HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Kaitlyn Hunt's mother und...

Sun May 26, 2013, 07:45 PM

Kaitlyn Hunt's mother under attack by bloggers who say 'Free Kate' is all lies

Kaitlyn Hunt, the Florida teen charged with committing lewd and lascivious acts on her younger girlfriend, declined a plea deal on Friday, opting for a trial by jury next month. According to a May 26 New York Daily News report, the younger girl’s parents finally addressed the media, saying they warned the 18-year-old to stay away from their daughter. The Hunt family, especially Kate’s mother, Kelley Hunt Smith, are now being called liars.

Hunt-Smith went public with Kaitlyn’s legal troubles on May 17, one week before a decision on the plea deal was due. The Facebook group “Free Kate” was formed, which now has over 50K members, and the case got international attention.

Kate Hunt was an 18-year-old senior. Her girlfriend was a 14-year-old freshman at her high school. Misreporting in the case initially had the girls at 15 and 17, stating that the Smiths waited until Hunt was 18 to go to the police.

This false information didn’t come from the Hunt family. Kaitlyn’s mom first explained the situation as:


more...
http://www.examiner.com/article/kaitlyn-hunt-s-mother-under-attack-by-bloggers-who-say-free-kate-is-all-lies





I bolded an interesting claim by Kaitlyn's mom, that I questioned whether or not it was true or yet another lie. It didn't take me long to find this post by Kaitlyn's dad:

http://www.xojane.com/issues/kaitlyn-hunt

While Kate was three years older than her girlfriend, they were peers. But when Kate's girlfriend's parents learned of their relationship, they went directly to the police to press charges without sharing their objections with Kate or her family.


snip...

This relationship occurred when they were both minors, and my daughter's girlfriend's parents waited until she turned 18 to arrest her.



That first quote has been contradicted by the younger girl's parents, and in all fairness could well be a case of "he said, she said". But the second quote is definitely false, and this definitely came from Kaitlyn Hunt's family.



Now they are blaming the media for bad reporting, just like they blamed the victim's parents for coming after Kate because it was a homosexual relationship. When will they stop blaming other people and take responsibility for a change?

189 replies, 34446 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 189 replies Author Time Post
Reply Kaitlyn Hunt's mother under attack by bloggers who say 'Free Kate' is all lies (Original post)
shawn703 May 2013 OP
southernyankeebelle May 2013 #1
shawn703 May 2013 #16
pnwmom May 2013 #27
shawn703 May 2013 #42
southernyankeebelle May 2013 #45
shawn703 May 2013 #48
southernyankeebelle May 2013 #49
alp227 May 2013 #154
Post removed May 2013 #2
arthritisR_US May 2013 #4
Honeycombe8 May 2013 #7
shawn703 May 2013 #8
LisaL May 2013 #9
arthritisR_US May 2013 #13
magical thyme May 2013 #17
shawn703 May 2013 #18
arthritisR_US May 2013 #19
shawn703 May 2013 #20
Drale May 2013 #176
arthritisR_US May 2013 #184
MrSlayer May 2013 #102
arthritisR_US May 2013 #157
vaberella May 2013 #182
11 Bravo May 2013 #6
shawn703 May 2013 #10
nolabear May 2013 #11
Iggo May 2013 #12
The Straight Story May 2013 #14
pacalo May 2013 #3
Honeycombe8 May 2013 #5
pacalo May 2013 #15
stupart74 May 2013 #38
jeff47 May 2013 #90
LisaL May 2013 #95
jeff47 May 2013 #98
LisaL May 2013 #104
jeff47 May 2013 #111
LisaL May 2013 #115
jeff47 May 2013 #118
LisaL May 2013 #119
jeff47 May 2013 #121
Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #142
Dorian Gray May 2013 #149
pnwmom May 2013 #28
LisaL May 2013 #62
pnwmom May 2013 #112
NaturalHigh May 2013 #130
pnwmom May 2013 #132
Mr. X May 2013 #26
pacalo May 2013 #29
Mr. X May 2013 #32
LisaL May 2013 #63
jeff47 May 2013 #92
davidpdx May 2013 #185
pacalo May 2013 #187
davidpdx May 2013 #188
nomorenomore08 May 2013 #21
roughrider101 May 2013 #22
nomorenomore08 May 2013 #23
roughrider101 May 2013 #24
nomorenomore08 May 2013 #25
Mr. X May 2013 #30
dsc May 2013 #81
Mr. X May 2013 #120
KamaAina May 2013 #173
Mr. X May 2013 #183
roughrider101 May 2013 #31
nomorenomore08 May 2013 #34
roughrider101 May 2013 #99
nomorenomore08 May 2013 #135
roughrider101 May 2013 #138
nomorenomore08 May 2013 #139
shawn703 May 2013 #140
roughrider101 May 2013 #141
Ms. Toad May 2013 #33
HiPointDem May 2013 #35
Chan790 May 2013 #61
NaturalHigh May 2013 #65
magical thyme May 2013 #110
lumberjack_jeff May 2013 #66
JVS May 2013 #165
davidn3600 May 2013 #36
davidn3600 May 2013 #37
shawn703 May 2013 #41
NaturalHigh May 2013 #103
CincyDem May 2013 #126
AverageJoe90 May 2013 #164
shawn703 May 2013 #166
davidpdx May 2013 #39
alphafemale May 2013 #40
shawn703 May 2013 #43
RockaFowler May 2013 #44
NaturalHigh May 2013 #46
ScreamingMeemie May 2013 #68
LisaL May 2013 #75
we can do it May 2013 #159
shawn703 May 2013 #163
LisaL May 2013 #64
NaturalHigh May 2013 #47
Ms. Toad May 2013 #50
itsrobert May 2013 #51
Ms. Toad May 2013 #54
NaturalHigh May 2013 #67
Ms. Toad May 2013 #70
NaturalHigh May 2013 #73
Ms. Toad May 2013 #79
shawn703 May 2013 #89
Ms. Toad May 2013 #94
shawn703 May 2013 #122
Ms. Toad May 2013 #156
DevilMayhem666 May 2013 #186
uppityperson May 2013 #189
davidn3600 May 2013 #55
backscatter712 May 2013 #83
shawn703 May 2013 #52
Ms. Toad May 2013 #59
LisaL May 2013 #60
shawn703 May 2013 #69
Ms. Toad May 2013 #71
shawn703 May 2013 #72
NaturalHigh May 2013 #78
backscatter712 May 2013 #88
NaturalHigh May 2013 #91
kiva May 2013 #150
Ms. Toad May 2013 #80
LisaL May 2013 #96
NaturalHigh May 2013 #53
Ms. Toad May 2013 #57
BuelahWitch May 2013 #125
dkf May 2013 #152
cali May 2013 #56
Ms. Toad May 2013 #58
roughrider101 May 2013 #137
Ms. Toad May 2013 #155
roughrider101 May 2013 #167
Ms. Toad May 2013 #172
roughrider101 May 2013 #174
Ms. Toad May 2013 #175
roughrider101 May 2013 #177
jeff47 May 2013 #76
NaturalHigh May 2013 #77
jeff47 May 2013 #85
roughrider101 May 2013 #101
jeff47 May 2013 #107
roughrider101 May 2013 #131
Iggo May 2013 #74
backscatter712 May 2013 #82
Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #84
backscatter712 May 2013 #86
roughrider101 May 2013 #105
NaturalHigh May 2013 #108
richmwill May 2013 #124
shawn703 May 2013 #143
jeff47 May 2013 #87
Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #93
jeff47 May 2013 #97
NaturalHigh May 2013 #100
jeff47 May 2013 #106
LisaL May 2013 #113
jeff47 May 2013 #116
backscatter712 May 2013 #117
shawn703 May 2013 #128
davidn3600 May 2013 #109
LisaL May 2013 #114
jeff47 May 2013 #123
shawn703 May 2013 #129
jeff47 May 2013 #144
shawn703 May 2013 #146
jeff47 May 2013 #148
shawn703 May 2013 #151
jeff47 May 2013 #179
AnalystInParadise May 2013 #162
roughrider101 May 2013 #181
roughrider101 May 2013 #170
roughrider101 May 2013 #180
roughrider101 May 2013 #133
jeff47 May 2013 #145
roughrider101 May 2013 #171
jeff47 May 2013 #178
roughrider101 May 2013 #134
jeff47 May 2013 #147
alp227 May 2013 #160
jeff47 May 2013 #161
roughrider101 May 2013 #168
Matariki May 2013 #127
roughrider101 May 2013 #136
DMacTX May 2013 #153
cali May 2013 #169
Initech May 2013 #158

Response to shawn703 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 07:57 PM

1. The whole thing stinks. If there is smoke then there is fire. I still think it has

 

to do with her daughter being gay. I think the case will hopefully be dismissed. The parents are doing damage to their daughter. If they were hoping for privacy they lost that option long ago

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to southernyankeebelle (Reply #1)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:47 PM

16. What smoke?

The only smoke and fire are the wild-eyed accusations, often proved false, coming out of the freekate camp.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #16)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:25 AM

27. Wild eyed accusations from the freekate camp? I think you have it backwards. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #27)

Mon May 27, 2013, 08:24 AM

42. Backwards?

How so?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #16)

Mon May 27, 2013, 09:29 AM

45. I don't know who to believe. I am so glad its clear to you.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to southernyankeebelle (Reply #45)

Mon May 27, 2013, 10:01 AM

48. Well usually it's harder to believe

The side that has already been caught in a lie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #48)

Mon May 27, 2013, 10:11 AM

49. Well I really am not following it to closely. I just hope the girl doesn't go to jail and they

 

can keep it out of the press to make it worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #16)

Mon May 27, 2013, 09:21 PM

154. The "3 year age gap" & other false talking points originated w/Kate's mother

Kate's mother scrubbed those claims in the newer "Free Kate" group.

The original rambling non-indented version, as preserved in various places online:

At the beginning of this school year, she started dating a fellow student, who happened to be another female. This girl also played varsity sports, was in the IB program, so she was in classes with upperclassman. There was an age difference between my daughter and the other girl, of 3 years, my daughter was older, however you would have thought it was the opposite by just looking at the girls. My daughter is tiny, looks very young, and the other girl looks much older and is much taller, either way there was a 3 year age gap. They were both students in the same high school, it was a mutual consenting relationship on both parts.


