US Teenager expelled, arrested for underage relationship, Homophobia alledged motivation

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

EDIT: More information came up at a later date which is below my original post. I'm leaving it here for transparency's sake but my view has shifted a bit since the original story broke.

A US teenager has been expelled and arrested over her same-sex relationship with a fellow high school student.

Kaitlyn Hunt was 17 years old when she began dating a 15-year-old member of her basketball team.

While Kaitlyn's parents supported the relationship, they say her girlfriend's parents were against it from the start.

Kaitlyn was asked to leave the school's basketball team for fear of causing "drama", her father, Steven Hunt says.

Then, a few months after her 18th birthday, her girlfriend's parents pressed charges. Kaitlyn was arrested for two felony counts of lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12 - 16 years of age after police recorded a phone call between the couple.

"[The parents] are out to destroy my daughter, because they feel like she 'made' their daughter gay," Kaitlyn's mother, Kelley Hunt Smith told Examiner.com.

"They see being gay as wrong and they blame my daughter. Of course, I see it 100 percent differently. I don't see or label these girls as gay.

"They are teenagers in high school experimenting with their sexuality - with mutual consent.

"And even if their daughter is gay, who cares? She is still their daughter."

Kaitlyn has been offered a plea deal of house arrest for two years, plus a year of probation.

After two judges ruled that Kaitlyn could finish her senior year with her peers, her girlfriend's parents appealed to the Indian River County School Board, who expelled Kaitlyn and sent her to an alternative school, Kaitlyn's mother claims.

While Kaitlyn's family believe her girlfriend's parents' decision to press charges related to sexuality, they clarified that the law in their state would be the same for a heterosexual couple with the same age difference.

According to the family, Kaitlyn's girlfriend is adamant that their relationship is entirely consensual. Photo: Facebook/Save Kate

"The law is [the same] but the law is unjust," Kaitlyn's uncle wrote on a Facebook page set up to garner support for his niece.

"It is unfair to expect high school students in the same school not to fraternise. It certainly shouldn't be grounds for criminal prosecution...

"They were peers in the same social circle with the same friends. I'm not sure age ever entered into either of their minds."

Kaitlyn's family set up the Facebook group Free Kate and a petition on Change.org. They hope to change the law and warn young couples who may find themselves in a similar position.

Source: http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/latest/17239668/gay-teen-expelled-and-arrested-in-us/

So here are the dot points for those of you who ignore reading the quoted article;

* One girl started a consenual relationship with another girl. The former was 17 and the latter 15 at the time.
* The second girl's parents rejected the relationship from the word go. The former's parents believe this is motivated by homophobia and blamed girl A for turning their daughter gay.
* A few days after the first girl turned 18 her parents pressed charges over the relationship.
* After two judges ruled that the girl should be allowed to graduate with the rest of her year group the second girl's parents appealed to the school board and got her expelled.
* The girl has been offered a plea bargin of two years house arrest with one year's probation on top of it.
* The law itself doesn't differentiate between hetrosexual and homosexual relationships.

So there are two issues here; the actions of the second girl's parents and the law itself. Starting with the law I think the way it's written is going against the original intent behind it. This isn't a 40 year old having a relationship with a 14 year old, it's a 17 year old in high school having a relationship with a 15 year old in the same high school, or less than two years seperating the two.

Secnod is the parent's actions, which are pretty much blatantly homophobic and going against their daughter's thoughts on the matter. Assuming all details are correct it's an entirely consensual relationship, no one is being hurt by it.

So escapists, your thought?

Update: So, a few clarrifications that have since popped up;

* Later articles stated the younger girl was 14 instead of 15, and both CBS and CNN are running with that number now.
* The younger girl's parents have spoken to the media and said their only motivation is the age difference and how different their daughter was acting.
* The older girl rejected the plea bargin, which would have been two years house arrest, one year probation, with a police officer having to have access to her internet and phone records. It would have also meaned she would have to put this felony on her record when applying for any job and would probably be barred from getting student loans and into certain industries. Her lawyer said that he was trying to get the prosecution to drop it down to a misdemeaner so it wouldn't have to go on a record.
* THe prosecution is moving ahead with the case and will put the younger girl on the stand to prove emotional damage.

