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

[Iceweasel]

14 year old girls don't look that young any more. With make up a 14 year old can look 20.

If you're a cradle robber.

One more time: I went to school with a girl who used her older sister's ID. She had ZERO trouble passing for 20 at 15, or 21 at 16! She did it for 3 years, and NEVER got caught!

Once again genius, a 14 yo doesn't have the life experience of a 21 yo. Passing to buy beer is not the same as passing yourself off as an adult. You clearly fall into the 'thinks with little head' camp.

 

[Katzndogz]

Both of these children are products of a culture that sees nothing wrong with hook ups for anonymous sex with strangers. It does no good at all to tell them that the internet apps that facilitate these hook ups are for adults only. The underage will just ignore it.

 

[Iceweasel]

Both of these children are products of a culture that sees nothing wrong with hook ups for anonymous sex with strangers. It does no good at all to tell them that the internet apps that facilitate these hook ups are for adults only. The underage will just ignore it.

Yep, kids lie. If you are boning them because you think they might be old enough and they said xyz I have zero sympathy if you get caught.

 

[martybegan]

he should be punished for the act, as it was statutory. However the labeling him as a sex offender is over the top. His purpose was to have sex with a 17 year old, which is legal, not a 14 year old. He shouldn't be lumped in with people who intend to have sex with 14 year olds.

We only have his word for it he didn't know she was 14.

What happens the next time he tries it and no one identified him properly.

Sorry, not getting upset over this guy.

Making sex offender lists that broad negates the purpose of having them at all.

 

[Stan Fan]

he should be punished for the act, as it was statutory. However the labeling him as a sex offender is over the top. His purpose was to have sex with a 17 year old, which is legal, not a 14 year old. He shouldn't be lumped in with people who intend to have sex with 14 year olds.

We only have his word for it he didn't know she was 14.

What happens the next time he tries it and no one identified him properly.

Sorry, not getting upset over this guy.

Making sex offender lists that broad negates the purpose of having them at all.

Having sex with a 14-year old girl when you are an adult is precisely WHY we have sexual predator lists in the first place. Everything else pertaining to this case is absolutely not relevant to the discussion - or the penalty. Saying he "thought" he was having sex with a 17-year old who legally can give consent makes as much sense as walking into the local 7-11 at midnight with a handgun, robbing the store, and killing the clerk with a fired round, than attempting to justify the robbery-murder with - well, my ONLY intention was to rob the store, the gun was there to scare the clerk and went off by accident. The excuse doesn't fly, the robbery and murder can't be separated, neither can the sex, and the victim's age.

Plus Michigan, for the third time I have posted it, does not permit Mistake - didn't know she was underage, as a legitimate defense for rape of a child. It is in that law specifically to protect 14-year old children, and any child under the age of 16, from being victimized by predator's, of which this guy is now one. Don't like the sentence - don't have sex with children, shesh, anybody who doesn't understand that is exceptionally obtuse.......

Just kick around the internet and social media a bit, you will see stories from all over the country of men mostly who got 10-15-20 years jail time, for sexual predator activities associated with children. Photographing underage girls, naked, one guy got 15-years just for having the picture on his I-phone. Distributing photos of underage girls, another got 25-years. Videotaping them with a concealed camera pen in upskirt attempts in a store, another got 12 years jail time.

There are hundred's of cases out there like that, and I am absolutely sure, each and every male involved, had some legitimate excuse in their own mind that mitigates their activities. When it comes to sexual encounters with children - you are going to jail, and getting posted as a sexual predator, no outs, in just about every state and every incident. The criminal 19-year old got off easy, engaging in sex with that child, and not getting prison. His excuse, her excuse, her parent's pleas all are irrelevant to the act. The judge decided to sent a message to anybody who does it, that you
CAN'T DO IT in Michigan, and I applaud him for it, and have absolutely no concern for the criminal, or anybody else who engages in that type of activity with children.

Guy will only be 44 when he is erased from that sexual predator registry - of course - that's if he can go 25-years without surfing the internet for sexual favors. BTW, it is pretty standard for modern women (no matter what their age), with how easy it is to obtain information on social media, to do a background check on men they meet, BEFORE they progress further in any relationship. They can do it on their telephones in minutes, while visiting a barroom ladies room. That's why he is on the sexual predator's list - so he is identified as a predator for engaging in sex with children and other women are not victimized as the 14-year old was.......

 

[Katzndogz]

14 year old girls don't look that young any more. With make up a 14 year old can look 20.

If you're a cradle robber.

One more time: I went to school with a girl who used her older sister's ID. She had ZERO trouble passing for 20 at 15, or 21 at 16! She did it for 3 years, and NEVER got caught!

Once again genius, a 14 yo doesn't have the life experience of a 21 yo. Passing to buy beer is not the same as passing yourself off as an adult. You clearly fall into the 'thinks with little head' camp.

If 12 year old girls don't need life experience to spread their legs a 14 year old doesn't. The girl had enough life experience to use an internet app for the purpose of finding sex. Where did she get the idea that finding sex with strangers was an appropriate life experience?

 

[Katzndogz]

he should be punished for the act, as it was statutory. However the labeling him as a sex offender is over the top. His purpose was to have sex with a 17 year old, which is legal, not a 14 year old. He shouldn't be lumped in with people who intend to have sex with 14 year olds.

We only have his word for it he didn't know she was 14.

What happens the next time he tries it and no one identified him properly.

Sorry, not getting upset over this guy.

Making sex offender lists that broad negates the purpose of having them at all.

Having sex with a 14-year old girl when you are an adult is precisely WHY we have sexual predator lists in the first place. Everything else pertaining to this case is absolutely not relevant to the discussion - or the penalty. Saying he "thought" he was having sex with a 17-year old who legally can give consent makes as much sense as walking into the local 7-11 at midnight with a handgun, robbing the store, and killing the clerk with a fired round, than attempting to justify the robbery-murder with - well, my ONLY intention was to rob the store, the gun was there to scare the clerk and went off by accident. The excuse doesn't fly, the robbery and murder can't be separated, neither can the sex, and the victim's age.

Plus Michigan, for the third time I have posted it, does not permit Mistake - didn't know she was underage, as a legitimate defense for rape of a child. It is in that law specifically to protect 14-year old children, and any child under the age of 16, from being victimized by predator's, of which this guy is now one. Don't like the sentence - don't have sex with children, shesh, anybody who doesn't understand that is exceptionally obtuse.......

Just kick around the internet and social media a bit, you will see stories from all over the country of men mostly who got 10-15-20 years jail time, for sexual predator activities associated with children. Photographing underage girls, naked, one guy got 15-years just for having the picture on his I-phone. Distributing photos of underage girls, another got 25-years. Videotaping them with a concealed camera pen in upskirt attempts in a store, another got 12 years jail time.

There are hundred's of cases out there like that, and I am absolutely sure, each and every male involved, had some legitimate excuse in their own mind that mitigates their activities. When it comes to sexual encounters with children - you are going to jail, and getting posted as a sexual predator, no outs, in just about every state and every incident. The criminal 19-year old got off easy, engaging in sex with that child, and not getting prison. His excuse, her excuse, her parent's pleas all are irrelevant to the act. The judge decided to sent a message to anybody who does it, that you
CAN'T DO IT in Michigan, and I applaud him for it, and have absolutely no concern for the criminal, or anybody else who engages in that type of activity with children.

Guy will only be 44 when he is erased from that sexual predator registry - of course - that's if he can go 25-years without surfing the internet for sexual favors. BTW, it is pretty standard for modern women (no matter what their age), with how easy it is to obtain information on social media, to do a background check on men they meet, BEFORE they progress further in any relationship. They can do it on their telephones in minutes, while visiting a barroom ladies room. That's why he is on the sexual predator's list - so he is identified as a predator for engaging in sex with children and other women are not victimized as the 14-year old was.......

Women might very well do a cursory background check prior to entering into a relationship. Now that you have qualified your comment with the requirement of relationship, what about those women who don't want a relationship. They just want to get laid in that moment. They don't bother with asking names, don't expect to get a real name if they do and don't bother giving their real name.

 

[martybegan]

he should be punished for the act, as it was statutory. However the labeling him as a sex offender is over the top. His purpose was to have sex with a 17 year old, which is legal, not a 14 year old. He shouldn't be lumped in with people who intend to have sex with 14 year olds.

We only have his word for it he didn't know she was 14.

What happens the next time he tries it and no one identified him properly.

Sorry, not getting upset over this guy.

Making sex offender lists that broad negates the purpose of having them at all.

Having sex with a 14-year old girl when you are an adult is precisely WHY we have sexual predator lists in the first place. Everything else pertaining to this case is absolutely not relevant to the discussion - or the penalty. Saying he "thought" he was having sex with a 17-year old who legally can give consent makes as much sense as walking into the local 7-11 at midnight with a handgun, robbing the store, and killing the clerk with a fired round, than attempting to justify the robbery-murder with - well, my ONLY intention was to rob the store, the gun was there to scare the clerk and went off by accident. The excuse doesn't fly, the robbery and murder can't be separated, neither can the sex, and the victim's age.

Plus Michigan, for the third time I have posted it, does not permit Mistake - didn't know she was underage, as a legitimate defense for rape of a child. It is in that law specifically to protect 14-year old children, and any child under the age of 16, from being victimized by predator's, of which this guy is now one. Don't like the sentence - don't have sex with children, shesh, anybody who doesn't understand that is exceptionally obtuse.......