Vs. now:

At the beginning of the school year, Kaitlyn made friends with a 14-year-old freshmen girl in Sebastian River High's IB program who played varsity sports and took classes with upper classmen. The girls were peers in the same social circle, and as happens every day in high schools across America, their friendship eventually developed into more. In September, shortly after Kaitlyn's 18th birthday, the girls began dating, and they eventually expressed their affection for one another in intimate ways.


Both versions claim Hunt is on the school basketball team, but I cannot find any evidence of Hunt ever being on any team roster. Sites like MaxPreps.com have HS sports info. I looked in MaxPreps.com, nothing there.

And which is it, did Kate have a friendship with the younger girl whenever the beginning of the year was or date before her 18th? This is where my tolerance for this Free Kate thing falls off. And Fox News thinks the Obama admin was doing this scrubbing with the Benghazi talking points!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Original post)


Response to Post removed (Reply #2)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:09 PM

4. I'm straight and detest the double standard. I think the

minor girls parents are homophobic and that is the only reason they are up in arms. JMHO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #4)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:15 PM

7. I don't think so. They probably wouldn't have warned the older one more than once first....

if it had been a man, they may well have gone to the police right off the bat.

The law is the law. The parents had asked the older one to leave the kid alone, she was too young. Not only did the older one refuse to do what the parents said, she went and got the kid out of her room in the middle of the night, which caused the parents a great deal of worry, when they discovered their daughter missing from her room. It was only then that they went to the police.

The charges seem warranted to me. The parents are in charge of what a minor does and does not do. When the parents ask an older person to quit have a relationship with the daughter, the older person has no choice but to agree to the demand. It's no one else's decision but the parents, and it's no one else's business, even if others don't agree (as long as the child's civil rights are not invaded). The parents are in charge of the minor. Not so hard to understand. The older one should confess to her crime and do her time, and save everyone a lot of time and worry and the taxpayers a lot of money. There would be no charges, if the older one had obeyed the parents' wishes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #4)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:17 PM

8. Well that's just silly

For one, the only people saying that sexuality has anything to do with it is the Hunt camp - but we've seen how "reliable" claims from the Hunt camp have been on this whole thing.

Secondly, you really think they wouldn't have gone after an 18 year old man? One of the other charges by their camp is that they are religious zealots. Isn't premarital sex just as forbidden to fundies?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #4)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:17 PM

9. Where is the double standard?

Parents of 14 year old could have just as easily turned in an 18 year old (legally adult) male.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #9)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:27 PM

13. Because the 18 yr old was female, we will never know but I

don't recall any uproar when Jerry was into his minor.

Edited for typo

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #13)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:53 PM

17. if you're referring to Jerry Seinfeld his minor was over the age of consent

 

and as creepy as the relationship was, it was legal and there wasn't a thing that could be done.

If his minor had been under 16, it would have been a different story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #13)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:54 PM

18. Conor Kennedy was 17

When he started dating the older Taylor Swift, and there was no uproar about that either. You know why? Because Conor Kennedy reached the age of consent just like Shoshonna Lonstein.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #18)

Sun May 26, 2013, 09:27 PM

19. My feeling is that the harm being done to the

young girl is being done by her parents and not by her former girlfriend, jmo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #19)

Sun May 26, 2013, 09:37 PM

20. Depends how you look at it

Kaitlyn could have respected the wishes of the girl's parents and not really throw gasoline on the situation by taking the girl home and having sex with her, and none of this would have happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #19)

Tue May 28, 2013, 04:37 PM

176. I agree but people are to blind to see it

but what do I know, I've been told by people on the internet that I don't know anything and that I'm wrong on every subject. People are ignoring the fact that this is going to turn this girl against her parents. They just destroyed their already damaged relationship with their daughter. Kate did not "kidnap" this girl like so many people want you to believe, the girl snuck out after her parents told her not to see Kate, because she believed that Kate was still her girlfriend. She's a teenager, they do stupid things, I snuck out as a teen to go see a girl and/or my friends and I'm sure plenty of other people did too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drale (Reply #176)

Tue May 28, 2013, 09:35 PM

184. I remember sneaking out as a teenager too so

I could be with my mates much to my mothers chagrin. She never held them responsible even though I was the youngest of us. No, she put the blame where it lie with me, it was my decision and the consequences as well. I have also heard the stories about the 18 year old kidnapping the 14 year old and if that were the case why were no charges to that effect brought against her. Like you, I see 2 young kids doing stupid things like young people do and the parents are acting like authoritarians to the detriment of the 14 year and her mate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #13)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:16 PM

102. You must not listen to Stern.

 

He relentlessly killed Seinfeld for that.

http://m.


There was plenty of uproar.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrSlayer (Reply #102)

Mon May 27, 2013, 09:50 PM

157. I can honestly say I have never listened to him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrSlayer (Reply #102)

Tue May 28, 2013, 06:43 PM

182. This I remember. Wasn't it on most shows being discussed?

I listened to Stern at the time and I remember when it happened. If I remember it then people were making noise about it. I'm not seeing the double standard accusation here. Further more...it is statutory rape. I would have done taken this to the police no matter who it was male or female.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #2)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:13 PM

6. "You straights"? No shit?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 11 Bravo (Reply #6)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:18 PM

10. Haha yeah

Did you take down your Jerry Seinfeld shrine in your attic yet?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #2)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:20 PM

11. "You straights"? C'mon.

"Worship"? C'mon. Seinfeld was a popular comedian with a popular show who was thought of as quite a creep by many people for that relationship.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #2)


Response to Post removed (Reply #2)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:35 PM

14. Deleting as the post referring to was hidden

Last edited Sun May 26, 2013, 09:41 PM - Edit history (1)



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:03 PM

3. When sex between two kids is referred to as "lewd & lascivious", I stop reading & dismiss

the article.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pacalo (Reply #3)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:11 PM

5. The law is the law. The 18 year old was asked more than once to leave the child alone....

but the older one not only did not do so, she went and got the 14 year old to sneak out of the house in the middle of the night. When her parents discovered she was gone, they were sick with fear. Had she been kidnapped, killed?

It was only then that the parents went to the police, when they discovered the older one had picked the kid up and taken her away in a car. The younger one, of course, could not drive, since she was still a child.

That's the story I read, anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #5)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:36 PM

15. I'm not about to defend the sneaking out at night; it's a parent's nightmare for the reasons

you mentioned. Parents of teenagers still go through it, however, & usually it involves teenagers of the same age group. The blaming of the "wrong" type of friends or blaming of "permissive" or "indulgent" parents is generally the reaction of some parents, when they don't have a "law" to lean on.

In this case, the parents used the law to put a stop to it because they could. They chose to destroy another kid's life & future -- a good, well-rounded kid with good grades & a promising future -- to deal with their own daughter.

"Lewd & lascivious acts" shouldn't be assigned lightly. The law should be intended for horrifying sex acts only. These are two kids of the same sex who had feelings for each other. The law is being exploited in this case when common sense has gone out the window. It is a parental issue only, imo. If the narrow-minded parents would not hesitate to go to the extreme of ruining another kid's life to save their own, perhaps they could have found a way to send their daughter away to live with out-of-state relatives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pacalo (Reply #15)

Mon May 27, 2013, 06:48 AM

38. Are you listening to yourself?

Kate Hunt was warned twice. She chose not listen. SHE chose to destroy her future. Those parents could have been charged for enabling. They did not have to warn her. Why should they have to send their child away? There are real parents out there who raise their children and not peddle them off when things like these happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stupart74 (Reply #38)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:43 PM

90. So was Romeo.

And we all know how we revile Romeo for continuing to pursue Juliette.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #90)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:56 PM

95. And look how well it ended for both of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #95)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:04 PM

98. Yeah, it's terrible that their scheme to flee their stupid parents failed.

And if the parents had behaved like adults, the kids would have had a happy life together.

Golly, I can't possibly see the relevance to this situation. It's not like there's some parents who are letting their bigotry rule them, resulting in permanent harm to kids.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #98)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:18 PM

104. I think it's about time to state the obvious. Romeo and Juliet are not actually people.

There are characters from a play.
If their parents "behaved like adults" there would be no play.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #104)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:28 PM

111. I think it's about time you realize your revulsion at this case

is counter to everything else in our culture. Which would mean we should not have expected the 18-year-old to back off - we taught her not to.

It would also indicate it's not a horrific crime where the 18-year-old's life must be permanently destroyed. Which is what that fantastic "plea deal" would do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #111)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:33 PM

115. How would her life be destroyed by a plea deal that included no jail time and no sex offender

registry? Do tell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #115)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:36 PM

118. It's a felony conviction.

You know how every employment application asks "Have you ever been convicted of a felony?"

You know how every apartment rental application asks "Have you ever been convicted of a felony?"

You know how every mortgage application asks "Have you ever been convicted of a felony?"

Do you think they ask those questions for fun?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #118)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:37 PM

119. If you can't do the time, then don't do the crime.

Considering she is facing actual prison time if convicted, this was not a bad deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #119)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:39 PM

121. The entire point is this should not be a crime.

And is definitely not prosecuted in the vast majority of incidents.

Even before "Romeo and Juliette" clauses were added to the books, incidents like this were common, and commonly overlooked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #98)

Mon May 27, 2013, 06:17 PM

142. Go read the damn play.

It's not a play about great tragic love, it's a play about idiotic hormonal young fools.

Romeo is a fickle hothead who becomes infatuated with a pretty little child on the rebound from his last fling; Juliet is an innocent, sheltered, airheaded 13-year-old who kills herself over her first crush.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Donald Ian Rankin (Reply #142)

Mon May 27, 2013, 08:20 PM

149. And her screeching

in the Zepherelli film makes her one of the most annoying characters in a movie I've ever seen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #5)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:28 AM

28. These are a couple girls, 3 and a half years apart, on the same team.

I think it's kind of ridiculous to treat 18 year old high school students as adults.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #28)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:40 AM

62. What?

18 year old is an adult in the eyes of the law. Why would it be ridiculous to treat them as adults?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #62)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:30 PM

112. In this situation. In general, I think the age of 21 for full adulthood

actually made more sense.

I agree with 18 year olds being able to vote because the abstract thinking part of their brains is developed. But the parts that control risky behavior aren't fully developed till the mid-twenties.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #112)

Mon May 27, 2013, 04:38 PM

130. Then by your logic, a 20-year-old hooking up with a 14-year-old would be okay?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #130)

Mon May 27, 2013, 05:03 PM

132. No, a six year age difference is too much.

But I think two high school students are in a different situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pacalo (Reply #3)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:16 AM

26. Except it wasn't two kids.

 

The articles I've read ignore this fact, but Kate is a adult.

