Comments on: 10 years in prison for consensual sex

By: diane

diane — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 05:06:21 +0000

17 year old boys having sex with 15 year old girls is old as sex itself. This young man should be set free so he can move on with his life.He only did what any 17 year old would have done he got his dick sucked.

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 21:49:29 +0000

Just read the Law about statutory rape and must say it’s the most ridicilous script since the old testament. The whole story of a 17 year old boy and a 15 year old girl having sex is normaly not even worth mentioning here in Europe and i’m sure in most of the USA as well so there seems to be more behind it than just that. Racism? Maybe. We could talk conspiracy here, another great ‘american’ topic (and i really mean that, i enjoyed Vineland immensely) but that doesn’t help at all. Making an uproar about this may. So: any ideas out there? Get musicians involved and start a project like ‘free the west memphis three’? All of us who believe that Justice wasn’t served by condemning a 17 year old boy to 10 years of prison should speak up and let ‘them’ know that we don’t appreciate that kind of judicial abuse.

By: masterblaster

masterblaster — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:53:17 +0000

My girlfriend and I both of us loose our virginity when I was 18 and she was 14. We were together 10 more years (not that it matters anyway). And if someone dares to call it abuse, well, check your head man, because its the most natural thing in the world. USA is a very sick society full of hypocrisy where children are sent to kill other children in war and then they say they protect children, what a bunch of hypocrites :(

By: Alan Rager

Alan Rager — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 08:05:49 +0000

Just because the statutes declare it as rape does not mean that it is just. That is what people are arguing here. This case is unjust. Teenagers will explore sexually, and a year or two of age is rarely a boundary. Nobody here is saying the guy was legally innocent. Calling the guy a rapist is rather inacurate, and he did not engage in intercourse with the 15 year old in any case. The conviction was of molestation, not rape.

By: annon

annon — Wed, 20 Dec 2006 22:46:57 +0000

And if your to lazy to click the link, heres its is c&p

“Statutory rape is the crime of sex with a minor under the age of consent (AOC). Statutory rape differs from other types of rape in that overt force or threat need not be present. By law (statute), any such sexual activity is assumed to be coercive since the minor is considered in law as unable to give consent to the acts.”

By: annon

annon — Wed, 20 Dec 2006 22:44:56 +0000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_rape

Read it, its RAPE under the LAW, its called STATUTORY RAPE
Read the first sentence, and there it explains it

By: Alex B

Alex B — Wed, 20 Dec 2006 08:09:25 +0000

My roommate has a friend of his, who was in the middle of having sex with a girl when they were both 17, and it was approaching Midnight. but when they finished it was the next day, and he therefore had turned 18 in the middle of having sex.

Well the girl, along with her family (who probably were the one that got her to do this) decided to bring the guy to court alleging that he was having sex with a minor, when in reality at the start of the intercourse they were both 17 and was entirely consensual.

Now isn’t that stupid. Well it just happens that (this is all from the details my roommate told me, I don’t know the guy or every fact of the case) the girl’s family got a really good lawyer or something, or the guy didn’t defend himself well, but the jury went in favor of the girl, and now the guy is on parole.

He is planning to attend my college in the next year or so, but is awaiting what is going to end up happening to him.

By: Dogcow

Dogcow — Wed, 20 Dec 2006 06:18:39 +0000

I’m not sure where your so called facts are coming from, or if you have some kind of mental filter that ignores them, but it clearly stated in the article that he did not rape anyone.

“She had what she later said was consensual oral sex with Mr. Wilson. But according to the law, a 15-year-old is below the age of consent. Mr. Wilson went to trial on charges of rape and aggravated child molesting.

After watching parts of the tape, the jury decided that Mr. Wilson had not raped the older girl. But it was bound by law to find him guilty of molesting the 15-year-old.”

And in case you’re wondering, the wording “bound by law” indicates that they did not deliberate on if he was guilty of molesting. Let me reiterate that she said it “was consensual oral sex.” That is not rape.

It’s probably why Derek called it “10 years in prison for consensual sex” rather than “10 years in prison for a guy maybe almost 18 years old possibly raping a girl who may have just turned 15 years old who has not had a period yet through oral sex.” haha.

Saying that I approve of rape is a fallacy. I approve of justice and logic, both of which seem to escape me in this case.

By: annon

annon — Wed, 20 Dec 2006 05:42:58 +0000

Well Dogcow, in fact he did rape her, even if it was “only” statutory.
Id love you to approach a rape victim and say, well at least you enjoyed it with out being mentally prepared for that kind of situation. Or better yet, say, what kind of rape happened to you? The good one or the bad one?
And if he said no its not inflicting harm, its just sexual assault.
Just because hes a man doesn’t make him less of a person, its because of outlooks like that I am creating my documentary on equality.

By: Alan Rager

Alan Rager — Wed, 20 Dec 2006 04:57:57 +0000

Well, he certainly did get f*cked for getting f*cked. In any case, it’s an example of the law destroying a life that could have become more. The heavy-handedness of the government in this case doesn’t have a positive effect on anybody. The guy gets sent away for 11 years (10 w/o parole) and can never lead a normal life. The girl isn’t “protected” in any way. She decided to blow him, so the only one she really need protection from is herself. This guy wasn’t a criminal, just an ordinary teenager with ordinary teenage attractions and reactions that don’t just apply to girls seventeen years and older. If you read the article, it states that there were already exceptions to the law, and if he had gotten her pregnant, he would have been much more gently treated.

Justice was not served.