Florida Teen Facing Criminal Charges For Relationship With Female Student

Published On May 22, 2013 | By Kate | Articles

An 18-year-old Sebastian River High School senior is reportedly being charged with a felony and expelled from high school as a result of a consensual relationship with another female student. Kaitlyn Hunt started dating a 15-year-old student from her high school basketball team when she herself was 17. Kaitlyn’s father, Steven R. Hunt Jr., claims his daughter was kicked off the basketball team because the coach feared a same-sex relationship would bring unwanted drama. Steven Hunt explained, “The girl’s mother found out about the relationship, and, as the track coach and Criminal Justice teacher told me, the girl’s mother said that there’s no way her daughter could be gay. The mother then took reigns and is now attempting to place felony charges upon my own daughter.” According to her family, Kate’s girlfriend was a freshman student enrolled in courses with upperclassmen and a fellow player on the varsity basketball team with Kaitlyn. Although Kaitlyn was three years older than her girlfriend, they were friends in the same social circle.

After Kaitlyn’s 18th birthday, her girlfriend’s parents sent the police to the Hunt residence, where she was arrested. Kaitlyn’s mother told The Examiner, “They are out to destroy my daughter, because they feel like she ‘made’ their daughter gay. They see being gay as wrong and they blame my daughter. Of course, I see it 100% differently. I don’t see or label these girls as gay. They are teenagers in high school experimenting with their sexuality — with mutual consent. And even if their daughter is gay, who cares? She is still their daughter.” Kaitlyn’s father wrote about the arrest, “My daughter was ripped out of her mother’s arms, hysterical. The police finally told us she was being arrested on probable cause.”

NYDaily News reports that Kaitlyn has been charged with two felony counts of, “lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12 – 16 years of age.” She has reportedly been offered a plea bargain of house arrest. Under these conditions, Hunt would be sentenced to two years house arrest and allowed to attend school or work only during that time. She would also endure one year of probation and attend sex offender counseling. Hunt’s mother, Kelley Smith, has until next Friday to accept what she calls the “outrageous plea offer” or take the case to trial.

If convicted, Hunt could face up to 15 years in prison and be required to register as a sex offender for the rest of her life.

Kaitlyn’s family took her story public on May 17 on a “Free Kate” Facebook page. Her mother wrote this personal message:

“Anyone who knows me, even a little, knows what kind of person I am. Anyone who knows my daughter Kate, knows how wonderful she is. Kate is an 18 year old senior about to graduate from SRHS. She has an exemplary record at school and home. She has always been a wonderful student, respected and well liked. She has cheered on the varsity cheer team all throughout high school, shes sung in chorus and was voted most school spirited. She has never been in trouble, ever, she truly is the model student and child. At the beginning of this school year, she started dating a fellow student, who happened to be another female. This girl also played varsity sports, was in the IB program, so she was in classes with upperclassman. There was an age difference between my daughter and the other girl, of 3 years, my daughter was older, however you would have thought it was the opposite by just looking at the girls. My daughter is tiny, looks very young, and the other girl looks much older and is much taller, either way there was a 3 year age gap. They were both students in the same high school, it was a mutual consenting relationship on both parts. This was unusual for Kate, she has always dated boys, but being the kind of mother I am, I didn’t want to make it a big deal. I talked to her about it, and figured it was just a social thing, times have changed and a lot of kids are experimenting, so I didn’t make much of it.”

Their family’s “Free Kate” Facebook page has more than 19,000 members.
In addition to the Facebook page, her family has also launched a website to share Kate’s story.

In response to those claiming the Hunt family is expecting special treatment because Kaitlyn is in a same-sex relationship, the Facebook page stated:

“The law needs to change, not only to protect Kate, but to protect the millions of teenagers, boys and girls, straight and gay, whose lives are regularly ruined because parents disapprove of their children’s sexual choices. We want justice for all 18-year-old high school seniors who have undergone criminal prosecution for exercising poor judgement in their dating life. Such students are not predators. They’re just kids.”

Under Florida’s 2007 “Romeo and Juliet” Law, an “offender” can petition the court to remove the need to register as a sex offender if the “victim in the case” is between 14 and 17 years old, “a willing participant in the sexual activity and no more than four years younger than the offender.” This law does not make it legal to have sexual relations with minors, but prevents the accused from being held as a sex offender. Historically the law has never applied in cases dealing with same-sex relationships.

Like this Article? Share it!

About The Author

  • ThirtyOneBravo

    First!

  • Jake

    Well, when I was in high school this was something that all of the boys knew and talked about. You have to be careful. You can’t date someone younger than you if you are 18. Just can’t do it. This law should probably be updated, but, as is, the law is the law. At least she can petition to not be listed as a sex offender. Take the deal..

  • Casual Observer

    This is only happening because these students were both of the same gender, and did not try to hide their affection for each other.

    If you can’t recognize the inherent sexism and homophobia in the attitudes of those choosing to pursue a prosecution in this case, that fact pretty much identifies you as a bigot, or an idiot… and probably both.

  • Shawn

    The screwy thing is that we don’t attack real predators hard enough. But this girl, we’ll hammer for her ‘crime’.

  • wiguy

    Seriously 31? I’m kind of disappointed yet not surprised. You’re a relatively new admitted cop commenter. t. used to be willing to have some reasonable debates but it seems you’re devolving into just another cop who comes to this site provoke.

    I just don’t understand why you’d post such a sophomoric comment. Are my standards really set so high that they can’t be reached for you guys?

