I frankly don’t think this guy should have gone to jail at all. He is innocent. The article also points out that:
when he found out she was 14, he tried to commit suicide twice
even his parents thought she was 21 when they met her
he was never seeking a relationship with a minor, and made no lies about his own age
This case means that all men now are going to have to ask for a faxed copy of a young women’s passport before asking them out just to verifty their date of birth.
I ABHOR paedophilia and net-predators. But this man is not that. And wasting time and money prosecuting someone who has a better case to sue his supposed “victim” than she him, is resources better spent pursuing actual paedophiles.
That’s not bad. I also accept birth certificate + photo ID.
I mean, I think it’s pretty clear that this guy didn’t intend to commit the crime. Also, though, it’s pretty clear that he did commit the crime. I mean, there’s no question that he’s guilty of the law as written, right?
It can be extremely difficult to guess somebody’s age from her appearance and demeanor. If someone here thinks they can always tell a teenager from a 21-year-old just from a casual conversation, they just haven’t met any crafty enough teenagers yet… that they know of.
I think that people over 18 should have some obligation to determine the age of their partners beyond just asking them, but not to the point of asking for ID. If they have no obligation, then they can actively ignore it and claim that they didn’t know. From the sound of things, this guy would have met my expectations. Until the law gets changed, though, I’m sticking with the passport copy.
It’s too tempting a target for someone to NOT do a classic drive-by “I’m so righteous” kinda “holier than thou” post.
EG; It was RAPE! How can you sit there in your smug little world and condone RAPE! Assholes like that deserve to DIE! Have you any idea how incredibly insensitive your position is? People like you allow the criminals of this world to get off scott free! It was RAPE! The law defines it as rape, and that’s what it was!
Oh, I should add… I agree with you by the way istara - all the circumstances would indicate that the young man was quite thoroughly duped and possessed zero immoral intentions.
Well, I suppose that one could argue that there is an adverse selection problem, i.e. it is pretty easy for someone to say that he really believed that the girl was of majority age. So by giving the guy some time, even though his motive was to not commit a crime, society’s interests are served in that he gets an unusually light sentence while potential statutory rapists still have the threat of a year in jail as a disencentive to screw underage girls.
He’s right, Jonathan. Stat rape is a strict liability crime, with no intent element. Texas law is illustrative:
Note the difference between the offenses described in (a)(1) and (a)(2). Sub (1) is classical statutory rape – note the absence of intent language similar to that found in sub (2) (which is basically flashing in front of a minor or having the minor flash).
As for “why,” some crimes society has decided are so bad that there just shouldn’t be an intent element attached to them. In the particular case of stat rape, it’s probably to prevent precisely the “but officer, she looked 18” defense employed here, because it would invariably be employed in every stat rape prosecution. The law presumes that in most cases this defense is bullshit. It also places the onus on the older party to the sexual encounter to inquire as to the age of his partner – with an intent requirement, willful ignorance would be a decent strategy for sexual predators.
IC 35-42-4-9
Sexual misconduct with a minor
…
c) It is a defense that the accused person reasonably believed that the child was at least sixteen (16) years of age at the time of the conduct.
Same here in Missouri. Recently a defendant was found not guilty by a jury of a similar crime. He took the stand in his own defense, and claimed the girl told him she was 18.
There’s a difference between blame/fault and responsibility. The guy’s over 18 and therefore responsible for his actions even though I don’t think that this was his fault.
On the other hand…
How’s a judge to tell this case apart from a case where the guy knew the girl was underage and the two collaborated their testimony to protect him from the legal consequences?
From this site, it appears that this guy could have raised the defense of mistake of age. Why he didn’t, I have no idea, but I’m guessing that there is more to it than the defendant’s statements now. And the fact remains that he PLEADED GUILTY. He had sex with a 14 year old. Sure she told him she was 21, but, maybe, just perhaps, going out on a limb, in the realm of possiblity, he might want to check out her real age. He met her on the internet, which isn’t exactly known for it’s transmission of the truth, especially in these kinds of situations. So he communicates online with a girl, thinks she’s 21, and then meets her, has dinner, goes to a movie, and has sex with her, all without a concern that maybe she might be under 21. I don’t think putting the burden on him to assure that she is over the age of consent is too tough.
And to those who say he’s not guilty of any crime… Ummmm, he pleaded guilty. Kinda hard to say he’s not guilty of any crime WHEN HE ADMITS IT.
Well, since this board is about fighting ignorance, I should probable fight some of my own. The link I provided in the above post was for Pennsylvania, which I assumed was where the offense occurred. In truth, it occurred in New Jersey, where the statute in question reads:
So, it appears the defense was not available. I apologize for the mistake.
However, I also do not have a problem with a statute that puts the burden of establishing the age of the person on the one who is going to have sex with her/him.