The boy said he targeted his younger sister because she was small and 'couldn't remember stuff'. Well, most of the population is retarded, so that's not much of a surprise. If nothing else, cases should be reviewed periodically for removal from the list. We should at least apply some degree here, say level 3 being a nightmare rapist that used a weapon, kidnapped, or beat the victim for sport and level 1 being the statutory goof described in this story. And it doesn't help my sister is a fat bitch. A teen boy expressed interest in her, and they slept together.
Of course, if he had screwed another 14 year old, then it would have been consensual you see. In addition, if you do not like that outcome do not go into that situation or get drunk in the first place. However, we should perceive them as opportunities. I would tell him he better cut it out, because she is either crazy or desperate, but that is a different issue. The only issue is the age of the participants and yes, a boy under the age of consent who has sex with a girl under the age of consent can be prosecuted for statutory rape. Usually, males do not have any pubic hair, and have a brain mass that is equivalent to that of a mouse. Add in the greater upper body mass of males, and societal conditioning, and the 14-year-old boy and 19-year-old girl should be either on equal physical footing, or on a footing favorable to the male.
Once inside the pen your sentence doesn't end until you drop dead. Plus, they don't have bras in Africa. Furthermore, on average, they admitted to having committed two to five times as many sex crimes for which they were not apprehended. So she shouldn't be on the list. The idea of women being unable to overpower men has been used for way too long to excuse female violence as negligible. Vera allegedly drove over to his house and picked him up, and they drove around and kissed. A fourteen year old boy usually can't be physically intimidated or controlled by most females.
There are lots of laws I think people should never be punished for breaking. I recognize I may be singing to the choir here, but aren't someone's rights to travel freely, raise their own children as long as they are not intentionally harming them, and property still worth a trial by jury? Not hers, nor ours, if our goal is to rehabilitate criminals into productive citizens. So if robbing a bank was not illegal on Monday when you did it, you cannot be prosecuted for it because the legislature made it illegal on Tuesday. It should be recognized by any adult, that if you go to a bar with the intent to get drunk. Any nudity in most of the states is illegal.
Take pictures of him fuming as that 7 foot fence comes down. Statutory rape between people with narrow age differences is still statutory rape and should be penalized. It is rape because made so by statute malum prohibitum regardless of the particular circumstances. There is pressure on children to be sexualised, particularly on younger boys, to start having sex. The felony in questions has to be of treason or similar type of crime that is consider close to treason. The only person who deserves a beatdown is the person who started a fight. You even resorted to the tired 'horny teenage boy' defense.
The youngster has now been sent to live with relatives away from his sister before he is sentenced at Blackburn Magistrates Court pictured The government has said that by the end of 2014 all devices with access to the internet will be blocked from accessing pornography, with users forced to opt in. Hoping severe punishment will curb questionable behavior has a long history of abject failure, and pushing for it is mostly something the right likes to do. Come to think of it, my parents are kind of creepy. And actually, there have been prosecutions of an underage male for having sex with an underage female. For parents, one problem with including them is that the predator is the needle you want to protect kids from, and Shawna is a straw.
He turned out to be 14 years old. These people are very unlikely to reoffend, so there's little practical reason to continue shaming them by maintaining a public list of their names. I challenge anyone to watch the interview embedded below and not feel heartbroken for Shawna. For taxpayers, keeping track of all the straw costs lots of money and ties up law enforcement. And offender registries cause other problems even aside from that.
If there's a registry, it would make far more sense to have one that was limited to law enforcement and contained those who are actual risks to the public. Individual cases should be investigated individually, and not prejudged. You don't get off unless you drop dead. Shawna's story is just one more example of why sex offender registries are cruel and unjust. Frequently, they like their mom better than their dad. Thank you, I thought I was going to have to explain to these plebeians that as long as nudity is displayed in a non-pornographic way, it's perfectly legal. But again, the thing that's going on here is that she's being lumped into a category with people whose crimes and natures are very different from hers.