  • Shawn

    @Casual

    Tell that to the guys who get in trouble for this. The lesbian angle is why we are hearing about it. But the issue is really that we attack the wrong sex offenders.
    Not everyone has to agree with the homosexual issue. To say we do have to agree is just another form of bigotry. In this case, thought bigotry.

  • tz

    Minors CANNOT give consent. That is part of why they are “minors”. They are not responsible for debts or for contracts they sign for the same reason, but that is also why they are “protected”.

    The younger of the duo did not ask for emancipation from her parents – her parents are responsible for her medical bills or anything she does. If she wanted to be treated as an adult, she needs to break the ties – be completely independent of her parents.

    This is not liberty, it is license. They want to be a “volunteerist” only when it comes to experimenting with sex, but want mom and dad to pay my tuition, for my car and insurance – auto and health, feed, clothe, and provide me shelter?

    If someone seduces your under-aged son or daughter, and they get HIV – which costs $100k/yr to stay alive, would you be upset? Or if the girl gets pregnant (the underage boy WILL be responsible for child support for the next 18 years!). Some experiments are too dangerous to attempt, especially for youngsters.

    And what IS the age limit for consent? 12? 10? 8? Can kiddie porn be “consensual”?

  • deepelemblues

    The law is the law is not an excuse when the law leads to manifestly unjust situations.

    The prosecutors should be ashamed of themselves for doing anything but declining to prosecute. Their offer is a travesty.

  • http://[email protected] Captain Six

    This isn’t about being gay, this is about statutory rape. If this had been a male/female thing, everyone would be out to castrate the guy for molesting a 15 year-old.

    Teenagers need to be aware of the law, and aware that doesn’t care if you go to school together.

    Under NYS law, if two 16 year olds have sex, they are MUTUALLY guilty of statutory rape, and can BOTH be tried AS ADULTS. So put that in your hat and wear it.

  • t.

    Statutory rape. Check.

    What, like 3 pedophiles posting that this was ok. Wow

  • Wow

    Funny how everyone wants to be the exception to the “rule” when it applies to “them”.

    TZ hit the nail on the head and drove it home in one swing.

    If we are going to make an exception for this case we might want to go back and revise all they other statutory rape cases as well. Otherwise, I can see the discrimination law suits piling up.

    I would agree the “deal” is a bit harsh, but it beats having to register as a sex offender.

    This site should consider a new name with some of the stories I have seen lately.

  • http://[email protected] Captain Six

    I especially liked a story a read a while back about a 13 year old boy who was raped by a 25 year old woman. She wound up pregnant, and now he has to pay his attacker support for the next 21 years.

  • certain

    Hey 6 – That’s the biggest pile of shit posted this week. Child gets raped by adult, who becomes pregnant. Child has to pay support. LOL. Yeah, that’s an accurate story.

  • LeaveTheMatrix

    I notice they do not specify the EXACT age of the 15 year old.

    Initially the relationship was at 15 and 17, then the 17 year old turned 18 and thats when the law got involved.

    What if the 15 year old became 16 one month after the 17 year old became 18, making the relationship “legal” again?

    Perhaps, they discontinued the relationship for this one month period (or however long it is “illegal”)?

    None of this is mentioned.

  • http://[email protected] Captain Six

    @Certain.

    So you think molesting children is funny?

    Go Google this:

    Child Victims of Statutory Rape Ordered to Pay Support Stationsixunderground

  • http://[email protected] Captain Six

    @Matrix.

    It all depends on what state it’s in. But theoretically, as long as no sex occurred during an “illegal” time frame, then they couldn’t prosecute.

  • Stacked Hats

    “What, like 3 pedophiles posting that this was ok. Wow”

    Leave it to a costumed tax feeding goose-stepping zombie robot fascist brown shirt nazi fucktard to fail to see the perspective.

  • t.

    What “perspective”?? There are people saying that this is wrongly motovcated because she alesbian? DDefending her actions. If it had been some boy banging a really young girl, would that change your “perspective”?? Yours, like theirs, is a dumb reaction. You buy anything sold here and that is very sad.

  • shawn

    @T

    ” “What, like 3 pedophiles posting that this was ok. Wow”

    Leave it to a costumed tax feeding goose-stepping
    zombie robot fascist brown shirt nazi fucktard to fail to
    see the perspective.

    t. says:

    May23, 2013 at 7:05 am
    What “perspective”??”

    The perspective is that this is under a 3 year age difference. This is not some 30yo person chasing girls. Now, I’m bible thumper hard on sex myself, especially ‘confused’ sex. But this is not Cooey.

    Now the law is the law, and that isn’t up to cops. But this sort of thing is deluting the concept of what a sex offender is.

  • Jean

    @ certain / May 22, 2013 at 11:52 pm

    Actually, there’s more than one case where that’s happened.
    Standard scenario is, HE is a monster; SHE is a victim. Regardless of her age. Regardless of HIS age. Go look up a few sites – AngryHarry (UK site – stay away from the fringe stuff, some of it he’s WAY out), Shattered Men, False Rape Society.

    As for the rest?
    – those saying we’re hearing about this only because it’s a same-sex situation are 100% correct. It fits “the narrative” – Bigoted, evil Christians oppressing their daughter, CHECK; Underage sex, CHECK; Lesbians, CHECK; Mother concerned this girl is “turning” her daughter gay, CHECK.
    (Supposedly one cannot choose sexual orientation. I’d guess it’s similar to other things – such as choosing Type A or Type B personality, it just develops based on DNA and hormonal washes of the brain during gestation. So, “turning” a girl gay? Probably 90% impossible, even with the documented fluidity of women’s sexuality. IE, they follow feelings. )

    – The whole Pedophile scare, along with the Recovered Memories and Satanic Abuse shit, was just that: shit. It was and IS a witch-hunt. How many people need to be demonized for consensual relations, or forced to pay child support to OLDER WOMEN (teachers, for example), before we admit the whole god-damn thing is RIDICULOUS?
    We are NOT talking the dirty 40-year-old diddling an infant here… We’re talking teens doing all-too-normal behavior. Sexting is under this realm, too – it’s literally “Kiddie Porn,” yet the boys get charged, and the girls are “victims,” even if SHE sends HIM the picture/video. This has gone WAY beyond the intent, we’re just manufacturing causes for more police, more funding, more prosecution: more people in prison.