Just kick around the internet and social media a bit, you will see stories from all over the country of men mostly who got 10-15-20 years jail time, for sexual predator activities associated with children. Photographing underage girls, naked, one guy got 15-years just for having the picture on his I-phone. Distributing photos of underage girls, another got 25-years. Videotaping them with a concealed camera pen in upskirt attempts in a store, another got 12 years jail time.

There are hundred's of cases out there like that, and I am absolutely sure, each and every male involved, had some legitimate excuse in their own mind that mitigates their activities. When it comes to sexual encounters with children - you are going to jail, and getting posted as a sexual predator, no outs, in just about every state and every incident. The criminal 19-year old got off easy, engaging in sex with that child, and not getting prison. His excuse, her excuse, her parent's pleas all are irrelevant to the act. The judge decided to sent a message to anybody who does it, that you
CAN'T DO IT in Michigan, and I applaud him for it, and have absolutely no concern for the criminal, or anybody else who engages in that type of activity with children.

Guy will only be 44 when he is erased from that sexual predator registry - of course - that's if he can go 25-years without surfing the internet for sexual favors. BTW, it is pretty standard for modern women (no matter what their age), with how easy it is to obtain information on social media, to do a background check on men they meet, BEFORE they progress further in any relationship. They can do it on their telephones in minutes, while visiting a barroom ladies room. That's why he is on the sexual predator's list - so he is identified as a predator for engaging in sex with children and other women are not victimized as the 14-year old was.......

I don't disagree that he should be found guilty, as the offense is statutory, I disagree that he should be put on the sex offenders list. If the story is true he was intending to have sex legally with a 17 year old. Why treat him as his intent was to have sex with a 14 year old?

Again, making a sex offenders list broadly defined negates the use of the list.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

The guy 'acted in good faith.' He wasn't looking for 14 year-old partners.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

The guy got screwed with his pants on by a judge who should be disbarred for circumventing the deal made between the prosecutor and defense attorneys. There was no malice or sexual predation here and the whole thing should have gone away but for the judge loosing his moral objection to the whole 'sexual dating' thing online these days.

 

[Syriusly]

he should be punished for the act, as it was statutory. However the labeling him as a sex offender is over the top. His purpose was to have sex with a 17 year old, which is legal, not a 14 year old. He shouldn't be lumped in with people who intend to have sex with 14 year olds.

We only have his word for it he didn't know she was 14.

What happens the next time he tries it and no one identified him properly.

Sorry, not getting upset over this guy.

Making sex offender lists that broad negates the purpose of having them at all.

I agree.

Over loading sex offender lists makes it difficult for people to separate the wheat from the chafe. There is no indication that this guy had any intention of committing any sexual crime or was looking for an underage offender- he broke the law- no doubt about that- but he is not the rapist/child molester that is likely to be a re-offender.

Not only is this kids life really screwed now- it actually makes the public less safe.

Some states have a system to deregister a sex offender after a specific period of time of no offense- hopefully that is available for this kid.

 

[Montrovant]

You may not be familiar with the differences in state age of consent laws, but the law is not universal in this country that an 18 year old cannot legally have sex with an under-18 year old. Some states have age of consent at 16, some have different rules for 18-20somethings than for older adults, etc.

As to the idea that a 19 year old must know that a 14 year old is not 17, that's ridiculous. Utterly asinine. Different people mature at different rates, some people may present themselves in a more adult fashion as children than others, and different people have varying abilities to determine the age of others. Without knowing either individual involved, it's nearly impossible to say whether the 19 year old should have known, simply through social interaction, the age of the 14 year old. Have you never known a particularly immature adult that could pass for a child? Hell, most teens on television are played by 20-somethings, and very often they do it fairly convincingly. The same can be true, at least to some extent, in the other direction. It is entirely possible that the girl did a good enough job presenting herself as a 17 year old to pass casual inspection both physically and emotionally.

Also, according to at least one of the articles, there is a provision in the law of this state that allows for leniency for offenders under the age of 21 (I believe). This was a 19 year old, first time offender, and the girl admitted to lying about her age. Add in the girl and mother both asking for the charges to be dropped and I seriously question the judge's decision.

As always, this is based on the facts available, there could well be further information which would change the situation.

The only part of your post which makes any sense whatsoever, is the last paragraph about the first time offender opt-out. The Judge decided not to extend that get-out-of-jail free card to this man. Whatever his reasoning was, it still comes down to protecting children. This guy isn't going to have sex with a child again, and it appears that judge is sending a severe message to every man in Michigan, that sex with minor children won't be tolerated, whether you are 18-19 or 60+ years old. I agree with him completely. This is what the criminal justice system is designed for, retribution and deterrence, not the liberal rehabilitation garbage you are crying crocodile tears over here.

You think the guy is going to stop having sex? We don't know the attitude he presented in court, what his defense was, other than she gave consent, which the child is not capable of doing. Obviously this judge, protecting the state's children by sending the message that you will end up on a sexual predator list for 25-years if you violate children sexually, and at that, he didn't send the guy to jail from what I understand.

Even if we took everything you wrote as gospel (and your tone is more liberal-cloud nonsense - let the guilty go), and we forget about the 18-year old consent rule, which apparently applies in this case, no guy in the world is going to mistake a 14-year old for an 18-year old. You can dress your silly ideas up with rhetoric about how teenager's on television are portrayed by 20-year old actors and actresses, but Hollywood insures their talent receives the absolute best makeup, grooming and makeover, before those people appear in front of a camera. That tosses that argument out the window, it is a sad excuse and a diversion from the real problem anyways.

She is a Freshman in High School, and a child. Why the concern for the parent's opinion regarding asking for leniency for the guy who had a sexual encounter with their way underage daughter? I raised a beautiful daughter, and trust me, at age 14, she was lovely - but nobody would have ever mistaken her for an 18-year old, and we controlled her appearance and clothing style to what a 14-year old should be as a High School Freshman.

What you should be posting about, instead of this liberal horse hockey, is calling for the parents to be charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor, and perhaps having the girl removed by Children's Services from their custody. Obviously they have no control over her. Also, you didn't respond to my question that the girl is sexually active - at age 14, and soliciting sex on the internet - there is another lack of control by the parents in their responsibilities to their daughter. And you want to have a judge accept their opinion and recommendation? Do you really think she is going to quit having sex for the next four years, until she turns 18-and can legally give consent? Of course not - but somebody better be keeping tabs on her activities - whereabouts - friends - internet access and style, in addition to her school work, of another guy is going to fall into her clutches. No matter how you look at this case, the 19-year old male isn't the victim, he is the instigator of the criminal act of illegal sex with a female child. If it deters even one adult male in the state from repeating his mistake, that the judge's decision to hang a sexual predator sign on him for 25-years is justified and fair.....................

You certainly are sure of yourself. Have you met this girl? No? Then how can you possibly know whether or not it is reasonable that she passed herself off as a 17 year old?

If you think it is impossible for a 19 year old boy to mistake a 14 year old girl for a 17 year old girl, then I would guess you have limited experience around teenagers. Then again, considering the self assured nature of your obviously incorrect assertions, perhaps you simply ignore anything that doesn't fit with what you think you already know.

Oh, and I didn't say the boy cannot be punished, rather that the punishment doled out is too severe. When the victim and the victim's parent both want leniency or for no charges to even be pressed, when the law specifically provides an outlet for leniency in this situation, when the boy is a first time offender, it seems harsh to spend the next 25 years on a sex offender list and to have your chosen college education ended for at least a couple of years. Again, there may be facts not available which would change my opinion, but everything written in the articles I read about the case indicate this was an honest mistake and not intentional sexual predation. There was nothing to say the boy was a particular threat to do this again. Putting him on a sex offender list demeans the purpose of such a list.

I find it interesting that you say 'another guy is going to fall into her clutches' in describing the 14 year old, and immediately follow that up by saying no matter how you look at the case the 19 year old isn't the victim. So falling into someone's clutches means what, exactly?

I happen to be a High School teacher for your information.
Do you happen to have a law degree?
When you are elected a judge in some state's or district's criminal court system, you can dispense justice however the law allows, and your own feelings would be valid and considered.
The law doesn't allow rape of minors. Children under the age of 16 in Michigan are minors. The guy went looking for sex on the internet, good way to get caught as a pedophile or predator by the police who monitor Facebook and social media sites like that. The girl did nothing wrong, because she isn't capable of making adult decisions. This is America, we follow the law. Somehow, you can't seem to get that through your head.
The girls feelings and decisions are not recognized in a court of law, because she is a child.
The parents opinion and pleas do not mitigate the rape charge, therefore, the judge didn't concede to them.
The judge passed a perfectly legal and appropriate sentence on this man, and if men all over Michigan, and probably by now, the country, reading about it, don't get the message that sex with minors is rape - they probably will end up the same way.
The judge was lenient - he didn't send the man to prison where he would have really understood, quickly, the true meaning of rape.
Your views are that of an idiot regarding this matter...............

You are a high school teacher who thinks it is impossible for a 19 year old boy to be fooled by a 14 year old girl into thinking she is 17?

I understand that this is a country of laws. What you seem unwilling to accept is that the law often allows for variations in sentencing and in this particular case, the facts seemed to warrant a lighter sentence. In fact, there is a sentencing law specifically designed for cases like this to allow more lenient sentencing. The victims asked for leniency. The judge decided not to grant it but I have yet to see on what basis it was denied. Making an example of this boy seems like a pretty thin reasoning; why him? What makes this particular case worthy of making an example?

