Nebraska charges man for having sex with 14-year-old wife

-Cp

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2004
2,911
362
48
Earth
Nebraska charges man for having sex with 14-year-old wife

LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) A 22-year-old man faces criminal charges in Nebraska for having sex with an underage 13-year-old girl, although he legally married her in Kansas after she became pregnant.

The man's lawyer said the couple, with their families' support, ``made a responsible decision to try to cope with the problem.''

Matthew Koso, 22, was charged Monday with first-degree sexual assault, punishable by up to 50 years in prison. He was released on $7,500 bail pending an Aug. 17 preliminary hearing.

After the girl became pregnant, her mother gave permission in May for Koso to take the young woman to Kansas, which allows minors to get married with parental consent. The girl is now 14 and seven months pregnant.

``The idea ... is repugnant to me,'' said Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning. ``These people made the decision to send their ... 14-year-old daughter to Kansas to marry a pedophile.''

He said the marriage is valid, thanks to the ``ridiculous'' Kansas law, ``but it doesn't matter. I'm not going to stand by while a grown man ... has a relationship with a 13-year-old now 14-year-old girl.''

Bruning, who has said he will seek a second term in 2006, has aggressively prosecuted sex crimes against children since he was elected in 2002

The couple were married in May by a judge in Hiawatha, Kan., just across the state line from Falls City.

Nebraska allows people as young as 17 to marry if they have parental consent.

Kansas law, however, sets no minimum marriage age, although case law sets the minimum age at 14 for boys and 12 for girls. The marriage must be approved by both parents or guardian, or by a district court judge, said Whitney Watson, spokesman for Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline. A judge also must approve if only one parent approves.

Koso's lawyer, Willis Yoesel, said the girl's mother and Koso's parents approved of the marriage. He said the girl's father has not lived with the family for some time.

``It seems to me like they, as much as they could, made a responsible decision to try to cope with the problem,'' Yoesel said.

``The families are all united in this effort,'' Yoesel said. ``I don't know who is complaining. ... What benefit is there to anybody in the prosecution of this young man?''

There was no comment from Koso, who does not have a listed telephone number.

http://www.cumberlink.com/articles/2005/07/26/breaking_news/story02.txt
 
As long as the U.S. allows individual states to set the age of consent, this thing is going to happen. It has happened before. If a guy gets caught having sex with a minor, all he has to do is "marry" her, then run off.
If this is going to be a federal crime, we need a federal age of consent.
 
Gabriella84 said:
As long as the U.S. allows individual states to set the age of consent, this thing is going to happen. It has happened before. If a guy gets caught having sex with a minor, all he has to do is "marry" her, then run off.
If this is going to be a federal crime, we need a federal age of consent.

Exactly the same reaons why we should've have states be able to set their own definitions of Marriage - which has ALWAYS been defined as a "union between a man and a woman"...

Some fags could get hitch and Mass. only to have their marriage not considered real in most other states... gee, what a shame....
 
I have never found a Mass to be offensive. Only some of the people who preside over them.
 
Gabriella84 said:
I have never found a Mass to be offensive. Only some of the people who preside over them.

Once again both your LD and stupidity and prejudice and intolerance are being blatantly exposed by your own post.
 
If the guy is willing to stick it out and provide for the girl and the baby, don't prosecute. But if he ever is unfaithful (as in with another minor!), or if he runs off, prosecute.
 
mom4 said:
If the guy is willing to stick it out and provide for the girl and the baby, don't prosecute. But if he ever is unfaithful (as in with another minor!), or if he runs off, prosecute.
so we charge or not based on "if" this or that? an adult, 22 y/o, had sex with a minor. plain and simple. and he shouldnt be charged if he stays with her?
he should be charged. he got her pregnant. if she hadnt gotten pregnant no one would hear anything about this. but he got caught with his "hand in the cookie jar" i guess you could say.

to charge or not based on ultimatums is ridiculous. either he's a pedo or he isnt, he had sex with her or he didnt
 
Don't know if he is a pedophile or not. Eight years isn't the hugest age difference, although he COULD have waited until they were 18 & 26....

Why compound the problem by sending the guy to jail, if it isn't a pattern of behavior? Maybe, he really was in love with this chick? If he was, removing him would just be making a SINGLE mom out of a teen mom.
 
If you read this story, the girl was 13 when she got pregnant and that is not legal in any state at all. Kansas should have prosecuted as well. This assumption that it's all good because the parents gave consent for a 14 year old to get married is only that an assumption. 14 seems to be the limit for a minor getting married, if this guy had sex with her at 13 it is simply illegal and he should be charged.

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
 
mom4 said:
Don't know if he is a pedophile or not. Eight years isn't the hugest age difference, although he COULD have waited until they were 18 & 26....

Why compound the problem by sending the guy to jail, if it isn't a pattern of behavior? Maybe, he really was in love with this chick? If he was, removing him would just be making a SINGLE mom out of a teen mom.


The proper term is Hebephile. It means those that are attracted to those who are barely post-pubescent.
 
It's all blecchy! :puke:

But now that it has been done, I'm just wondering if a family can be made out of this? Even if it started under blecchy conditions.
 
mom4 said:
Don't know if he is a pedophile or not. Eight years isn't the hugest age difference, although he COULD have waited until they were 18 & 26....

Why compound the problem by sending the guy to jail, if it isn't a pattern of behavior? Maybe, he really was in love with this chick? If he was, removing him would just be making a SINGLE mom out of a teen mom.
so the next time a bank gets robbed, the person has jsut to give the money back and he wont get charged? if your going to apply it to one crime you know how it would propigate through to the others. thats just opening the door
 
Johnney said:
so the next time a bank gets robbed, the person has jsut to give the money back and he wont get charged? if your going to apply it to one crime you know how it would propigate through to the others. thats just opening the door

That argument doesn't work. Different crimes, different laws, different sentences.

If you are going to apply the same to every crime, you'll be giving the death penalty for parking violations.
 
GotZoom said:
That argument doesn't work. Different crimes, different laws, different sentences.

If you are going to apply the same to every crime, you'll be giving the death penalty for parking violations.
not all parking violations, just the ones who park in the handicap spots who dont need them.

but why stop with jsut this one charge? and yo uknow it wont. people will try to stretch it across anything and everything.
if your going to cut one criminal a break might as well get to cutting all them a break. doesnt matter what the crime is. a crime is a crime.
 

Forum List

Back
Top