Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting. The judge felt like the guy should have a pass, because he went to sex offender treatment....he FAILED the first one for lying! Was caught, kicked out, and went to another program....
I consider sex offender treatment as bogus as a three dollar bill. Sex offenders are liars, manipulative sociopaths. They pretend to buy into the program, and express remorse about their crime. Believe me, the only "remorse" they feel is that they were caught.
They charm and manipulate social workers, and the court system. They pretend to be really nice people who were coerced into a sexual relationship with a child, and while they barely acknowledge their complicity, they make it seem like they were a victim in the entire event.
Congrats judge, you were snowed. Manipulated by this con...how does it feel? And you are not even fourteen years old....
But we weren't there and heard the words the guy used.
We can't just assume he ever tried to charm or manipulate anyone.
Some of you are scary. kids act as adults with NO clue of reality... they are NOT and never will be- yes in other countires young gals marry earlier n life and it is the norm - but rape has happened since day one- but DO NOT SUGAR COAT IT!- 40+ old men have NO cause to be with a yound gal still in high school- here in Fl, if you are NOT sure and have sex, you going to jail if you didn't see proof of DOB- yes sir,, you best get proof, you can't say in court OHH she looked and acted mature. won't fly. and for that parent who thinks it was consensual... who cares, maybe she was infatuated, maybe scared, maybe he gave her money maybe was already "groomed" IT IS NOT RIGHT morally- ethically or legally-,, the judge sent out a horrible message and I hope they run him out of the country!
Actually, "minor" is a legal concept. Don't believe me? Trying picking up a 14 year-old girl, have sex with her, then take her to the local police department and explain what you've done to her. What will happen next won't be "artificial".
Yes, it used to be common for 13 year-olds to marry. It also used to be common for people to own slaves. We've since stopped that, too.
It's still arbitrary though. Yes, the law says that minors are essentially controllable vegetables, but that's not actually true.
Your thought process there is ridiculous. To your chain of comments, I could say that being nice to each other is wrong too, because is used to be very common, but we've mostly stopped doing that too!
I'm not single, but let's pretend for a minute that I am not only single, but a teacher. It wouldn't matter if I had a girl that was "very" mature for herage in my class. The fact that she is a student and I am a teacher is enough to guarantee there would be nothing going on other than me teaching the class.
I find it interesting -- and a bit troublesome -- that you ultimately put the blame on the MOTHER'S failure at parenting. So this teacher -- who at 49 is certainly old enough to know the rules -- bears NONE of the responsibility? You go on to fault her parents lack of time invested into raising her as the reason this happened. Why don't you put this on the teacher?
I've rewritten one sentence for you:
"Fourteen year old children should be supervised and not be given the opportunity to be in a position where they can have sex with a 49 year old man SEVERAL TIMES"
.......should probably read:
49 year-old men should not seek to have sex SEVERAL TIMES with unsupervised fourteen year old children.
Maybe he doesn't agree with the rules. I find it amazing that people think that just because laws exist, people will all follow them all the time.
Interesting reading. Particularly like the posters who portray the young girl as a Jezabel Lolita.
With a Mother who is neglectful.... Or maybe a single Mother, who works two minimum wage jobs to keep food on the table.
The assumptions people make....
All we know is that a man, age 49, had sex with a 14 year old girl. A student in his class.
Can anyone defend this guy, on any level?
Can anyone defend that a teacher who had sex with an underage student should only receive a 30 day sentence? That a judge who gave this sentence, should not have a peer review?
Anyway you want to put it, this was rape of a minor. No question.
This should have a more serious sentence. Mary Laturneau received six months of a sentence for raping her student, and that was consensual as well.
It's insane that consensual sex is ever described as rape in the first place and is offensive to people who were forced to have consenters in the same category as them.
If you think the sentence should have been more serious, then your beef should be with those who offered the plea deal in the first place.
The judge doesn't have the power to throw out the plea deal after it has been accepted.
And you don't want to invent peer review for judges. Cases take way too long as it is. Now you want every decision to be reviewed, which means every appeal will be reviewed.
Will cases soon be considered by a win 7 of 13 trial decision?
There is no defense for what the teacher did. None.
He should go to jail for years - not days.
What he did was immoral, unethical and illegal, and he should be more severely punished.
My beef with the conversation is the assumption - by many on here - that teenagers can't consent to sex, whether with an adult or another teen.
We know that - legally - a teen can't consent to sex with an adult (depending on age and state, which is arbitrary enough itself to start another thread). But we do not speak about that consent with another teen.
Look, we know they have sex. And they are having sex at younger and younger ages. About 2 yrs ago, there was a big bruhaha about 5th graders caught making a porn video in school. It shocks the senses, but regardless of how we feel about it, it's happening. Stick your head in the sand if you'd like, but it still won't change the fact that kids - not just teens - are having sex.
We can debate the physiology, psychology, and development of the child brain all day, but until we can monitor them 24/7/365, kids will find a way. Every single one of you reading this post knows that, as you were once a kid and can recall many times you had windows of opportunity to do things you knew were wrong, you knew you'd get in trouble over and knew you'd be punished for - but you still did it, anyway.
So we could debate the legal definition of "consent" all day, but it doesn't change anything in the minds of these kids/teens that - in some ways - are more mature than we were at their age. 14 year old girls have been having sex since before we climbed down from the trees. Even in modern times, it's still legal in many parts of the world - including the US - to marry at this age. So please, drop this idea that we can define what consent is for the world and have everyone follow it. This is both naive and stupid.
So if you acknowledge that teens can actually consent, then why is what this guy did immoral and unethical?
Of course teenagers can consent to sex. Teens and pre-teens, sadly, will experiment with all things sexual. And sex is a normal part of the human existence. I have no preconceived notion that teenagers younger than the age of 18 will at some point start having sex. Hopefully they take the necessary precautions, as 99% of them truly aren't really prepared for all that is involved with having sex.
And while we want to believe that teens these days are more mature than we were at that age -- and having raised 4 teenagers, I highly doubt that -- the law is what the law is.
But this thread isn't about two teenagers having at it in the backseat of a Buick. It is about a 49 year-old raping a 14 year-old. The "age of consent" argument doesn't apply here. Rape is illegal. Yes, the 49 year-old seems to have avoided serious prison time, but what kind of 49 year-old man has a sexual interest -- consensual or non-consensual -- in a 14 year-old girl?
A man who has some serious issues, that's who.
But it wasn't rape. The girl consented to the intercourse.
There's really not much involved for this stuff anyway. If you're prepared to deal with and raise a child, you're fine.
Well, having raised one of my own, one on the way, and being a teacher of teens for 2 decades, I can also speak from experience. While they actually have degraded in intellectual maturity (at least in many cases) with what past generations had to deal with, their physical maturity has started much earlier. Look at when girls are menstruating. Look at guys and shaving. in the physical aspect, they are more mature. And that physical maturity - tied with earlier onset of hormones - will guide their decisions. Doesn't make it right, but it is what it is, and to deny it is wrong.
As for what this thread is about, have you seen anyone in here actually saying its okay for a 49-yr old man to have sex with a 14-yr old girl? Nope, didn't think so. We've all stated - several times, in fact - that's it's wrong, illegal, immoral, and unethical. Doesn't mean the conversation can't drift occasionally to topics in the same vein. Which it has, several times. Get a grip.
I think it COULD be OK.
I personally think it is a dumb decision, but that's just what I think.
There are lots of things I think are dumb that are still justifiable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