It was sex between a adult and a child - which is, technically, child molestation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr. X (Reply #26)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:30 AM

29. She's a kid. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pacalo (Reply #29)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:42 AM

32. Yes

 

The victim was. She was 14.

Kate isn't though. She is 18 - a adult.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pacalo (Reply #29)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:41 AM

63. One does one stop being a kid nowdays?

Do tell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #63)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:47 PM

92. There's multiple measurements.

One is the arbitrary legal definition, which is set at 18. But most 18-year-olds are only mature in their own minds.

A better measurement would be the maturity of the person involved, which would mean "adulthood" would arrive somewhere in the 20s. But it would be very difficult to build a legal system around that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pacalo (Reply #3)

Thu May 30, 2013, 10:46 AM

185. Which is funny, because here is the definition of that

Definition

Lewd and lascivious adj., adv. references to conduct which includes people living together who are known not to be married, entertainment which aims at arousing the libido or primarily sexual sensation, open solicitation for prostitution, or indecent exposure of genitalia (which is itself a crime). Due to the tendency of judges to be overly careful in writing about moral and/or sexual matters the definitions have been cloaked in old-fashioned modesty. Today the term usually applies to pornography, prostitution, and indecent acts


So according to those calling it "lewd & lasciviousness" Kate and her girlfriend would have had to 1)lived together unmarried (Didn't happen); 2) preforming entertainment which aims at arousing the libido of primary sexual sensation, open solicitation for prostitution, or indecent exposure of their genitalia (I haven't seen proof of this, but my guess is it isn't true). The main use of the term in the modern day is for pornography, prostitution, and indecent acts.

So I'm just wondering how you prosecute someone for things they didn't do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #185)

Thu May 30, 2013, 08:00 PM

187. The laws weren't as insane when I went to high school.

It wasn't at all unusual for freshmen girls to date seniors. I remember two freshmen girls dating guys who were already out of high school; both couples went on to marry & are still together.

This senior girl is being prosecuted under a law that was meant for sexual predators preying upon younger, weaker victims. There's no room for the fact that the two girls had feelings for each other. The concept I've read here, in effect, is that the older girl went so far as to "kidnap" the younger one who is basically portrayed as an "imbecile" who had no mind of her own.

Kaitlyn's reputation has already been ruined. She lost her senior year due to expulsion. It's the adults involved whose actions are the most destructive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pacalo (Reply #187)

Thu May 30, 2013, 08:13 PM

188. Agreed

She was allowed to graduate, but I guess did miss the last 4 months or so of school. I think some of the accusations being made are pretty far out there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 09:52 PM

21. And of course people indignantly deny that there's any *hint* of bias at work.

Never mind that these girls live in a conservative, heavily Republican community where a same-sex relationship will almost certainly be looked upon with more suspicion, than a hetero one with a similar age gap. Never mind that most 18-year-old boys who engage in sexual relationships with 14-year-old girls are never arrested or indicted, and that when they are, they're often able to plead down to a misdemeanor and avoid any sex-offender status.

Nope, not even the slightest chance that Kaitlyn is being treated more harshly because of her sexuality. Why, the very suggestion is outrageous!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nomorenomore08 (Reply #21)

Sun May 26, 2013, 11:07 PM

22. except not really

"avoid any sex-offender status"

Actually they did offer her a plea deal that would avoid any sex-offender status.
They can not however lower it to a misdemeanor, because of the age of the girl and the current laws.
Frankly, you can blame the DA as much as you want, but frankly his hands would be tied.

"Never mind that most 18-year-old boys who engage in sexual relationships with 14-year-old girls are never arrested or indicted"

Do you have any statistics on that? It sounds like conjecture.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #22)

Sun May 26, 2013, 11:11 PM

23. No actual stats, but I can think of worse cases than that where nothing ever happened to the guy.

I mean people that I've actually known - mainly girls I knew in high school, when I was that age (15-ish) myself. And this is in California where the age of consent, legally speaking, is set pretty firmly at 18.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nomorenomore08 (Reply #23)

Sun May 26, 2013, 11:43 PM

24. Do you know

of any cases of your 14 year old friends with an 18 year old and the sexual relationship was known to authorities?

*That is also a significant aspect. I'd imagine people have "gotten away with it", but if the relationship was actually reported that is a different story. If I got caught speeding I would get a ticket, my argument cant be that "you dont catch the other speeders or catch me the other times I speed, so you should not give me a ticket".

This is part of the reason Ms. Hunt really messed up. According to the affidavit she was warned several times to by the parents to stop. If she stopped nothing would have come of it. After the younger one ran way from home to Ms. Kate's house, the parents filed a police report (which a parent will do when their 14 year old disappears from the house at night).
This brought the situation into the criminal justice system, and obligated the authorites to follow up because the activity was illegal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #24)

Sun May 26, 2013, 11:50 PM

25. Admittedly, no.

But I still maintain that Ms. Hunt is still being treated with excessive harshness, because of her sexuality. I realize that this is partly a matter of opinion, but I'm comfortable with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nomorenomore08 (Reply #25)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:36 AM

30. Do the laws

 

That she is charged with breaking specify harsher punishments based on whether or not the relationship is heterosexual or homosexual?

People are going to be harsh about this case, for or against. Still though, most of the newer backlash is because the arrest affidavit was released - which revealed that a lot of the information that Kate's parents gave out was crap. Simply put, most of the harshness (now) is because Kate and her parents tried feeding everyone a bullshit sandwich.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr. X (Reply #30)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:25 PM

81. drug laws don't have penalties based on race

but pretty much no sane person thinks they aren't being enforced in a racist manner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #81)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:37 PM

120. Yes and no

 

Police put more attention to specific races due to racial stereotypes, but when it comes to punishment they give what the law allows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr. X (Reply #120)

Tue May 28, 2013, 02:48 PM

173. But penalties for crack are more severe than for powder cocaine

 

Crack is used more often by African Americans. Powder cocaine is more often the drug of choice for white people. You figure it out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KamaAina (Reply #173)

Tue May 28, 2013, 07:12 PM

183. And?

 

They are not the same drug.

http://casapalmera.com/differences-between-cocaine-and-crack/
http://www.differencebetween.net/object/difference-between-crack-and-powder/

The drugs, although similar, have enough differences to be able to give them diffrient punishments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nomorenomore08 (Reply #25)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:38 AM

31. So what you are saying is

You maintain something is true, with no evidence that it is, and in fact plenty of evidence to the contrary.....because ya want to.

You dont see the problem with that?
You dont see how that is as dumb as the tea bagger yelling about how Obama is a socialist muslim black panther, because that's their narrative and they are sticking to it?

Think about it....you're being like them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #31)

Mon May 27, 2013, 04:46 AM

34. No, I'm putting my own interpretation to a somewhat ambiguous situation.

Things aren't as black and white here as you'd apparently like them to be. And no matter what, I still don't think she should've been expelled from school or charged with multiple felonies - unless there was obvious coercion involved, which nothing I've seen suggests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nomorenomore08 (Reply #34)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:04 PM

99. a somewhat ambiguous situation?

What is ambiguous? I mean, other than you saying the situation is ambiguous can you point out the ambiguity?

Things aren't as black and white here as you'd apparently like them to be.


Not for nothing, but are you not the one making it "black and white", by asserting, with no evidence to back up your assertion other than conjecture, that because a lesbian is in trouble for breaking a law it is because she is a lesbian, and that because her parents did not want their 14 year old having sex with an 18 year old it is because of Homophobia?

nd no matter what, I still don't think she should've been expelled from school or charged with multiple felonies


Ok, but that is completely irrelevant to the claim of discrimination, isnt it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #99)

Mon May 27, 2013, 05:12 PM

135. If you trust the word of Christian fundamentalists who think Kaitlyn "made their daughter gay"

then that's your own issue. I'm tired of this whole subject anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nomorenomore08 (Reply #135)

Mon May 27, 2013, 05:25 PM

138. Who are Christian fundamentalists?

If you trust the word of Christian fundamentalists who think Kaitlyn "made their daughter gay"


Do you have any evidence for your assertion or are you again pulling things out based soley on conjecture?
I will say this much, the Smith parents have no made any bold face lies to the media, as the Hunt family has, so yes, their credibility is right now far better.

Let me ask though, in all seriousness....
Why do you personally insist that the Smith parents are Christian fundamentalist homophobic bigots, with no evidence?
Why do you personally take the word, at face value, of the Hunt family when they make a claim, even after previous claims made by them were lies?

Do you see what you are doing, and why it is very not very different than what the Freepers do on their message boards? Form opinions based on conjecture and assumption that fit the narrative they want instead of facts? You're basically showing the 'liberal' side of the wack doodle conservative coin. Same thought process

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #138)

Mon May 27, 2013, 05:34 PM

139. Maybe we're both seeing what we want to see. That's very possible.

Maybe I just don't trust a conservative community to treat a gay person fairly, regardless of the situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nomorenomore08 (Reply #139)

Mon May 27, 2013, 05:50 PM

140. And like many red-state Democrats

The Smith family could be very liberal people living in a conservative area. As parents, they don't believe their 14 year old daughter should be sexually involved with an 18 year old, and many liberals on DU would support them in that view. They are an interracial couple too, and probably have more of an appreciation for tolerance and acceptance than the typical conservative in that community. I just fail to see why people are automatically believing the homophobe smear because someone else is saying it without any evidence. We see this crap with the stuff the birthers fling at Obama and can see through it easily. Is it just because some people just want to believe there is an anti-gay agenda at work here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nomorenomore08 (Reply #139)

Mon May 27, 2013, 06:00 PM

141. It's not likely

Im not seeing anything beyond the facts.
I have no personal opinion on the Smith family (they may be total jerks), however I am not going to create one out of the blue without knowing them. Nor am I going to base one strictly on the hearsay of the Hunt family, who again has shown to be dishonest on their petition and initial media plea.
I have no personal opinion on their daughter (I dont know her). I have no personal opinion on the DA (I dont know him). I have no personal opinion on the community (I dont live there).
The only thing I am basing any opinion on is fact, not rumor, not conjecture, not assumption.