    BTW, contracts with minors ARE VALID: They are also VOIDABLE by the minor. Easy example is a car purchase. Buy a car at 17, sign the contract; 6 months later, teen CHOOSES to return the car and void the contract. Car is returned, contract is voided. Mileage and wear and tear is – Dealer is SOL. (Why they generally would want a co-signer Adult.)

    We have developed a society where females want LICENSE. SHE decides; HE pays. SHE can choose to initiate sex; if he takes it, that’s of course rape. SHE gets to decide she was drunk the next morning – so it’s now rape. If he records it, that’s another charge – not proof of innocence. It doesn’t matter if she’s the town bicycle – he’ll be excoriated in public, charged, & she’ll be shielded from public view, and her sexual history is inadmissable. If she’s an adult and he’s a minor, HE will still be charged, potentially as an adult, and he WILL be listed as a sex offender. Reversing the positions – SHE gets off scott-free. (Barring a few anecdotal cases that stick out only because they ARE anecdotal. LeTourneau, anyone?) IF she gets pregnant – SHE can CHOOSE unilaterally to abort or have the child. HE gets no input. She can name anyone as the father, too – DNA testing is illegal in some places, so you can’t even confirm parentage – and you’re considered “notified” if the notice is SENT. Doesn’t have to reach you, doesn’t even have to be an address you ever lived at – you’re considered served for child support purposes because it was SENT. (An abuse of the post-box rule, at the very least.)
    Should she decide to keep the “foetus” until birth, she can then demand child support. She can choose to give the child up for adoption, or she can abandon the child at a hospital, fire station, or police station, no questions asked. HE… Has no input or choice.

    ALL her bases are covered. His ONLY choice is to NOT get involved with a woman. (Omitting condoms – I’ve heard of women taking the used condoms and inserting them into her “orifice” to get pregnant; one guy – Roissy, IIRC – suggested using hot sauce in used condoms. But that can lead to charges of assault, even sexual assault – despite the fact that SHE has to actually dig it out of the trash and stick it inside her. Again, protecting the infant from the consequences of her actions. And people say _I_ am sexist – yet the infantilize a woman – invalidating her personhood, adulthood, intellectual ability – at every turn. I just figure they’re all usurous c*nts trying to take me for all I’m worth… I act thinking they KNOW what they’re doing. I STILL see them as adults with agency. Hmmm… Who is the real misogynist again?)

    We ARE talking about creatures who have a HISTORY – since time immemorial – of pursuing older men. The older man is established, has greater social standing and power, and is more stable as a result. The whole, “get with a woman your own age” is a modern phenomenon. (and to clarify, we’re not talking a 14-year-old pursuing a 60-year-old man – more like a 14-18 year old looking at someone 1-10 years older. SHE has become a woman – that’s biology – and HE – well, may or may not have become a man, but the old women used to keep things in line a lot better. Now they’re busy chanting, “YOU GO GRRL!” and suggesting she bang the whole football team to figure out who’s best. Seriously F*cked up, compared to our recent monogamous cultures. You know, the sorts of societies that produced the US, modern Western Europe – UK, Spain, Greece, France, etc. Produced the USSR, Russia; Japan, China, Mexico, Countries of South America… Basically the modern world. Only place with any “real” (limited, BTW) record of Matriarchal societies is AFRICA. Great place, right? Sub-Saharan Black Africa? We ALL want to live THERE, right? Just can’t WAIT to emigrate?
    ?
    ?
    ?
    Yeah, didn’t think so.. :-P

    I know this turned into a missive: but this is just another example of how we’re DESTROYING our own culture. I could give a F*ck less what the orientation involved is – gay or straight is largely irrelevant, and gay might even be LESS of a problem from point of view of children – there won’t BE any, after all.
    But it’s another point where the state has unnecessarily gotten involved in PRIVATE dealings, giving people like t and certain more power to control and coerce us.

    Better – AND easier – to kill the real animals (that 40YO touching the infant or even 14-year-old). What good does it do to leave tham alive, but unable to even co-exist with society? Can’t be near a playground, school, church, anywhere children might be? What good does that do? And with the conviction, can’t get a job, either. More merciful to execute the rapists and ignore the panty-sniffers. Women can deal with creeps, they have for ages. It’s the Beasts they cannot handle and need some portection from. Now that guns are available, they need FAR LESS male support. (Also, sociologicaly, because they can work fairly freely outside the home. No need for financial support. And no need for a hunter, since the grocery store has food.)
    But you MUST treat them as adults, and grant them full personhood -which includes holding them accountable and responsible. Get drunk or high, get gang-banged, YOUR problem. We’re still going to prosecute them if/when we catch them, but YOU were proximate cause: YOU exhibited bad judgement. YOU are responsible for that. (THEY are responsible for their actions, too, which is why we’re going to imprison them: you went looking for trouble and found it; they violated you, with the caveat that we might ameliorate the punishment if they are also high/drunk at the time. If both parties are unable to give consent, you can’t hold one accoutnable and let the other go. You MUST let both go, or you violate all concepts of having Law.)

