Man gets no prison time after 14-year-old girl tied up, sexually assaulted
- Thread starter Charlemagne
- Start date
Pretty sure a 14 year old cannot give consent, so that consensual talk would be moot. Next he'll tell us a 6 year old consented with the promise of candy.it was stautory rape, and there seems to be evidence it was consensual.... how did she complain, did she agree to it then express regret later? Who knows....
As has been mentioned several times, the age of consent used to be 14, and I can tell you that as a male, I could give consent for sex with a 19 year old female (or older) when I was 14. Theoretically maybe the age of consent should be different for men and women though such a proposal would never fly politically or socially...Pretty sure a 14 year old cannot give consent, so that consensual talk would be moot. Next he'll tell us a 6 year old consented with the promise of candy.
The way I understand it, statutory rape is charged if the person is underage, regardless of consent. I think a few people were in relationships or even got married and the guy was charged with stat rape because they hooked up when she was underage.Pretty sure a 14 year old cannot give consent, so that consensual talk would be moot. Next he'll tell us a 6 year old consented with the promise of candy.
As has been mentioned several times, the age of consent used to be 14, and I can tell you that as a male, I could give consent for sex with a 19 year old female (or older) when I was 14. Theoretically maybe the age of consent should be different for men and women though such a proposal would never fly politically or socially...
The age of consent used to be 14 in Canada and was switched to 16. This happened in the US where age of consent is 18. Even though you (and even I) could have consented at 14, the rules are written to govern all
No...not true. It's utter and complete speculation. He wasn't there and neither were you yet you're acting as if you know exactly what happened. And once again, instead of believing the female's story, you automatically call it a double standard.True...
This goes back to threads about the 'double standard' between the sexes. If it were the reverse - a typical 14 year old male and a 19 year old female - the engagement would be remembered fondly as the time of his life.
This is not a double standard by any means. Fact is in MOST cases if the aggressor was a woman, most guys would be ok with it as most guys, including 14-year olds are horny. But the treatment of the victim and perp is not a double standard because if a 19-year old woman assaults a 14-year old male who DIDN'T want it, she'd be prosecuted the same. Only question is whether the boy is going to claim assault or roll with it.No...not true. It's utter and complete speculation. He wasn't there and neither were you yet you're acting as if you know exactly what happened. And once again, instead of believing the female's story, you automatically call it a double standard.
I think we all understand the law has to draw a line somewhere...and I accept that. But this is where judges come in. 14 year olds vary a great deal in their psycological maturity and looks. So may variables need to be taken into account. Did he know she was 14, did she look and portray herself as being over 16, etc etc etc. Its not the same as a 6 year old and you really put your intellect on display when you try to make that case.Pretty sure a 14 year old cannot give consent, so that consensual talk would be moot. Next he'll tell us a 6 year old consented with the promise of candy.
I'm really beginning to wonder who has the smaller cock here, you or me???No...not true. It's utter and complete speculation. He wasn't there and neither were you yet you're acting as if you know exactly what happened. And once again, instead of believing the female's story, you automatically call it a double standard.
You're putting YOUR intellect on display when you throw out red herrings like 'some 14 year olds are mature than others'. Well, some 30 year olds are more mature than others. However, that means NOTHING. You sit there thinking a 15 year old can make the case that he is far more mature than his peers so he should be able to walk into a store and buy alcohol.I think we all understand the law has to draw a line somewhere...and I accept that. But this is where judges come in. 14 year olds vary a great deal in their psycological maturity and looks. So may variables need to be taken into account. Did he know she was 14, did she look and portray herself as being over 16, etc etc etc. Its not the same as a 6 year old and you really put your intellect on display when you try to make that case.
Holy irrelevance, batman. The age of consent used to be 14. So what? Is it now??As has been mentioned several times, the age of consent used to be 14, and I can tell you that as a male, I could give consent for sex with a 19 year old female (or older) when I was 14. Theoretically maybe the age of consent should be different for men and women though such a proposal would never fly politically or socially...
You can tell the guys who really like them young. I guess that's why that Barely Legal shyte is still somewhat popular.
Its not a red herring, the fact is the law needs to draw a line and the fact that there are other factors and variables is why we have judges to take into account mitigating factors and impose a sentence that fits the crime. In France the legal drinking age is 16, so why is it 19 in Canada, are we just too stupid to deal with that responsibility at that age? Is France in chaos? Why is it 21 in the USA? Please explain all these discrepancies since its so obvious to your great mind.You're putting YOUR intellect on display when you throw out red herrings like 'some 14 year olds are mature than others'. Well, some 30 year olds are more mature than others. However, that means NOTHING. You sit there thinking a 15 year old can make the case that he is far more mature than his peers so he should be able to walk into a store and buy alcohol.
Of course I like them young and thin, not everyone is attracted to fat grannies like you.Holy irrelevance, batman. The age of consent used to be 14. So what? Is it now??
You can tell the guys who really like them young. I guess that's why that Barely Legal shyte is still somewhat popular.
I have seen 20-year old girls that look like they are 10. I have seen 17-year old girls who look like they are 22-25. I have seen boys, especially some athletes, who look like they are 18+ and turn out to be 14-15. And occasionally you run into a man who has a boyish face and you think he's underage but he's well over.um when i was 14, i thought 19 year old guys were all the rage. do you even know what 14 year old boys look like these days? BOYS. you don't need much education to know that older guys are way hotter.
I am not so much talking about the girl going with the guy. Plenty of opportunity for that to take place and yes, the older guy is always more mature and thus attractive. But where were her parents in all this? My parents had a leash on me and my siblings until we were 17 when we could drive on our own with a G2 license. They knew who my friends were and I don't think I could do anything without them investigating and finding out things. People say the system failed her. It did but I think her parents may also have failed her too. Clearly she wasn't sneaking around with this guy so the parents knew and did nothing. No 19-year old should be going out with a 14-year old IMO.
lol. What kind of playground rebuttal is that? What gave you the impression that I am into fat grannies? But if it's between a fat granny and a 14 year old, I will stay with the fat granny. You can have your 14 year old 'hottie' and hopefully they put you in a place where you can go grab your ankles for Bubba. lolOf course I like them young and thin, not everyone is attracted to fat grannies like you.
PS: If the saying 'a hit dog will holler' ever applied to a situation, this is it. Or as they would say where I'm from: 'throw stone in a hog pen, who bawl first get lick'.
The law is the law. It doesn't matter what YOU think. It only matter what the law states. I can see it now "your honor, I am only 12 but I can assure you that I am highly intelligent, very mature and totally capable of ....."Its not a red herring, the fact is the law needs to draw a line and the fact that there are other factors and variables is why we have judges to take into account mitigating factors and impose a sentence that fits the crime. In France the legal drinking age is 16, so why is it 19 in Canada, are we just too stupid to deal with that responsibility at that age? Is France in chaos? Why is it 21 in the USA? Please explain all these discrepancies since its so obvious to your great mind.
Those mitigating factors you speak of must be for things where they try minors as adults. It's not the same as punishing a store owner for selling alcohol to said minor, just because the child may have eloquently stated why he should be allowed to purchase it due to his well developed maturity level.