The whole reason I am arguing with you so strenuously is because you are doing just that, creating a narrative based purely on conjecture and imagination. You want them to be bigots, so you insist they are. You want Ms. Hunt to be being persecuted for being gay, so you insist she is. Neither of these things are things you could have concluded based on evidence. There are no facts to back these claims up...but you insist on them...because you want to and because of a certain amount of being reactionary so that you just make non sequiturs.
For example:
All men are humans.
Mary is human.
Therefore, Mary is a man.

Except the partisan one works like this:

the Far right religious zealots do not support Homosexuals
Ms. Hunt is homosexual
therefore to not support Ms. Hunt makes one a Far right religious zealot

This is a dangerous way of thinking that has become WAY too common.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #24)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:38 AM

33. Yes.

14 year old and 19+ year old (I don't know the exact age, but his younger brother was in my then 18 year old daughter's class - and he was at least a year older). The teachers, principal, and superintendent at the high school were aware of the relationship - they regularly attended school events together and were very obviously a physically involved couple.

Not to mention dozens of 9th grade/senior romances in the 11 years I taught high school.

I am astounded at the number of people who seem to believe it is a rare occurrence among heterosexual students.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #33)

Mon May 27, 2013, 04:52 AM

35. at my high school, one of the girls in my class was having a relationship with a teacher,

 

something i didn't learn until much later, though i always got a strange vibe from the way they interacted in class.

she was one of the 'popular' crowd, on the artsy end.

they later married and then i lost track.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #22)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:37 AM

61. That's factually incorrect...

 

she was offered a deal where months after she accepted said deal a judge would decide whether or not she had to register as a sex offender. That deal predicated a requirement of jail time and the decision would be made while she was incarcerated, meaning it was not even behaviorally-conditional. (ie. You won't be a sex offender as long as you meet these conditions {a,b,c} and do not have contact with your victim.)

That's in no way the same as a deal that explicitly allows her upfront to "avoid any sex-offender status."

If a deal that took sex-offender status off the table either-conditionally-or-unconditionally had been offered, the Hunts almost certainly would have taken it since Kate Hunt and her parents had already offered to relocate the family out of state and sever any contact between Kate and the 14 year old in exchange for dismissal of the charges.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chan790 (Reply #61)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:43 AM

65. Actually, the plea deal offered included no jail time.

She would have been subject to home detention and monitoring, but she wouldn't have gone to jail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chan790 (Reply #61)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:28 PM

110. can you provide a link? because almost every article I've seen

 

stated the plea deal that she rejected reduced the charges to child abuse (i.e. no registered sex offender status) with 2 years house arrest and 1 year probation. At this point, I think I've seen 4 articles that say this.

I've seen one article that stated that she would still be a sex offender and one blog with an obvious editing error that made it impossible to know what they meant to state.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nomorenomore08 (Reply #21)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:46 AM

66. The net was designed to catch 18 year old boys.

 

Kaitlin is bycatch and we're in "save the dolphins" mode.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #66)

Tue May 28, 2013, 02:38 AM

165. +1


18 year old man with 14 year old boy: Unbelievably deep shit. News might not even cover this to protect the boy from getting exposure
18 year old man with 14 year old girl: Deep shit.
18 year old woman with 14 year old girl: Slightly less deep shit. People defend the woman.
18 year old woman with 14 year old boy: Water Cooler fodder. People joke about him being lucky.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Original post)


Response to shawn703 (Original post)

Mon May 27, 2013, 05:17 AM

37. FYI...one blogger leading this charge about all this being a lie is a known far-right winger

 

Looking at the comment sections of his site concerning this story, it's filled with tea partiers and homophobes talking about "gay agenda" conspiracies and how it's the far-left is trying to "destroy western society." And you are kind of playing right into it.

But... first off the media never gets anything right. Especially when a story is first reported, 90% of the information is wrong or it's interpreted incorrectly. We see this all the time if you watch cable news during a breaking story...speculation runs wild. No one knows anything for sure. And everything is exaggerated. So yes, the media does twist facts. Second off, why do we automatically trust the other parents? Because they did an interview on CNN? There are people that say those parents are not angels either. Both sets of parents are going to give a story that supports and helps their child and their case. That's to be expected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidn3600 (Reply #37)

Mon May 27, 2013, 08:20 AM

41. So here's an easy one then

Explain how Kate's father's statement

This relationship occurred when they were both minors, and my daughter's girlfriend's parents waited until she turned 18 to arrest her.


isn't a lie when the facts as we now know them since the release of the affidavit prove otherwise?

The relationship did not occur when they were both minors. The girlfriend's parents did not wait until she turned 18 to arrest her.

Knowing that they didn't tell the truth here, why should we believe them when they make the claim that the girlfriend's parents are religious zealots that only made this an issue because their daughter is gay?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #41)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:18 PM

103. Yeah, he got caught red-handed on that one.

It's hard to float blatant lies like this when there is so much attention (which the parents invited) on this case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #41)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:54 PM

126. I'm not sure it is that easy.

Having been through the teen dating dance with 5 kids, I think it's impossible to know when the "relationship" began. Was it a first date, a first kiss, a first "dear diary" entry, a first time someone saw them in public maybe holding hands, or a first intimate contact? Hard to say because "relationship" is such a vague word.

I knew one of my daughters was in a relationship months before she did. What did that look like ? Hmmm. Guess who's name kept coming up at the dinner table. Guess who has a sudden interest in basketball...but just a coincidence he's on the bball team. Guess who just happens to show up on a saturday afternoon to hang around in the back yard. But ask either of them and they'll tell you there weren't dating until the late spring of that year. And, in the only time of my life I've actually been more observant than my wife, I noticed it before her. Not by a lot but I mentioned it to her a couple times and she just blew me off. Eventually she saw it too.

I'm not saying this is exactly what happened here because we'll never know. I do, however, think there's lots of gray zone all over this one and I'm not even a trial will sort it out.

You got a couple young girls (yes - 14,15,17,or 18...they're all "young" and if any of you have lived in a household with more than one of that age at the same time, you know what I'm talking about. It can be amazingly wonderful to watch them grow and experience life and the next moment it can be every man's definition of hell on earth. It's not predictable and it's not logical, especially when it involves relationships. Compound that with it being a LGBT relationship and all the ancillary social questions...it had to be insane.

I've been, and will continue to be, supportive of Kate's side of the story in spite all of the hypothetical predator threads that support spawns. I understand it's a slippery slope and I know that some will think what about it being a guy...what about him being 20 instead of 18...what about her being 12 instead of 14. Yeah, I get it. BFD...in this case, it wasn't and we seem to have lost the ability to think in the gray zone.

I don't know Kate, I don't know her family and I don't know the other girl's family. And I don't know ALL the facts (a statement I would submit is true for most of us). But I know statistics.

Statistically, more parents are likely to have a unfavorable first impression of a child coming out (or even testing out). Doesn't make them bad people but if this younger girl is an only child, you can bet there was at least one conversation between mom and dad that included the phrase "how does that grandchildren thing work".

Statistically, more parents are willing to do anything to "save" their children. I think both these parents fall into that camp. On one side, you've got parents who will do anything to save their child from a potential LGBT lifestyle and eliminate the influence in her life toward that possibility. On the other hand, you've got parents who don't want their child tainted for life for being a teen-ager. Neither parents are bad but they have different fears and different agendas.

The unfortunate reality is that between them, they've lit a fuse that neither may be able to extinguish and no matter the outcome, these families will never be the same.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidn3600 (Reply #37)

Tue May 28, 2013, 02:05 AM

164. Very true, Dave, very true.

 

In fact, I'm not sure even the cops got everything right on this one(well, this IS Florida, after all, it's to be expected).

And sadly, I'm not surprised that a far-right nutjob would be leading the charge against Kaitlyn Hunt's mother.
What I'd like to know, is why the parents of the other girl(who seem to be quite scummy, btw) aren't being looked into by the lamestream media....that's what worries me, is the clear lack of objectivity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AverageJoe90 (Reply #164)

Tue May 28, 2013, 07:23 AM

166. So what is your explanation

For the statements that Kate Hunt's father made in his blog post - no "misreporting" by the media - which have been proven false?

He forgot when his daughter's birthday was?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Original post)

Mon May 27, 2013, 06:53 AM

39. Not only bloggers, but many members of DU have as well


http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022899209

People have been making accusations that Hunt's parents are saying nasty things about the other family. I have found the opposite to be true. Since this has occurred I have read posts from Kate's mother specifically instructing supporters not to do or say anything toward the younger girl or her family. It directly contradicts some of the nasty things that have been said here in DU about Hunt's family.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Original post)

Mon May 27, 2013, 07:06 AM

40. 18 and 14 is not child molestation...especially when it was just turned 18 and almost 15.

This is rediculous.

17 and 364 days old is ok.

One day older is a child molester.

Please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alphafemale (Reply #40)

Mon May 27, 2013, 08:29 AM

43. It's not like Kate wasn't warned

Twice she was told to stay away by the girlfriend's parents. She responds by taking the girl home to have sex. Obviously, simply asking this woman to please stop undermining their authority as parents wasn't going to work, and they had to take it to the next level.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #43)

Mon May 27, 2013, 08:35 AM

44. According to the Smiths

This is a he said-she said story here

The parents interview with the local CBS station here was very strange to me. Never mind the fact that the station has a strong conservative bias (they are owned by Sinclair after all), they were making the story all about them. Not about their daughter. It was all about how they feel. They didn't seem to care one way or another how their daughter feels about anything. So did they talk to Kate beforehand?? I doubt it. I still believe they went right to the authorities because their daughter left home and went to Kate's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RockaFowler (Reply #44)

Mon May 27, 2013, 09:43 AM

46. According to the younger girl's family...

yes, they talked to Ms. Hunt and asked her to stay away from their daughter. Ms. Hunt chose to ignore their requests. It may be he said - she said, but that's what they maintain happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RockaFowler (Reply #44)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:55 AM

68. Never mind the fact that that is the only station--the only reporter even, that they will talk

to.

I agree with you RockaFowler.

