Teen's 17-year sentence for gay sex upheld

[Onlooker]

<http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=101&e=1&u=/po/20040131/co_po/teens17yearsentenceforgaysexupheld>

SUMMARY: Advocates for GLBT rights were outraged after the Kansas Court of Appeals ruled that the state can punish homosexual acts between minors much more severely than heterosexual ones.

Advocates for GLBT civil rights reacted with anger after the Kansas Court of Appeals ruled Friday that the state can punish homosexual acts between minors much more severely than heterosexual ones.

The 2-1 ruling affects Matthew R. Limon, who was sentenced in 2001 to more than 17 years in prison for having consensual oral sex after he had just turned 18 with a boy nearly a month away from his 15th birthday in a home for the developmentally disabled.

******************

I hope some progressive groups organize a national boycott of Kansas to draw attention to this inequity. It seems to me the conservaties constantly get away with pretending there is no prejudice, while blatant and cruel examples such as this get very little attention by the national media.

[Columbia]

1. So there's a "Romeo and Juliet" exception

But no "Romeo and Mercutio" exception, eh?

[papau]

24. heterosexual rape of mentally disabled child should a 17 year sent. also

If GLBT rights advocates take any approach other than the need for equal sentencing, this is a lousy case - the wrong case - for them to get involved in.

A "Romeo and Juliet" exception for pedophilia with a 14 year old mentally disabled child is just not what the law should do - and until I'm shown otherwise - it is not what I believe the law would do.

No one who is mentally challenged can consent to underage sex.

[plurality]

27. for one they were BOTH in the hospital

and two, there was slightly more than 3 years difference. What's frightening here is how willing people are to throw children into prison for being children.

[papau]

35. OK-I was wrong-this's about unfair treatment but more to retarded than gay

The intellectual range between "borderline intellectual functioning" and "mild mental retardation." should have made the 2 prior sodomy assault arrests while a child something that did not force the 17 year sentence - he should have gotten the standard 5 years.

This is a case of throwing the book at a child - but while the court discussed the "Romeo" defense that his lawyers brought up - and said the State was permitted to discriminate - the injustice in this case - in my opinion - was not taking into account the mental level and claiming some other person's prior case decision forced you to treat this case as the 3rd adult offense.

The "State can discriminate language" in the decision is sickening.

[gate of the sun]

40. I agree wrong case

they shouldn't connect themselves with it and by doing so can lose credibility.

[roughsatori]

2. It is a statistical fact that gays are given the death penalty

at a higher rate than heterosexuals. There was a gay group trying to get the death penalty off the table for Gays until society "catches up." The opponents stated the GLBT groups were looking for special treatment. They refused to accept that straight people GET special treatment over gays in capitol cases.

Here's another small snip from the article that clearly shows the unequal status:

"According to state law, sexual activity with anyone under 16 is illegal. But if Limon had been having a heterosexual encounter, he would have only faced a sentence of 15 months under the state's "Romeo and Juliet" law, which limits penalties for underage sex between heterosexual teenagers."


Thanks for posting.

[jsw_81]

3. This isn't over

The homophobic fundies are going to lose this at the Supreme Court, just like they lost last year in Lawrence.

[Speed8098]

4. Pedophilia is pedophilia

Regardless of sexual oreintation.

The 2-1 ruling affects Matthew R. Limon, who was sentenced in 2001 to more than 17 years in prison for having consensual oral sex after he had just turned 18 with a boy nearly a month away from his 15th birthday in a home for the developmentally disabled

I hate the way gays are decimated and degraded for their lifestyle, but I would lock up ANYONE who practices pedophilia.

Flame me if you want, but wrong is wrong. A 15 year old boy is not mature enough to take on the baggage that goes along with being sexually active,especiallly if there is a mental disorder. It doesn't matter if it's heterosexual or homosexual.

(Edited for content)

[roughsatori]

5. You completely missed the point

It is about the inequality in sentencing. Please don't pretend that anyone here is promoting pedophilia. It is unconstitutional to give out wildly different sentences due to race, sexual orientation or gender.