The sentence may have been legal but the argument is about the appropriateness.

And perhaps you would do well to avoid calling others idiots in the same post where you say that a girl lying about her age and having sex with an older boy, causing him to end up arrested, jailed, forced to forgo his current educational path, and put on a sex offender list for 25 years is not doing anything wrong. Legally she may have done nothing wrong (and despite being a minor, she can do things wrong legally) but morally?

We are not discussing morality here, we are discussing legality. Whatever Michigan's laws are, even with a leniency clause, can not excuse a 19-year old adult male having sex with a 14-year old female. If she was 16, she could have given consent - but not at 14, not recognized by law. If you think 14-year old's, engaging in sexual activity is not a problem, than your view are skewed. All your lib sympathy rests with the adult male criminal, not smart enough to differentiate between a 14-year old girl and an 18-year old girl. Not smart enough to understand you don't go onto the internet and arrange meeting's with unknown females for sexual favors either. If I remember correctly, the girl lived in another state, but close to the male, so as a minor, incapable of giving consent, she crossed state lines for sexual activity. We don't know if she went to him, or he picked her up in her home state. If he did, and crossed state lines, he violated the Federal Mann Act of transporting a female across state lines for sexual purposes, that makes it a Federal charge. Serious enough for you? You misplaced sympathies are touching - but nonsense. I have absolutely no trouble telling, with a year, of the ages of most females in public simply by looking at them, and listening to their vocabulary. Fourteen year old teenage girls have a fourteen year old's vocabulary, that alone should have alerted the 19-year old male criminal that the pickup was misrepresenting herself. Mistake - and you can also read that as tricked - the part of my post you didn't read or respond to - is NOT a legal defense in Michigan's Statutory Rape Laws. My concern, and I am sure the judge was probably thinking the exact same way, is, no matter whether the 14 year old was promiscuous or not, no 19-year old male, no matter how they met, or what excuse he used for it, is permitted to have sex with a 14-year old. You keep writing that the child is at fault, and the sentence is unfair. Unfair to who? He stepped on his (you know what), and now he has 25-years to live with the mistake - and the judge made an example of him. End of story bud, damn, hope you don't have children, particularly teenage girl(s). If you did, you wouldn't have ever let one of them get into the position this girl did by using the internet to advertise herself as available for sex to anyone responding. In fact, at age 14, she isn't even permitted to engage in sexual activity. One 19-year old is made an example of by the legal authorities - well done - who knows how many raped children this will deter?.................

You seem to have a really hard time differentiating between the ideas of too harsh a sentence and no sentence at all. I accept that the guy should be found guilty, but for all your harping on this being the law, you seem to not care that the law specifically gives a chance for leniency to people in this guy's situation and it was ignored. Why? What happened in this case that made using the leniency option written into the law unpalatable for the judge?

You have no trouble telling how old someone is? Good for you. Do you actually think that everyone has this talent of yours? I can tell you in no uncertain terms that not everyone can tell age so easily (and to be honest, I question your own confidence in your ability to do so). You also seem to discount the possibility that some people are more or less mature than others of the same age.

This isn't all the fault of the girl, but she certainly appears to have deceived the 19 year old based on the articles. The punishment is unfair to him because of its severity. This guy is made an example of.....why? Is making an example a sound basis for someone's sentencing? Is that being treated equally under the law or being singled out by the judge?

How many raped children will this deter? Very few, I'm thinking. I doubt the average 19 year old will even hear of this case, let alone change their ways based on it.

 

[Stan Fan]

The only part of your post which makes any sense whatsoever, is the last paragraph about the first time offender opt-out. The Judge decided not to extend that get-out-of-jail free card to this man. Whatever his reasoning was, it still comes down to protecting children. This guy isn't going to have sex with a child again, and it appears that judge is sending a severe message to every man in Michigan, that sex with minor children won't be tolerated, whether you are 18-19 or 60+ years old. I agree with him completely. This is what the criminal justice system is designed for, retribution and deterrence, not the liberal rehabilitation garbage you are crying crocodile tears over here.

You think the guy is going to stop having sex? We don't know the attitude he presented in court, what his defense was, other than she gave consent, which the child is not capable of doing. Obviously this judge, protecting the state's children by sending the message that you will end up on a sexual predator list for 25-years if you violate children sexually, and at that, he didn't send the guy to jail from what I understand.

Even if we took everything you wrote as gospel (and your tone is more liberal-cloud nonsense - let the guilty go), and we forget about the 18-year old consent rule, which apparently applies in this case, no guy in the world is going to mistake a 14-year old for an 18-year old. You can dress your silly ideas up with rhetoric about how teenager's on television are portrayed by 20-year old actors and actresses, but Hollywood insures their talent receives the absolute best makeup, grooming and makeover, before those people appear in front of a camera. That tosses that argument out the window, it is a sad excuse and a diversion from the real problem anyways.

She is a Freshman in High School, and a child. Why the concern for the parent's opinion regarding asking for leniency for the guy who had a sexual encounter with their way underage daughter? I raised a beautiful daughter, and trust me, at age 14, she was lovely - but nobody would have ever mistaken her for an 18-year old, and we controlled her appearance and clothing style to what a 14-year old should be as a High School Freshman.

What you should be posting about, instead of this liberal horse hockey, is calling for the parents to be charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor, and perhaps having the girl removed by Children's Services from their custody. Obviously they have no control over her. Also, you didn't respond to my question that the girl is sexually active - at age 14, and soliciting sex on the internet - there is another lack of control by the parents in their responsibilities to their daughter. And you want to have a judge accept their opinion and recommendation? Do you really think she is going to quit having sex for the next four years, until she turns 18-and can legally give consent? Of course not - but somebody better be keeping tabs on her activities - whereabouts - friends - internet access and style, in addition to her school work, of another guy is going to fall into her clutches. No matter how you look at this case, the 19-year old male isn't the victim, he is the instigator of the criminal act of illegal sex with a female child. If it deters even one adult male in the state from repeating his mistake, that the judge's decision to hang a sexual predator sign on him for 25-years is justified and fair.....................

You certainly are sure of yourself. Have you met this girl? No? Then how can you possibly know whether or not it is reasonable that she passed herself off as a 17 year old?

If you think it is impossible for a 19 year old boy to mistake a 14 year old girl for a 17 year old girl, then I would guess you have limited experience around teenagers. Then again, considering the self assured nature of your obviously incorrect assertions, perhaps you simply ignore anything that doesn't fit with what you think you already know.

Oh, and I didn't say the boy cannot be punished, rather that the punishment doled out is too severe. When the victim and the victim's parent both want leniency or for no charges to even be pressed, when the law specifically provides an outlet for leniency in this situation, when the boy is a first time offender, it seems harsh to spend the next 25 years on a sex offender list and to have your chosen college education ended for at least a couple of years. Again, there may be facts not available which would change my opinion, but everything written in the articles I read about the case indicate this was an honest mistake and not intentional sexual predation. There was nothing to say the boy was a particular threat to do this again. Putting him on a sex offender list demeans the purpose of such a list.

I find it interesting that you say 'another guy is going to fall into her clutches' in describing the 14 year old, and immediately follow that up by saying no matter how you look at the case the 19 year old isn't the victim. So falling into someone's clutches means what, exactly?

I happen to be a High School teacher for your information.
Do you happen to have a law degree?
When you are elected a judge in some state's or district's criminal court system, you can dispense justice however the law allows, and your own feelings would be valid and considered.
The law doesn't allow rape of minors. Children under the age of 16 in Michigan are minors. The guy went looking for sex on the internet, good way to get caught as a pedophile or predator by the police who monitor Facebook and social media sites like that. The girl did nothing wrong, because she isn't capable of making adult decisions. This is America, we follow the law. Somehow, you can't seem to get that through your head.
The girls feelings and decisions are not recognized in a court of law, because she is a child.
The parents opinion and pleas do not mitigate the rape charge, therefore, the judge didn't concede to them.
The judge passed a perfectly legal and appropriate sentence on this man, and if men all over Michigan, and probably by now, the country, reading about it, don't get the message that sex with minors is rape - they probably will end up the same way.
The judge was lenient - he didn't send the man to prison where he would have really understood, quickly, the true meaning of rape.
Your views are that of an idiot regarding this matter...............

You are a high school teacher who thinks it is impossible for a 19 year old boy to be fooled by a 14 year old girl into thinking she is 17?

I understand that this is a country of laws. What you seem unwilling to accept is that the law often allows for variations in sentencing and in this particular case, the facts seemed to warrant a lighter sentence. In fact, there is a sentencing law specifically designed for cases like this to allow more lenient sentencing. The victims asked for leniency. The judge decided not to grant it but I have yet to see on what basis it was denied. Making an example of this boy seems like a pretty thin reasoning; why him? What makes this particular case worthy of making an example?

The sentence may have been legal but the argument is about the appropriateness.

And perhaps you would do well to avoid calling others idiots in the same post where you say that a girl lying about her age and having sex with an older boy, causing him to end up arrested, jailed, forced to forgo his current educational path, and put on a sex offender list for 25 years is not doing anything wrong. Legally she may have done nothing wrong (and despite being a minor, she can do things wrong legally) but morally?