And, I will add, the linked-to article is an Examiner piece... Anyone can write for the Examiner, including friends of the "other" Smiths.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ScreamingMeemie (Reply #68)

Mon May 27, 2013, 01:36 PM

75. WTF should they talk to the press at all, unless they want to?

Are they obligated somehow?
What freaking nonsense is that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #43)

Mon May 27, 2013, 10:08 PM

159. How well did you listen to your parents when they told you to stay away from someone?

Everyone I know, young to very old pretty much acknowledge that is the best way to keep 2 kids together.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to we can do it (Reply #159)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:49 PM

163. I've never been in a position

Where I've had someone else's parents tell me to stay away from their kid, but I have never put myself in a situation like Kaitlyn did either. Set aside that personally I didn't have any attraction to any girls that much younger than me when I was a senior, I couldn't see getting involved with someone I know could get me in trouble (Kaitlyn's Facebook posts to her girlfriend show she knew she could get in trouble), let alone get busted by her parents and push my luck even further by picking her up one night and taking her back to my place to spend the night? Personally, I wouldn't have been in a position to need one warning, and blatantly ignoring two would have been out of the question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alphafemale (Reply #40)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:42 AM

64. She didn't "just" turn 18.

She turned 19 in August. Police were contacted in February. Nobody waited until she turned 18 to turn her in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Original post)

Mon May 27, 2013, 09:49 AM

47. When my daughter was 14...

anybody, male or female, who was already 18 and had a romantic interest in her would have been told firmly to stay away. Yes, I would have talked to the young person and his/her family first, but if that didn't work, I wouldn't have hesitated to contact law enforcement.

Ms. Hunt's parents are understandably worried about their daughter's future, but the blame for all of this does not rest with the younger girl's parents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #47)

Mon May 27, 2013, 10:38 AM

50. How about parenting your child instead.

If your child is not following your family restrictions on dating - ground her, restrict telephone privileges, or whatever else is appropriate if she is voluntarily associating with people you don't want her to associate with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #50)

Mon May 27, 2013, 10:47 AM

51. You obviously have no clue on teenagers.

Doing those steps would make her rebel more and more, making her easy prey for predators like Ms Hunt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to itsrobert (Reply #51)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:00 AM

54. Ms. Hunt is not a predator.

They are two high school kids who had a relationship that became sexual. I don't think it was appropriate for them to be sexually involved - but also I would not have thought it was appropriate 108 days earlier, or a year earlier, or two years earlier - when it would have been perfectly legal. There are lots of decisions teenagers make which are not good for them. I don't think criminalizing what is, unfortunately, normal teenage behavior is a good thing.

And, FWIW, I was a high school teacher for 11 years and my own child is well past her teenage years. So I know quite a bit about teenagers. Teenagers are going to rebel against all sorts of rules imposed on them, and enforcing the rules does - in many instances - make them rebel more. My issue is going after someone else's child rather than parenting their own child.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #54)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:54 AM

67. I'm not so sure that she's not a predator.

She is 3 1/2 years older, presumably more mature, and certainly higher up on the high school pecking order (senior vs. freshman). It's very possible that she took advantage of all these things to entice this younger girl into a relationship.

I don't think she's the picture of innocence that she's been portrayed to be by some. Her parents have certainly misrepresented the facts of this case to the media. How complicit is she in her parents' lies?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #67)

Mon May 27, 2013, 12:34 PM

70. If you were asked to describe your teenage child's girlfriend or boyfriend

are you confident you would get all of the details right about when the relationship began, the exact ages of the kids, when their relationship became sexual, or even what grades they were in?

I know one of those pieces of information for my daughter's first sexual relationship. I could guess at the others and be relatively accurate. But I don't think that getting the details of a relationship in which I was not directly involved a bit scrambled is the same as lying - especially since at least the mother and the uncle have been trying to correct mistakes they are aware of since they became aware of the discrepancies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #70)

Mon May 27, 2013, 01:00 PM

73. "A bit scrambled" is one thing...

but Ms. Hunt's parents have been involved in a blatant PR attack since all of this started. From claiming that the ages were 17-15 instead of 18-14 (a pretty significant error) to calling the victim's parents homophobes and bigots, they have set a very nasty tone from the beginning. The fact that Ms. Hunt picked up the girl from her house and took her to spend the night in her room was also not mentioned. Of course, they didn't want to talk about the romantic tryst in the school bathroom.

I get that you are sympathetic to Ms. Hunt and her family (and understand why), but she and her family have been pretty dishonest in this whole thing. Just my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #73)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:16 PM

79. It is not that I am sympathetic to Ms Hunt -

it is that I don't believe consensual sexual activity is a matter for the criminal justice system. I also know the difficulties of telling someone else's story accurately. Ages change when birthdays occur and during the relevant times the ages ranged from 14-15 for the younger girl and from 17-18 for the older one (depending on whether the girls met in summer programs associated with their extra-curricular activities.

I don't know whether homophobia was involved or not, but it may well have been. Unfortunately it is not uncommon for parents to freak out about their LGBT children. Many are kicked out of their homes, forced into ex-gay ministries, or otherwise ostracized for activities which would not have been subject to disfavor or punishment. I believe that (or bending over backward to not appear to favor LGBT relationships) is the source of a lot of the heat on DU (even though I am sure those most heated will deny it). The reality is that despite numerous claims that people on DU would be calling for the head of any 18 year old boy having a sexual relationship with a 14 year old girl (and that it has happened every time it came up here) - and despite my repeated request to any links on DU supporting that - no one has provided a single link.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #79)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:41 PM

89. I think you won't find the link you're looking for

Since it's likely not much of a controversy at all when 18 year old males get arrested for sleeping with 14 year old females. Why would there be a news article to be discussed on this message board when it's not controversial enough to be reported? The only reason this Kate Hunt issue made the news is because the parents threw around unfounded charges of homophobia and got everyone riled up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #89)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:54 PM

94. Several people on DU made the very specific assertion

That every time this has come up on DU before with a heterosexual couple, DU members have been up in arms and calling for the young man's head. They have been unable to provide a link to it. I didn't ask for it out of the blue - I asked the people who asserted the same outrage exists with heterosexual couples to prove it. They have been unable to.

As far as unfounded charges of homophobia - I assure you those of us who experience it recognize it when it occurs, which it does on an all too regular basis - even when the people who are acting out of that motivation deny it. I don't know that was the motive. What I do now is that the people directly involved perceived it that way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #94)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:41 PM

122. Couldn't the absence of such threads

be proof that prosecutions of 18 year old men for sleeping with 14 year old girls generally agreed to be just on this board? Men get arrested for this offense quite often. Why is this one upsetting so many people when the same people won't start petitions to free the 18 year old men?

I haven't seen Kaitlyn herself say her girlfriend's parents were homophobic (though I may have missed it?). Why are her straight parents experts on recognizing homophobia when it occurs?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #122)

Mon May 27, 2013, 09:38 PM

156. Actually, I am pretty sure it is quite rare

for 18 year old seniors dating freshmen (regardless of gender), because it is such a common occurrence. On the rare occasion when there are criminal charges I see the same kind of outcry.

Again - I was asking people who asserted that DU has (and would continue to have) a field day condemning the same behavior with to put up or shut up. They have not been able to point to a single instance on DU of members of DU calling for the head of a male 18 year old senior dating a freshman.

Kaitlyn is (wisely) not speaking very much. Personally I think the one press conference she did give is a mistake - they had said she would not be speaking and, for legal reasons, they probably should have stuck with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #156)

Thu May 30, 2013, 07:10 PM

186. This is about sex not dating

There are no laws on just dating. This is about sexual intercourse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DevilMayhem666 (Reply #186)

Fri May 31, 2013, 12:14 AM

189. Welcome to DU and indeed, that it is, about sex, not "dating".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to itsrobert (Reply #51)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:01 AM

55. Always someone else's fault, right?

 

typical parents these days.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to itsrobert (Reply #51)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:29 PM

83. Quick! Call Chris Hansen!

Kate a predator? What planet did you come from?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #50)

Mon May 27, 2013, 10:48 AM

52. And if it comes to it

Do whatever is necessary to prevent outside negative influences from undermining your parental authority.

Sounds like they covered it to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #52)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:25 AM

59. Nothing I've seen said they did anything

change their own child's behavior before blaming someone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #59)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:32 AM

60. I don't see any evidence that parents of a 14 year old didn't try to control their child.

Frankly I find it disgusting to see that people are smearing them.
If 18 year old was a male, who would be defending him around here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #59)

Mon May 27, 2013, 12:31 PM

69. Nothing you've seen

Said they didn't either. How can you say what parenting steps they took before calling the police? We do know that they tried to put a stop to it by talking to the adult in the equation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #69)

Mon May 27, 2013, 12:41 PM

71. All I can go by is what they have said publicly.

And their public focus has been on what they did to, or with respect to, the other participant in the relationship.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #71)

Mon May 27, 2013, 12:52 PM

72. So would you be happier

If the girlfriend's parents put up their own Facebook page to explain their side of the story, and make this even more of a circus than it already is?

I don't see why they should be explaining to anyone how they parent their child when that's not even the legal issue at hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #72)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:10 PM

78. "I don't see why they should be explaining to anyone..."

I couldn't agree more. They are having to speak out because of the smear campaign that Kaitlynn Hunt's parents have started.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #78)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:41 PM

88. And they should be fucking smeared for their religious bigotry.

They're on a Jesus-vendetta, trying to create an example to scare the entire LGBT community. Why the hell shouldn't we jump on their cases?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #88)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:43 PM

91. According to whom?

Ms. Hunt's parents are the ones claiming that the victim's parents are bigots, and they don't really seem too trustworthy at this point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #88)

Mon May 27, 2013, 08:34 PM

150. I've seen this stated again and again,

would you please say what they said or put up a link or something? Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #72)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:19 PM

80. The parents have already made statements.

I am merely commenting on what they have said (and not said) about how they dealt with the fact that their child was involved in a sexual relationship.

Frankly, I think they should have handled it within their family. If they had we would not even know there was a relationship between the girls.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #80)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:58 PM

96. It's their child, not yours. These people are following the law. They are fully within their rights

to contact police over unlawful conduct against their child.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #50)

Mon May 27, 2013, 10:54 AM

53. I don't disagree with you.

Going to law enforcement would not be my first choice, but if the relationship continued despite my efforts, I would definitely call the police.

