ACTON, Mass. —
“A Massachusetts teenager who was located after an overnight search is accused of killing his mother and younger brother, according to Middlesex County District Attorney Marian Ryan.”
“Ryan said the teenager had previously been using the internet and ChatGPT to explore “gothic novel” stories about the deaths of his family.”
That’s it exactly. Minors are minors, whether they are 17 years old, or 17 days old.
Not the first time they’ve had a mass murder in Winfield. Scroll down, not very far, to “History - 20th Century.”
For that matter, there are only 14 states in the US where 18 is the age of consent - but one of them is California, where most mass media is produced, so people tend to believe that that’s the rule everywhere.
I think in many of the states with an age of consent of less than eighteen, the age of the other person is a consideration, in particular how different the two ages are.
So what are you actually trying to say? That the woman was, or was not, a minor under relevant law?
Minors are not minors at 17 years old if a 17-year-old is not a minor.
Depends on the context.
For the purposes of filming sexual content and distributing that film, 17 is still considered a minor.
Yeah, but age of consent is not actually age of majority. In Colorado age 17 is the age of consent. But under a different law under 18 is treated as a minor as it pertains to recording sexual activity. Legal to engage in sexual activity, illegal to record said sexual activity or posses or distribute said recording.
I’m speaking of the context of this conversation, where the person in question is old enough to be legal.
Yes, and depending on circumstances, 18 is the age of majority in most (but not all) states in the US, yet for alcohol and nicotine consumption 21 is the age of majority (or legal minimum age, at least). I’m talking about a particular circumstance that NWH seems oblivious to.
The state I live in, 16 is the age of consent. (Though that raises to 18 if it is determined that the older person is in some position of authority over the younger person.)
That is the context of this conversation. It is legal in Colorado for Boebert to have had sex with this woman. But dissemination of a recording of that sex is illegal. Both of those distinctions are related to her being 17.
“Legal minimum age” and “age of majority” are not the same thing. You’re not still a minor at 21 just because you can’t rent a car or run for president.
You’re correct, and what I really should have said is that whether the person is a minor is irrelevant to this situation.
I believe it is still illegal even if she were 18+. Or, is it legal to secretly record yourself having sex with an adult and then share that video with others without her consent? As I said before, I think there are two crimes: Child pornography along with whatever secretly videoing sex and then distributing is called. Being a douchebag?
I dunno but it gets a little murkier, whereas “Sex tapes of under 18s are considered child pornography” is a pretty hard line.
I suspect that, in most states, filming someone having sex and distributing it without their permission is a crime (regardless of whether you’re the person they’re having sex with).
But in all states, filming a minor having sex and distributing it are both crimes, and very serious ones. So there are at least two and probably three crimes Boebert is accused of.
The fact that there is not a fourth crime from the sex itself, due to age of consent, is mostly irrelevant.
I’ve seen no indication or claim that it was secretly recorded. Under other circumstances I’d even argue these charges are a bit of a farce even if technically entirely correct. She was apparently three weeks from her 18th birthday at the time, which is close enough to 18 for me to truly, truly not give a shit about them recording a sex video together (assuming that is what happened and he didn’t secretly record her). They were just under a year apart in age and she was close enough to 18 for government work IMHO.
The reason I don’t give a shit about the little weasel being prosecuted is exactly his sharing of this video, which is dirtbag behavior. Even then if it somehow came out that he asked for her permission and she gave it, which to be clear I think is incredibly unlikely, I think he’d only be guilty in a non-by-the-book sense of being terminally stupid. Well, that and also the elephant in the room of contributing to the continued existence of a site that is illegal on the face of it and also being a presumed consumer of said videos, which I’m sure is also 100% illegal. His video might be skirting the edge, I’m sure there were other ones there that were considerably less gray.
Again, don’t conflate being a minor with having the age of consent. It’s the latter that matters. In the state of Mississippi, you are a minor until you are 21, but I doubt that filming a 20-year-old having sex is criminal there. (The age of consent in Mississippi is 16, so that’s a huge 5 year difference.)
In 2005, Hugh Hefner informed the FBI that one of the Playboy Playmates had been trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein for a decade.
The FBI didn’t follow up on the tip for 15 years.
That’s exactly what I’m not doing.
That’s how “minor” is defined for most purposes in Mississippi. For some laws, the definition is different. Including laws concerning child pornography.
Interestingly, the age of majority for that law is 18.
I assume this is the current law, as it was passed only 2 years ago.
https://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2024/html/HB/1300-1399/HB1363PS.htm
“Minor” means any person under the age of eighteen (18) years.
But the age of consent in Mississippi is 16, assuming this is accurate.
Yet you are not considered an adult legally in most cases until 21.
So it’s all over the place.