We are not discussing morality here, we are discussing legality. Whatever Michigan's laws are, even with a leniency clause, can not excuse a 19-year old adult male having sex with a 14-year old female. If she was 16, she could have given consent - but not at 14, not recognized by law. If you think 14-year old's, engaging in sexual activity is not a problem, than your view are skewed. All your lib sympathy rests with the adult male criminal, not smart enough to differentiate between a 14-year old girl and an 18-year old girl. Not smart enough to understand you don't go onto the internet and arrange meeting's with unknown females for sexual favors either. If I remember correctly, the girl lived in another state, but close to the male, so as a minor, incapable of giving consent, she crossed state lines for sexual activity. We don't know if she went to him, or he picked her up in her home state. If he did, and crossed state lines, he violated the Federal Mann Act of transporting a female across state lines for sexual purposes, that makes it a Federal charge. Serious enough for you? You misplaced sympathies are touching - but nonsense. I have absolutely no trouble telling, with a year, of the ages of most females in public simply by looking at them, and listening to their vocabulary. Fourteen year old teenage girls have a fourteen year old's vocabulary, that alone should have alerted the 19-year old male criminal that the pickup was misrepresenting herself. Mistake - and you can also read that as tricked - the part of my post you didn't read or respond to - is NOT a legal defense in Michigan's Statutory Rape Laws. My concern, and I am sure the judge was probably thinking the exact same way, is, no matter whether the 14 year old was promiscuous or not, no 19-year old male, no matter how they met, or what excuse he used for it, is permitted to have sex with a 14-year old. You keep writing that the child is at fault, and the sentence is unfair. Unfair to who? He stepped on his (you know what), and now he has 25-years to live with the mistake - and the judge made an example of him. End of story bud, damn, hope you don't have children, particularly teenage girl(s). If you did, you wouldn't have ever let one of them get into the position this girl did by using the internet to advertise herself as available for sex to anyone responding. In fact, at age 14, she isn't even permitted to engage in sexual activity. One 19-year old is made an example of by the legal authorities - well done - who knows how many raped children this will deter?.................

You seem to have a really hard time differentiating between the ideas of too harsh a sentence and no sentence at all. I accept that the guy should be found guilty, but for all your harping on this being the law, you seem to not care that the law specifically gives a chance for leniency to people in this guy's situation and it was ignored. Why? What happened in this case that made using the leniency option written into the law unpalatable for the judge?

You have no trouble telling how old someone is? Good for you. Do you actually think that everyone has this talent of yours? I can tell you in no uncertain terms that not everyone can tell age so easily (and to be honest, I question your own confidence in your ability to do so). You also seem to discount the possibility that some people are more or less mature than others of the same age.

This isn't all the fault of the girl, but she certainly appears to have deceived the 19 year old based on the articles. The punishment is unfair to him because of its severity. This guy is made an example of.....why? Is making an example a sound basis for someone's sentencing? Is that being treated equally under the law or being singled out by the judge?

How many raped children will this deter? Very few, I'm thinking. I doubt the average 19 year old will even hear of this case, let alone change their ways based on it.

I have no trouble differentiating the age of 14 year old girls from adults. They are High School babies, just listen to them talk sometime. Also, watch how they attempt to dress themselves up to make themselves look older, it is laughable most of the time. It isn't rocket science, you have the same ability - you just won't post it because it doesn't jive with your interpretation of the crime. Exceptions to it, sure - but the odds that any adult, whether 19-65 wouldn't "make" the girl as a 14-year old minor, and back away from the sexual encounter, slim. As possibly a 17-year old, perhaps. But, again, tell me what law school you graduated from that puts you in the position to question a sitting judge in a rape case where a 19-year old had sexual relations with a 14-year old. His mindset and his intention to commit such an act of raping that child, are specifically outlined in the Michigan law as not being allowed as a defense, despite the law also containing a leniency clause.

You don't understand how serious a problem this happens to be, but, let me divert the discussion just a bit, only to prove a point you keep missing - the seriousness of the crime.

If this was a white man having sex with a 14-year old black child, would your opinion of the sentence be different?
Would society and the media look upon it differently?

If this was a black man having sex with a 14-year old white child, would your opinion of the sentence be different?
Would society and the media look upon it differently?

We can toss this topic back and forth for 50 plus more posts, or until a moderator steps in and closes the thread, and your refusal to accept that 19-year old adults raping 14-year old girls, which is the only thing this is about, is dead wrong, and the guy got exactly what he deserved, because he solicited sex on the internet and didn't take any precautions to insure the victim had reached the age of consent. Writing that girls can make themselves up to look older to get into club's with false ID's to party isn't the story line here - big deal - I know what a 14-year old girl looks like and how they act and speak, and this guy does to, and ignored it. Once you make the mistake - you can't have a do-over - he got off easy........

 

[Montrovant]

You certainly are sure of yourself. Have you met this girl? No? Then how can you possibly know whether or not it is reasonable that she passed herself off as a 17 year old?

If you think it is impossible for a 19 year old boy to mistake a 14 year old girl for a 17 year old girl, then I would guess you have limited experience around teenagers. Then again, considering the self assured nature of your obviously incorrect assertions, perhaps you simply ignore anything that doesn't fit with what you think you already know.

Oh, and I didn't say the boy cannot be punished, rather that the punishment doled out is too severe. When the victim and the victim's parent both want leniency or for no charges to even be pressed, when the law specifically provides an outlet for leniency in this situation, when the boy is a first time offender, it seems harsh to spend the next 25 years on a sex offender list and to have your chosen college education ended for at least a couple of years. Again, there may be facts not available which would change my opinion, but everything written in the articles I read about the case indicate this was an honest mistake and not intentional sexual predation. There was nothing to say the boy was a particular threat to do this again. Putting him on a sex offender list demeans the purpose of such a list.

I find it interesting that you say 'another guy is going to fall into her clutches' in describing the 14 year old, and immediately follow that up by saying no matter how you look at the case the 19 year old isn't the victim. So falling into someone's clutches means what, exactly?

I happen to be a High School teacher for your information.
Do you happen to have a law degree?
When you are elected a judge in some state's or district's criminal court system, you can dispense justice however the law allows, and your own feelings would be valid and considered.
The law doesn't allow rape of minors. Children under the age of 16 in Michigan are minors. The guy went looking for sex on the internet, good way to get caught as a pedophile or predator by the police who monitor Facebook and social media sites like that. The girl did nothing wrong, because she isn't capable of making adult decisions. This is America, we follow the law. Somehow, you can't seem to get that through your head.
The girls feelings and decisions are not recognized in a court of law, because she is a child.
The parents opinion and pleas do not mitigate the rape charge, therefore, the judge didn't concede to them.
The judge passed a perfectly legal and appropriate sentence on this man, and if men all over Michigan, and probably by now, the country, reading about it, don't get the message that sex with minors is rape - they probably will end up the same way.
The judge was lenient - he didn't send the man to prison where he would have really understood, quickly, the true meaning of rape.
Your views are that of an idiot regarding this matter...............

You are a high school teacher who thinks it is impossible for a 19 year old boy to be fooled by a 14 year old girl into thinking she is 17?

I understand that this is a country of laws. What you seem unwilling to accept is that the law often allows for variations in sentencing and in this particular case, the facts seemed to warrant a lighter sentence. In fact, there is a sentencing law specifically designed for cases like this to allow more lenient sentencing. The victims asked for leniency. The judge decided not to grant it but I have yet to see on what basis it was denied. Making an example of this boy seems like a pretty thin reasoning; why him? What makes this particular case worthy of making an example?

The sentence may have been legal but the argument is about the appropriateness.

And perhaps you would do well to avoid calling others idiots in the same post where you say that a girl lying about her age and having sex with an older boy, causing him to end up arrested, jailed, forced to forgo his current educational path, and put on a sex offender list for 25 years is not doing anything wrong. Legally she may have done nothing wrong (and despite being a minor, she can do things wrong legally) but morally?

We are not discussing morality here, we are discussing legality. Whatever Michigan's laws are, even with a leniency clause, can not excuse a 19-year old adult male having sex with a 14-year old female. If she was 16, she could have given consent - but not at 14, not recognized by law. If you think 14-year old's, engaging in sexual activity is not a problem, than your view are skewed. All your lib sympathy rests with the adult male criminal, not smart enough to differentiate between a 14-year old girl and an 18-year old girl. Not smart enough to understand you don't go onto the internet and arrange meeting's with unknown females for sexual favors either. If I remember correctly, the girl lived in another state, but close to the male, so as a minor, incapable of giving consent, she crossed state lines for sexual activity. We don't know if she went to him, or he picked her up in her home state. If he did, and crossed state lines, he violated the Federal Mann Act of transporting a female across state lines for sexual purposes, that makes it a Federal charge. Serious enough for you? You misplaced sympathies are touching - but nonsense. I have absolutely no trouble telling, with a year, of the ages of most females in public simply by looking at them, and listening to their vocabulary. Fourteen year old teenage girls have a fourteen year old's vocabulary, that alone should have alerted the 19-year old male criminal that the pickup was misrepresenting herself. Mistake - and you can also read that as tricked - the part of my post you didn't read or respond to - is NOT a legal defense in Michigan's Statutory Rape Laws. My concern, and I am sure the judge was probably thinking the exact same way, is, no matter whether the 14 year old was promiscuous or not, no 19-year old male, no matter how they met, or what excuse he used for it, is permitted to have sex with a 14-year old. You keep writing that the child is at fault, and the sentence is unfair. Unfair to who? He stepped on his (you know what), and now he has 25-years to live with the mistake - and the judge made an example of him. End of story bud, damn, hope you don't have children, particularly teenage girl(s). If you did, you wouldn't have ever let one of them get into the position this girl did by using the internet to advertise herself as available for sex to anyone responding. In fact, at age 14, she isn't even permitted to engage in sexual activity. One 19-year old is made an example of by the legal authorities - well done - who knows how many raped children this will deter?.................