  • Keith

    Jean, shut up, we are not here to read a book. As far as you anarchist loonies, it is not a double standard, at least not by anyone but the mom and dad. Trust me, if this is an 18 year old boy fucking HIS 15 year old daughter, he kill the kid. The kid would get arrested, happens all the time, and he woudl be a sex offender for lie. So yes, the attitude is a double standard, the attitude that it’s ok cuz it’s 2 chicks. Last time I checked, you cant fuck children, no matter what gender you are.

  • Keith

    And when did this forum turn from copblock, citizens holding the police accountable, to anti-government, no matter what, big brother is evil?

  • Jean

    Keith,
    Maybe if your type read a few books, we’d have a better country? ;-)

  • DN

    I think this is selective prosecution at its worst, and a clear example of bigotry. There is no question that there would not be such a high profile arrest and prosecution had this been a case of heterosexual lovers. The comparison of course wouldn’t be one of an older teen boy, younger teen girl, but the opposite, an older high school girl, younger high school boy. I wonder how many times that combination has received this kind of vindictive approach by the state and the police. It seems to me they are trying to teach lesbians and gays “a lesson.” I certainly hope the overwhelming national and international condemnation of what is being done to Kaitlyn pressures the state into dropping the charges. Her expulsion and government encouraged harassment by bigots is already damage enough for what I hope will be a very large lawsuit. Mentioning Salem or the Scopes monkey trial by comparison is hardly hyperbole, considering how far the rest of the country has come. If I weren’t so outraged, I’d be laughing at how backwards and absurd it is for the government to be wasting tax money on this kind of witch hunt. It’s time to stop the hate, it really is.

  • Keith

    Jean, my wifes thoughts exactly. She reads like a fiend but I’m barely literate. ADHD makes it that way for me, sadly.

  • Keith

    Ahhhh, Jean, just got the “your type” comment. Not sure what that means. Do you mean more people that will volunteer for our military in a time of war, twice? The kind that donates blood and is an organ donor? The kind that believes people who hurt women and children should be punished to the full extent of the law, and then some. The kind of guy that thinks personal adult freedoms, where no victim can exist, should be off limits to government and law enforcement. The kind that holds a door open for a lady, or one that raises his son to be an upstanding citizen? Not sure what kind that is, unless you mean prick, which i am definitely “that” kind. :)

  • Chris Mallory

    Casual Observer says:
    May 22, 2013 at 6:22 pm

    “This is only happening because these students were both of the same gender, and did not try to hide their affection for each other.”

    We weren’t given enough information to know if they were the same gender or not. We were told that they were both the same sex. Sex and gender are not the same thing.

  • KAZ

    I am very torn between the two sides on this relationship. On one hand they were together before the older girl turned 18 and everyone was just fine! Then magically once the older girl turns 18 and people start screaming statutory rape.
    Should the 18 year old girl be responsible for her unlawful actions even though the relationship was consentual? This question is the reason why we have juries. If I were on this jury I would find her not guilty based on the fact they were together before it became a crime.

  • t.

    Jean Jean The.Dancing Machine:::::: Easy guy.

    Now I know that they are just arbitrary ages…but what the alternative? You said their just teenagers. How about a 19 year old with a 13 year old? Still good for you? The reason behind these ages are just to try and keep an older teen (or older than that) from overly influencing a young, still developing teen or child from being overly pressures into something that they are t equipped to handle. Your arguement has no limits. By your thoughts there shouldn’t be any problem with a 40 year old diddling an infant. Your line of logic says the ages shouldn’t make any differences. And there needs to be limits

    As for the teenagers / contracts thing. You do realize the your example proves the point against you, right? The dealer is SOL if the car is returned because….wait for it….I love this part so much….because, the initial contract with the minor is unenforcible.

    Now I’ll agree that the only reason this story is posted here is just the salacious nature of the story…teenage lesbians. But that is a red herring about the real story of an 18 year old unduly influencing a 15 year old into sex. Really just that simple

  • slappy

    I can’t keep up this charade any longer. I’m just a troll. I’m a 34 year old mall security guard. I live in my mom’s basement. I failed out of the police training program at community college. The only sexual experience I’ve ever had was with my uncle. Posting comments on sites like this and pissing others off is the only way I can find to feel good. It’s really the only way I can get any attention or really get anyone to interact with me. I’m just angry at my own personal failures in life and I’m really lonely. I honestly just need a friend and a hug.
    :(

  • Common Sense

    Just as tz commented, it’s an age if cement issue. Nothing more. She was too young to a sexual encounter, thus the charge. Open and shut.

  • Stacked Hats

    No, jackboot, I’m saying that a stupid brainless unthinking automaton like you would obey your orders and arrest her (or a boy) the day they turned 18 for having sexual relations with a person they’ve been with consistently before they turned 18.

    But, of course, that’s how you, and the rest of your “profession” thinks. If you were around 2000 years ago, you would have obeyed your orders to beat and nailed Jesus Christ to a cross. If you were around 150 years ago, you would have obeyed your orders and returned escaped slaves to a life of misery. If you were around 60 years ago, you would have obeyed orders and poured blue pellets down a chute into a room full of screaming people. If you were around 50 years ago, you would have obeyed your orders and sicked dogs on people of color who simply wanted to be treated as equals. If you were around 40 years ago, you would have obeyed your orders and arrested young men for resisting the draft. That is your mentality, t. It is what you live for, you fascist mother-fucker.

  • brian

    “slappy says:
    May 23, 2013 at 2:43 pm
    I can’t keep up this charade any longer. I’m just a troll. I’m a 34 year old mall security guard.”

