![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
It don't make no sense to me
Jul. 10th, 2007 10:44 amThis morning's local paper ran on the front page a story about the guilty pleas entered in the case of the assault of a 13 year old girl. The girl, drunk, and perhaps unconscious, was victimized by two males at a party.
The males pled guilty to 1st degree sexual abuse (a class D felony). They will serve their time (the statuted minimum of two years--max is 2 1/3 to 7), and then will be listed on a sex offender list for the rest of their natural lives.
The age of consent in New York State is 17, so of course their original claim, that the sex was consensual, didn't matter. Even if she was sober and consented, sex with a minor 16 years or under is a crime in New York State.
I don't dispute that the males did wrong.
So, what "don't make sense to me"?
Well, the offense occurred in October 2006. At the time of sentencing, the two males are 16. The offenders themselves are below the age where they can even give consent themselves to engaging in sexual activity, because the state has deemed them below the age where they can make an informed decision about what to do with their own bodies, let alone anyone else's. It's at least possible that one or both was 15 at the time of the offense. How then can they be held to the same standard as an adult in this?
Sure--charge them with assault, if she was drunk. We hold kids accountable all the time for beating up other kids. Rape (and I'll concede that sex with someone incapacitated physically or mentally by alcohol or pharmaceuticals can not be consensual) is assault, and holding a child accountable on those grounds is consistent with assault law.
But, since they aren't, by statute, considered able to make decisions about having sex, how can you list them on a sexual offenders list??
Clearly, New York needs a Romeo and Juliet law.
Do I think the boys committed a crime? Yes. But the statutes clearly have a fundamental internal contradiction that needs to be addressed.
And for the record, if it had been consensual, they all (including the girl) should receive exactly equivalent charges and punishments. I'm tired of boys always getting the blame and being the only ones involved doing the time.
Which assumes you think minors having consensual sex with other minors is a felony. That's an entirely different conversation.
The males pled guilty to 1st degree sexual abuse (a class D felony). They will serve their time (the statuted minimum of two years--max is 2 1/3 to 7), and then will be listed on a sex offender list for the rest of their natural lives.
The age of consent in New York State is 17, so of course their original claim, that the sex was consensual, didn't matter. Even if she was sober and consented, sex with a minor 16 years or under is a crime in New York State.
I don't dispute that the males did wrong.
So, what "don't make sense to me"?
Well, the offense occurred in October 2006. At the time of sentencing, the two males are 16. The offenders themselves are below the age where they can even give consent themselves to engaging in sexual activity, because the state has deemed them below the age where they can make an informed decision about what to do with their own bodies, let alone anyone else's. It's at least possible that one or both was 15 at the time of the offense. How then can they be held to the same standard as an adult in this?
Sure--charge them with assault, if she was drunk. We hold kids accountable all the time for beating up other kids. Rape (and I'll concede that sex with someone incapacitated physically or mentally by alcohol or pharmaceuticals can not be consensual) is assault, and holding a child accountable on those grounds is consistent with assault law.
But, since they aren't, by statute, considered able to make decisions about having sex, how can you list them on a sexual offenders list??
Clearly, New York needs a Romeo and Juliet law.
Do I think the boys committed a crime? Yes. But the statutes clearly have a fundamental internal contradiction that needs to be addressed.
And for the record, if it had been consensual, they all (including the girl) should receive exactly equivalent charges and punishments. I'm tired of boys always getting the blame and being the only ones involved doing the time.
Which assumes you think minors having consensual sex with other minors is a felony. That's an entirely different conversation.