You seem to have a really hard time differentiating between the ideas of too harsh a sentence and no sentence at all. I accept that the guy should be found guilty, but for all your harping on this being the law, you seem to not care that the law specifically gives a chance for leniency to people in this guy's situation and it was ignored. Why? What happened in this case that made using the leniency option written into the law unpalatable for the judge?

You have no trouble telling how old someone is? Good for you. Do you actually think that everyone has this talent of yours? I can tell you in no uncertain terms that not everyone can tell age so easily (and to be honest, I question your own confidence in your ability to do so). You also seem to discount the possibility that some people are more or less mature than others of the same age.

This isn't all the fault of the girl, but she certainly appears to have deceived the 19 year old based on the articles. The punishment is unfair to him because of its severity. This guy is made an example of.....why? Is making an example a sound basis for someone's sentencing? Is that being treated equally under the law or being singled out by the judge?

How many raped children will this deter? Very few, I'm thinking. I doubt the average 19 year old will even hear of this case, let alone change their ways based on it.

I have no trouble differentiating the age of 14 year old girls from adults. They are High School babies, just listen to them talk sometime. Also, watch how they attempt to dress themselves up to make themselves look older, it is laughable most of the time. It isn't rocket science, you have the same ability - you just won't post it because it doesn't jive with your interpretation of the crime. Exceptions to it, sure - but the odds that any adult, whether 19-65 wouldn't "make" the girl as a 14-year old minor, and back away from the sexual encounter, slim. As possibly a 17-year old, perhaps. But, again, tell me what law school you graduated from that puts you in the position to question a sitting judge in a rape case where a 19-year old had sexual relations with a 14-year old. His mindset and his intention to commit such an act of raping that child, are specifically outlined in the Michigan law as not being allowed as a defense, despite the law also containing a leniency clause.

You don't understand how serious a problem this happens to be, but, let me divert the discussion just a bit, only to prove a point you keep missing - the seriousness of the crime.

If this was a white man having sex with a 14-year old black child, would your opinion of the sentence be different?
Would society and the media look upon it differently?

If this was a black man having sex with a 14-year old white child, would your opinion of the sentence be different?
Would society and the media look upon it differently?

We can toss this topic back and forth for 50 plus more posts, or until a moderator steps in and closes the thread, and your refusal to accept that 19-year old adults raping 14-year old girls, which is the only thing this is about, is dead wrong, and the guy got exactly what he deserved, because he solicited sex on the internet and didn't take any precautions to insure the victim had reached the age of consent. Writing that girls can make themselves up to look older to get into club's with false ID's to party isn't the story line here - big deal - I know what a 14-year old girl looks like and how they act and speak, and this guy does to, and ignored it. Once you make the mistake - you can't have a do-over - he got off easy........

You certainly are full of yourself.

Perhaps you can tell any 14 year old from a 17 year old. That you think the same is true of everyone is laughable. I know that I certainly cannot accurately judge age by looking at someone, nor casual talking to them. I have seen young girls that could easily pass for young adults physically. I have talked to young girls who seemed mature beyond their years. You seem to think that not only are all 14 year old girls basically the same, but that all 19 year olds have the ability to tell the age difference between a 14 year old and 17 year old through casual contact, no matter how the 14 year old presents themself. I don't know why you have that belief.

Sure, it's possible this guy knew or suspected that the girl was underage. Based on the information available, however, there is nothing to indicate that is true. So again I ask, if this boy was not intentionally preying on a minor, if he has no previous criminal offenses, and if Michigan law specifically provides for leniency for him in this case, what is the compelling reason to deny that leniency?

I'm also curious what law school you graduated from that puts you in the position to confirm a sitting judge? More importantly, why should anyone need a law degree to question a judge's decision? This is a message board, we're not making a legal case before a court. Giving our opinion on matters such as these is the entire premise behind the board.

Oh, and just how do you calculate the odds that a 19 year old would not 'make' the girl as a 14 year old?

As to your racial questions, I don't actually know the races of the parties involved. I don't recall if they were given in the articles and it is immaterial to my opinion. I can't speak for the media or society.

I also wonder, if I were to find a case in which the circumstances were identical (or nearly so) but the judge gave a lesser sentence, would you still consider that the guy got exactly what he deserved? Do you think the sentence should change with varying circumstances, or is this exactly the correct sentence for any instance of a 19 year old having sex with a 14 year old? Do you not believe in mitigating circumstances?

 

[Stan Fan]

I happen to be a High School teacher for your information.
Do you happen to have a law degree?
When you are elected a judge in some state's or district's criminal court system, you can dispense justice however the law allows, and your own feelings would be valid and considered.
The law doesn't allow rape of minors. Children under the age of 16 in Michigan are minors. The guy went looking for sex on the internet, good way to get caught as a pedophile or predator by the police who monitor Facebook and social media sites like that. The girl did nothing wrong, because she isn't capable of making adult decisions. This is America, we follow the law. Somehow, you can't seem to get that through your head.
The girls feelings and decisions are not recognized in a court of law, because she is a child.
The parents opinion and pleas do not mitigate the rape charge, therefore, the judge didn't concede to them.
The judge passed a perfectly legal and appropriate sentence on this man, and if men all over Michigan, and probably by now, the country, reading about it, don't get the message that sex with minors is rape - they probably will end up the same way.
The judge was lenient - he didn't send the man to prison where he would have really understood, quickly, the true meaning of rape.
Your views are that of an idiot regarding this matter...............

You are a high school teacher who thinks it is impossible for a 19 year old boy to be fooled by a 14 year old girl into thinking she is 17?

I understand that this is a country of laws. What you seem unwilling to accept is that the law often allows for variations in sentencing and in this particular case, the facts seemed to warrant a lighter sentence. In fact, there is a sentencing law specifically designed for cases like this to allow more lenient sentencing. The victims asked for leniency. The judge decided not to grant it but I have yet to see on what basis it was denied. Making an example of this boy seems like a pretty thin reasoning; why him? What makes this particular case worthy of making an example?

The sentence may have been legal but the argument is about the appropriateness.

And perhaps you would do well to avoid calling others idiots in the same post where you say that a girl lying about her age and having sex with an older boy, causing him to end up arrested, jailed, forced to forgo his current educational path, and put on a sex offender list for 25 years is not doing anything wrong. Legally she may have done nothing wrong (and despite being a minor, she can do things wrong legally) but morally?

We are not discussing morality here, we are discussing legality. Whatever Michigan's laws are, even with a leniency clause, can not excuse a 19-year old adult male having sex with a 14-year old female. If she was 16, she could have given consent - but not at 14, not recognized by law. If you think 14-year old's, engaging in sexual activity is not a problem, than your view are skewed. All your lib sympathy rests with the adult male criminal, not smart enough to differentiate between a 14-year old girl and an 18-year old girl. Not smart enough to understand you don't go onto the internet and arrange meeting's with unknown females for sexual favors either. If I remember correctly, the girl lived in another state, but close to the male, so as a minor, incapable of giving consent, she crossed state lines for sexual activity. We don't know if she went to him, or he picked her up in her home state. If he did, and crossed state lines, he violated the Federal Mann Act of transporting a female across state lines for sexual purposes, that makes it a Federal charge. Serious enough for you? You misplaced sympathies are touching - but nonsense. I have absolutely no trouble telling, with a year, of the ages of most females in public simply by looking at them, and listening to their vocabulary. Fourteen year old teenage girls have a fourteen year old's vocabulary, that alone should have alerted the 19-year old male criminal that the pickup was misrepresenting herself. Mistake - and you can also read that as tricked - the part of my post you didn't read or respond to - is NOT a legal defense in Michigan's Statutory Rape Laws. My concern, and I am sure the judge was probably thinking the exact same way, is, no matter whether the 14 year old was promiscuous or not, no 19-year old male, no matter how they met, or what excuse he used for it, is permitted to have sex with a 14-year old. You keep writing that the child is at fault, and the sentence is unfair. Unfair to who? He stepped on his (you know what), and now he has 25-years to live with the mistake - and the judge made an example of him. End of story bud, damn, hope you don't have children, particularly teenage girl(s). If you did, you wouldn't have ever let one of them get into the position this girl did by using the internet to advertise herself as available for sex to anyone responding. In fact, at age 14, she isn't even permitted to engage in sexual activity. One 19-year old is made an example of by the legal authorities - well done - who knows how many raped children this will deter?.................

You seem to have a really hard time differentiating between the ideas of too harsh a sentence and no sentence at all. I accept that the guy should be found guilty, but for all your harping on this being the law, you seem to not care that the law specifically gives a chance for leniency to people in this guy's situation and it was ignored. Why? What happened in this case that made using the leniency option written into the law unpalatable for the judge?

You have no trouble telling how old someone is? Good for you. Do you actually think that everyone has this talent of yours? I can tell you in no uncertain terms that not everyone can tell age so easily (and to be honest, I question your own confidence in your ability to do so). You also seem to discount the possibility that some people are more or less mature than others of the same age.

