Another 14 year-old girl bullied to death ...

[Canarr]

Where did I ever say I was clamouring for his death? Or declaring him a rapist? Or that even he only slept with her because she was easy? Nowhere.

Where exactly did I accuse you of clamouring for his death?

But, yeah: I threw the comments of others about him being a rapist and/or only with her because she'd be easy together with yours in my post, sorry for that. I should have separated the different points I was making.

<Disclaimer: generalization inbound>

In the end, what I'm trying to say: we're talking about two teenagers here. Overly hormonal creatures with a notorious lack of common sense coupled with the conviction that they know better than anyone else. That's not exactly a mixture that sugggests "good judgement" there. And turning 18 doesn't magically turn a kid into a mature, sensible adult. Hell, not even turning 30 does that.

To quote a certain teenaged vampire slayer: "Of course I'm immature! I'm a teen! I've yet to mature!"

Or, the classic: "Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained through stupidity!" The kid's 18; that makes him an idiot, but not necessarily an asshole.

[Eisa]

It was still statutory rape.

And now the guy has another charge against him.

I mean...he's not exactly this oh-so-innocent "I just like 14-year-old girls" guy...

Edit: Although now I'm thinking of this song. Little Girls...

[Lace Neil Singer]

Just to clarify to anyone who thinks differently, I am NOT excusing this boy's actions in any way. The boy certainly did break a law and he deserves to be punished for it, especially since he did admit to doing so. However, he does not deserve to be branded a rapist. No-one who is innocent of forcing someone to have sex deserves that terrible, terrible brand... especially since it's one that's not shed easily.

Like a few years back, this woman got drunk and slept with a man and the morning after, she cried rape. He ended up being aquitted, yet mud still sticks. It's an awful thing to do to anyone, and it cheapens genuine rape victims. Yes, this boy is a creep for going after an underage girl; however, that doesn't make him a rapist. Just as the fact that she committed suicide does not make her a naive, innocent angel of goodness. I'm just trying to see both sides unemotionally, that's all.

You should go back and read the story again.

She sold him out, which is why her friends ditched her.

I fully agree that the crap that's still going on with the Facebook pages and what is reputed to have gone on at the school (we still only have her and her mother's word for that, and both have proven to be honesty-impaired) should neither be condoned nor allowed to continue.

^-.-^

This. Exactly this. I'm glad that the Facebook pages have been taken down; the subhumans who were posting all those disgusting pictures and attacking the girl shouldn't be allowed to continue. But the fact still stands that this girl willingly consented, had sex then after her mother found out, tried to whitewash her actions by crying rape. And that's a horrible thing to do to anyone, be it a thirty year old man or an immature eighteen year old.

[AdminAssistant]

Just as the fact that she committed suicide does not make her a naive, innocent angel of goodness.

It doesn't. But it does mean that she's paid the ultimate price for her wrongdoing...should we really be slinging extra mud on her grave by calling her a coward? And the *root* cause is that an 18 year old couldn't keep it in his pants around a 14 year old girl. I don't care that she wanted it. He should have done the right thing. Since there's been another charge, it's clear that this is a problem that the young man has.

I'm also wondering what role her mother had to play in this.

[Eisa]

Although most places...if this new charge is statutory, too...

Statutory rape lands you on the sex offenders list, too...

I also agree with AdminAssistant.

[blas87]

Thank you, Admin. You worded it very well.

This girl paid the ultimate price and people won't let her rest. This guy is still alive and after more young teen girls. I think I can rest my case when I say he is a creep.

[Andara Bledin]

Yes, this boy is a creep for going after an underage girl; however, that doesn't make him a rapist.

Just a minor quibble, but it appears that she went after him. How much effort he put into their getting together has not been been reported.

And now the guy has another charge against him.

Since there's been another charge, it's clear that this is a problem that the young man has.

No, there hasn't been another charge. Please go back and re-read the comments and articles. There has been another complaint, which has been known since October 22. Over three weeks have gone by and that investigation has yet to turn into an actual charge.

^-.-^

[Eisa]

Ok, another complaint. Still. The first charge shouldn't have been dropped. It was statutory--and he admitted it. He admitted he had sex with a 14-year-old. That's like...the definition of statutory rape.

And with another complaint against him?

Yeah. He's a creep.

[Greenday]

Just a minor quibble, but it appears that she went after him. How much effort he put into their getting together has not been been reported.

How much effort he put into getting with her is irrelevant. It is almost impossible, in this day and age, that he didn't know that an 18 year old having sex with a 14 year old is legally rape.

Ok, another complaint. Still. The first charge shouldn't have been dropped. It was statutory--and he admitted it. He admitted he had sex with a 14-year-old. That's like...the definition of statutory rape.

It is the definition of statutory rape. The problem is...proof. Unless they have a written confession from him or some actual form of physical evidence, there cannot and there should not be a conviction.

[Andara Bledin]

How much effort he put into getting with her is irrelevant. It is almost impossible, in this day and age, that he didn't know that an 18 year old having sex with a 14 year old is legally rape.

For the argument at hand, it's not irrelevant; intent has legal repercussions. As for the latter comment, could you please point out where I said otherwise. Oh, and it's "statutory rape" not "legally rape." If the difference between the two didn't matter, they wouldn't have separate legal definitions.

It is the definition of statutory rape. The problem is...proof. Unless they have a written confession from him or some actual form of physical evidence, there cannot and there should not be a conviction.

This.

At this point, I suspect local law enforcement have dropped the original charge because if they pursued it and failed to gain a conviction, they could never pursue it again without strong and substantial new information.

They are likely now gathering what evidence they can regarding the other complaint and hoping that it will be strong enough for them to levy a charge that they can get a conviction on. Considering how quickly he was charged in the first case, there is a distinct possibility that the second complaint is either not legitimate, or that there is a lot more going on with it.

^-.-^

[Eisa]

I thought he did confess to it, though? Again, statutory rape still gets you on the sex offenders list in most states. Some states are coming up with different 'levels' on the sex offender registry, so you're not labeled a "dangerous" sex offender the same as someone who's raped 5-year-olds, but....you're still a sex offender.

I wouldn't say the second complaint isn't legitimate...at this stage, anyway. There might be a lot more to it.

Also...perhaps I'm just biased against the police right now, but from personal experience...My sister was raped by her ex November 2nd. Pretty clear-cut [from my standpoint, anyway]. He even admitted to her bf on Facebook it wasn't consensual.

The police still haven't arrested him.

[Greenday]

His confession means nothing if it's not written down. Otherwise he can just say he never said it and plead not guilty when it goes to court. Then what will they convict him on? Complete hearsay?

[kibbles]

I agree that people should stop slandering a girl that is now gone. It's lower than lower to lot let someone rest in peace.

But in saying that, the girl was no angel and IMO I do no think the guy is a creep. JMO.

[Anthony K. S.]

For the argument at hand, it's not irrelevant; intent has legal repercussions.

Not necessarily.

In many jurisdictions in the United States - including Michigan, I believe - statutory rape is classified a "strict liability" offense.

The term "strict liability" means that in order to convict a person of breaking this law, the state merely has to prove that the defendant committed the action in question. Whether the defendant intended to break the law, or even knew that he/she was doing something illegal, is irrelevant.

In other words . . . Legally, it doesn't matter what he wanted. It doesn't matter what she wanted. It doesn't even matter whether or not he knew that she was underage. Under Michigan law, he can still be convicted of statutory rape.

The "strict liability" nature of statutory rape laws is somewhat controversial, but as far as I know, it still stands. I googled the terms "statutory rape," "strict liability," "Michigan," and "750.520" (which is the portion of Michigan law that covers sexual offenses), and found a number of references to this, although I don't know how up-to-date they were. It was also a bit difficult at times to sort through the legalese.

In the end, though . . . If my understanding of Michigan law is correct, then if he had sex with her, he's guilty of statutory rape. End of story.

Whether that's fair or not is a matter of opinion, but the law seems clear.

[Eisa]

^Exactly. I can't remember much about this case, but there was a guy who had sex with a 16-year-old...who looked 19, who told him she was 19, and even had a fake ID proclaiming she was 19.

...he was still convicted of statutory rape.