    I don’t think you’re smart enough to be a security guard.
    Living in your mom’s basement however, I do believe.

  • t.

    Stacked: So you stand clearly in the pedophile camp then. So blind that you can’t realize that it’s wrong for an adult to be seeking a sexual relationship with a young teenager or child What if a male teacher had done this to your daughter? Still just a matter of age right? You are blinded by your own stupidity.

  • Stacked Hats

    Go stick that red herring up your stupid fucking fascist nazi ass, cocksucker. I would have a problem with an authority figure (like you believe yourself to be) taking advantage of a vulnerable young person. But that’s not the point of this story, is it? The day before she turned 18 it’s OK. The day she turns 18, you or one of your brainless robot twit colleagues would throw her in a cage. Fuck off!

  • t.

    Hats: Wow. Wrong and angry. Not a good combo for you. It’s ok to be wrong Keep hanging with pedophiles. It’s ok.

  • Wow

    Hats if it where 40 years ago, you’d be dead. How I wish it were 40 years ago.

  • Stacked Hats

    Again with the red herring. Not only are you a stupid fucking fascist nazi ass cocksucker, but you are a shallow one to boot. When you take a shit, 75% of you IQ goes down the toilet with it. You like to toss around the word pedophile without really knowing what it means. Apparently you’ve never heard of hebephilia or ephebophilia. Even then, none of those terms has anything even remotely to do with this young person’s story.

    And I’m not wrong. If you were ordered to throw this person in a cage, you’d do it.

  • Stacked Hats

    Why, Wow? Because I think throwing teenagers in a cage for doing what teenagers have been doing for tens of thousands of years is bullshit? Go suck t’s dick.

  • Wow

    Hats,

    That’s kinda hard to do when Ts dick is stuffed up your moms ass.

  • https://www.facebook.com/585ROC Justin

    Stacked, your command of the English language is astonishing. Where did you ever learn to use such colorful words? You do realize though, as much as you swear to get your point across, it just makes us laugh at you even more. You obviously cant hold a mature conversation about this topic without becoming extremely defensive and down right offensive, makes me believe what t says about you is true, why else would you be so angry?

  • Ariel

    t.

    A pedophile wants sex with a prepubescent child. It’s the damn exacting definition of a pedophile. Hebephiles (used but still in flux for acceptance) want pubescent or just post children. An ephebophile likes adolescents, but adolescents that are on the cusp of being adult. John Derek raised Ursula Andress, Linda Evans, and Bo Derek to stardom while being what I would call an ephebophile. He had this thing for 16 year old girls, but that doesn’t make him a pedophile.

    I realize in your profession you confuse the definitions, and in fact think one defines all, but that confusion leads to such statements as “you’re a pedophile” when talking about an 18 year old with a 16 year old. And that is a segue…

    Thirty states have the age of consent at 16, 9 at 17, the remainder at 18. But that isn’t the whole picture, because many of those states have proximity rules (Indiana has 18 prosecutable if other is 14, look the rest up). It isn’t cut and dried across the states. The 18 BS is a Federal standard that requires crossing state lines. I read this crap all the time from supposedly knowledgeable people that really have no effing clue at how variable it is.

    The first sign of ignorance on this subject is using “18”. And yeah I fall into the same trap even though I know better. It’s a myth hard to let go. But it needs to be shit canned.

    This was just all sorts of stupid:”So you stand clearly in the pedophile camp then. So blind that you can’t realize that it’s wrong for an adult to be seeking a sexual relationship with a young teenager or child What if a male teacher had done this to your daughter? Still just a matter of age right? You are blinded by your own stupidity.” Stacked Hats wrote nothing of the sort, and you went into all sorts of having no clue about the laws across the USA, besides making straw-men that are best burned if only to make a statement for intelligence.

    I know you’re lost on the difference between grammar and semantics. Your grammar was fine, but your semantics were illustrative. You took what SH wrote and turned it into “adult with young teenager or child”. What if it was with an old teenager or not a child? What then for you?

    The problem here is birthdays and parents.

  • Stacked Hats

    I don’t play footsie with violent state worshiping fascists mother fuckers like you who want to hold guns to peoples’ heads to get what they want. So go lick t’s boots while Wow sucks him off.

  • t.

    Areil: I was just “getting his goat” as they say. I couldn’t possible care any less about a fool such as he. Low brow insults from a low brow thinker. What is ad is that he can’t see the larger point, can’t see past his emotional response. Typical for mist if the “cop blockers” on this site. Facts and logic escape them, emotions rule.

  • Stacked Hats

    Of course I can see the big picture, you jackbooted fuck. But that’s not what this story is about, and you are too stupidly blinded by your obedience to the “law” to see it any other way. So go fuck off and find Wow and Justin. They are looking for you.

  • t.

    And you continue with the dumb. Earlier I commented that, yes, these are just arbitrary numbers / ages. But what are those choices? Should the police, law and society not respect the rights and responsibilities of the young girls parents? You are clearly still caught up in the emotions of it and not thinking beyond that. Youmdont like 18-15. OK, What about 21-14? 30-15? Plug in whatever arbitrary ages youd like, the results are the same. As I clearly pointed out earlier, these laws are in place to stop younger teens / kids who aren’t emotionallymature from being overly influenced and preyed upon by older people for sex. You, in your blind stupidity, can’t see past the intentional set up emotional component of the story. How easily lead you are.

  • Jean

    t.
    The ages are NOT Arbitrary. As I said – 40 year olds with 16 year olds. If the MALE is the older one – he’s a rapist and goes to prison as a sex offender and child molestor. (Probably rightly so.)
    But reverse the sexes, and HE can be orderd to pay child support! So I guess those ages don’t really mean jack schitt, do they? It’s just Who Has the Penis. And the one with the Penis must pay. Evil penises!

