Ok this is just to settle an argument,I realize that even if these things are technically illegal,they are unlikely to be prosecuted or result in a conviction.
Oh and if the ages below are over age of consent in a state or country,just change them to be a year below .
Gotta bite nit-picking in the bud.
Ok first scenario,two 16 year olds have sex,are they both in violation of age of consent laws? Could one or both be considered a “child molestor” basically?
Number two,16 girl gives her 16 year old boyfriend a nude,sexually suggestive picture of herself,is he guilty of possesing child porn?
Three,same girl takes some suggestive nudes of herself,and keeps them. Is she guilty of producing and or possessing child porn?
Unless the powers that be in your locale are also the sex police, …
Two 16-year-olds screwing around will not have the book thrown at them, unless its their respective parents and/or guardians.
Smart move of the girl is not to give away such photos to anyone. Better still, don’t even make them in the first place. Guilty as in law? No. You need a trial to do that.
Wait until you’re legal age to do that. Same answer as above about guilt, too.
The OP asks if certain conduct is violative of the law. You answer that they won’t be prosecuted. That may be true, but it hardly answers the question. You answer that the conduct is not a “smart move”. Again true, but again hardly an answer. You answer that rather than engaging in the conduct, they should wait until they’re legal age. Well, excellent advice, but not an answer to the question.
This is especially egregious when the OP prefaces his questions with the acknowledgement that these offenses are unlikely to actually be prosecuted.
In short, it’s unclear to me precisely what “answering value” your post had.
To the OP:
Both underage participants in a consensual sex act are comitting a crime. If the crime is called “molestation” in your state, then I suppose both could be considered child molestors.
The boy is guilty of possessing child porn.
The girl is guilty of possessing child porn. There’s nothing in the law that creates an exception for photos of yourself, so far as I know.
As you (and Duckster) have made clear, it is highly unlikely that these scenarios, especially the third, would ever be prosecuted.
Actually, people have been prosecuted for underage sex. It’s rare, but it happens.
Generally, a teenage boy is only going to be prosecuted for having sex with a teenage girl if:
[ul]
[li]The local D.A. has a hair up his butt to prosecute the “crime” for some sort-of political gain or ego trip. This actually happened in, IIRC, Wisconsin. The D.A. was running for re-election (or maybe he was just over-zealous) and some boy was actually looking at 20 years for boffing his girlfriend.[/li][li]The local D.A. (or sheriff or whatever) is the girl’s father.[/li][/ul]
The age of consent in most states is not 18, as many people seem to think. In about half the states, it is 16. Most states have provisions making it legal for people who are close in age to have sex without breaking the law. In Maine, for example, it is illegal for a 20-year-old to have sex with a 14-year-old, but not illegal for a 18-year-old to have sex with a 14-year-old.
Heard on the TV about 10 years ago that due to the proliferation of sex and the lack of cell space, the powers that be are more interested in extracting child support. Most times these affairs come to light when the girl gets pregnant. Therefore, in your twenties they are reluctant to prosecute and exceptions are made sometimes in the thirties, obviously with a girl close to the age of legal consent.
Another thing to remember, the agency in charge of minors seems to be mostly interested in removing children. Thus molesting or abusing one’s one child attracts a great deal more attention than someone else doing it. That has been my impression. Perhaps a social worker could chime in with statistics and a reason why it might be so?
My impression of Consent laws is that it is usually the folks that have legal control over their minor childrens’ sexuality. Thus, if the minor children are having sex that is considered against the law in the area of which they reside, the folks can have the offending guy/girl arrested if they want to–& I have seen this happen.
However, I have known a few dads who gave their minor daughters permission to have sex with boys who got permission from their folks first to have sex.
NH, usa, has the lowest age of consent that I know of, which is 13, if you get permission from the right people first. effac3d, that means they would have to be 12 years old to qualify for your question & I think that’s pushing it a bit, eh?