ANd the latest article for your enjoyment: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/05/24/justice/florida-teen-sex-case/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Link to Article? Or, at least say what State this takes place in? Relevant because each state has different Statutory Rape Laws.

Shaoken:
Starting with the law I think the way it's written is going against the original intent behind it. This isn't a 40 year old having a relationship with a 14 year old, it's a 17 year old in high school having a relationship with a 15 year old in the same high school, or less than two years seperating the two.

Doubtful. An adult (18) having sex with a minor (15) is the very definition of statuary rape in some states, like Rhode Island.
The fact that the adult is 18 and not 40, or that the relationship started when they were both legally minors, is irrelevant.

Secnod is the parent's actions, which are pretty much blatantly homophobic and going against their daughter's thoughts on the matter.

Your article indicates otherwise.

While Kaitlyn's family believe her girlfriend's parents' decision to press charges related to sexuality, they clarified that the law in their state would be the same for a heterosexual couple with the same age difference.

To say this is homophobic is just asinine, because you're assuming they would have been fine with their 15 year old daughter having sex with an 18 year old male.

It simply looks like they complaining family had a rebellious child, that they couldn't control. So, the only legal recourse is to wait until the relationship crossed into illegal waters and file a complaint.

tl;dr: Don't mess around with jail bait.

Okay, let me play devil's advocate. How much do the sexes of those in the relationship play a role in this, do you think? Would there be a different kind of outrage if it were an 18 year old male with a 15 year old female?

Btw, why didn't you link where you got your quote?

If their relationship started when one was 17 and the other was 15, and the timing of the birthdays occurred so that one turned 18 just before one turned 16, then it is a load of bullshit, homo or hetero.

That said, I am willing to bet every scrap of money I have ever earned or ever will earn that the parents of the 15-year old did it because it was a lesbian relationship, and wouldn't of done squat if the first girl was a dude.

madwarper:

You article indicates otherwise.

While Kaitlyn's family believe her girlfriend's parents' decision to press charges related to sexuality, they clarified that the law in their state would be the same for a heterosexual couple with the same age difference.

To say this is homophobic is just asinine, because you're assuming they would have been fine with their 15 year old daughter having sex with an 18 year old male.

That doesn't say anything about the motivations of the parents. We only have speculation from the defendant's parents on that matter, sadly. However, I propose another possibility. Society is less likely to attribute sexual predation to females as they are to men. As such, a "progressive" parent with no problem with homosexuality could be less likely to see a problem with their 15 year old female dating an 18 year old female but would be more likely to have a problem with their 15 year old female dating an 18 year old male. However, a parent that is unaccepting of homosexuality would still have a problem with the former relationship due to a problem with homosexuality. The possibility also exists that the parents of the 15 year old are uncomfortable with the relationship regardless of the genders of those involved, I'm just trying to look at this with different angles. I'm not excusing anything, either, I just see this as more of a mental exercise than anything.

Ultimately, our guesses at the 15 year old's parent's motivations are just as much navel gazing as the assertions by the 18 year old's parents at this point.

Edit: Cleaned up the post to make it more understandable

LetalisK:
Ultimately, our guesses at the motivations of the 15 year old's parent's motivations are just as much navel gazing as the assertions by the 18 year old's parents at this point.

True. But, I fear that people are going to look at this and have a knee-jerk reaction "OMGERD, teh Gays r persecuted", and ignore the whole "Adult having sex with minor".

madwarper:
Link to Article? Or, at least say what State this takes place in? Relevant because each state has different Statutory Rape Laws.

No state given, although the school is in Indian River County.

Shaoken:
Starting with the law I think the way it's written is going against the original intent behind it. This isn't a 40 year old having a relationship with a 14 year old, it's a 17 year old in high school having a relationship with a 15 year old in the same high school, or less than two years seperating the two.

Doubtful. An adult (18) having sex with a minor (15) is the very definition of statuary rape in some states, like Rhode Island.
The fact that the adult is 18 and not 40, or that the relationship started when they were both legally minors, is irrelevant.