    Do you even listen to yourself? EVER? Or are you just always playing Devil’s Advocate (IE, Trolling)?
    What is legal on Thursday shouldn’t be illegal on Friday (and vice-versa, with alcohol being the prime example.)
    Here’s another example: If she’s old enough to know that shaking her tits in my face gets my attention, she’s old enough to know what goes along with it, and that SOME men (and women) will follow up REGARDLESS of HER wants. So she shouldn’t be shaking them in my (or anyone else’s) face unless she wants the follow-through. And if she DOES follow through – not forced, she initiates – it should automatically be legitimate. She asked, someone answered, done deal.

    VOIDABLE contracts are NOT unenforceable. Should the terms of the contract be broken, the “results” or costs of breaking the contract apply. Voiding the contract is separate from default on the contract. You can’t keep the car and decide that the contract is void, unilaterally. You must return the car. You can’t total the car, declare the contract void, and walk away. You’re still on the hook to fulfifll relevant terms of contract. There’s an exchange of value to be satisfied. Turning in 5 million soda cans won’t stop your need to pay cash. (Let’s pretend the refund value of the cans would cover the dollar amount; doesn’t matter, soda cans aren’t currency.)

    We are talking about a law here that is used to penalize teenagers for getting married, WITH PARENTAL CONSENT, even. But “the law is the law.” So, if Congress passes a law saying it’s legal to kill Americans, would you just start shooting? What if they stated that Evangelical Christians are now deemed a threat to the State? Will you help track down each Evengelical Christian and brand a cross on their forehead, “because it’s the law”?

    Jawohl, Mein Fuhrer! Ve vill teach de nasty Joos to defame der Fuhrer! Into de cars, svine!

    Reductio ad absurdem? Only if we hadn’t already seen this countless times throughout history.

    No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

    You KNOW which one you serve.

    (BTW, not an Evangelical here. Lapsed Catholic, in fact.)

  • Wow

    Stacked Hats says:
    May 24, 2013 at 6:07 am
    “I don’t play footsie with violent state worshiping fascists mother fuckers like you who want to hold guns to peoples’ heads to get what they want”

    Who said anything about playing “footsie”? You strike me as the type who would hold a gun to someone’s head if you wanted something they had.

  • t.

    Jean: I don’t know what happened in your life, but I definitely sense a strong anti-woman vibe in many if your posts. Now, that’s OK as you are entitled to think what you wish and we are all influenced but the things that happen to us during lifes journey.

    But things don’t exist in a vaccum guy. The parents of the 15 year have rights and responsibilities to their child. This didn’t just start on Tuesday and its now just a problem on Friday. It was surely a LNG term issue and the parents couldn’t get this 18 year to stop. So they reached out for assistance.

    By “arbitrary ages” I mean that legislators picked a reasonable age gap. Like you pointed out…on Tuesday it was fine because they were both children. On Friday….one wasn’t anymore. 2 15 year old kids doing this? No laws broken. Why? Be cause what is being sought is to stop a predatory nature of older people preying on young teens. Its really just that simple.

  • deepelemblues

    Who cares about these hypothetical situations.

    One was 15, the other 17. 17 turns 18 so now it’s a crime.

    No one should be prosecuted for having consensual sex with a 15 year old when they were 17 when the relationship started.

    It is a total fucking joke, 2 years and some months age difference = crime.

    Just ridiculous. Disagree all you want, you have something wrong in your head. We have laws against nonconsensual sex, consensual sex between people 2 years apart in age is not a crime period.

  • t.

    blues: I’m not saying that I even agree with it all. But where do you draw the line? Legislatures have drawn it at various ages. I problem is how frightening it is how few here think there should be any limits at all.

  • justgottheblues4u

    Question:

    Do the cops have a right to tell you how to live your life regardless of the age that you are as if they gave birth to you?

  • t.

    4u: It’s not “the cops” that passed the law. So apparently you think it’s ok for a 40 year man to “date” and have sex with a 12 year old then? No limits to any kind of behaviors at all?

  • deepelemblues

    T, I would do it like this:

    If she or he is under 16 and you’re 18 or over, no dice.

    If both of you are under 18 when the relationship starts, that’s fine. Unless the age difference is 3 years or more. I feel as uncomfortable about 17 year olds dating 14 year olds as I do about 18 year olds dating 15 year olds.

    If he or she is 13 or under and you’re 15 or older, no dice.

    If he or she is under 13 and you’re 14 or older, no dice.

    That’s how I’d do it, I see a big difference between a 13 year old and a 15 year old, a big difference between 14 and 17, a big difference between 12 and 14, etc.

    Yeah that sounds a little complicated but those are the numbers that just seem common sense to me.

    http://cbs12.com/news/top-stories/stories/vid_7610.shtml

    Kaitlyn has rejected the plea deal, go Kaitlyn! Make them take you to trial and get a jury to convict you if they wanna restrict your freedom over some bullshit.

  • t.

    Blues: I don’t get you. You layout your own complicated formula (pretty much just like every legislature did….ages may vary some…but pretty much the same) but then applaud her for standing up for what she did? Is it just me that sees that as an iinconsistency?

  • Ariel

    t.,

    “I was just “getting his goat” as they say.” by misusing the term pedophile to the extant of in “the pedophile camp” just isn’t good. For those of us who have had to go through this crap in our families terms are important.

    I realize cops have to grow a callous, but for others it’s a wound.

  • Ariel

    My spelling is in the whole: extent not extant. Two puns for the price of one.