Sometimes kids just won't respond to their parents' best efforts. It's hard to keep track of kids 24-7, especially at school (and it needs to be remembered that these girls had a sexual encounter in the school bathroom). Ms. Hunt took advantage of this girl. No, she doesn't deserve a felony conviction or a sex offender label, but some sort of punishment is certainly warranted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #53)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:16 AM

57. I don't believe she did.

Senior-freshman relationships are very common. You put kids in the same school and relationships of all sorts, including romantic, are going to occur. Some of those are deemed consensual by virtue of the senior being 17, and some are deemed predatory by virtue of the senior being 18. But the fact that one child has passed some magic age doesn't change the reality of the dynamic of those relationships from consensual to predatory.

The reality of the relationship is what concerns me, and that reality among schoolmates doesn't depend on whether one has crossed an arbitrary age barrier.

The reality of teenagers is that you can't watch them 24/7 and if they are intent on misbehaving they can find ways to do so. I just don't think criminalizing the behavior of one of two kids in a relationship is an appropriate response to this particular misbehavior.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #57)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:46 PM

125. A 7th grade classmate of mine dated a Senior toward the end of the term

He took her to the Prom that year, so I'm guessing the parents were ok with it. Ours was a Junior/Senior High School, so there were lots of ages mixed together. This was in the mid-70s and it's split up now. The reason I brought this up wast to back up Ms. Toad's point and also to say that by the time 8th grade rolled around, the boy had gone on to college and the girl was dating someone else. This likely would have happened with Kate and her girlfriend if the younger girl's parents had acted differently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BuelahWitch (Reply #125)

Mon May 27, 2013, 08:54 PM

152. The problem is Kate picked up the 14 year old at night without the girls parents knowledge

 

In these days of missing kids that is purely irresponsible. When asked to stay away she wouldn't.

Kaitlyn's parents had this kid in their house at night and did nothing. They are part of the problem too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #50)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:10 AM

56. right. you know so much about how the poster parents? the fuck you do.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #56)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:19 AM

58. "your"

referred to the parents of the younger child - who the poster asserted took steps to try to control the behavior of the older child but apparently none to control the behavior of their own.

(Or generically to the parents of any younger child who tries to control their own child's behavior by punishing someone else's child)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #58)

Mon May 27, 2013, 05:17 PM

137. the behavior of the older child ?

What older child?
18+ is legally an adult.

Are we now going to consider 18 year olds legally children?
If so, which adult civil rights should be start holding from them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #137)

Mon May 27, 2013, 09:30 PM

155. When they are in high school,

like it or not, they are treated like children. And - like it or not, when 17 year old students go to college they are treated as adults.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #155)

Tue May 28, 2013, 11:36 AM

167. No...they arent.

Last edited Tue May 28, 2013, 01:20 PM - Edit history (2)

"they are treated like children."

Can Ms. Hunt vote in elections? Can she drive a car? Can she drop out of school and work in a factory?
Yes? Then she is not treated like a child, is she?

when 17 year old students go to college they are treated as adults.


A) Not really. If you are a 17 year old college freshman can you vote in an election? Can you buy a pack of cigs? Pawn something? Go play the slots in Vegas? Go to a strip club? No? What if you are in college? Oh, still no. Guess they arent treated as adults.
B) We arent talking about a 17 year old, as 17 is also not legally a child. A juvenile is defined as someone under 16.
For example if a 15 year old gets busted selling drugs or something, they would not get "arrested", they would get "detained", and instead of going to court they would go to Juvenile adjudication and not get an adult criminal record. A 16 year old however, could go to jail. If a 15 year old decides they want to drop out of school, they can not. If a 16 year old decides they want to drop out of school they can. So forth and so on.

YOU may treat an 18 year old like a child, but the law does not. The law treats an 18 year old like an adult.
If you want to change the law to treat an 18 year old as a child, unless they are in college, ok, good luck with that. Start circulating the petition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #167)

Tue May 28, 2013, 02:24 PM

172. I'm not talking about legal interactions -

Last edited Tue May 28, 2013, 03:07 PM - Edit history (1)

I am talking about how people you are with for the single largest chunk of the day, 5 days a week interact with you - because that is primarily what forms your sense of your place in the world and power in interactions with other people.

I don't know anyone who starts interacting with people differently because they reached a magic age (or, in college, those who have not yet reached a magic age). On the other hand how people interact with you changes very dramatically when you move from high school (or into the work world after high school).

As a high school teacher there was absolutely no distinction between students who were 17 and students who were 18-21 in my classroom. They did not suddenly become my peers - or stop being peers of their classmates. I still communicated with their parents about them, their grades, their issues doing homework, special awards they might be receiving, and so on. Their parents still signed off on schedule changes, or other important documents, and so on.

In college, on the other hand, as a 17 year old college student - the college communicated directly with me even though I was not yet a legal adult, and expected me - not my parents - to be making important decisions about my life in college.

Yes, there are legal markers that happen when you turn 18 (and 21), but passing through those markers have very little real impact on whether you feel like (and interact with others as) a child or an adult.

ETA: I also just ran across this interesting tidbit about how Florida treats 18 year olds who have not yet graduated from high school and the age of majority (or removal of the "disability of nonage" - it would take more research than I'm interested in investing to track down the case law to see how this exception is applied, but the court does apparently, in some circumstances, treat 18 year olds still in high school as minors:

You reach the age of majority on your 18th birthday.

Residents of Florida are permitted to leave home when they reach the age of majority, which is 18. According to Florida Statutes Title XLIII, Chapter 743.07, "the disability of nonage is hereby removed for all persons in this state who are 18 years of age or older, and they shall enjoy and suffer the rights, privileges, and obligations of all persons 21 years of age or older except as otherwise excluded by the State Constitution." The court makes exceptions for those who are mentally or physically disabled. Exceptions are also made for 18-year-old residents who are still in high school, provided they have a "reasonable expectation of graduation before the age of 19."



Read more: Florida State Laws on Legal Age to Leave Home | eHow http://www.ehow.com/list_6907156_florida-legal-age-leave-home.html#ixzz2UcDhFsOH

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #172)

Tue May 28, 2013, 03:34 PM

174. You're making the point wrong in the beginning

As a high school teacher there was absolutely no distinction between students who were 17 and students who were 18-21 in my classroom


Ok, would there be a distinction between an 18 year old student and 14 year old one?

Yes, there are legal markers that happen when you turn 18 (and 21), but passing through those markers have very little real impact on whether you feel like (and interact with others as) a child or an adult.


Which is why there is typically a middle threshold of 16.
But this is the problem...you cant write laws to make subjective 'adulthood' and 'childhood'. The only way it can be done in a reasonable way is to use 'markers'. I am sure there are many very immature 19 year olds that have what I might find the maturity level of a 15 year old. Does this mean I can then strip that person of their rights as an adult, because I deem them immature? Who would judge this? We would need to have every person go through a yearly adjudication process where a judge decides if they are mature enough to be a legal adult? This is way too messy and subjective...hence the markers.


Exceptions are also made for 18-year-old residents who are still in high school, provided they have a "reasonable expectation of graduation before the age of 19."


Ok, now we are getting somewhere, as the other stuff we are arguing is just opinion and has no legal standing. This would be the foundation for a defense........if......that is what Florida Statutes Title XLIII, Chapter 743.07 said. It's not.
The quote you got of "e-how" is not the full text, but a 'cut up' of two sections of the statute.
The full text is:

743.07 Rights, privileges, and obligations of persons 18 years of age or older.—
(1) The disability of nonage is hereby removed for all persons in this state who are 18 years of age or older, and they shall enjoy and suffer the rights, privileges, and obligations of all persons 21 years of age or older except as otherwise excluded by the State Constitution immediately preceding the effective date of this section and except as otherwise provided in the Beverage Law.
(2) This section shall not prohibit any court of competent jurisdiction from requiring support for a dependent person beyond the age of 18 years when such dependency is because of a mental or physical incapacity which began prior to such person reaching majority or if the person is dependent in fact, is between the ages of 18 and 19, and is still in high school, performing in good faith with a reasonable expectation of graduation before the age of 19.
(3) This section shall operate prospectively and not retrospectively, and shall not affect the rights and obligations existing prior to July 1, 1973.

http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/743.07



The High School 'exception' in the statute does not apply to or make except anything to do with rights, privileges, and obligations. What it does do is allow for a count to possibly require financial support to a dependent person beyond the age of 18 years, until they finish high school. It's not relevant then to the case at hand or to a criminal charge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #174)

Tue May 28, 2013, 04:15 PM

175. No you're accepting that the law, as it is, is how it should be.

I reject the premise that the law is an appropriate one as written, and am suggesting that the law should conform more to real life distinctions. Age 18 is an arbitrary day-in-the-life, and has no real life meaning other than being an arbitrary date at which one's legal status changes for a number of things. Graduation from high school, on the other hand, means real changes in your life, and in how you are treated in the world by those you interact with on a daily basis. If you asked people whether their life changed more when they turned 18 or when they graduated from high school, I suspect that far more would respond that their life changed more with

And, FWIW, as a teacher I did treat 14 year old students in the same manner as I treated 21 year old students (I regularly had 18-21, and in a few instances 22 year old students, who had not accumulated enough credits to graduate). There were students at 14 who could handle more responsibility and were permitted much more independence in their work, and 21 year olds who I regularly refused to give a bathroom pass to because they could not be trusted to use it responsibly. I evaluated each child based on their maturity (in a variety of senses) and treated them in accordance with that maturity, in most instances, I didn't know (or care about) what age they were. I don't know any teacher who treated their students differently based on either grade level or age. I know my daughter was not treated differently as a 12th grader than she was as a 9th grader.

I have not argued anywhere that this case literally falls within the statute. My entire point is that this should not be a criminal matter. And I was not suggesting the summary was the statute, or that it literally applied to the law in question - I was merely pointing out that in some instances in Florida, 18 year olds in high school are treated differently than 18 year olds who have graduated - since you had insisted that 18 is an adult. Period. Apparently, sometimes in Florida, it isn't - and, more to the point - for purposes of this particular statute I don't believe it should be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #175)

Tue May 28, 2013, 05:35 PM

177. So are all laws. You dont want subjective laws do you?

Age 18 is an arbitrary day-in-the-life, and has no real life meaning other than being an arbitrary date at which one's legal status changes for a number of things.


And so is a BAC of .08. Is someone who blows a point .08 intoxicated and someone who blows a .07 not? Why?
It has very big life meaning...its when you turn 18 that you gain a ton of new rights. If that had no meaning to you, so be it, I personally felt having the right to vote was a huge deal.
Like I said repeatedly though, there is the 16 threshold as well, so no, it is not sudden. You dont go from Juvenile to Adult overnight. After turning 16 you are no longer a Juvenile..and you got a whole two years to get ready for 18.