This isn't all the fault of the girl, but she certainly appears to have deceived the 19 year old based on the articles. The punishment is unfair to him because of its severity. This guy is made an example of.....why? Is making an example a sound basis for someone's sentencing? Is that being treated equally under the law or being singled out by the judge?

How many raped children will this deter? Very few, I'm thinking. I doubt the average 19 year old will even hear of this case, let alone change their ways based on it.

I have no trouble differentiating the age of 14 year old girls from adults. They are High School babies, just listen to them talk sometime. Also, watch how they attempt to dress themselves up to make themselves look older, it is laughable most of the time. It isn't rocket science, you have the same ability - you just won't post it because it doesn't jive with your interpretation of the crime. Exceptions to it, sure - but the odds that any adult, whether 19-65 wouldn't "make" the girl as a 14-year old minor, and back away from the sexual encounter, slim. As possibly a 17-year old, perhaps. But, again, tell me what law school you graduated from that puts you in the position to question a sitting judge in a rape case where a 19-year old had sexual relations with a 14-year old. His mindset and his intention to commit such an act of raping that child, are specifically outlined in the Michigan law as not being allowed as a defense, despite the law also containing a leniency clause.

You don't understand how serious a problem this happens to be, but, let me divert the discussion just a bit, only to prove a point you keep missing - the seriousness of the crime.

If this was a white man having sex with a 14-year old black child, would your opinion of the sentence be different?
Would society and the media look upon it differently?

If this was a black man having sex with a 14-year old white child, would your opinion of the sentence be different?
Would society and the media look upon it differently?

We can toss this topic back and forth for 50 plus more posts, or until a moderator steps in and closes the thread, and your refusal to accept that 19-year old adults raping 14-year old girls, which is the only thing this is about, is dead wrong, and the guy got exactly what he deserved, because he solicited sex on the internet and didn't take any precautions to insure the victim had reached the age of consent. Writing that girls can make themselves up to look older to get into club's with false ID's to party isn't the story line here - big deal - I know what a 14-year old girl looks like and how they act and speak, and this guy does to, and ignored it. Once you make the mistake - you can't have a do-over - he got off easy........

You certainly are full of yourself.

Perhaps you can tell any 14 year old from a 17 year old. That you think the same is true of everyone is laughable. I know that I certainly cannot accurately judge age by looking at someone, nor casual talking to them. I have seen young girls that could easily pass for young adults physically. I have talked to young girls who seemed mature beyond their years. You seem to think that not only are all 14 year old girls basically the same, but that all 19 year olds have the ability to tell the age difference between a 14 year old and 17 year old through casual contact, no matter how the 14 year old presents themself. I don't know why you have that belief.

Sure, it's possible this guy knew or suspected that the girl was underage. Based on the information available, however, there is nothing to indicate that is true. So again I ask, if this boy was not intentionally preying on a minor, if he has no previous criminal offenses, and if Michigan law specifically provides for leniency for him in this case, what is the compelling reason to deny that leniency?

I'm also curious what law school you graduated from that puts you in the position to confirm a sitting judge? More importantly, why should anyone need a law degree to question a judge's decision? This is a message board, we're not making a legal case before a court. Giving our opinion on matters such as these is the entire premise behind the board.

Oh, and just how do you calculate the odds that a 19 year old would not 'make' the girl as a 14 year old?

As to your racial questions, I don't actually know the races of the parties involved. I don't recall if they were given in the articles and it is immaterial to my opinion. I can't speak for the media or society.

I also wonder, if I were to find a case in which the circumstances were identical (or nearly so) but the judge gave a lesser sentence, would you still consider that the guy got exactly what he deserved? Do you think the sentence should change with varying circumstances, or is this exactly the correct sentence for any instance of a 19 year old having sex with a 14 year old? Do you not believe in mitigating circumstances?

Diversion, diversion, diversion - your opinion is off task and topic. The case is an adult raping a 14 year old girl, the law doesn't allow for any mistake when the child is that age. It does allow for leniency at age 16, not 14. Even so, I work with enough teenager's to figure out their approximate ages - ten months a year. That you can't tell the difference is scary. Also, if it was your daughter engaged, at age 14, having sex with a 19-year old male adult - would you be in that court room pleading for him to be let off and the charges dropped? Unless you are in the habit of searching for sex on the internet and a child predator yourself, certainly not. Nobody cares about the leniency law, the judge didn't, he threw out the objections, and took swift and appropriate action. If your compassion isn't with the underage children, but with the sexual predator's, of which this guy is now registered as, there is something seriously wrong with your thinking. You seem to think the parents of the child have some say in absolving the guy - when in fact, the child should be taken away from them for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The girls mindset and actions are not considered, by reason of law, not fairness. The judge ruled accordingly regarding the case, by law, he is under no obligation to defend his sentence, particularly from the media, parents, lawyers, prosecutor's or internet posters. Getting drunk and getting behind the wheel of a car, with no intention of harming anybody, happens as we write. That drunk driver's kill off more people than cancer yearly, and are sent to jail for vehicular homicide, for years, routine. You can't introduce intent, or lack of intent into any DUI vehicular homicide case as a defense. Neither can you introduce Mistake - I didn't know she was only 14 year's old, after soliciting her and meeting her for sexual conduct, on the internet. The law in Michigan says it is not a defense - apparently your legal mind thinks it is. How unfortunate for the underage female children who come into contact with you, with your attitude of forgiveness for rape of a child............

 

[Katzndogz]

When the girl takes pains to seek out a fuck partner, he doesn't need forgiveness for the rape. Buy him a beer and tell him to be more careful next time. What can help this girl who is still looking for fuck partners?

Good thing she still has a functioning Hot or Not app.

 

[Montrovant]

You are a high school teacher who thinks it is impossible for a 19 year old boy to be fooled by a 14 year old girl into thinking she is 17?

I understand that this is a country of laws. What you seem unwilling to accept is that the law often allows for variations in sentencing and in this particular case, the facts seemed to warrant a lighter sentence. In fact, there is a sentencing law specifically designed for cases like this to allow more lenient sentencing. The victims asked for leniency. The judge decided not to grant it but I have yet to see on what basis it was denied. Making an example of this boy seems like a pretty thin reasoning; why him? What makes this particular case worthy of making an example?

The sentence may have been legal but the argument is about the appropriateness.

And perhaps you would do well to avoid calling others idiots in the same post where you say that a girl lying about her age and having sex with an older boy, causing him to end up arrested, jailed, forced to forgo his current educational path, and put on a sex offender list for 25 years is not doing anything wrong. Legally she may have done nothing wrong (and despite being a minor, she can do things wrong legally) but morally?

We are not discussing morality here, we are discussing legality. Whatever Michigan's laws are, even with a leniency clause, can not excuse a 19-year old adult male having sex with a 14-year old female. If she was 16, she could have given consent - but not at 14, not recognized by law. If you think 14-year old's, engaging in sexual activity is not a problem, than your view are skewed. All your lib sympathy rests with the adult male criminal, not smart enough to differentiate between a 14-year old girl and an 18-year old girl. Not smart enough to understand you don't go onto the internet and arrange meeting's with unknown females for sexual favors either. If I remember correctly, the girl lived in another state, but close to the male, so as a minor, incapable of giving consent, she crossed state lines for sexual activity. We don't know if she went to him, or he picked her up in her home state. If he did, and crossed state lines, he violated the Federal Mann Act of transporting a female across state lines for sexual purposes, that makes it a Federal charge. Serious enough for you? You misplaced sympathies are touching - but nonsense. I have absolutely no trouble telling, with a year, of the ages of most females in public simply by looking at them, and listening to their vocabulary. Fourteen year old teenage girls have a fourteen year old's vocabulary, that alone should have alerted the 19-year old male criminal that the pickup was misrepresenting herself. Mistake - and you can also read that as tricked - the part of my post you didn't read or respond to - is NOT a legal defense in Michigan's Statutory Rape Laws. My concern, and I am sure the judge was probably thinking the exact same way, is, no matter whether the 14 year old was promiscuous or not, no 19-year old male, no matter how they met, or what excuse he used for it, is permitted to have sex with a 14-year old. You keep writing that the child is at fault, and the sentence is unfair. Unfair to who? He stepped on his (you know what), and now he has 25-years to live with the mistake - and the judge made an example of him. End of story bud, damn, hope you don't have children, particularly teenage girl(s). If you did, you wouldn't have ever let one of them get into the position this girl did by using the internet to advertise herself as available for sex to anyone responding. In fact, at age 14, she isn't even permitted to engage in sexual activity. One 19-year old is made an example of by the legal authorities - well done - who knows how many raped children this will deter?.................

You seem to have a really hard time differentiating between the ideas of too harsh a sentence and no sentence at all. I accept that the guy should be found guilty, but for all your harping on this being the law, you seem to not care that the law specifically gives a chance for leniency to people in this guy's situation and it was ignored. Why? What happened in this case that made using the leniency option written into the law unpalatable for the judge?

You have no trouble telling how old someone is? Good for you. Do you actually think that everyone has this talent of yours? I can tell you in no uncertain terms that not everyone can tell age so easily (and to be honest, I question your own confidence in your ability to do so). You also seem to discount the possibility that some people are more or less mature than others of the same age.

This isn't all the fault of the girl, but she certainly appears to have deceived the 19 year old based on the articles. The punishment is unfair to him because of its severity. This guy is made an example of.....why? Is making an example a sound basis for someone's sentencing? Is that being treated equally under the law or being singled out by the judge?