To the current law. My argument is that the law itself is flawed for not caring about the distinction.

Granted I'm biased because laws in my country (Australia) state that it's not statutary rape if both parties are over ten and the older party is less than two years age difference from the younger.

Secnod is the parent's actions, which are pretty much blatantly homophobic and going against their daughter's thoughts on the matter.

Your article indicates otherwise.

While Kaitlyn's family believe her girlfriend's parents' decision to press charges related to sexuality, they clarified that the law in their state would be the same for a heterosexual couple with the same age difference.

To say this is homophobic is just asinine, because you're assuming they would have been fine with their 15 year old daughter having sex with an 18 year old male.

Yes, the law could be used if it was a hetrosexual relationship as I outright stated in my dot points. The issue is that, from what we have been told from the article, the parents weren't pissed their daughter was in a relationship, they were pissed she was in a relationship with a girl. Unless otherwise stated I'm assuming the article at the very least is accurate.

Half my post was "the law as written is going against the spirit of it."

It simply looks like they complaining family had a rebellious child, that they couldn't control. So, the only legal recourse is to wait until the relationship crossed into illegal waters and file a complaint.

The first family seems the be under the impression it was based on homophobia. From the article there's nothing beyond the second girl's father raising enough of a ruckuss to get the first girl kicked off the basketball team and later expelled after two judges disagreed, so either the first family is jumping to conclusions or more happened in the article

madwarper:

LetalisK:
Ultimately, our guesses at the motivations of the 15 year old's parent's motivations are just as much navel gazing as the assertions by the 18 year old's parents at this point.

True. But, I fear that people are going to look at this and have a knee-jerk reaction "OMGERD, teh Gays r persecuted", and ignore the whole "Adult having sex with minor".

Just out of curiosity, what is the legal age of consent in the relevant area? It's kind of relevant and quite frankly, I have no idea. With 15 being the age of consent in Sweden I doubt it would be considered illegal here. And the small age gap can be enough for the courts to declare that it doesn't qualify as rape of minor anyways.

Is "spirit of the law" a thing in US?

madwarper:

LetalisK:
Ultimately, our guesses at the motivations of the 15 year old's parent's motivations are just as much navel gazing as the assertions by the 18 year old's parents at this point.

True. But, I fear that people are going to look at this and have a knee-jerk reaction "OMGERD, teh Gays r persecuted", and ignore the whole "Adult having sex with minor".

Except while legally 18 is an adult, not a whole lot of people would look at the first girl and say "she's a few days over 18, clearly an adult."

Anyway half my point was about wether or not 18 year olds should be charged over high-school romances with partners less than two years younger than them (which is an Australian thing. Hell in one state it's not statutary rape if the younger party is between 15 and 18 and the older party is within five years of them). The article could have used more facts in the matter (like where Indian River county actually is).

madwarper:
Link to Article? Or, at least say what State this takes place in? Relevant because each state has different Statutory Rape Laws.

Here you go. Not the same article, but it covers the same case. The girls are from Florida.
http://www.examiner.com/article/florida-teen-fights-expulsion-and-criminal-charges-for-same-sex-relationship

It's important to note that Florida has a fairly wide 'Romeo and Juliet' window, allowing for relations between people as old as 23 with people as young as 16.

As such, this case seems to be exploiting a rather narrow window of opportunity to prosecute, namely that time between when the elder girl turns 18 and when the younger one turns 16. Given that they'd started dating while the former was 17 and the latter was 15, there was less than a year within which a legal objection might be had. Indeed, given that the article says the two met on the basketball team and that Hunt was kicked off of it because of the relationship, we're probably looking at a maximum of 6-9 months before she hits the exception range. (Quick Google search suggests that the high school basketball season lasts from November to February)

While the reasoning behind the Younger Girl's parents' were asinine, the law nor the Judge can be said to be homophobic. Silly and misguided? Maybe, but not homophobic.

Shaoken:

Granted I'm biased because laws in my country (Australia) state that it's not statutary rape if both parties are over ten and the older party is less than two years age difference from the younger.

