls are making false allegations of sexual misconduct against male teachers because of low /failing grades.
These girls are becoming more and more predatory. They use their sexuality and their far too early puberty as a weapon.
The laws have to be changed to reflect some semblance of common sense.

 

[Stan Fan]

Okay - so I skipped all 28 replies to this!

As far as I'm concerned, society has no business telling two (or more) people what to do sexually! Over and over again, trying to legislate morality has never, ever worked.

If she was old enough to know what it was all about and wanted it, who in the hell has the right to tell her it's bad?

Her parents?

Her parents asked the state to drop the charges

Ayup... this judge is just a POS.

The girls parents are not lawyers so I doubt if they even understood the law. They should have been prosecuted for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The sitting judge - arguably with knowledge of the law, ruled against any pleas by them to drop the charges and let a 19-year old sex offender walk with a no-harm, no foul. Terrible parents. Michigan law has specific penalties for sex with minors, particularly one as young as 14, whether she is promiscuous or not, and Mistake - not knowing she was underage - and Intent - not deliberately trying to have sex with a minor, both are not allowed as defenses under Michigan law.

Once convicted, automatically his name goes on the sexual predator list, also Michigan law. Girl is not old enough, even if she "tricked" the guy into having sex with her - law doesn't recognize anything she did because she is below the age of consent. Soliciting sex with minor's via social media - electronic media - is a separate crime in Michigan also - and since intent and mistake are not permitted as defenses (otherwise every rapist would use them as defenses), the guy gets what he deserved, and the judge made that clear in stating the law, and enforcing the sentence. Dude stepped on his XXX and pays the price. Sex with a 14-year old - sick.

Way too many Alpha male dawg's posting on this board about the no-harm, no foul, girl is at fault idea. putting their legal expertise and "opinions" on record, which have no veracity when it comes to the written Statutory Rape laws of the State of Michigan. I cite the judge and his decision over the dawg's anyday, apparently you guys' moral standards are from the animal house level here, and think you can have sex with Freshmen High School girls. With that attitude, I would have all of you on a sexual predator list, because your written words reflect predatory sexual attentions against children to be just fine. Ugly..............

You're a POS. I hope to god that someone tricks your ass into doing something illegal and then you get locked up.

Thanks for chiming in with a beautifully written piece of garbage, and wasting 15-seconds of my life reading it. From what I am seeing on this thread alone, it is readily apparent that USMB is not a place for debate, conversation, or anybody above a high school level intellect. Low level intellect on display on almost every thread; low information or no information pertinent to the OP's being displayed from what I read. Certainly not a place I particularly want to be a member of. You alpha-dawg kiddie rapers have fun with the rest of the thread, since all of you know the Michigan laws better than a sitting judge. BTW - from what I have read here - there are a lot of you on the bubble for ending up the same way as this adult rapist - there is no chance it would ever happen to me - I don't engage in sexual encounters with Freshman High School girls. Time to leave you perverts to your imagination's...............

 

[RKMBrown]

Her parents?

Her parents asked the state to drop the charges

Ayup... this judge is just a POS.

The girls parents are not lawyers so I doubt if they even understood the law. They should have been prosecuted for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The sitting judge - arguably with knowledge of the law, ruled against any pleas by them to drop the charges and let a 19-year old sex offender walk with a no-harm, no foul. Terrible parents. Michigan law has specific penalties for sex with minors, particularly one as young as 14, whether she is promiscuous or not, and Mistake - not knowing she was underage - and Intent - not deliberately trying to have sex with a minor, both are not allowed as defenses under Michigan law.

Once convicted, automatically his name goes on the sexual predator list, also Michigan law. Girl is not old enough, even if she "tricked" the guy into having sex with her - law doesn't recognize anything she did because she is below the age of consent. Soliciting sex with minor's via social media - electronic media - is a separate crime in Michigan also - and since intent and mistake are not permitted as defenses (otherwise every rapist would use them as defenses), the guy gets what he deserved, and the judge made that clear in stating the law, and enforcing the sentence. Dude stepped on his XXX and pays the price. Sex with a 14-year old - sick.

Way too many Alpha male dawg's posting on this board about the no-harm, no foul, girl is at fault idea. putting their legal expertise and "opinions" on record, which have no veracity when it comes to the written Statutory Rape laws of the State of Michigan. I cite the judge and his decision over the dawg's anyday, apparently you guys' moral standards are from the animal house level here, and think you can have sex with Freshmen High School girls. With that attitude, I would have all of you on a sexual predator list, because your written words reflect predatory sexual attentions against children to be just fine. Ugly..............

You're a POS. I hope to god that someone tricks your ass into doing something illegal and then you get locked up.

Thanks for chiming in with a beautifully written piece of garbage, and wasting 15-seconds of my life reading it. From what I am seeing on this thread alone, it is readily apparent that USMB is not a place for debate, conversation, or anybody above a high school level intellect. Low level intellect on display on almost every thread; low information or no information pertinent to the OP's being displayed from what I read. Certainly not a place I particularly want to be a member of. You alpha-dawg kiddie rapers have fun with the rest of the thread, since all of you know the Michigan laws better than a sitting judge. BTW - from what I have read here - there are a lot of you on the bubble for ending up the same way as this adult rapist - there is no chance it would ever happen to me - I don't engage in sexual encounters with Freshman High School girls. Time to leave you perverts to your imagination's...............

We're not talking about whether the Judge was within his rights, nor are we disagreeing with what the law states in Michigan. We're just pointing out that dinosaurs like you that RUIN PEOPLES LIVES CAUSE THEY WERE DECEIVED are evil pieces of shit. Oh don't let the door hit you in the ass.