This still ignores what i said, in that how do you propose to change the laws then? Are you going to have each person adjudicated yearly to determine their adulthood? Some people will become legal adults at 18, some at 23, some at 13 based on how mature the judge thinks you are? No, that is ridiculous, so we establish objective age markers that determine these things.
Do you have a better idea?
If you are going to argue that unless an 18 year old graduates high school they do not get the same rights as an adult, ok, argue that. However, thus far I havent gotten any idea what exactly you would do differently.

as a teacher I did treat 14 year old students in the same manner as I treated 21 year old students (I regularly had 18-21, and in a few instances 22 year old students, who had not accumulated enough credits to graduate).


I'm actually amazed by that. That is just depressing. I am surprised such people are not placed in a GED program or special school by then or something.

I know my daughter was not treated differently as a 12th grader than she was as a 9th grader.


I find this hard to believe.

But skipping the anecdotes.....are you saying that if you caught one of your 22 year old students having digital penetration in the bathroom with one of your 14 year old students, you would treat it the same as if it was with two 16 year old students? If not, why not? That seems the logical conclusion implied.
Also, the the reasoning you expressed it should not be illegal for a 22 year old to have sex with a 14 year old, provided they are both high school students.

Is this what you are saying?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #47)

Mon May 27, 2013, 01:48 PM

76. You really think a relationship between a senior and a freshman is unusual?

A kid born early in the school year will turn 18 early their senior year.
A kid born late in the school year will be 14 their entire freshman year.

Relationships between seniors and freshmen in high school are extremely common.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #76)

Mon May 27, 2013, 01:50 PM

77. Probably not as unusual as they should be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #77)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:34 PM

85. Oh please.

While 18-year-olds are on average more mature than 14-year-olds, we're not talking a massive difference. 18-year-olds are still plenty immature everywhere except their own minds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #76)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:14 PM

101. They are?

I dont recall any when I was in High School.
Maybe they are common among hill people in the Ozarks or something.
I recall a guy who was 17 who dated a 14 year old freshman....we all thought he was really creepy for doing that and when people found out it was deemed rather cringe worthy. I just really want to know where these 18/14 year old sexual relationships are "extremely common".

anyway, how is it a defense exactly? Selling Meth is "extremely common", but it is still illegal. If you get caught by the police selling Meth you cant go "but lots of other people sell meth!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #101)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:25 PM

107. You do realize the plural of "anecdote" is not "data", right?

Your experiences are not everyone's experiences.

Maybe they are common among hill people in the Ozarks or something.

I knew of about a dozen in my time high school. In Los Angeles. But good job working the anti-southern bigotry in there.

anyway, how is it a defense exactly?

Because the puritans are claiming this incident causes horrible damage to children. This incident. They are unwilling to look at all the other incidents of the same damn thing happening around them. Those are just "young love".

Hell, we still teach Romeo and Juliette to high school kids as a great, timeless romance, and that's a 13-year-old and a 25-year-old.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #107)

Mon May 27, 2013, 04:46 PM

131. Because the puritans?

"I knew of about a dozen in my time high school. In Los Angeles"

Interestingly then, this points to a serious problem in LA high schools.
But then again...how many people were there during your time in high school that made a dozen relatively common? Either way, it would have been extremely illegal, and I doubt it was deemed acceptable and normal by your peers.

Now, about the puritans. Can we stop that ad hominem, because it is too ironic.
The Puritans would be honky Dorry with a grown up bedding a child, they did it all the time. Statutory rape and age of consent laws were the result of progressive policies developed to protect and define children. In Iran a grown man can have sex with a 9 year old girl, that doesnt make Iran enlightened and progressive....it makes it the opposite.
I'm not arguing with you as a friggen Puritan. There is no god, and god has nothing to do with anything.
I'm for consenting adults being allowed to have whatever kind of kinky sex with as many consenting adults at the same time as they want. I believe they have a right to film it and then later get off watching it while peeing on each other if they desire. This has nothing to do with Puritans.
I'm not even for harsh sentencing for when the age difference is <4 years, but I find myself needing to argue more because this argument is over blown with fallacies (and I'm upset about the way the Hunt family lied and manipulated the GLBT movement).

They are unwilling to look at all the other incidents of the same damn thing happening around them. Those are just "young love".


In what universe? This is not going on 'all around anyone", by your own admission it is rare (you knew of a dozen such cases in your entire time in high school), and IT IS PROSECUTED if the authorities become aware of it, as your high school chum would have been if it was known to the police.
99% of Statutory rape cases involve heterosexual couples.
In 42% of Statutory rape cases that were prosecuted nation wide were where the younger victim was 14 years old, and the suspect was between 3-5 years older.
Do you have different stats that show that this case is discriminatory?
If not, then that should tell you something.


Data source: Federal Bureau of Investigation. National Incident-Based Reporting System Master Files for the years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000 [machine-readable data files].


timeless romance, and that's a 13-year-old and a 25-year-old.


You are suggesting that it should be legal for a 13 year old to have sex with a 25 year old?
FFS, they also teach The Merchant of Venice that doesnt mean you can sign contracts using a LB of flesh for collateral.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Original post)

Mon May 27, 2013, 01:31 PM

74. ...and this thread...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iggo (Reply #74)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:26 PM

82. Oh, didn't you know, Kaitlyn's a sexual predator!

Everyone call Chris Hansen!

Because two high schoolers dating who are slightly in excess of the socially accepted age difference is obviously the same as a 45 year old creeper trolling the Internet for eight-year-olds!

How Republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #82)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:33 PM

84. Now there's a charming euphemism for "an adult having sex with a child".

I agree that there's a difference between the two scenarios you describe, but it's a difference of degree only.

But both of them are cases of adults taking advantage of children's naivette to have sex with them, and both should be illegal.

There's a strong case to be made that the potential penalty that Hunt faces is excessive (although it's worth noting that she was offered a plea bargain that would have kept her off the sex offenders register). But she's an adult, and her victim (yes, victim, not lover; lover implies the ability to give informed consent) was a child, and that means that the child's parents were entirely right to demand legal protection against her, and the state was right to provide it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Donald Ian Rankin (Reply #84)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:39 PM

86. Fucking stupid is what this case is.

This is two high-schoolers, who shared classes and sports, who did what teenagers do.

And for that, the older one gets hit with felony charges, is threatened with prison time, will not be able to go to college or get any job because she'll be scarlet-lettered for the rest of her life.

Damned straight that's fucking excessive.

This shouldn't go to the criminal justice system at all, and I'm betting the only reason it has was because it was a same-sex relationship, and the younger girl's parents are on a fundie-vendetta. Ruining lives for Jesus because they think their religion justifies their bigotry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #86)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:18 PM

105. so what?

who shared classes and sports


So what?
I went to EMT class when I was 28.
There were 16 year olds taking the course along with adults up to 40. It would still be illegal to have sex with them despite being in the same class. Heck, I went to college at 26, I still knew better than to fondle 17 year old freshmen in the bathroom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #105)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:25 PM

108. Good post.

The whole "peer group" meme is getting tiresome. Anyone who has ever played a team sport in high school knows that there is a big difference between the seniors and the freshmen on the team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #108)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:46 PM

124. Agreed. "Peer group" makes no sense.

I used to volunteer for a Youth Group that ranged from ages 12-17. If I walked in on a 17 year old in an illicit act with one of the 12 year olds, was I supposed to just chuckle it off with "Oh, well- they're in the same peer group so it's fine"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #86)

Mon May 27, 2013, 07:28 PM

143. What denomination are the Smiths?

How do you know they're fundies? How do you know they're even Christian? Hell for that matter, how do you even know they believe in a god at all? Because that's what you feel in your heart?

You do realize that's the same kind of thinking fundies follow right? No evidence needed, if somebody wrote it down it must be true!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Donald Ian Rankin (Reply #84)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:39 PM

87. Bullshit.

People do not magically become more mature on their 6,575th day.

although it's worth noting that she was offered a plea bargain that would have kept her off the sex offenders register

And still would have resulted in a felony on her record, which would make her nearly unemployable and nearly un-house-able for the rest of her life.

Boy, what a fantastic deal!

and that means that the child's parents were entirely right to demand legal protection against her

And those religious fundamentalist parents had no other motivation for objecting to the relationship. Why, they'd be just as appalled if the 18-year-old was a boy.

And I've got some lovely oceanside property in Kansas I can sell you for cheap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #87)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:50 PM

93. I'm afraid I think you're just making stuff up.

Your claim to certainty that the victims parents are among the minority of parents who would not object to an 18 year old boy taking advantage of their 14 year old daughter, rather than among the large majority who would, is implausible, to say the least.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Donald Ian Rankin (Reply #93)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:58 PM

97. I'm afraid I think you're making stuff up.

You have no idea what is the majority or the minority. You assume the majority agrees with you.

The fact that this incident would not be a crime in the majority of states indicates you are not in the majority.

So unless you want to produce statistics to back up your assertion, I'm gonna assume you're making that up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #97)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:07 PM

100. This would not be a crime in the majority of states???

I think you're wrong on that one. Whether or not it would be charged is a different story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #100)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:21 PM

106. I'm not.

The vast majority of states have enacted "Romeo and Juliette" clauses in their statutory rape laws. Those clauses exempt kids that are "close enough" in age from statutory rape charges. And these two girls would be "close enough" in most of those states.

Florida decided to do what they usually do with laws, which is completely fuck it up. Florida law says age of consent is 18, unless the older party is 23 or younger. Then age of consent is 16.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #106)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:30 PM

113. What vast majority of states? And how many years difference are we talking about in this

vast majority of states?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #113)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:34 PM

116. Usually, the age difference is about 4 years.

with a minimum age set at around 13.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #106)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:35 PM

117. Very true. This is Florida, the most brain-damaged state in the union.

Case in point: Florida Man, America's worst superhero!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #106)

Mon May 27, 2013, 04:25 PM

128. Romeo and Juliet laws

do nothing to make crimes no longer crimes. Florida has a Romeo and Juliet clause, and if convicted Kaitlyn can petition the judge to have it applied in her case. It doesn't nullify a conviction, only makes it so she won't have to register as a sex offender as part of the penalty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #100)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:27 PM

109. Would not be a crime in most countries is a better way to put it

 

Age of consent in half of Europe is 14 and 15... it's 13 in Spain and Argentina.