In which case this would still be statutory rape under Australian law as they would have an age difference between two and three years. Not saying you don't understand this, but rather pointing out an implication that you also disagree with Australian law in this case and think the threshold should be widened even in your own country.

Shock and Awe:
While the reasoning behind the Younger Girl's parents' were asinine, the law nor the Judge can be said to be homophobic. Silly and misguided? Maybe, but not homophobic.

Judge? Only two judges were involved in this process which was wether or not the older girl could finish her graduation year with her peers. Both judges said she could, the younger girl's parents appealed to the school board who expeleld her.

Anyway, I admited as much that the law wouldn't distinguish between hetrosexuals and homosexuals. The homophobic ones would be the younger girl's parents (assuming all facts as reported are correct and something has not been correctly identified/documented).

Angelowl:

Is "spirit of the law" a thing in US?

Yes. I've most often seen it as some sort of appeals court looking at police exploiting an unintended loophole in a law and the judge knocking them down for it.

Shaoken:
from what we have been told from the article, the parents weren't pissed their daughter was in a relationship, they were pissed she was in a relationship with a girl. Unless otherwise stated I'm assuming the article at the very least is accurate.

And, all we have from the article is word of the parents of the 18 year old who are likely grasping at straws because their daughter was reported for breaking the law.

You know, no proof whatsoever of their claims.

Half my post was "the law as written is going against the spirit of it."

Proof? Australia law might be different that US law... But, this didn't happen in Australia. So, the "spirit" of your law is irrelevant.

Back when I was in highschool (PA), there was a big education campaign specifically stating that an 18 having sex with someone 3 years their junior (ie. 15) is statutory rape.

The first family seems the be under the impression it was based on homophobia. From the article there's nothing beyond the second girl's father raising enough of a ruckuss to get the first girl kicked off the basketball team and later expelled after two judges disagreed, so either the first family is jumping to conclusions or more happened in the article

The family has causes a ruckus, but you've offered no proof that this was because of the homosexual nature of the relationship, rather than the fact that their daughter was in a sexual relationship.

LetalisK:

Shaoken:

Granted I'm biased because laws in my country (Australia) state that it's not statutary rape if both parties are over ten and the older party is less than two years age difference from the younger.

In which case this would still be statutory rape under Australian law as they would have an age difference between two and three years. Not saying you don't understand this, but rather pointing out an implication that you also disagree with Australian law in this case and think the threshold should be widened even in your own country.

It's not a literal "two years and not a day over" law. In the end it would be up to a judge to determine what constitutes "no more than two years," which just as easily could be "two years and three hundred and sixty four days."

Unless it was in Tasmania in which case there's a five year gap.

madwarper:

Shaoken:
from what we have been told from the article, the parents weren't pissed their daughter was in a relationship, they were pissed she was in a relationship with a girl. Unless otherwise stated I'm assuming the article at the very least is accurate.

And, all we have from the article is word of the parents of the 18 year old who are likely grasping at straws because their daughter was reported for breaking the law.

You know, no proof whatsoever of their claims.

Point conceeded.

Half my post was "the law as written is going against the spirit of it."

Proof? Australia law might be different that US law... But, this didn't happen in Australia. So, the "spirit" of your law is irrelevant.

I am of course refering to the American law which is in question. I'm assuming

Back when I was in highschool (PA), there was a big education campaign specifically stating that an 18 having sex with someone 3 years their junior (ie. 15) is statutory rape.

That....is a bit disconcerning that there was a specific campaign on 18/15 sexual relations.

The first family seems the be under the impression it was based on homophobia. From the article there's nothing beyond the second girl's father raising enough of a ruckuss to get the first girl kicked off the basketball team and later expelled after two judges disagreed, so either the first family is jumping to conclusions or more happened in the article

The family has causes a ruckus, but you've offered no proof that this was because of the homosexual nature of the relationship, rather than the fact that their daughter was in a sexual relationship.

[/quote]

As I keep saying, I'm assuming everything the article said is true until such a time as someone can bring forth another article with something yet unrevealed.

