I agree in part. However, the boy did not harm the girl, or threaten her. He didn't force himself on her, and treated her well. He isn't the same as other sex offenders simply because he didn't prey on this child. He deserves to be punished, but to have his life ruined for the next 25 years for an act which didn't harm anyone? I don't agree with that.
Okay, but the law says otherwise.
And, no, he didn't treat her well. He had sex with a girl who our laws says isn't able to make those kinds of decisions.
Police officers arriving at the scene of a domestic dispute, where a woman, (or in some cases a man), has been assaulted (not even saying sexual assault here), just regular assault, and they observe bruises, automatically, whether the victim wants to prosecute or not, takes the perpetrator into custody. The State's Attorney than also goes forth with a prosecution, whether the victim wants to or not. Many times, later, in court, the victim doesn't want to proceed with the prosecution, women are notorious for sticking with abusive men (until they kill em). Remember the girlfriend who the NFL player cold clocked in the elevator? Professional football player strength, hit her with everything he had, and she went down like a ton of bricks. The dumb girlfriend sticks with the guy later and lots of people say she attacked him, and deserved the punch ???? She will become another sad statistic eventually.
So, whether the girls parents wanted the boy prosecuted for having sex with their minor daughter or not, means absolutely nothing whatsoever, and the girl, by law, is incapable of reasoning correctly on sexual matters like this. At age 18, people become adults, although they still, in many states, have to wait until they are 21 for some priviledges. You can't purchase a drink - but you can join the military, obtain a driver's license - change your name, drop out of High School, etc.
What you can't do, once you become 18-years old, is have sexual relations, of any type, groping, penetration, assault, with a child UNDER the age of 18. That clear fact seems to be escaping a lot of poster's here. If the girl was 17, he couldn't do it. With a child of 14, absolutely not, and I know of a school teacher who went to jail here for having relations with a 16 year old student. Also, two school security guards, ages 19-20, went to jail, back-to-back one day. First one observed kissing a 15-year old HS student on the CCTV, was arrested when he arrived for work in uniform the next day, and if that wasn't warning enough, his partner was observed on the CCTV, letting a 14-years old HS student (both were female), get in his car at the end of the school day. He was arrested and joined his co-worker on arrival at school the next day. Both got 3-years jail time, the teacher is doing 10 -20 years, and he had the girls consent, in fact, was dating here for quite awhile. She couldn't give consent legally.
One doesn't raise the age of consent on sexual matters, based on the fact that the times have changed and juveniles are exposed to much more than in previous times. The human mind and maturity hasn't changed. Despite the long lives of some of our Founding Father's, the lifespan during colonial times only averaged about 35 years, with all the diseases. Modern teenagers mature biologically, much faster than they do intellectually. Therefore, we have an age of consent law in just about every state, and 18 seems to be the cut off age. Is there any adult on this forum that would put much stock in the opinions and comments of 14 year old posting? I doubt it. You would know they are a child just by reading their words.
What that judge is doing in putting the 19-year old on the Sexual Predator's register, is protecting the next 12-13-14-15-16-17 year old girl he or any other 19-60 year old decides to go after, for the next 25-years, and sending a message to everyone in his state that this type of behavior will NOT be tolerated. Whether the parents wanted the case dismissed, means nothing, and the girls opinion isn't valid either, she can't make that decision - by law. The judge rightly dismissed the opinion of the parents and the girl, because he is protecting society from this type of behavior by others in the future.
That is why we have laws, and why laws have to be obeyed. Teenage girls can make themselves up to look older than they are, and very provocative - but it is the responsibility of the male to insure they are of age, otherwise, you are going to get hit with the full weight of the law, if you even touch them. She might have looked 22 on her web page - but you can't tell me once they met, that the guy couldn't tell she was a minor, all you have to do to determine that is listen to their speech in most cases. Also, what happens when this girl repeats the offense with another stupid 18-19-20 plus year old boy, or man? You think she is going to stop having sexual relations for the next four years, until she turns age 18?
Some people in here are living in a liberal cloud - change the law and let the guilty go, instead of protecting the innocent, that is the 14 year old, and every minor child under the age of 18, and whether she solicited the engagement or not, we follow the law, because the message is clear - hands off, they are children.....
