Pretty much done with the human race

[MisterOJ]

I just looked up the rape laws for my home state (Kentucky) and was a little surprised at what I found.

EDIT: I did post them, but I have deleted them now because they were from a second-hand source and I'm not sure about the accuracy of them.

EDIT2: The original information I posted was indeed, out of date. Here are the most current statutes.

510.040 Rape in the first degree.

(1) A person is guilty of rape in the first degree when:

(a) He engages in sexual intercourse with another person by forcible compulsion; or

(b ) He engages in sexual intercourse with another person who is incapable of consent because he:

1. Is physically helpless; or

2. Is less than twelve (12) years old.

(2) Rape in the first degree is a Class B felony unless the victim is under twelve (12) years old or receives a serious physical injury in which case it is a Class A felony.

510.050 Rape in the second degree.

(1) A person is guilty of rape in the second degree when:

(a) Being eighteen (18) years old or more, he engages in sexual intercourse with another person less than fourteen (14) years old; or

(b ) He engages in sexual intercourse with another person who is mentally incapacitated.

(2) Rape in the second degree is a Class C felony.

510.060 Rape in the third degree.

(1) A person is guilty of rape in the third degree when:

(a) He or she engages in sexual intercourse with another person who is incapable of consent because he or she is an individual with an intellectual disability;

(b ) Being twenty-one (21) years old or more, he or she engages in sexual intercourse with another person less than sixteen (16) years old;

© Being twenty-one (21) years old or more, he or she engages in sexual intercourse with another person less than eighteen (18) years old and for whom he or she provides a foster family home as defined in KRS 600.020;

(d) Being a person in a position of authority or position of special trust, as defined in KRS 532.045, he or she engages in sexual intercourse with a minor under eighteen (18) years old with whom he or she comes into contact as a result of that position; or

(e) Being a jailer, or an employee, contractor, vendor, or volunteer of the Department of Corrections, Department of Juvenile Justice, or a detention facility as defined in KRS 520.010, or of an entity under contract with either department or a detention facility for the custody, supervision, evaluation, or treatment of offenders, he or she subjects a person who he or she knows is incarcerated, supervised, evaluated, or treated by the Department of Corrections, Department of Juvenile Justice, detention facility, or contracting entity, to sexual intercourse.

(2) Rape in the third degree is a Class D felony.

And if you're curious about the sentences the various charges carry:

For a Class A felony, not less than twenty (20) years nor more than fifty (50) years, or life imprisonment;

For a Class B felony, not less than ten (10) years nor more than twenty (20) years;

For a Class C felony, not less than five (5) years nor more than ten (10) years; and

For a Class D felony, not less than one (1) year nor more than five (5) years.

[Ciella]

You remember correctly. The NAACP was all over that case. I'm interested in what you would consider a slap on the wrist? I'd say 10 days in prison and a few months of prison would have sufficed.

I would say at least 30 days in prison with maybe a max of a year. A two year difference in age is not all that much, but the perpetrator is still old enough to know better. Assuming the Judge isn't like the one in the OP, he/she should be able to gauge the appropriate length for the situation.

I also think the "Sex Offender" label should have an expiration date or not be applicable in that situation. Though I'll be honest, I'm not sure how it works in Georgia. I know there can be a lot of regulations as to where you can live in relation to schools as well as your name in a public database.

[karaddin]

I think karaddin is implying that his apology is somewhat disingenuous and only occurred because of the notoriety the case received. Without that notoriety, it's doubtful he would've apologized or made any statement whatsoever. I also think karaddin is saying that his original statement betrays a personal bias and belief that can't convincingly be countermanded by a simple apology stating that what he did was "wrong". If what he did was "wrong", then the beliefs that led to his saying such a thing must be wrong, which he did not admit to all. He blamed it on a bit of courtroom "fumbling", which seems specious at best.

There's no way to know for certain whether his apology is genuine or not, but people are entitled to gauge that for themselves.

This may be the most accurate talking on my behalf anyone has done for me on this board. Thanks Naz.

[Hutch]

As a resident of Montana I'd like to assure everyone that we are not as backwards and fucked up as this article makes us appear. The judicial system is a bit shady, but the same can be said for everywhere. Also, Montana only seems to make national news when something horrible like this happens (Unabomber, Freemen, etc) so please don't judge us on this. The judge in question is shady as shit, and honestly I'm amazed he hasn't been ousted before this.

[Weeping Sore]

I just looked up the rape laws for my home state (Kentucky) and was a little surprised at what I found.