 

[Steinlight]

f you spent less time watching Dr.Who, maybe you could get an ugly woman to stand the sight of you, instead of you pulling your pecker all day like you do now.

lots of chicks love Doctor Who. That's why it's been around for 50 years.

Yea, autistic and nerdy ones like you.

 

[Steinlight]

Her parents?

Her parents asked the state to drop the charges

Ayup... this judge is just a POS.

The girls parents are not lawyers so I doubt if they even understood the law. They should have been prosecuted for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The sitting judge - arguably with knowledge of the law, ruled against any pleas by them to drop the charges and let a 19-year old sex offender walk with a no-harm, no foul. Terrible parents. Michigan law has specific penalties for sex with minors, particularly one as young as 14, whether she is promiscuous or not, and Mistake - not knowing she was underage - and Intent - not deliberately trying to have sex with a minor, both are not allowed as defenses under Michigan law.

Once convicted, automatically his name goes on the sexual predator list, also Michigan law. Girl is not old enough, even if she "tricked" the guy into having sex with her - law doesn't recognize anything she did because she is below the age of consent. Soliciting sex with minor's via social media - electronic media - is a separate crime in Michigan also - and since intent and mistake are not permitted as defenses (otherwise every rapist would use them as defenses), the guy gets what he deserved, and the judge made that clear in stating the law, and enforcing the sentence. Dude stepped on his XXX and pays the price. Sex with a 14-year old - sick.

Way too many Alpha male dawg's posting on this board about the no-harm, no foul, girl is at fault idea. putting their legal expertise and "opinions" on record, which have no veracity when it comes to the written Statutory Rape laws of the State of Michigan. I cite the judge and his decision over the dawg's anyday, apparently you guys' moral standards are from the animal house level here, and think you can have sex with Freshmen High School girls. With that attitude, I would have all of you on a sexual predator list, because your written words reflect predatory sexual attentions against children to be just fine. Ugly..............

You're a POS. I hope to god that someone tricks your ass into doing something illegal and then you get locked up.

Thanks for chiming in with a beautifully written piece of garbage, and wasting 15-seconds of my life reading it. From what I am seeing on this thread alone, it is readily apparent that USMB is not a place for debate, conversation, or anybody above a high school level intellect. Low level intellect on display on almost every thread; low information or no information pertinent to the OP's being displayed from what I read. Certainly not a place I particularly want to be a member of. You alpha-dawg kiddie rapers have fun with the rest of the thread, since all of you know the Michigan laws better than a sitting judge. BTW - from what I have read here - there are a lot of you on the bubble for ending up the same way as this adult rapist - there is no chance it would ever happen to me - I don't engage in sexual encounters with Freshman High School girls. Time to leave you perverts to your imagination's...............

You don't engage in sex with anyone.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Yes no kidding. I surely don't want Stanfan to procreate. We have enough idiots in the world. I wonder if stan the moron has enough brain cell left in his head to know that our age of consent laws, just 100 years ago, were FAR different than today. My grandmother was 13 when she married my grandpa who was, I believe, 19 at the time, maybe 20. They were only married for 70 years before he died of cancer. By todays laws, he should have been a sex offender. By the laws back then, he was an upstanding citizen and he ran a very successful insurance firm as a young man. The AOC for hundreds of years was 10. FUCKING 10 YEARS OLD!!! Nobody would think twice about an adult man banging a 10 year old. Now, that SOB would be hung by his balls. And that was back when girls didn't hit puberty until 15 or 16, not 10 like they do today. So back then a 10 year old very much still looked like a child in every way, yet was legal.

Laws change much faster than biology. What was legal 100 years ago suddenly isn't. But what was biologically acceptable 100 years ago still is.

 

[JoeB131]

Old thread. Discussion over.
You're wrong....But I will remind you next time of your far right wing Morals Police commentary next time you circle the wagons around a philandering liberal

If a philandering liberal breaks the law, I would be all for him getting an appropriate punishment.

This guy got an appropriate punishment.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yes no kidding. I surely don't want Stanfan to procreate. We have enough idiots in the world. I wonder if stan the moron has enough brain cell left in his head to know that our age of consent laws, just 100 years ago, were FAR different than today. My grandmother was 13 when she married my grandpa who was, I believe, 19 at the time, maybe 20. They were only married for 70 years before he died of cancer. By todays laws, he should have been a sex offender. By the laws back then, he was an upstanding citizen and he ran a very successful insurance firm as a young man. The AOC for hundreds of years was 10. FUCKING 10 YEARS OLD!!! Nobody would think twice about an adult man banging a 10 year old. Now, that SOB would be hung by his balls. And that was back when girls didn't hit puberty until 15 or 16, not 10 like they do today. So back then a 10 year old very much still looked like a child in every way, yet was legal.

Laws change much faster than biology. What was legal 100 years ago suddenly isn't. But what was biologically acceptable 100 years ago still is.

Beechcraft Bonanza w/butterfly tail.....Perhaps the most unstable of all general aviation light aircraft.....Did you work on these?....Did you ever have your private ticket? Or just fix 'em?

 

[RKMBrown]

Old thread. Discussion over.
You're wrong....But I will remind you next time of your far right wing Morals Police commentary next time you circle the wagons around a philandering liberal

If a philandering liberal breaks the law, I would be all for him getting an appropriate punishment.

This guy got an appropriate punishment.

Here's to hoping you go to jail for the rest of your life for some trivial bullshit.