  • t.

    Ariel: “For those of us who had to go through this crap in our families”. Your statement. Let it sink in. Go back and read it in context if you’d like.

    The you get girl has a family as well. There always that flip side of the coin. You and so money others here, like the idiot Stacked Hats, think there shouldn’t be any limits. Pedophiles and NAMBLA have the same ideas.

    But that young girl has a family. Parents with rights and responsibilities. Your “wound” is having salt poured in by the vary people you defend.

    Your comment. Own it.

  • Ariel

    t., 05/27/13 @ 0039,

    That was a bunch of disjointed, irrational crap. I’d quote you (or requote in your English) but it’s too painful. If there was a Darwin Reward for intellectual death, you’d be a front-runner.

    I’ve had 8 years to let things sink in. I’ve renounced one entire side of my family. My wife, her siblings, and I am that young girl’s family, as well the side that supported her. We followed our rights and responsibilities. I renounced those that protected the pedophile for good reason; that side wanted me to commit a felony and my daughter to get no help, just shut up forever.

    I’m not arguing for no limits, have never argued that except in your fetid fantasy; I’m arguing for reasonable and rational limits that take into account teenage sexuality. I argue for “Romeo and Juliet” laws so that an 18 year old Senior having sex with a 17 year old Senior, or 16 year old Junior, or 15 year old Sophomore, isn’t branded a sex offender. I’m arguing that the laws are wrong, wrong-headed, and cause more harm than the harm supposedly done.

    I am not arguing that a 15 year old can touch a 6 year old’s genitals or expose himself or herself to that 6 year old. When you can’t make distinctions you prove yourself a danger equal to the act you wish to stop. You cause harm by your ignorance.

    I do not defend pedophiles (I gave you the damn definitions and you went back to pedophile is “all”, willful ignorance). I’ll only address NAMBLA in that it stinks of your ass, from which you pulled it. NAMBLA is one group of perverts, another group supports these irrational laws and can’t understand what “pedophile” actually means. At least the majority of states understand what constitutes teenage sexuality and do not equate it to pedophilia.

    As for salt in a wound, you are that salt too. You are just one side of the same coin. You are as responsible in your ignorance because you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. And will ever be so, because you show an inability to learn. Your return to pedophile is a clear example.

    Your entire response is shallow, ignorant, and offensive to anyone that has put more thought into it than what you did by just grabbing your balls and thinking that is thought.

    Your ignorant comment is all yours, and indicative of you. Own it in ignorance. Willful ignorance.

  • t.

    Ariel: I used a caricature….an exaggeration….to help clarify the discussion. @deepelmblues stepped into it a little bit. But YOU dove in and smashed your head on the bottom of the pool. Here’s why:

    Look at your last 2 comments. At 8:19 pm you are pleading for understanding as it is an awful thing to go through for families At 10:31 pm you are just all over the place about this. In the same paragraph, you call for “reasonable and rational limits” but 2 sentences later you call the reasonable laws already in place “wrong, wrong headed”. Which is it? Those are opposing viewpoints. Or are just arguing for different ages? 18/15 is ok? How about 16/13? Want a bigger span? 18-14? How about 16-12? 4 years is 4 years no matter how you slice it. You can’t have one without the other. If 18-15 is good so should 16-13 and 15-12. Or is that unreasonable?

    You claim to be a parent and victim of a similar type of crime. One where and older person took advantage of a younger child. The ages don’t really matter, it’s the victimizing of you g kids who aren’t mature enough to decide and act on their own.

    You talk about intellectual death, you have committed suicide on this topic. You got so caught up in the titilating nature of this story, 2 girls, that you can’t even see. To back and look at your posts / arguements on this topic. You allowed that fact that these are both girls to blind you and you are now arguing against yourself. Re-read your brilliance inthe third paragraph of your 10:31pm comment and see you arguing against your own position. Blind.

    Guy I guess I should apologize for throwing out the bait and then reeling you in like I did. But I won’t. You get so pompous thinking that you are the smartest and most experienced guy in every room. Clearly you are not.

    As for the salt in the wound. You not only want that wound to fester, you want other kids wounded as well. You are so close to the tree that you have bark up your nose and you still can’t see it.

  • Ariel

    t.,

    Now you’re doing actual debate and that’s a great step in the right direction. This issue has so many emotional prejudices that going after my actual words is a great leap forward.

    At 20:19 I’m pleading to use the damn term properly. This post is not pedophilia, and use of “pedophile camp” diminishes the damage pedophilia does by misconstruing it into teenage sexuality.

    At 22:31 I’m writing that the laws in place in too many states are wrong headed. I gave you my limits, all were teenagers in HS and the span was 18-15: I have no idea why you took it further when I was quite plain on it.

    I don’t claim, when I say it happened in my life I don’t claim and I don’t have to; my daughter was, and the age difference makes a big effing non-avoidable, unarguable difference. I gave you a hint that was lost on you: 15 on a 6 year old. Age makes a big fucking difference when the child is actually pre-pubescent.

    “kids who aren’t mature enough to decide and act on their own.” The problem with this is that it encompasses both the 18 year old and 17 year old, or any combination I gave you and not the ones you made up. Teenage sexuality is not adult sexuality.

    “You got so caught up in the titilating (sic) nature of this story, 2 girls, that you can’t even see.” I saw nothing titillating in this story. Nothing whatsoever. I had a charge that was bisexual that needed a home, I took her in to protect her. It was a financial hardship, but she was more important. Her sexual proclivities meant nothing to me. You project; I’m 58, how old are you and where lie your sexual fantasies? This isn’t about the sex, it’s about reasonable laws.