Er, did the 18 year old actually have sex with the 15 year old? Because that doesn't seem to be specified.

thaluikhain:
Er, did the 18 year old actually have sex with the 15 year old? Because that doesn't seem to be specified.

I assume so, if only because of how stupid this one state's laws would be. The charge seems to be based off a recorded cell-phone conversation which....I don't think can be used as evidence maybe possibly?

It doesn't speak well to that police force's priorities if this is what they chose to use tax payer dollars on.

It should be noted that while this may be motivated by homophobia; it isn't a charge based on one as people have pointed out. In saying that I wouldn't want my 15 year old child dating someone 3 years their senior; regardless of their gender. I was in High School once, I know how naive and easily manipulated 15 year old girls can be by their older peers.

Then again this 'victim' is described as a She was a cheerleader, a basketball player, a camp counselor and cheering coach. It reasons to me that her parents likely have high expectations of her performance; relationships tend to get in they way of that. Perhaps another possible motivation? Or maybe I just try to see higher motivations in people that don't exist....

Shaoken:

Granted I'm biased because laws in my country (Australia) state that it's not statutary rape if both parties are over ten and the older party is less than two years age difference from the younger.

Statutory rape laws in Australia are mandated by State legislation rather than federal. Judges however to tend to use a 'rule of thumb' of three years when deciding whether to press charges in such incidences.

Shaoken:

Shock and Awe:
While the reasoning behind the Younger Girl's parents' were asinine, the law nor the Judge can be said to be homophobic. Silly and misguided? Maybe, but not homophobic.

Judge? Only two judges were involved in this process which was wether or not the older girl could finish her graduation year with her peers. Both judges said she could, the younger girl's parents appealed to the school board who expeleld her.

Anyway, I admited as much that the law wouldn't distinguish between hetrosexuals and homosexuals. The homophobic ones would be the younger girl's parents (assuming all facts as reported are correct and something has not been correctly identified/documented).

Ah shit, that was a typo on my part. I meant to type "cant" instead of "can".

Shaoken:
Point conceeded.

Then, would you mind editing the thread's title? As it stands, the title is inflammatory and misleading, because the teenager in question is being charged with "two felony counts of lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12 - 16 years of age", not with "being in a Lesbian relationship".

thaluikhain:
Er, did the 18 year old actually have sex with the 15 year old? Because that doesn't seem to be specified.

(5) LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION.-
(a) A person who intentionally touches in a lewd or lascivious manner the breasts, genitals, genital area, or buttocks, or the clothing covering them, of a person less than 16 years of age, or forces or entices a person under 16 years of age to so touch the perpetrator, commits lewd or lascivious molestation.

It's pretty much any thing regarding a sexual activity with a minor age 12-16 in Florida, she has been arrested and charged so yeah they got some "evidence" for that.

madwarper:

Shaoken:
Point conceeded.

Then, would you mind editing the thread's title? As it stands, the title is inflammatory and misleading, because the teenager in question is being charged with "two felony counts of lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12 - 16 years of age", not with "being in a Lesbian relationship".

The girl may have been arrested due to a same-sex relationship, or well for a relationship that the parents do not approve of. I doubt it's the only case where a freshman is dating a senior and i also doubt that every senior that hit's 18 before their partner hits their sweet 16 has criminal charges brought on them.

This is a case of parents that cannot tolerate the relationship their daughter is in that abuse the letter of the law to terminate it.

That said I've seen plenty of 18-20 year old "creeps" hitting on girls 3 younger because they can spin them around their finger and they can't get a date their age.
It's quite easy for a senior to hit on a freshman, heck most girls would take is as a "compliment" at that age.

So without actually judging the incident on the relationship level you can't really decide if this was hateful prosecution against the spirit of the law, or a case of an older girl taking advantage of a younger girl.

So couple of "cute" pictures and 150 words on Yahoo is not something you should judge the case by.

madwarper:

Shaoken:
Point conceeded.

Then, would you mind editing the thread's title? As it stands, the title is inflammatory and misleading, because the teenager in question is being charged with "two felony counts of lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12 - 16 years of age", not with "being in a Lesbian relationship".