EDIT: I did post them, but I have deleted them now because they were from a second-hand source and I'm not sure about the accuracy of them.

EDIT2: The original information I posted was indeed, out of date. Here are the most current statutes.

510.040 Rape in the first degree.

(1) A person is guilty of rape in the first degree when:

(a) He engages in sexual intercourse with another person by forcible compulsion; or

(b ) He engages in sexual intercourse with another person who is incapable of consent because he:

1. Is physically helpless; or

2. Is less than twelve (12) years old.

(2) Rape in the first degree is a Class B felony unless the victim is under twelve (12) years old or receives a serious physical injury in which case it is a Class A felony.

Thanks for posting this, OJ. I didn't realize the law made such fine distinctions on degrees of rape. I still feel that it's very important to insulate the victims from any implication of culpability, and that the law should probably err on the side of protecting minors. I may have gone a little overboard with my argument as the results of this case were particularly tragic and infuriating.

[The Grey Wolf]

Sadly, the news media is a business and where the blood flows money goes. Still, I hear you. [Nice of you to stand up for your state Hutch.]

[Hutch]

Sadly, the news media is a business and where the blood flows money goes.

Sad, but true.

[The Grey Wolf]

As are many other things of this world.

[thetitansbastard]

I know the teacher-student relationship could complicate the law, but assuming the rapist and victim were otherwise acquainted, this would have been legal in many parts of the world. That's what seems crazy.

[karaddin]

Here's a good article on why the judge is so, so wrong in his pronouncements, not that anyone here really disagrees on that.

Given where the conversation has been I thought it worth bumping this fantastic article again as it seemed not many read it. Read that and see how a "willing" child can do incredible harm to themselves being manipulated by adults that are supposed to know better.

What I needed, and what she needed, were strong male role models in my life who knew how the fuck to say "No thanks" to a little girl's come-ons. Because it doesn't matter if a young girl is saying yes, it's an adult man's job to say no.

As soon as you start getting into discussion of "well forcible rape is worse than consensual rape" you create wiggle room. And fuckheads will use that wiggle room to talk away x scenario being rape, since really the girl was willing, she wanted it or whatever other shit they put forward.

Rape is rape, and rape is unacceptable regardless of what form is takes. Anything less does not send a strong enough message - society condemns this in all forms it takes and doesn't give you any wiggle room. As someone else said, if there is physical assault and battery involved, those will be additional charges not part of the rape charge.

If you are concerned about that grey area where someone is just over the age of consent and someone just under, I agree the law in that area needs reform - I would say it can easily be address by adding another caveat - if the two participants are within 2 or 3 years (there is room for discussion on what that number should be) then they are close enough in age that their understanding and ability to consent is comparable and accepted.

MisterOJ - I'd just like to point out that by the statute in Kentucky a woman can't commit a 1st or 2nd degree rape, only 3rd degree. That seems fucked up to me, although I recognise rape law is fucked the world over for acknowledging rape can be perpetrated by women and against men. Often this is worked around in practice even while outdated laws remain on the books.

[thetitansbastard]

As soon as you start getting into discussion of "well forcible rape is worse than consensual rape" you create wiggle room. And fuckheads will use that wiggle room to talk away x scenario being rape, since really the girl was willing, she wanted it or whatever other shit they put forward.

Rape is rape, and rape is unacceptable regardless of what form is takes.

You don't think forcible is worse?

[karaddin]

I think they are both extreme violations of a person, and as was already noted it's hard to see how this case could have been worse as it seems (according to her mother) that it led to her suicide. I think any attempt at painting "forcible" as worse does more harm to society than good by creating the wiggle room within the rape definition, which slime balls are only too happy to exploit.

Once again, did you read the linked article that Gertrude posted and I bumped? It's about how much harm can be done by this.

[thetitansbastard]

I think they are both extreme violations of a person, and as was already noted it's hard to see how this case could have been worse as it seems (according to her mother) that it led to her suicide. I think any attempt at painting "forcible" as worse does more harm to society than good by creating the wiggle room within the rape definition, which slime balls are only too happy to exploit.

Once again, did you read the linked article that Gertrude posted and I bumped? It's about how much harm can be done by this.

But are you saying forcible and consensual should be punished the same? Don't get me wrong 30 days is rediculous for this guy, and the fact he was her teacher makes it MUCH worse. that aside, its such an arbitrary distinction the law has to make, especially since individuals mentally develop at different rates. Assuming an age of consent of 16 (which I assume is the most common in the world), I don't think you can say an adult having sex with someone who is 16 and a day is totally fine, but if the minor was 15 yrs 364 days they should get 20 years. I don't know, its a tough topic.

