California Prop 83 passed

[Gambino]

Born and raised on "the farm" in the midwest, I'm a civil libertarian and during law school I worked for the prosecutor and public defender. Our legal system is a mess and certainly has nothing to do with "justice" on either side. You realize that you could be banging your girlfriend, she say's no/stop and you thrust into her one more time you're a rapist and have to register as a sex offender for the rest of your life if convicted? If our legal system was perfect and actually wanted justice then I would have no problem. Seeing it as I have, I do require a pattern of conduct. Mistakes are made constantly and when a public defender can fall asleep multiple times during a death penalty case trial and it's NOT grounds for appeal.....

so you believe their is a certain level of raping that is, per se, somewhat acceptable?? i just wanna make sure i understand, date rape vics are not as damaged as random rapes?
i bet the vics would disagree
and maybe i should go back and read the whole thread, i have no idea what napping defenders has to do with this subject

 

[TC2]

Isn't statutory rape even of the willing considered a sex crime?

That is what I have a problem with.

yep, It happened to an old friend of mine.

Guy 19..hooks up with girl 16(he did not know, he met her in a club, plus she looks 23).

Guy gets tired of girls crazy shit breaks it off with her.

girl gets vindictive and gets him into trouble.

Now guy is registered sex offender.

 

[Wulfgar]

lol
only california peeps bitch about rights for sex offenders and other waste
i don't get it

try having your state spend 500 Million $$ year 1, and then 200 Million $$ a year of YOUR TAX MONEY on an law about as useful in stopping criminal action as a cock-flavored lollypop, not to mention sets the stage for other violations of our constitutional rights and throws due process out the window then come talk to me.

 

[jnevin]

so you believe their is a certain level of raping that is, per se, somewhat acceptable?? i just wanna make sure i understand, date rape vics are not as damaged as random rapes?
i bet the vics would disagree
and maybe i should go back and read the whole thread, i have no idea what napping defenders has to do with this subject

Dude, sometimes you pick the stupidest details to try to pick apart.

 

[Lao Tzu]

notice the people who agree with wulfgar are largely cali progressives

Yup, except I'm in Indiana. If anyone here has a better idea I'm all ears. But sex crime is a serious issue in teh world and we are not dealing with it right now. We are just driving it underground and ignorning it with our current methods.

 

[patsfan1379]

sex crimes = teh gaye

 

[javaguru]

so you believe their is a certain level of raping that is, per se, somewhat acceptable?? i just wanna make sure i understand, date rape vics are not as damaged as random rapes?
i bet the vics would disagree
and maybe i should go back and read the whole thread, i have no idea what napping defenders has to do with this subject

I posted how the legal definition of a sex offender isn't as easy as proponents of these bills would have you believe. We had a case come before our court where the kid was sixteen and the girl was seventeen, she admitted to consenting to sex but then withdrew consent because "she felt like a slut." Her withdraw of consent was, " I don't think I should be doing this. Followed later with, I don't want to do this anymore" He "finished" within moments but her parents found out( she was busted for underage consumption when the cops raided the party) and wanted to press the issue, not her. We offered him a lesser charge so that he wouldn't be labeled a sex offender for life, not to mention it was not a "rape" case from a real world stance even though he was a rapist based on a strict legal definition. I'm sure she felt really bad about this guy going through hell because she was trying to cover her ass with her parents, that was the consensus at the prosecutor's office. Had it been an election year and it been made an issue, we could have easily pushed for a conviction(pleading) with a sentence recommendation. The kid's family didn't have the means to fight the case long term and the judge trying the case was a prosecutor for almost twenty years, generally favorable to the prosecution in her judgements. Basically, we could label a kid a sex offender for life if it suited someone even though nobody thought he was...

It's easy to use a pedophile example to justify the law. It's not so easy when someone consents to sex and then withdraws consent during the act. You're saying a pedophile case is the same as someone capable of giving consent, engages in the act willingly and decides to withdraw consent during the act?

 

[patsfan1379]

You guys are too smart for me... I just want to see criminals who commit sex acts against children die by slowly dripping battery acid into their eyeballs.

The means that get to that end I dont know how to do...

 

[Gambino]

I posted how the legal definition of a sex offender isn't as easy as proponents of these bills would have you believe. We had a case come before our court where the kid was sixteen and the girl was seventeen, she admitted to consenting to sex but then withdrew consent because "she felt like a slut." Her withdraw of consent was, " I don't think I should be doing this. Followed later with, I don't want to do this anymore" He "finished" within moments but her parents found out( she was busted for underage consumption when the cops raided the party) and wanted to press the issue, not her. We offered him a lesser charge so that he wouldn't be labeled a sex offender for life, not to mention it was not a "rape" case from a real world stance even though he was a rapist based on a strict legal definition. I'm sure she felt really bad about this guy going through hell because she was trying to cover her ass with her parents, that was the consensus at the prosecutor's office. Had it been an election year and it been made an issue, we could have easily pushed for a conviction(pleading) with a sentence recommendation. The kid's family didn't have the means to fight the case long term and the judge trying the case was a prosecutor for almost twenty years, generally favorable to the prosecution in her judgements. Basically, we could label a kid a sex offender for life if it suited someone even though nobody thought he was...

It's easy to use a pedophile example to justify the law. It's not so easy when someone consents to sex and then withdraws consent during the act. You're saying a pedophile case is the same as someone capable of giving consent, engages in the act willingly and decides to withdraw consent during the act?

certainly not and the distinction should be made
i hate bullshit cases like that, own up to it

 

[mrplunkey]

You guys are hilarious making it sound like someone can just casually get convicted of a sex crime.

1) Even if you have the "drunk, unwelcome grab at the breast" or the "accidental underage hookup", those crimes almost always get pleaded-down to non-sexual crimes. It's not worth the prosecutors office running a sex crimes case till the bitter end when they can get you to plead a lesser crime and be done with the case.

2) So lets say they do want to go after someone over a grab at a breast or underage hookup. Most states (Tennessee sure does) will allow diversion for first time offenders. Here, when that 46 year old pervert decides he's in love with a 15 year old girl, he can divert his class "E" felony and have it completely eliminated from his record. Hence, in the eyes of the law it never even happened -- he didn't even need to enter a plea.

Now what if you already have a criminal history or riddled past and have blown your chance at diversion? Well then -- guess you better not be grabbing breasts or failing to check ID on that sweet young hookup.