Err, no. The title is accurate; a US teenager was arrested (for the reasons you listed) and that it was a lesbian relationship is alledged to be a mitigating factor and, more to the point, was the name of the article I'm quoting so it stays. The point being conceded is that there is no proof that the second girl's parents are homophobic. There is equally no proof that they aren't, and we have one side claiming it so it stays.

Verbatim:

thaluikhain:
Er, did the 18 year old actually have sex with the 15 year old? Because that doesn't seem to be specified.

(5) LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION.-
(a) A person who intentionally touches in a lewd or lascivious manner the breasts, genitals, genital area, or buttocks, or the clothing covering them, of a person less than 16 years of age, or forces or entices a person under 16 years of age to so touch the perpetrator, commits lewd or lascivious molestation.

It's pretty much any thing regarding a sexual activity with a minor age 12-16 in Florida, she has been arrested and charged so yeah they got some "evidence" for that.

The "evidence" seems to consist of a recorded phone call between the two girls. I'm not sure if that legally counts or not as proof.

Again, the whole situation seems utterly retarded and a waste of police time and effort to go after high-school relationships.

Shaoken:

madwarper:

Shaoken:
Point conceeded.

Then, would you mind editing the thread's title? As it stands, the title is inflammatory and misleading, because the teenager in question is being charged with "two felony counts of lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12 - 16 years of age", not with "being in a Lesbian relationship".

Err, no. The title is accurate; a US teenager was arrested (for the reasons you listed) and that it was a lesbian relationship is alledged to be a mitigating factor and, more to the point, was the name of the article I'm quoting so it stays. The point being conceded is that there is no proof that the second girl's parents are homophobic. There is equally no proof that they aren't, and we have one side claiming it so it stays.

Verbatim:

thaluikhain:
Er, did the 18 year old actually have sex with the 15 year old? Because that doesn't seem to be specified.

(5) LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION.-
(a) A person who intentionally touches in a lewd or lascivious manner the breasts, genitals, genital area, or buttocks, or the clothing covering them, of a person less than 16 years of age, or forces or entices a person under 16 years of age to so touch the perpetrator, commits lewd or lascivious molestation.

It's pretty much any thing regarding a sexual activity with a minor age 12-16 in Florida, she has been arrested and charged so yeah they got some "evidence" for that.

The "evidence" seems to consist of a recorded phone call between the two girls. I'm not sure if that legally counts or not as proof.

Again, the whole situation seems utterly retarded and a waste of police time and effort to go after high-school relationships.

I'm quite sure that the content of the call has references to a sexual activity, the police does not arrest people for the lack of evidence and a complain by the parent's is not enough. No DA would charge you, not to mention offer a plea deal if they did not had enough evidence to go to court, not to mention no judge would sign an arrest warrant without evidence.

The sex does not matter right now, it's just dumb parents doing dumb things that their child may not forgive so easily.

Verbatim:

Shaoken:

madwarper:
Then, would you mind editing the thread's title? As it stands, the title is inflammatory and misleading, because the teenager in question is being charged with "two felony counts of lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12 - 16 years of age", not with "being in a Lesbian relationship".

Err, no. The title is accurate; a US teenager was arrested (for the reasons you listed) and that it was a lesbian relationship is alledged to be a mitigating factor and, more to the point, was the name of the article I'm quoting so it stays. The point being conceded is that there is no proof that the second girl's parents are homophobic. There is equally no proof that they aren't, and we have one side claiming it so it stays.

Verbatim:

It's pretty much any thing regarding a sexual activity with a minor age 12-16 in Florida, she has been arrested and charged so yeah they got some "evidence" for that.

The "evidence" seems to consist of a recorded phone call between the two girls. I'm not sure if that legally counts or not as proof.

Again, the whole situation seems utterly retarded and a waste of police time and effort to go after high-school relationships.

I'm quite sure that the content of the call has references to a sexual activity, the police does not arrest people for the lack of evidence and a complain by the parent's is not enough. No DA would charge you, not to mention offer a plea deal if they did not had enough evidence to go to court, not to mention no judge would sign an arrest warrant without evidence.