How many raped children will this deter? Very few, I'm thinking. I doubt the average 19 year old will even hear of this case, let alone change their ways based on it.

I have no trouble differentiating the age of 14 year old girls from adults. They are High School babies, just listen to them talk sometime. Also, watch how they attempt to dress themselves up to make themselves look older, it is laughable most of the time. It isn't rocket science, you have the same ability - you just won't post it because it doesn't jive with your interpretation of the crime. Exceptions to it, sure - but the odds that any adult, whether 19-65 wouldn't "make" the girl as a 14-year old minor, and back away from the sexual encounter, slim. As possibly a 17-year old, perhaps. But, again, tell me what law school you graduated from that puts you in the position to question a sitting judge in a rape case where a 19-year old had sexual relations with a 14-year old. His mindset and his intention to commit such an act of raping that child, are specifically outlined in the Michigan law as not being allowed as a defense, despite the law also containing a leniency clause.

You don't understand how serious a problem this happens to be, but, let me divert the discussion just a bit, only to prove a point you keep missing - the seriousness of the crime.

If this was a white man having sex with a 14-year old black child, would your opinion of the sentence be different?
Would society and the media look upon it differently?

If this was a black man having sex with a 14-year old white child, would your opinion of the sentence be different?
Would society and the media look upon it differently?

We can toss this topic back and forth for 50 plus more posts, or until a moderator steps in and closes the thread, and your refusal to accept that 19-year old adults raping 14-year old girls, which is the only thing this is about, is dead wrong, and the guy got exactly what he deserved, because he solicited sex on the internet and didn't take any precautions to insure the victim had reached the age of consent. Writing that girls can make themselves up to look older to get into club's with false ID's to party isn't the story line here - big deal - I know what a 14-year old girl looks like and how they act and speak, and this guy does to, and ignored it. Once you make the mistake - you can't have a do-over - he got off easy........

You certainly are full of yourself.

Perhaps you can tell any 14 year old from a 17 year old. That you think the same is true of everyone is laughable. I know that I certainly cannot accurately judge age by looking at someone, nor casual talking to them. I have seen young girls that could easily pass for young adults physically. I have talked to young girls who seemed mature beyond their years. You seem to think that not only are all 14 year old girls basically the same, but that all 19 year olds have the ability to tell the age difference between a 14 year old and 17 year old through casual contact, no matter how the 14 year old presents themself. I don't know why you have that belief.

Sure, it's possible this guy knew or suspected that the girl was underage. Based on the information available, however, there is nothing to indicate that is true. So again I ask, if this boy was not intentionally preying on a minor, if he has no previous criminal offenses, and if Michigan law specifically provides for leniency for him in this case, what is the compelling reason to deny that leniency?

I'm also curious what law school you graduated from that puts you in the position to confirm a sitting judge? More importantly, why should anyone need a law degree to question a judge's decision? This is a message board, we're not making a legal case before a court. Giving our opinion on matters such as these is the entire premise behind the board.

Oh, and just how do you calculate the odds that a 19 year old would not 'make' the girl as a 14 year old?

As to your racial questions, I don't actually know the races of the parties involved. I don't recall if they were given in the articles and it is immaterial to my opinion. I can't speak for the media or society.

I also wonder, if I were to find a case in which the circumstances were identical (or nearly so) but the judge gave a lesser sentence, would you still consider that the guy got exactly what he deserved? Do you think the sentence should change with varying circumstances, or is this exactly the correct sentence for any instance of a 19 year old having sex with a 14 year old? Do you not believe in mitigating circumstances?

Diversion, diversion, diversion - your opinion is off task and topic. The case is an adult raping a 14 year old girl, the law doesn't allow for any mistake when the child is that age. It does allow for leniency at age 16, not 14. Even so, I work with enough teenager's to figure out their approximate ages - ten months a year. That you can't tell the difference is scary. Also, if it was your daughter engaged, at age 14, having sex with a 19-year old male adult - would you be in that court room pleading for him to be let off and the charges dropped? Unless you are in the habit of searching for sex on the internet and a child predator yourself, certainly not. Nobody cares about the leniency law, the judge didn't, he threw out the objections, and took swift and appropriate action. If your compassion isn't with the underage children, but with the sexual predator's, of which this guy is now registered as, there is something seriously wrong with your thinking. You seem to think the parents of the child have some say in absolving the guy - when in fact, the child should be taken away from them for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The girls mindset and actions are not considered, by reason of law, not fairness. The judge ruled accordingly regarding the case, by law, he is under no obligation to defend his sentence, particularly from the media, parents, lawyers, prosecutor's or internet posters. Getting drunk and getting behind the wheel of a car, with no intention of harming anybody, happens as we write. That drunk driver's kill off more people than cancer yearly, and are sent to jail for vehicular homicide, for years, routine. You can't introduce intent, or lack of intent into any DUI vehicular homicide case as a defense. Neither can you introduce Mistake - I didn't know she was only 14 year's old, after soliciting her and meeting her for sexual conduct, on the internet. The law in Michigan says it is not a defense - apparently your legal mind thinks it is. How unfortunate for the underage female children who come into contact with you, with your attitude of forgiveness for rape of a child............

You clearly have no idea about the leniency provided for in the law that I have been speaking of. It has nothing to do with the girl being 14 rather than 16, it has to do with the age of the boy. According to the article, in fact, the prosecution lawyer violated the plea agreement by reminding the judge that he had ignored the leniency clause in the past.
I can't say I'm overly surprised you don't seem to understand what I've been saying in regards to leniency in this case; you have shown that you think you know not only your own abilities to judge age, but those of every other adult male on the planet.

Are you claiming the girl's mother is 'in the habit of searching for sex on the internet and a child predator' because she asked for leniency or to have the charges dropped?

Yes, the judge's sentence appears to be within the bounds of the law. That doesn't make it appropriate, merely legal.

The judge seems to have decided that his own moral judgements are reasonable basis for rendering sentence, based on his quotes from the article, "You went online, to use a fisherman's expression, trolling for women to meet and have sex with. That seems to be part of our culture now: meet, hook up, have sex, sayonara. Totally inappropriate behavior. There is no excuse for this whatsoever." Is there a provision in Michigan law for increasing sentences based on the moral appropriateness of someone's behavior? Or are circumstances outside the bounds of the law only relevant when the judge wants them to be?

And one more time here : I am not saying that this boy needed to be absolved of all responsibility in this case. I am saying that ignoring the leniency provision in the law in a case that seems fairly clearly to have not been a malicious offense for a first time, 19 year old offender, and forcing this 19 year old to quit his current college education, is overly harsh. I also think that Michigan would do well to change the laws so that mitigating circumstances are more easily taken into account, but even without that, this seems to me to be a judge who is more concerned with his own moral judgement than with the proper application of the law.

 

[Jarlaxle]

he should be punished for the act, as it was statutory. However the labeling him as a sex offender is over the top. His purpose was to have sex with a 17 year old, which is legal, not a 14 year old. He shouldn't be lumped in with people who intend to have sex with 14 year olds.

We only have his word for it he didn't know she was 14.

What happens the next time he tries it and no one identified him properly.

Sorry, not getting upset over this guy.

Making sex offender lists that broad negates the purpose of having them at all.

Yep. I work with a "sex offender". He was 20, he had too much Corona, and he took a whiz in someone's shrubbery.

 

[Jarlaxle]

14 year old girls don't look that young any more. With make up a 14 year old can look 20.

If you're a cradle robber.

One more time: I went to school with a girl who used her older sister's ID. She had ZERO trouble passing for 20 at 15, or 21 at 16! She did it for 3 years, and NEVER got caught!

Once again genius, a 14 yo doesn't have the life experience of a 21 yo. Passing to buy beer is not the same as passing yourself off as an adult. You clearly fall into the 'thinks with little head' camp.

And yet (one more time for the slow kid), in the dozens of times she did it, she never, one single time got found out! Not just to buy beer...hell, she got pulled over by a cop! Her ID said she was 21, she was 16...and he was none the wiser. Yes, it is certainly possible for a 14 year old to pass for 17!

 

[Stan Fan]

We are not discussing morality here, we are discussing legality. Whatever Michigan's laws are, even with a leniency clause, can not excuse a 19-year old adult male having sex with a 14-year old female. If she was 16, she could have given consent - but not at 14, not recognized by law. If you think 14-year old's, engaging in sexual activity is not a problem, than your view are skewed. All your lib sympathy rests with the adult male criminal, not smart enough to differentiate between a 14-year old girl and an 18-year old girl. Not smart enough to understand you don't go onto the internet and arrange meeting's with unknown females for sexual favors either. If I remember correctly, the girl lived in another state, but close to the male, so as a minor, incapable of giving consent, she crossed state lines for sexual activity. We don't know if she went to him, or he picked her up in her home state. If he did, and crossed state lines, he violated the Federal Mann Act of transporting a female across state lines for sexual purposes, that makes it a Federal charge. Serious enough for you? You misplaced sympathies are touching - but nonsense. I have absolutely no trouble telling, with a year, of the ages of most females in public simply by looking at them, and listening to their vocabulary. Fourteen year old teenage girls have a fourteen year old's vocabulary, that alone should have alerted the 19-year old male criminal that the pickup was misrepresenting herself. Mistake - and you can also read that as tricked - the part of my post you didn't read or respond to - is NOT a legal defense in Michigan's Statutory Rape Laws. My concern, and I am sure the judge was probably thinking the exact same way, is, no matter whether the 14 year old was promiscuous or not, no 19-year old male, no matter how they met, or what excuse he used for it, is permitted to have sex with a 14-year old. You keep writing that the child is at fault, and the sentence is unfair. Unfair to who? He stepped on his (you know what), and now he has 25-years to live with the mistake -

and the judge made an example of him. End of story bud, damn, hope you don't have children, particularly teenage girl(s). If you did, you wouldn't have ever let one of them get into the position this girl did by using the internet to advertise herself as available for sex to anyone responding. In fact, at age 14, she isn't even permitted to engage in sexual activity. One 19-year old is made an example of by the legal authorities - well done - who knows how many raped children this will deter?.................