Did you miss this in the story: "According to state law, sexual activity with anyone under 16 is illegal. But if Limon had been having a heterosexual encounter, he would have only faced a sentence of 15 months under the state's "Romeo and Juliet" law, which limits penalties for underage sex between heterosexual teenagers."

Limon got 17 years because it was a same sex encounter. Heterosexuals would face a max of 15 months. That is wrong and unequal under the law. To say that is not to promote pedophilia. If it does not matter to you (as you write) if it is homosexual or heterosexual then the sentencing should be the same. You somehow miss that and seem to imply that someone is saying pedophilia is OK. I can not find any such thing in the thread.

(I see you have edited your post which may make my response seem out of proportion to those who did not read the original).

[Speed8098]

8. No, you missed the point

This 15 year old boy was mentally challenged. I just wonder to what degree he was disabled.

I agree that the laws are not equal and that needs to be changed and I would like to see the same sentence for a woman who has sex with an underage boy whit a mental disability.

This particular case, considering the disability, is not one I think the gay community should get behind.

Battles DO have to be waged against this inequality in the law, but battles must be chosen that will advance the agenda we are talking about. Lacking the knowledge of the severity of his disability, this one looks like an 18 year old taking advantage of a mentally challenged boy.

[bowens43]

10. you did miss the point

and apparently continue to do so....

[October]

11. I agree with you Speed8098

A lot of people seem to be overlooking the "mentally challenged" part of the story, which confounds me.

I live in a community where gays are open, so please don't flame me.

It's just that I don't understand how anyone who is mentally challened can consent to anything.

[gonefishing]

16. Another agree

In the DU where most people are extremely sensitive and understanding you will receive responses like Speed8098 and mine. When you base your arguments on cases like this one the insensitive and non-understanding world will pound on you.

If it were me I would pick a different battle.

[NickB79]

48. The 18 yr old was also living in the group home

Implying he too was mentally challenged to have been living there. I also wonder to what degree they were BOTH mentally challenged. If the mental state of the 15 yr old is considered in sentencing, shouldn't we also consider the mental state of the 18 yr old?

[SquireJons]

6. Soooo

... you're saying that tens of millions of sexually active teens are felons? Man that's gonna cost a lot; better get out your checkbook. But think what a boon it will be to the economy to build all those prisons!

Where in the world did Americans get the idea that consensual sex is bad, or that teens were incapable of making decisions regarding sex? This country is nuts if they think teenage sex can be stamped out, communism had a better chance of working than this...

[Enraged_Ape]

7. Sex between teenagers should be given some sort of leeway...

but I absolutely disagree with your implication that all teens are somehow capable of making decisions about sex. What do YOU suggest the age of consent should be? 13?

Having sex with a minor (<18 in most states) is pedophilia and against the law, and I encourage the fullest prosecution of those adults that break that law. But I can see how the "Romeo and Juliet" law could have (and definitely should have) applied here.

[SquireJons]

39. Sex Education is the Key

...not fear and repression. There are plenty of places in the world (industrialized nations too) where the age of consent is 13. They don't seem to have the problems we do. I guess all those French (where the average person loses their virginity at 14) are just a bunch of criminals. And I know lots of people who had sex by 14 and it didn't harm them. I wanted to have sex by 13, but couldn't make it happen.

I have a young son, and I don't want him to be having sex when he's 13 (except the way I did) but I don't want some girl thrown in jail if he does have sex with her. So what's the difference? We are not talking about adults manipulating children for sexual purposes. It's simply our Protestant paranoia that blinds us to the truth and makes us think that's the issue here.

[bowens43]

9. First , we're talking about 3 years difference in age

it ISN'T pedophilia. Second, it's not even the issue. The issue is the disparity in sentencing.

[gonefishing]

18. An 18 year old had sex with a 14 year old mentally disabled child.

If that was my child I would be pissed off.

