Fabricate something? I don’t think so. If they truly “fabricated” a change, it wouldn’t stick in a court of law. They could charge them with murdering all those little spermies - doesn’t mean they would convict them for it. Or, they could charge them for something relatively minor, like destroying public property (there was a stain on the seat of the school bus, your honor).
I’d rather they take a couple of weeks to work with the DA and decide what makes sense - especially given the age of the accused - than rush into charges that are wrong.
Once again, I cannot comment on what the law is in MA, but here in Wisconsin “Child means a person who has not attained the age of 18 years” (Wisconsin state statute 948.01(1))
I was using the term “children” as a legal definition, not as a degrading remark which you seem to think I was.
I realize that some states use the terms “minor” or “juvenile” instead of “Child”, but some, like here in the the Majikal Land O’Cheese, use the term Child. It’s a legal term.
The boys will get off with probation and lip service. The girl will have her head handed to her on a platter. Was the act completed or did the bus driver head it off?
Would it be any different if this situation had occurred on a public bus between adults, with adults cheering them on?
It would have been a public lewdness thing, and the participants would have been arrested on that charge.
The onlookers would not have been charged, so the onlooking “children” shouldn’t have legally been charged, either. Not that their parents and the school counselors shouldn’t have done SOMETHING to make the onlookers understand their culpability in this whole mess…they SHOULD.
What a mess. And what in the world? How could this have HAPPENED? Where did these kids get the idea that this was a “cool” thing to do? In public?
Bleah. If I ever decide to be a lawyer (ow! Stop hitting!), remind me never to practice law in Wisconsin.
Do they also have a statute that says something like “The term ‘Sodomy’ includes anal intercourse, intercourse of any kind between a human and an animal, and the eating of cheese manufactured in any State other than Wisconsin” ?
If one or both of the participants were minors and the onlookers had been bullying the participants --shouting “let her suck your cock, what are you some sort of faggot!? Pussy!!” or “Suck his cock, bitch!”–then they’d be charged. Knowing what I do about high school students, I think it is prudent for the cops to investigate whether or not what the on lookers were doing constituted some sort of illegal act. The fact that the cops were called in to investigate it makes me suspect that the people in charge of the school have some reason to suspect this is the case.
Apparently, you are taking the commentary of one member of the state legislature’s House Courts of Justice Committee, and extrapolating that into either Virginia law or policy. Odd.
In fact, as a moment’s reflection would show, and as the article points out, judges may get speeding tickets - even reckless driving tickets - and remain judges. Nor, in the end, was there even a plan to ask the judge is she’s violated the crimes against nature act; the focus, at least in this legislator’s mind, was more on an out-of-court settlement between this judge and a former worker for sexual harrassment charges.
If those charges were based in fact, there might well be a legitimate concern about reappointing the judge.
No, “counciling” would be “acting as a council” insofar as it has any reasonable meaning – using it that way makes it one of those execrable nouns-used-as-verbs, if I may caveat your usage and definition your implication. (insert barf smiley here)
What the girl was doing was obviously an in-depth staff study!
Am I the only one who thinks this isn’t something we should be trying to ruin any of these kids’ lives over? Is getting a blowjob on the bus really something we want to punish so badly that these kids won’t get into colleges which reject kids with a criminal record?
Detention? Absolutely. Suspension? Most likely.
Charging them with a sex crime - a tag that will follow them forever? Please. Have some common sense, people.
“Section 23. Whoever unlawfully has sexual intercourse or unnatural sexual intercourse, and abuses a child under sixteen years of age shall, for the first offense, be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for life or for any term of years, or, except as otherwise provided, for any term in a jail or house of correction, and for the second or subsequent offense by imprisonment in the state prison for life or for any term of years, but not less than five years.”
If this girl wasn’t coerced into giving the blow job, I don’t see how this would apply. Also, if none of the witnesses objected, I’m not sure how indecent exposure should be applied. IMO, the police shouldn’t get involved unless someone or something was harmed.
If any of the witnesses objected to the act, then I can see grounds for indecent exposure. However, punishing the onlookers is just plain stupid (again, only if they had no part in coercing the girl).
IMO, all that should be done would be to tell the parents of the incident and have a couple days suspension.