I guess their teenagers are just more mature and mentally advanced than ours...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidn3600 (Reply #109)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:31 PM

114. Considering a lot of people here are arguing that 18 year old aren't mature,

then yes, our teenagers and legal adults are obviously lees mature and mentally advanced.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #114)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:44 PM

123. Just because you're not mature, doesn't mean you won't have sex

And if you aren't mature, you're very likely to have sex for dumb reasons or in bad situations.

You are arguing we should throw more than 60% of our kids in prison for statutory rape.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #123)

Mon May 27, 2013, 04:27 PM

129. 60% of 18 year olds have sex with 14 year olds?

Holy shit!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #129)

Mon May 27, 2013, 07:29 PM

144. You should pay attention to a thread before replying.

The subject at hand moved to all sex under 18 being illegal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #144)

Mon May 27, 2013, 07:40 PM

146. That's not how I interpreted the posts leading up to yours

LisaL's post seemed a little snarky to me, since everyone defending Kate is saying she's not an adult and not mature even though she is 18.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #146)

Mon May 27, 2013, 07:44 PM

148. Well, apparently you need some help with reading comprehension then.

since everyone defending Kate is saying she's not an adult and not mature even though she is 18.

No.

People defending Kate are arguing two things:
1) A senior in high school having sex with a freshman in high school is very common. And the vast majority of those cases are not prosecuted. It's not fair to prosecute this one and ignore all the others.
2) It appears that the 14-year-old's fundy parents are pursuing this case because of their bigotry.

To which Kate's attackers are saying "She's 18!! She should have left the 14-year-alone when her parents got upset!!". Apparently because said people have utterly forgot what it's like to be 18.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #148)

Mon May 27, 2013, 08:35 PM

151. If you haven't seen the "they're both just kids" argument

You must be pretty new to the discussion.

And your number 2 point is a claim with no evidence to support it. That's the kind of thing I'd expect from a birther, and is disappointing to see from people on this board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Reply #151)

Tue May 28, 2013, 05:43 PM

179. The "they're both just kids" is not about 18-year olds being immature.

It's about the kids being similar in age.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #148)

Mon May 27, 2013, 11:26 PM

162. Frankly, I don't care if people know what it is like to be 18 or not.

 

An 18 year old is still subject to the law as a 19 year old is as a 20 year old is. We don't grant exceptions because gosh darnit she is just 18 and it is a magical time. That kind of thinking fortunately is not present often in the legal system.

I don't have a teenage daughter so I don't know how either family feels. However, I know hypocrisy when I smell it and many defenders of this young woman are being very hypocritical. The argument breaks down two ways.

1. These are just two dumb kids, they don't know any better, why they are children and how can WE expect children to have any common sense and know how to deal with a situation like this. Shucks, these kids are just answering their emotions and WE as adults need to let the kids be kids and not trouble them with adult concerns.........HOWEVER we burden these same 18 year old CHILDREN with the most important thing they can ever do and implore them to vote in overwhelming numbers because WE want to win. If they are children and can't understand right from wrong on relationships, why on earth do we expect them to understand Tax policy, Foreign Policy, Affordable Health Care, Social Issues. Yet, we push them to vote, to register every 18 year old they can and have them vote also. I don't know much but I smell rank hypocrisy when we give them a pass when it suits some peoples agendas and we hold them accountable when it serves our agenda in a far different way.

2. This is a short argument: If this was a male, the lynch mob on this site would perhaps stretch down the road quite a ways. But it is not a male, it is a female that is a lesbian. I have no problem with who she is and the way she was born, it's a damn shame that we don't have national gay marriage laws, HOWEVER, she is an adult, gay or straight she is an adult. Adults have consequences put on them when they break laws. I was in the military with plenty of 18 year old's that were held accountable for being 18 and sleeping with 14 and 15 year old's. If the law if Florida is written the way it looks, then she has committed a crime. If she refuses a plea deal, which is in essence the system going easy on her, then she must go to trial and a jury of her peers (not her peer group in high school, a jury of her peers, i.e. adults will judge her as they see fit when the evidence is presented). The day she turned 18 she was held to a different standard, and the ability to be considered a child went away.

Now all my hyperbole aside, I have nothing personal against this young woman, she seems like a great student and someone who could do something with her life. However, she did break the law in the state of Florida, I will never sign a petition to excuse her behavior because I don't want her behavior excused. I want her to face the fact that she broke the law and must be held accountable if it is proven that she did in fact do so. I also think Florida needs to change this law because it is a stupid law that needs to be written more clearly. However I cannot condone an 18 year old that can vote, that can fight and die for their country, that can buy cigarettes, that can own property, and that can enter into contracts if they choose to sleep with a child......And that other girl is a child. No matter how you want to spin it, an adult molested a child. An adult took a child from her parents home without the parents permissions, an adult refused to abide by the demands of the legal parents of a child to stop seeing that child. There is a word for someone like that, a criminal......Personally I ope the young lady takes the plea deal, does her punishment and moves on with her life wiser and more cognizant of the responsibilities of adulthood

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #148)

Tue May 28, 2013, 06:03 PM

181. What would you respond if I said

1)And the vast majority of those cases are not prosecuted. It's not fair to prosecute this one and ignore all the others.


Yes they are. They are prosecuted all the time. In fact cases where the girl is between 14 and 16 and the man is between 18 and 20 make up the majority of statutory rape prosecutions.
Data source: Federal Bureau of Investigation. National Incident-Based Reporting System Master Files for the years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000 [machine-readable data files].
Can you provide data that shows this is false, and the prosecution is unusual in the case of an 18 and 14 year old?

2) It appears that the 14-year-old's fundy parents are pursuing this case because of their bigotry.


What do you base this on?
I dont know the parents. I assume you do not know them either.
What do you base their 'Fundiness' on? I'm an Atheist and not exactly Prudence McPurity myself, but ya know what I'd probably be pretty upset if an 18 year old was fingering my 14 year old in the school bathroom....So if you're going to make accusations about them, at least have something to back it up other than conjecture. Either that or we might as well start accusing the Hunt parents of being racists. Why not?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #144)

Tue May 28, 2013, 11:46 AM

170. What?

The subject at hand moved to all sex under 18 being illegal.


Whooooo, since when did that happen? You should have felony battery charges for how you beat up that strawman.
Sex under 18 is not illegal. Heck if the younger girl was 16 there would not be any problem at all. If Ms. Hunt was 17 they would not be in big trouble either.

So I have no idea what you are arguing, you just went out and found a strawman and started punching him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #144)

Tue May 28, 2013, 05:48 PM

180. When did this happen?

Literally nobody has argued that from what I can see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #123)

Mon May 27, 2013, 05:04 PM

133. Where did you pull that stat from?

The article you linked to said no such thing.
Can you point it out for me?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #133)

Mon May 27, 2013, 07:31 PM

145. Seriously?

I provided the link. Did you stop at the first sentence?

If you had read allllllll the way to the second paragraph, you'd find the stat summarized and a link to the original study.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #145)

Tue May 28, 2013, 11:52 AM

171. Where in the second paragraph?

Im looking at it right now.
Please point out where it indicates that 60% of 18 year olds have sex with 14 year olds?
I cant find it anywhere!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #171)

Tue May 28, 2013, 05:40 PM

178. You have to actually follow the discussion you are trying to participate in.

The subject has moved on to banning all sex under 18. Not just the particular situation in the OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #123)

Mon May 27, 2013, 05:10 PM

134. Based on this

Would you be willing to raise the age of adulthood (currently at over 18) or lower the age of childhood (currently at under 16)?

Then we can not let 18 year olds vote or drive, work in factories, join the military, do things without parental permission, ect.
or
We can let 14 year olds get credit cards, drop out of school, be charged as adults for crimes, ect


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roughrider101 (Reply #134)

Mon May 27, 2013, 07:40 PM

147. Seriously? 45 states can handle different thresholds

There's only 5 states where the age of consent is 18. The other 45 states have a lower age of consent, or situations with a lower age of consent (such as "close in age".

Not only that, but we already separate the threshold for "adult" and "can drink alcohol".

We are fully capable of coming up with different thresholds for different activities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #147)


Response to alp227 (Reply #160)

Mon May 27, 2013, 10:21 PM

161. Read the entire 2 sentences before replying.

Then your reply won't be dumb.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #147)

Tue May 28, 2013, 11:41 AM

168. Are you responding to me?

Because your argument makes no sense in the context of what I said.

There's only 5 states where the age of consent is 18


I know. Most states, including Florida have it at 16. As I said in the comment you responded to, typically a Juvenile or child is defined as someone under 16 years old.

We are fully capable of coming up with different thresholds for different activities.


Exactly, as pointed out from the fact that different thresholds exist at 16, 18, and 21.
If the younger girl was 16, she would not be a Juvenile (although still not an adult), and this would not be a big issue that an adult of 18 had digital penetration with her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Original post)

Mon May 27, 2013, 03:58 PM

127. They were both in HIGH SCHOOL

High school seniors should get arrested for having relationships with freshmen? This is so ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Matariki (Reply #127)

Mon May 27, 2013, 05:14 PM

136. High school seniors dont get arrested for having relationships with freshmen

There is no law against a Senior having sex with a Freshmen.
Just like there is no law against a Professor from having relations with a college student.

The laws are age specific, and not related to a persons progress in school.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Original post)

Mon May 27, 2013, 09:06 PM

153. 18 year old having sex with a 14 child is wrong. Period.

I'm a proud liberal and avid supporter of equal rights for. I think this hysteria is counterproductive and seems to advocate preferential treatment for the 18 year old because of her sexual preference.

18 year olds need to keep their adult hands off of 14 childrens bodies. Male/female is irrelevant.

Simple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DMacTX (Reply #153)

Tue May 28, 2013, 11:42 AM

169. I believe there are degrees of wrong

 

and that equating sexual activity between an 18 year old and a 14 year old and say, a 25 year old and a 14 year old is nuts. an 18 year old is legally an adult (in most things) but it's absurd to talk about an "the adult hands of an 18 year old when you're talking about an year old sexually involved with a 14 year old.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shawn703 (Original post)

Mon May 27, 2013, 10:01 PM

158. Ugh, social media gives people ways to meddle in other people's business.

Where they have no business meddling in the beginning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread