I found interesting in this article the observation that "when two minors engage in sex, both are perpetrators of statutory rape and both are victims of the same crime." The absurdities of the law strike again!
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
I've always wondered too why 19 year olds can be arrested
as 'minors' in possession of alcohol---then they're tried as adults.
It's a lot like a friend of mine's son: he's the commander of a
machine-gun fire team in Afghanistan, but while here on furlough, he
couldn't purchase a handgun because he wasn't 21!
I found interesting in this article the observation
that "when two
minors engage in sex, both are perpetrators of statutory rape and
both are victims of the same crime." The absurdities of the law
strike again!Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))> http://mensnewsdaily.com/glennsacks/2009/02/10/selective-
> prosecution-of-males-in-underage-sex-cases/
>
> Selective Prosecution of Males in Underage Sex Cases?
>
> 2009-02-10 at 5:30 pm · Filed under blog
>
> A 14-year-old Massachusetts boy has been charged with various
sex
> crimes for his involvement in sexual game-playing with three
girls
> aged 12 and 11. Although he too is a minor, the state declined
to
> charge the girls with any wrongdoing.
>
> Strange as it may seem to say, that type of sexual behavior
among
> children that young is not all that unusual these days.
>
> Where the plot thickens, though is that his attorney moved the
> court for an order requiring the state to produce documents
showing
> that its prosecution of the boy was not sexually motivated.
That
> is, he's claiming that the state discriminates against boys in
its
> decisions about prosecution in sex cases involving minors. The
> state vociferously objected to the defense motion, but the trial
> court ruled for the boy and the Supreme Judicial Court agreed.
>
> Now, according to this article in the Boston Globe, the defense
has
> received the documents and is preparing a motion to dismiss all
> charges against the boy, presumably based on discriminatory
> prosecution (The Boston Globe, 2/6/09).
>
> I'm no authority on the laws of Massachusetts, but I suspect
that
> he still has a long way to go to get these charges dismissed.
> Among other things, he'll probably have to show the court that,
> even if the documents show the state discriminates against
males,
> his prosecution was a direct result of that discrimination. The
> state's failure to prosecute the girls for participating in the
> very activities he's charged with may give him an ace in the
hole
> on that issue.
>
> Stay tuned. Whether this boy gets his charges dismissed or not,
> these documents may tell us a lot about whether the State of
> Massachusetts is stuck in the bad old days when only males could
be
> charged with sex crimes regarding minors.
>
> In the meantime, it's refreshing to read statements that make
sense
> on this issue. For example, I've always wondered how it is
that,
> when two minors engage in sex, both are perpetrators of
statutory
> rape and both are victims of the same crime. Presumably, both
> could be convicted and sent to prison and, at the same time,
> petition the state's crime victim's compensation fund for
> recompense. So when the defendant's attorney, Janice Bassill,
says
> "People should be treated the same way under the law. You can't
be
> a perpetrator and a victim too," it has the ring of simple sense.
>
> And let's hear a cheer for someone who actually understands the
> concept of gender equality. Sarah Wunsch, attorney for the
ACLU's
> Women's Rights Project and Reproductive Freedom Project, which
> filed a brief in support of the defendant, is one who gets it.
>
> "We should not be enforcing the law based on stereotypical
notions
> about girls as not being capable actors in the same way that
boys
> are,'' Wunsch said. "They are doing what teenagers are doing
today
> -- they are fooling around sexually and the girls are
participants
> in the same way that boys are.''
>
> Think about it; we could treat girls, not as a special group of
> helpless, ever-aggrieved victims, but as they are - individuals
> whose actions should be judged, for good or ill, according to
their
> merits of demerits. And if we can treat girls that way, maybe
we
Here's another interesting story from the state I fled so many years ago about how the law holds different standards for rapists. In Texas, if you're a rapist wearing a badge, you don't have to go to jail (where, coincidentally, the crimes occurred). Of course, the sheriff was not convicted of rape, only of violating the civil rights of the victims, which is why he's free to wander around for months until he's scheduled to be sentenced in May.
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/02/11/federal-judge-allows.html
Terry
I'll only point out here that this story is not unique. It seems the
cops are held to different standards no matter what.
Here's another interesting story from the state I fled so many
years ago about how the law holds different standards for rapists. In
Texas, if you're a rapist wearing a badge, you don't have to go to
jail (where, coincidentally, the crimes occurred). Of course, the
sheriff was not convicted of rape, only of violating the civil rights
of the victims, which is why he's free to wander around for months
until he's scheduled to be sentenced in May.
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/02/11/federal-judge-allows.html
Terry
From: "Starchild" <sfdreamer@...>
To: CALibs@yahoogroups.com, "LPSF Discussion List" <lpsf-
discuss@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 4:13:58 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada
Pacific
Subject: [lpsf-discuss] "Selective Prosecution of Males in Underage
Sex Cases?" (MensNewsDaily.com, 2/10/09)
I found interesting in this article the observation that "when two
minors engage in sex, both are perpetrators of statutory rape and
both are victims of the same crime." The absurdities of the law
strike again!Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))> http://mensnewsdaily.com/glennsacks/2009/02/10/selective-
> prosecution-of-males-in-underage-sex-cases/
>
> Selective Prosecution of Males in Underage Sex Cases?
>
> 2009-02-10 at 5:30 pm · Filed under blog
>
> A 14-year-old Massachusetts boy has been charged with various sex
> crimes for his involvement in sexual game-playing with three
girls
> aged 12 and 11. Although he too is a minor, the state declined to
> charge the girls with any wrongdoing.
>
> Strange as it may seem to say, that type of sexual behavior among
> children that young is not all that unusual these days.
>
> Where the plot thickens, though is that his attorney moved the
> court for an order requiring the state to produce documents
showing
> that its prosecution of the boy was not sexually motivated. That
> is, he's claiming that the state discriminates against boys in
its
> decisions about prosecution in sex cases involving minors. The
> state vociferously objected to the defense motion, but the trial
> court ruled for the boy and the Supreme Judicial Court agreed.
>
> Now, according to this article in the Boston Globe, the defense
has
> received the documents and is preparing a motion to dismiss all
> charges against the boy, presumably based on discriminatory
> prosecution (The Boston Globe, 2/6/09).
>
> I'm no authority on the laws of Massachusetts, but I suspect that
> he still has a long way to go to get these charges dismissed.
> Among other things, he'll probably have to show the court that,
> even if the documents show the state discriminates against males,
> his prosecution was a direct result of that discrimination. The
> state's failure to prosecute the girls for participating in the
> very activities he's charged with may give him an ace in the hole
> on that issue.
>
> Stay tuned. Whether this boy gets his charges dismissed or not,
> these documents may tell us a lot about whether the State of
> Massachusetts is stuck in the bad old days when only males could
be
> charged with sex crimes regarding minors.
>
> In the meantime, it's refreshing to read statements that make
sense
> on this issue. For example, I've always wondered how it is that,
> when two minors engage in sex, both are perpetrators of statutory
> rape and both are victims of the same crime. Presumably, both
> could be convicted and sent to prison and, at the same time,
> petition the state's crime victim's compensation fund for
> recompense. So when the defendant's attorney, Janice Bassill,
says
> "People should be treated the same way under the law. You can't
be
> a perpetrator and a victim too," it has the ring of simple sense.
>
> And let's hear a cheer for someone who actually understands the
> concept of gender equality. Sarah Wunsch, attorney for the ACLU's
> Women's Rights Project and Reproductive Freedom Project, which
> filed a brief in support of the defendant, is one who gets it.
>
> âWe should not be enforcing the law based on stereotypical
notions
> about girls as not being capable actors in the same way that boys
> are,ââ Wunsch said. âThey are doing what teenagers are
doing today
> -- they are fooling around sexually and the girls are
participants
> in the same way that boys are.ââ
>
> Think about it; we could treat girls, not as a special group of
> helpless, ever-aggrieved victims, but as they are - individuals
> whose actions should be judged, for good or ill, according to
their