[plurality]

30. for one, they were both in the home

so they were both mentally disabled. and one of them JUST turned 18. it's not pedophilia, it's two kids screwing around.

[SquireJons]

41. So would I

But, not enough to see the other kid's life ruined, and have him raped in prison for years to come. I'd talk to my son... that's the responsible thing to do.

[fjc]

13. So, you think 17 years is here is a fair sentence?

[gonefishing]

15. Agreed!

If I understand this one correct - An 18 year old had sex with a 14 year old mentally disabled child. Enough said. Not buying this one.

[MattBaggins]

43. Leaving out half the facts are we?

An 18 year old mentally disabled child had sex with a 14 year old mentally disabled child.

[MrPrax]

28. sure...down with Pedophilia

But the more interesting part is...

"who was sentenced in 2001 to more than 17 years in prison for having consensual oral sex after he had just turned 18 with a boy nearly a month away from his 15th birthday in a home for the developmentally disabled"

This is not a REAL pedophile and 17 years????

Truly unbelieveable...

You feel safer?

[Eloriel]

33. You can't reasonably call this pedophilia just because one is

of technical legal age to be an adult. They're both still teenagers, both still developmentally disabled (one presumes). Three years difference is a lot for teens, but not "enough" IMO to make this a case of pedophilia. There are plenty of heterosexual couples with these kinds of age differences -- is that pedophilia too?

[Occulus]

34. "Just turned 18" and

"nearly a month away from his 15th birthday".

Hmmmm.

When *I* was "nearly a month away" from my 15th birthday, I didn't say I was 14. I said I was almost 15. Every day after that brought me closer to driving age, the first major step to adult freedom back in the day (I'm 28 now- almost 29 :) ).

but get this:

"Green also wrote that heterosexual offenses are less objectionable because they could lead to babies being born, and "same-sex relationships do not generally lead to unwanted pregnancies.""

Pardon me. First, we're fed the idea that students need to learn abstainance in school, which send the message to gay high school students that they shouldn't ever have sex (this being the message because they cannot marry). Then, we're told that heterosexual encounters among youths are less bad vs. homosexual encounters, because they could lead to pregnancy.

Are we trying to send the message to gay youth that they have no hope at all? And where oh where in Christ's name do people get the idea that the 18 year old is a pedophile in the making? Where's the evidence that he's after young boys, in the plural? Were there any actual gay men in his environment? Did the younger one tell the 18 year old that he was gay, too? And don't feed me the line of bull that a kid almost 15 doesn't know for sure, because I knew it in my soul by the age of ten or so. In fact, most of the gay men I know tell me they knew about their own sexual orientation around or before that time.

There's not enough information in the article for me to call the older one a pedophile. If this is a repeat occurrance, I'd be more prepared to call it that. Until then, though, this is a very dangerous precedent to set. What it's doing is sending a message to all gay youth everywhere that they can be expected to be treated differently under the law. Now, I ask you, since we adults do not have this kind of official discrimination on the books yet... what does this mean?

Are the Powers That Be "preparing" gay youth for their adulthoods- years down the road- that this is what they can expect in the future? Remember, there's that proposed marriage amendment.

How long will it be if this is allowed to stand before adults homosexuals are expected to, say, register themselves somehow? Before known homosexuals are reported to police because their simple presence in public "endangers the children"? Before they are required- for the future generations, of course- to be chemically castrated?

Yes, I know I'm being extreme. Yes, I know this is a bad case to use. The fact is, we do not control the legal cards we are dealt. The Powers That Be do. If they win this, they can then use it as a precedent for a stronger case, such as another one involving two adults for "public health reasons". Not long after that one skates, which it would if this one does, we'll start seeing some of the actions I mentioned above.

Discriminatory legal precedent set by the Supreme Court is hard to alter. Everyone will acknowledge at least this. Yes, it may be a bad case to make the argument on, but we don't have the luxury of deciding which case will set the precedent.

[TreasonousBastard]

12. The way I read this, it's insane.

Must be something more to it.