[brook]

But are you saying forcible and consensual should be punished the same? Don't get me wrong 30 days is rediculous for this guy, and the fact he was her teacher makes it MUCH worse. that aside, its such an arbitrary distinction the law has to make, especially since individuals mentally develop at different rates. Assuming an age of consent of 16 (which I assume is the most common in the world), I don't think you can say an adult having sex with someone who is 16 and a day is totally fine, but if the minor was 15 yrs 364 days they should get 20 years. I don't know, its a tough topic.

Yes they SHOULD be punished the same... and then if there is an additional assault that should be punished under a separate charge.

At what age does 'she consented (even though she can't legally consent)' stop being a factor that makes it less serious in your view? 11? 5? When does it end?

If, as a society we draw the line that a child under x age cannot consent to sex than having sex with a child that age is rape and just as serious as any other rape.

[karaddin]

Well we don't live in an ideal world and you do have to draw a line somewhere. The line is drawn and then it's enforced. Yes I am saying they should be punished the same, they are both huge violations of a person and they both carry the potential to damage that person for a long time. The determination should be whether the accused violated the other persons consent, if they did then there should be a range for the sentence and the judge determines it within this (and I hope to fuck that the sentence is more than 30 days). If there was also assault and battery, that would be an additional charge and an additional sentence.

Rape is rape, sex without consent is rape, sex where one party cannot consent is rape.

[thetitansbastard]

Yes they SHOULD be punished the same... and then if there is an additional assault that should be punished under a separate charge.

At what age does 'she consented (even though she can't legally consent)' stop being a factor that makes it less serious in your view? 11? 5? When does it end?

If, as a society we draw the line that a child under x age cannot consent to sex than having sex with a child that age is rape and just as serious as any other rape.

I wasn't really talking about this particular case. And its mind-boggling that x age that differs greatly by jurisdiction. And I think its messed up that a 17 year old can be convicted of rape for having sex with his 15 year old girlfriend, but a 40 year old can have sex with the same person a month later and its fine (in many jurisdictions).

[thetitansbastard]

Well we don't live in an ideal world and you do have to draw a line somewhere. The line is drawn and then it's enforced. Yes I am saying they should be punished the same, they are both huge violations of a person and they both carry the potential to damage that person for a long time. The determination should be whether the accused violated the other persons consent, if they did then there should be a range for the sentence and the judge determines it within this (and I hope to fuck that the sentence is more than 30 days). If there was also assault and battery, that would be an additional charge and an additional sentence.

Rape is rape, sex without consent is rape, sex where one party cannot consent is rape.

Whether or not battery is involved, I'm fine with anyone convicted of forcible rape being immediately executed tbh.

[Joyful Union]

Yeah, I don't see how an 17 year old having sex with his 15 year old girlfriend should be punished to the degree that a 40 year old man forcibly raping a 12 year old, for example. If you can have degrees of murder, why not rape as well?

[brook]

and the 40 year old who forces himself on the 12 year old v the 40 year old who groomed her until she 'consented' v the 40 year old who pays a 12 year old street kid for sex... how should they all be punished? Do the second two get a lesser punishment because she said yes?

[karaddin]

Yeah, I don't see how an 17 year old having sex with his 15 year old girlfriend should be punished to the degree that a 40 year old man forcibly raping a 12 year old, for example. If you can have degrees of murder, why not rape as well?

How about actually reading the arguments I've already made which a) answer why I think they should be treated the same - due to the impact on attitudes towards rape that allowing this distinction seems to be happening, and B) says that I think the law needs to be changed regarding couples who are close in age above/below the age of consent to ensure that this doesn't happen.

ETA:

I wasn't really talking about this particular case. And its mind-boggling that x age that differs greatly by jurisdiction. And I think its messed up that a 17 year old can be convicted of rape for having sex with his 15 year old girlfriend, but a 40 year old can have sex with the same person a month later and its fine (in many jurisdictions).

While I'm sympathetic to this on one level, unfortunately both my principles (anti death penalty) and practicalities get in the way. I suspect that if you make sentencing for rape as severe or worse than the sentence for murder, you would see an increase in the amount of raped women who are also murdered. It's perverse, but you need to keep the punishment lighter to try and encourage rapists not to become murderers.