>In Maine, for example, it is illegal for a 20-year-old to have sex >with a 14-year-old, but not illegal for a 18-year-old to have sex >with a 14-year-old.
Being from Maine, for some reason I feel compelled to say, that both circumstances quoted above from Bibliophage are still VERY much frowned upon, even here in the wilderness… lol
P.S. sorry I don’t know the proper way to quote someone’s post yet…
My therapists’ professional association was told by our lawyer that the answer to this was “yes.” This matters because in our capacity as therapists we may hear about these activities and are then faced with our duty to report child abuse versus the client’s expectatioin of privacy.
Age of consent laws and the laws enforcing them vary widely state by state, so asking these questions will inevitably get you the response “Check with a local attorney.”
I am not sure where “bit bucket” is, so I’ll give you my understanding of the laws in Illinois:
In your first example, the crime being committed is a misdemeanor, called Criminal Sexual Abuse, which requires:
If these are charged, they are generally handled in juvenile court because of the age of the accused/victim.
Your second and third questions fall under the Child Pornography statute and are both illegal, regardless of which party has the picture.
First, I don’t know where you’re getting this from, or what agency you’re thinking of. Since you’re making the assertion, I think the onus of saying that an agency is more interested in removing children lies with you.
Second, the presumption is that parents will look after their children. If a young person is in a bad situation with a third party, there’s generally no need to remove the child from the parents - they’re not the source of the risk, and presumably will do whatever they can to protect the child. It’s when the parents themselves are abusing the child that a child protection agency will feel compelled to step in - because the child isn’t in a safe environment and the people who are expected to look after the child are themselves the source of danger.
Prostitution being technically illegal but tacitly tolerated in certain locations is unremarkable, whatever the country. And, we can find 13-year-olds turning tricks in major USA cities today if we look close enough – in spite of all our prosperity, opportunity, “protective” legislation, tough law enforcement and higher age-of-consent.
As this thread is winding down, I hope you don’t mind if I try a minor hijack…Is there any defense to a statutory rape charge based on being misled about the age of a person in question? Say Bob has sex with Alice, who claims to be 21. Can he successfully use that as a defense? Let’s assume for the moment that she acknowledges she lied to him. What if he meets her in a bar, where it is assumed that everyone present is at least 21? Howabout if she gives him a fake ID?
"Say Bob has sex with Alice, who claims to be 21. Can he successfully use that as a defense? "
Sure he can use just about any defense he wants to, whether it’s accepted as truth by the judge/jury is another matter. I think alot of times it’s used but not very successfully.
IANAL and YMMV but my understanding is that in general, mistake as to the age of the participants is not a defense to a charge of statutory rape. Heck, in Wisconsin, marriage isn’t even a defense even if the marriage was performed in a state in which it was legal. The legal name of the offense in Wisconsin, BTW, is “sexual assault of a child,” not statutory rape. There are two differnet classifications, one for having sex with a child under the age of 13 and one for having sex with a child under the age of 16.
There might be more to Alereon’s question than you give credit for – in the UK the defence “I believed that she (it’s almost invariably a she) was above the age of consent” is expressly disallowed if the defendant is older than 24.
(Also, IIRC two consenting minors commit no offence (in the UK)).
Once again, my response is state specific and is in no way intended to be legal advice.
The relevant code section reads:
This section, taken together with the charging sections, limits the use of the “I thought she was older defense” to times when the victim is at least 13 years old. It is a affirmative defense, which means the initial burden is on the defense to have the issue raised, but the State can disprove the defense by showing either the defendant knew the victim was under17 or if that the belief was unreasonable.
In your example, if Alice is at least 13 years old, and the jury found that Bob thought she was older and that thought was reasonable, then he would have a defense.
Prostitution being technically illegal but tacitly tolerated in certain locations is unremarkable, whatever the country. And, we can find 13-year-olds turning tricks in major USA cities today if we look close enough – in spite of all our prosperity, opportunity, “protective” legislation, tough law enforcement and higher age-of-consent.