Apparently, if you have heterosexual sex with a minor, there is a sentence limit, but this limit hasn't been extended to homosexual sex. The Supremes have already addressed this disparity, and sent the case back for resentencing under their own guidelines.

The state appeals court then deliberately ignored the Lawrence decision AGAIN and slams the kid.

If they had said it was because the underaged teen was disabled, it still might have been an excessive sentence, but would have made some sense. If they claimed sexual assault, it might have made some sense. But no, they seem to have affirmed the idea that homosexual sex is worse because it can't produce unwanted babies.

So, they fly into the face of a Supreme Court decision and make an incredibly stupid argument while doing it.

How many appeals before someone straightens this out?

[kcwayne]

14. How can anyone justify 17 years for a sex offense

when manslaughter cases get as little as 5 years?

There is no rationality to the criminal sentencing once sex, race, and/or sexual orientation are part of the decision process.

[bmbmd]

17. How about seventeen years

for rape of a child?

[Laughing Mirror]

19. but what is a child?

My World Almanac for the year 2000 informs me that 14-year old boys and 12-year old girls in the states of Kansas and Massachusetts are, by parental consent, eligible to get married and presumably have children.

But what about their homosexual brothers and sisters. What about two 14-year old boys getting married? Or two 12-year old girls?

[Robb]

20. Because dead people are done suffering

..and rape victims suffer forever? :shrug:

I agree the inequity here is absurd; but this seems like a legislative issue that could be addressed procedurally, without having to have the national impression that the GLBT community is backing someone having sex with a developmentally disabled kid. Right?

[foreigncorrespondent]

21. Disgusting!

Granted the 18 year old should have chosen someone of his own age to have sex with, but nevertheless the court should not be handing down a harsher penalty because it was gay sex and not heterosexual sex.

Just more proof of bigotry in the court system and government.

[Virginian]

22. Sex took place in home for mentally challenged.

Most of the comments I have read seem to assume the 18 year old in normal and the 14 year old is challenged. They could both be functioning at the same age.

Nothing states that the 18 year old was the aggressor. He may have been functioning at a lower mental age than the 14 year old.

Nothing says whether this was the first time or if this was not addressed while the older boy was 17 in order to get him an adult sentence.

This may be more of a situation where the 18-year old was incapable of taking care of himself, but because he was 18, the govt would no longer support him. As he needed a place to live, prison would house him. If that were the case, this would be less of a gay thing and more of a statement about how we take care of our weakest citizens.

To throw a person into prison because he cannot provide for himself reeks of the problems Reagan started when he threw people into the streets by closing mental health facilities.

[proud2BlibKansan]

31. They were both handicapped

I posted a link to a story in the local media. But it's not here. I'll try to post it again.

[proud2BlibKansan]

32. Here's the link

http://www.pitch.com/issues/2004-01-22/feature.html/1/index.html

[Virginian]

46. Thanks

[SemperEadem]

37. That's because most people have no experience

with developmentally challenged teenagers, let alone mental health issues, period, so they just assume that mental illness is like a cold, that you shake it off, act right and get a grip on yourself...

I agree--these were 2 minors--one 17, the other 14 when the incident happened. There is no evidence to suggest that the older one was the aggressor or pursuer or that he was less impacted by his mental illness than the younger one. There is nothing to suggest that the younger one didn't do the pursuing, wasn't the instigator in this.

They are teenagers---they are still going to be curious about the pleasurable feelings of sex; mental illness does not override or short circuit a basic human drive, as unpleasant as that may be for some to consider.. it doesn't mean that one assigns the usual forms of blame to these two boys that would be applicable with someone with clear, premeditated intent to harm and intimidate a child.

There is nothing in the articles which would lead a reasoned person to believe that the older boy was, by default, a preditor with evil intent---especially if the two of them were living at this facility.

[davsand]

23. There is an element of victimization in this case.

Legally, at 18, he's viewed as an adult. The 15 year old is still viewed as a minor. While I agree with the Supreme Court that there should be no difference in sentencing for a gay sex act -v- a straight one, I can see how a conservative court would rule harshly in this case.

