Page 1 of 2

17 year old gets 10 years for having sex with 15 year old

Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:29 am
by Derek Ortt
http://www.cnn.com/

I cannot get the link to the news video, but it is on the headlines just right of the mian photo

This prosecutor should be hanged for stupidity, the worst crime of them all. A 17 year old mino having consentual sex with a 15 year old minor is worth 10 years?

If he were 18 and an adult, then I could see the sentence and would even support it. If the sex was not consentual, I would also fully support it. But this, unless they are enforcing old adultery laws (which if so and I think they should since it is still on the books in many jurisdictions, both should be in the can), go prosecute the real crimes

Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:58 am
by brunota2003
lets see...both were minors, both were within 4 years of each other...so what law did they break? unless, if it was on video it could be that child stuff thing...

Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:59 am
by fwbbreeze
Derek,
You would be amazed at some of the ludicrous laws on the books. I believe in Georgia I read where adultery is considered a misdemeanor. I am not arguing whether its morally wrong or right but I do not believe it is the governments right to legislate that morality.

I agree this case was truly amazing and the sentence was ridiculously harsh.

fwbbreeze

Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 12:31 pm
by vbhoutex
Ok, fwb your avatar BUGS me!!!

Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 12:38 pm
by TexasStooge
That's such a sickening story! :18:

Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 12:46 pm
by Derek Ortt
I have no problem if the two were prosecuted for adultery and would fully support that. That law is to protect the sanctity of marriage.

But this conviction... will someone PLEASE drugtest the DA and judge. He'd have to be on something to make a decision as stupid as that

Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 12:47 pm
by Cryomaniac
Thats a load of crap. I doubt he would have been prosecuted in this country. 10 years for what should be a misdemeanor at most? Even if he had been 18 it's still stupid. If he had like abducted her or something yeah, but consenting sex? Age is a number, as long as both parties are physically mature and know what they are consenting to, sex should not be illegal.

Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 1:25 pm
by conestogo_flood
That is absolutely one of the stupidest things I have ever read. They are going to screw up this kids life by putting him in jail for 10 years because he had sex? More harm than done is being played here... this should go to the Supreme Court ASAP.

Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 2:31 pm
by Brent
This is such a joke... but that's Georgia for you. I see it everyday on the news. :roll:

Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:39 pm
by Ptarmigan
I don't condone teen and pre-marital sex. I know what he did was very stupid. This is just ridiculous and a travesty. If I recall, it was the girl who started the sex, not him. Also, around that time at the same school he went, a female teacher was caught having sex with a minor and she got off with a slap on the wrist. I hope he gets a full pardon.

Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 8:05 pm
by tropicana
That is def. not worth 10 years! the law is so stupid, its absolute nonsense.

Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 1:34 am
by JQ Public
No matter how much we try to say that the crime was a 17 year old having sex with a 15 year old...we all know he was put in jail b/c he was a 17 year old black kid having consensual sex with a 15 year old white girl. Sad :(

Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 1:52 am
by Regit
JQ Public wrote:No matter how much we try to say that the crime was a 17 year old having sex with a 15 year old...we all know he was put in jail b/c he was a 17 year old black kid having consensual sex with a 15 year old white girl. Sad :(


Considering the location, I thought the same thing at first. But the foreman of the jury was black and said that she felt she had to go by the letter of the law, no matter how ridiculous the law was.

Now, I think the reason very well may be the parents of the girl, racially driven, digging up some law that's never even been used and going to the prosecutor with it.

If he doesn't receive a full pardon from the governor, then the honorable Mr. Purdue isn't fit to hold the office.

This is just another example of why you can't legislate morality.

Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:28 am
by Derek Ortt
No matter how much we try to say that the crime was a 17 year old having sex with a 15 year old...we all know he was put in jail b/c he was a 17 year old black kid having consensual sex with a 15 year old white girl. Sad

Can we stop bringing race into the picture. I am tired when race is brought up everytime a black goes to jail

This is just a case of a total moron being in the position of prosecutor, and a jury who lacks all common sense

Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:52 am
by george_r_1961
No wonder jails are overcrowded :roll:

Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:02 pm
by Opal storm
george_r_1961 wrote:No wonder jails are overcrowded :roll:
Exactly,and 10 years of jail time is just going to turn him into a thug who will probably do more harm.

Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 2:55 pm
by Meso
Wow,that`s madness :S The poor dude... Age of consent differs so much from country to country,some being 14.I see no problem in pre-marital sex as long as it isn't random casual sex.Damn 10 years :eek:

Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:34 pm
by kevin
17 and 15 year olds can consent to sex. This is nothing but cultural madness. For tens of thousands of years people of that age range have copulated, produced children, and raised them. So whats the big deal?

15 year olds fought in wars, sailed ships, conquered foreign lands, wrote novels, and led nations.

17 year olds did so more frequently.

Our division of adulthood and childhood on the basis of 18/21 is absurd.

Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 6:19 pm
by Aslkahuna
If Jewish tradition of those days was followed, and there's no reason why it would not have been, Mary was 13 and Joseph 18 when they became betrothed. He would have just finished his apprenticeship in Carpentry. In olden times, a girl was considered a woman and thus marriageable as soon as she became capable of bearing children-that being a function of the short life expectancies then. That was true even in this Country into the 19th Century.

Steve

Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:13 pm
by Ptarmigan
Aslkahuna wrote:If Jewish tradition of those days was followed, and there's no reason why it would not have been, Mary was 13 and Joseph 18 when they became betrothed. He would have just finished his apprenticeship in Carpentry. In olden times, a girl was considered a woman and thus marriageable as soon as she became capable of bearing children-that being a function of the short life expectancies then. That was true even in this Country into the 19th Century.

Steve


It was more of an agrarian society, so the need for labor was really great. It was common to have large families because the need for labor, especially in the farm. Also, many babies died at birth. The birthrate and fertility rate were very high. It even carried well into the Industrial Revolution.