You seem to have a really hard time differentiating between the ideas of too harsh a sentence and no sentence at all. I accept that the guy should be found guilty, but for all your harping on this being the law, you seem to not care that the law specifically gives a chance for leniency to people in this guy's situation and it was ignored. Why? What happened in this case that made using the leniency option written into the law unpalatable for the judge?

You have no trouble telling how old someone is? Good for you. Do you actually think that everyone has this talent of yours? I can tell you in no uncertain terms that not everyone can tell age so easily (and to be honest, I question your own confidence in your ability to do so). You also seem to discount the possibility that some people are more or less mature than others of the same age.

This isn't all the fault of the girl, but she certainly appears to have deceived the 19 year old based on the articles. The punishment is unfair to him because of its severity. This guy is made an example of.....why? Is making an example a sound basis for someone's sentencing? Is that being treated equally under the law or being singled out by the judge?

How many raped children will this deter? Very few, I'm thinking. I doubt the average 19 year old will even hear of this case, let alone change their ways based on it.

I have no trouble differentiating the age of 14 year old girls from adults. They are High School babies, just listen to them talk sometime. Also, watch how they attempt to dress themselves up to make themselves look older, it is laughable most of the time. It isn't rocket science, you have the same ability - you just won't post it because it doesn't jive with your interpretation of the crime. Exceptions to it, sure - but the odds that any adult, whether 19-65 wouldn't "make" the girl as a 14-year old minor, and back away from the sexual encounter, slim. As possibly a 17-year old, perhaps. But, again, tell me what law school you graduated from that puts you in the position to question a sitting judge in a rape case where a 19-year old had sexual relations with a 14-year old. His mindset and his intention to commit such an act of raping that child, are specifically outlined in the Michigan law as not being allowed as a defense, despite the law also containing a leniency clause.

You don't understand how serious a problem this happens to be, but, let me divert the discussion just a bit, only to prove a point you keep missing - the seriousness of the crime.

If this was a white man having sex with a 14-year old black child, would your opinion of the sentence be different?
Would society and the media look upon it differently?

If this was a black man having sex with a 14-year old white child, would your opinion of the sentence be different?
Would society and the media look upon it differently?

We can toss this topic back and forth for 50 plus more posts, or until a moderator steps in and closes the thread, and your refusal to accept that 19-year old adults raping 14-year old girls, which is the only thing this is about, is dead wrong, and the guy got exactly what he deserved, because he solicited sex on the internet and didn't take any precautions to insure the victim had reached the age of consent. Writing that girls can make themselves up to look older to get into club's with false ID's to party isn't the story line here - big deal - I know what a 14-year old girl looks like and how they act and speak, and this guy does to, and ignored it. Once you make the mistake - you can't have a do-over - he got off easy........

You certainly are full of yourself.

Perhaps you can tell any 14 year old from a 17 year old. That you think the same is true of everyone is laughable. I know that I certainly cannot accurately judge age by looking at someone, nor casual talking to them. I have seen young girls that could easily pass for young adults physically. I have talked to young girls who seemed mature beyond their years. You seem to think that not only are all 14 year old girls basically the same, but that all 19 year olds have the ability to tell the age difference between a 14 year old and 17 year old through casual contact, no matter how the 14 year old presents themself. I don't know why you have that belief.

Sure, it's possible this guy knew or suspected that the girl was underage. Based on the information available, however, there is nothing to indicate that is true. So again I ask, if this boy was not intentionally preying on a minor, if he has no previous criminal offenses, and if Michigan law specifically provides for leniency for him in this case, what is the compelling reason to deny that leniency?

I'm also curious what law school you graduated from that puts you in the position to confirm a sitting judge? More importantly, why should anyone need a law degree to question a judge's decision? This is a message board, we're not making a legal case before a court. Giving our opinion on matters such as these is the entire premise behind the board.

Oh, and just how do you calculate the odds that a 19 year old would not 'make' the girl as a 14 year old?

As to your racial questions, I don't actually know the races of the parties involved. I don't recall if they were given in the articles and it is immaterial to my opinion. I can't speak for the media or society.

I also wonder, if I were to find a case in which the circumstances were identical (or nearly so) but the judge gave a lesser sentence, would you still consider that the guy got exactly what he deserved? Do you think the sentence should change with varying circumstances, or is this exactly the correct sentence for any instance of a 19 year old having sex with a 14 year old? Do you not believe in mitigating circumstances?

Diversion, diversion, diversion - your opinion is off task and topic. The case is an adult raping a 14 year old girl, the law doesn't allow for any mistake when the child is that age. It does allow for leniency at age 16, not 14. Even so, I work with enough teenager's to figure out their approximate ages - ten months a year. That you can't tell the difference is scary. Also, if it was your daughter engaged, at age 14, having sex with a 19-year old male adult - would you be in that court room pleading for him to be let off and the charges dropped? Unless you are in the habit of searching for sex on the internet and a child predator yourself, certainly not. Nobody cares about the leniency law, the judge didn't, he threw out the objections, and took swift and appropriate action. If your compassion isn't with the underage children, but with the sexual predator's, of which this guy is now registered as, there is something seriously wrong with your thinking. You seem to think the parents of the child have some say in absolving the guy - when in fact, the child should be taken away from them for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The girls mindset and actions are not considered, by reason of law, not fairness. The judge ruled accordingly regarding the case, by law, he is under no obligation to defend his sentence, particularly from the media, parents, lawyers, prosecutor's or internet posters. Getting drunk and getting behind the wheel of a car, with no intention of harming anybody, happens as we write. That drunk driver's kill off more people than cancer yearly, and are sent to jail for vehicular homicide, for years, routine. You can't introduce intent, or lack of intent into any DUI vehicular homicide case as a defense. Neither can you introduce Mistake - I didn't know she was only 14 year's old, after soliciting her and meeting her for sexual conduct, on the internet. The law in Michigan says it is not a defense - apparently your legal mind thinks it is. How unfortunate for the underage female children who come into contact with you, with your attitude of forgiveness for rape of a child............

You clearly have no idea about the leniency provided for in the law that I have been speaking of. It has nothing to do with the girl being 14 rather than 16, it has to do with the age of the boy. According to the article, in fact, the prosecution lawyer violated the plea agreement by reminding the judge that he had ignored the leniency clause in the past.
I can't say I'm overly surprised you don't seem to understand what I've been saying in regards to leniency in this case; you have shown that you think you know not only your own abilities to judge age, but those of every other adult male on the planet.

Are you claiming the girl's mother is 'in the habit of searching for sex on the internet and a child predator' because she asked for leniency or to have the charges dropped?

Yes, the judge's sentence appears to be within the bounds of the law. That doesn't make it appropriate, merely legal.

The judge seems to have decided that his own moral judgements are reasonable basis for rendering sentence, based on his quotes from the article, "You went online, to use a fisherman's expression, trolling for women to meet and have sex with. That seems to be part of our culture now: meet, hook up, have sex, sayonara. Totally inappropriate behavior. There is no excuse for this whatsoever." Is there a provision in Michigan law for increasing sentences based on the moral appropriateness of someone's behavior? Or are circumstances outside the bounds of the law only relevant when the judge wants them to be?

And one more time here : I am not saying that this boy needed to be absolved of all responsibility in this case. I am saying that ignoring the leniency provision in the law in a case that seems fairly clearly to have not been a malicious offense for a first time, 19 year old offender, and forcing this 19 year old to quit his current college education, is overly harsh. I also think that Michigan would do well to change the laws so that mitigating circumstances are more easily taken into account, but even without that, this seems to me to be a judge who is more concerned with his own moral judgement than with the proper application of the law.

And that is the judge's decision, perfectly legal. If he wants to accept the leniency clause he can do so or ignore it based on his own moral position as to the serious nature of the crime, the rape of a child. The moral judgement that sex with a 14 year old should be punished with the criminal listed for 25 years as a sexual predator, perfectly all right, he deserved it. So the next time some 19-year or 20- year old idiot decides to go on-line and solicit for a sexual partner - he will think twice about it, before jumping the gun, and discovering she isn't of the legal age of consent. You also continually repeat writing about the leniency clause and ignore the fact that MISTAKE is not a legal defense in Michigan law and can't be used as such, despite your repeatedly bringing it up as appropriate in this crime.

More liberal garbage to excuse illegal and unethical behavior. We don't have sex with children despite what you liberals think is acceptable. You want to change the laws of Michigan, move there, and run for office and try to change the law. The judge knows better than any of us what this guy deserved, exercised his legal authority appropriately, and I agree with him. You, on the other hand, approve of raping children. Sad commentary about your morals.