Yeah I'm getting the feeling that the article should have had more information in it. Although I have no idea how charges of such nature work in relation to standard of evidence.

Although the plea deal isn't proof or disproof of the amount of evidence they have. DAs will always try to get people to plead out to avoid the time and cost of a trial (fun fact; if every criminal charged in the US refused to take a plea bargin the collective cost of all of those trials would crush the legal system).

But from the article it seems the parents are the one's pressing charges, but from the other source I'd say that's just a fuck-up on Yahoo's part.

Shaoken:

Err, no. The title is accurate; a US teenager was arrested (for the reasons you listed) and that it was a lesbian relationship is alledged to be a mitigating factor and, more to the point, was the name of the article I'm quoting so it stays. The point being conceded is that there is no proof that the second girl's parents are homophobic. There is equally no proof that they aren't, and we have one side claiming it so it stays.

I think you mean aggravating factor. If it were a mitigating factor, that would mean the 15 year old's parents are less pissed off about a lesbian relationship than they would be over a heterosexual relationship.

Unless you meant mitigating factor for the judges, but I don't see anything to indicate they took the orientation of the relationship into consideration one way or the other.

I see the biggest problem here as being how can one set of parents get a girl thrown out of school by complaining enough.

LetalisK:

Shaoken:

Err, no. The title is accurate; a US teenager was arrested (for the reasons you listed) and that it was a lesbian relationship is alledged to be a mitigating factor and, more to the point, was the name of the article I'm quoting so it stays. The point being conceded is that there is no proof that the second girl's parents are homophobic. There is equally no proof that they aren't, and we have one side claiming it so it stays.

I think you mean aggravating factor. If it were a mitigating factor, that would mean the 15 year old's parents are less pissed off about a lesbian relationship than they would be over a heterosexual relationship.

Unless you meant mitigating factor for the judges, but I don't see anything to indicate they took the orientation of the relationship into consideration one way or the other.

Err.....

Yeah I probably shouldn't throw out terms I'm not 100% sure of. But yes, aggravating factor.

Anyway I wonder just how many hetrosexual couples this happens to. Looking at that definition of the crime she's being charged under you could get a decent chunk of any mixed-gender school on those charges.

Somehow I knew that it would be a statutory rape case and nothing to do with homosexuality in particular before I even clicked on the thread.

And what's with automatic relationship = sex thing? What happened to platonic love? Seriously. 'Oh hey, let's all contract HO41 and spread it everywhere! This is the best idea ever!'

If this was hetero no one would care. Bullshit is bullshit, it was statutory rape, equality under law. Morons are going to throw a bitch fit over this anyway.

Kopikatsu:
Somehow I knew that it would be a statutory rape case and nothing to do with homosexuality in particular before I even clicked on the thread.

I even admitted as such. The issue seems to be that the parents were the one forcing the issue (would the police have even considered this if the parent's didn't go to them?)

Although this isn't stat rape case, it's a molestation charge. Which leads to the next point;

And what's with automatic relationship = sex thing? What happened to platonic love? Seriously.

From the wording of the law it seems just groping is enough to count under this law. You could get so many teenagers on that law it's a joke.

Shaoken:

Kopikatsu:
Somehow I knew that it would be a statutory rape case and nothing to do with homosexuality in particular before I even clicked on the thread.

I even admitted as such. The issue seems to be that the parents were the one forcing the issue (would the police have even considered this if the parent's didn't go to them?)

Although this isn't stat rape case, it's a molestation charge. Which leads to the next point;

And what's with automatic relationship = sex thing? What happened to platonic love? Seriously.

From the wording of the law it seems just groping is enough to count under this law. You could get so many teenagers on that law it's a joke.

Why is it a joke? Laws generally aren't changed because a lot of people break them. Should we get rid of speeding laws because most people drive 5-10 mph over the speed limit?

Kopikatsu:
And what's with automatic relationship = sex thing? What happened to platonic love? Seriously. 'Oh hey, let's all contract HO41 and spread it everywhere! This is the best idea ever!'

Well, teenagers. But, having said that, you are of course correct, even if most young 'uns today wouldn't agree. Or older people or at any age for that matter.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here