I may not agree with them, but I can see where the question of victimization comes into play here in a conservative court. There is a big question about how "consensual" any sex act is when it is between an "adult" and a minor, let alone one that is viewed as developmentally disabled.

Had that been 15 year old retarded GIRL I suspect it would have been sentenced less harshly, and THAT is my fundamental disagreement with this ruling.

Laura

[Virginian]

26. Are boys worth more than girls?

If the same 18-year-old had been involved in an act with a 14-year-old girl, The sentance would have been less.

If an adult female had been involved in an act with the 14-year-old boy, she would have gone to prison.

If two females, 18 and 14 had had an encounter, it probably would have gone unreported.

man + boy = 17 years
woman + boy = ? years
man + girl = months
woman + girl = nothing.

[Ratty]

38. Exactly so! This policy is more sexist than homophobic!

I can't contribute anything more to your argument. You said it most convincingly.

[xchrom]

25. without know why the 18 yr old

was in the institution also -- it's a three year difference in their ages -- that is not pedophilia.
now it might have been taking advantage of the situation -- but i don't think it warrants a seventeen year sentence.
especially in the light of what happens to heterosexuals under similar circumstances.

[bleedingheart]

29. If it was a 14 year old girl and an 18 year old boy it would classify

as statutory rape in some states or it would be overlooked. Hell there are cultures where it is not unusual to marry off gals as young as 8 or 9..

I think that both boy's mental state should be taken into consideration because by sentencing this older boy to prison he may become the sexual predator he never was to begin with.

By the way my sister worked with the retarded years ago and she said that people mistakenly think that just because someone is mentally challenged that they won't have sexual urges....that is not the case.

[Chicago Democrat]

44. Consensual Sex Between Minors

What is RAPE? I thought rape was a violent act. A violent taking of sex. A horrible crime. It is so totally different from what took place here. IT WAS CONSENSUAL! I don't see how anyone could confuse the two. I understand the principle of Statutory Rape, but there should be exceptions for children so close in age.

What is Pedophilia? Creepy adults who like sex with kids. Like what Michael Jackson is accused of. A far far FAR cry when compared to this case. I don't think a child can -be- a pedophile. Especially a "developmentally disabled" one aged 18 years should not be considered one.

Furthermore, housing "children" aged 14 to 18 years in the same facility is just asking for such a thing to happen. And since the act was "consensual" , maybe it was a natural part of the maturing process. Kid who sleep together after about 14 years of age, start to experiment sexually. They masturbate separately or sometimes together or play doctor or my GOD actually have sex. Why is America so totally F*CKED up when it comes to SEX!!!!?

And what about this young 14 year old? What if he was gay and this was his first time... The message must be 'gay sex is so bad one blow job equal 17 years in prison'. or Gay = Destroyed Life.

What social good is advanced by the state intervening in this way? What responsibility do the caretakers of these "disabled" children bear?

[peterh]

36. Clinton gets impeached for a bj….

Janklow get a 100 days for killing a man…
We have an misadministration that is still free to terrorize the world after killing thousands in a admittedly illegal war….

A “kid” gets 17 years for a bj……

Damn, this is one fucked up country I be living in….

[SquireJons]

42. "This be one f@cked up country"

Amen Brother...

[dsc]

45. This is both sad and absurd

A few responses to points raised below.

First, this isn't pedeophilia. This is a senior dating a freshman. Not common but not pedeophilia either. I knew I was gay at that age. I was capable of, and did, have consentual sex at that age. But more to the point we have no idea who was functioning here on what level. My dad used to be principal of the local school for the menatally retarded. And I can assure you age is no indication of ability to function in that community.

Second, the point here is that this is unequal treatment no matter how it is sliced. Had this 15 year old been a girl the 18 year old would have gotten less than 1/12th of the sentence. That defines disparete treatment.

[TexasProgressive]

47. EXACTLY - read the post from dsc for the final word

Thank you, dsc.