    The rest of your argument in that paragraph is just nonsense, not to mention incoherent, which kind of follows. You assumed something and ran with it. Poorly.

    Check the hook, there’s nothing on it. Baiting is setting up someone to respond with an argument that you have already formulated a rebuttal, and one that addresses the argument you expected. It has a focus predetermined and ready. Just asserting doesn’t make it so. My profession was making arguments where authority has to be proven; yours starts with authority self-presumed and descends from there. Bait the hook next time, you may catch me.

    The pomposity is just me working on vocabulary and proper argument. You have skill sets I don’t, and I have skill sets you don’t. The shame is that you think yours includes mine.

    “As for the salt in the wound. You not only want that wound to fester, you want other kids wounded as well.” No what I want is that you, and the whole edifice that is “Justice”, don’t wound those kids further. You, as a LEO, live with the letter of the law. My point is that both the letter and, too often, the spirit are wrong. When the spirit is right, the letter as enforced is too often wrong because it ignores the spirit. A little Thoreau for you.

    “You are so close to the tree that you have bark up your nose and you still can’t see it.” I have no response to the irony of that statement.

  • t.

    So, after all of that nonsense….you still offer up nothing. Its OK that you can’t grasp it. Really it is. But you wanting to deny the parents, of the younger girl, deny them their rights as parents….is still wrong.

    Would you have been OK if it was a 9 year old on that 6 year old? How about 10? 11? You can’t escape that it is still an older person preying on a younger child. Predatory behavior. Apparently your new stance is that it is inoncence., sweet young love. But I ask again…where are your limits? I gave several examples that you glossed over as you didn’t want to have acknowledge that you are standing, not even upon loose rock, but rubble. You keep dancing, the music stopped on your argument long ago.

  • Ariel

    t.,

    All you did is make a dismissive assertion, then move the goalpost. You did as well some really sophistic rhetorical flourishes.

    Glossing over, even ignoring, is your form of argument not mine. I was specifically writing on teenage sexuality, with a further point of quit using pedophilia wrongly. You keep going to the extreme thinking you make a point by ignoring the subject.

  • Ariel

    t.,

    Oh, as for limits, I’ve given them, and the concepts, over and over on the subject at hand. You can’t find them because you refuse to see them.

  • t.

    No. You haven’t set any. You are for no reasonable limits and putting children at risk. You lost both the argument and any moral standing. Just face it.

  • Ariel

    No, t., I did. You continue to make the immoral, even amoral, argument because you see law as the moral argument. Teenagers aren’t children , to keep to topic, but aren’t adults. The laws need ot reflect that or the laws are just, and unjust, application of adult sexuality on teenagers.

    I gave the limits, you ignored them, and asserted they didn’t exist. You will continue to do so. You put children in prison by your unthinking adherence to unjust laws. Who puts children at more risk?

    I’m going to do a cross-comment across a number of posts to drive this home. You don’t support what is moral, you shouldn’t ever make the argument, you support the law as it is. The law changes by people making moral arguments and political arguments to force unjust laws into just. Our laws have changed too many times to argue that law represents “moral standing”.

    I’m likely more prudish on sex than you are, if only given your profession’s tendency to commit sex crimes above the general populace. Or that I want a greater gradation on

    Still fighting for Jim Crow? Or the anti-miscegnation laws that weren’t confined to the South? Still fighting against Joyce, Cleland, or MIller? Your profession enforced those laws, because your profession doesn’t enforce anything other than the law. Moral, amoral, or immoral. You can’t tell the difference. You enforce the law.

    It’s the rest of us that determine the law’s morality and it’s justice. You by profession represent less than 0.3% of the population, you barely rise to a minority voice. What’s worse, your voice is just a parroting of the laws, with no judgement on those laws. You don’t represent the body politic, you represent only the government.

  • Ariel

    Sorry, a hanging sentence “Or that I want a greater gradation on” becomes “age of consent”. Given how often cops violate sex laws, I can only assume a change in age of consent would interfere with the job.

  • Ariel

    So now my cross-comment to all LEOS from t.’s “I have to protect EVERYONES RIGHTS. You are only concerned with YOUR RIGHTS.” I use “you” for the profession

    No you enforce the law. If tomorrow the law was “free speech is confined to a 100 yard radius” at a municipal center, you’d enforce that law. If tomorrow the law said “round up Muslims” you would enforce that law. You enforced Jim Crow. You enforced anti-miscegnation laws. You beat bloody the Labor movement, the movement that gave you your Unions and wrongly because private isn’t public. If tomorrow SCOTUS made the 4th and 5th moot by decree, you’d move accordingly. You wouldn’t wait for the amendment, SCOTUS would suffice.

    If the laws are wrong, you enforce them. You aren’t a moral agent, you never have been. Your profession isn’t based on moral agency, it’s based on enforcing the law. You enforce laws even if morally wrong. You need to get that. You need to understand your part in injustice, accept it, and realize who you actually are: you enforce laws, no matter the morality. You aren’t moral agents, you enforce the law.

    The rest of us determine the law and it’s moral worth. You don’t, your profession has nothing to say on it. You are not moral agents.

  • t.

    Areil: Just accept that you are seriously off course….and intentional so….just because you want to “win’ an argument. Your stance is both morally bankrupt and simply wrong. You chose to place innoncnce in the sights of those that want to prey upon it. Sure sounds like the moral high ground now doesn’t it?

  • Slappy

    youre a!stupid cunt t, i can have sex with children if i want to fagot

  • Ariel

    t.,

    Your whole post of 08:20 was one long straw man. It’s why you think you knocked me down so well. Makes it easy. The appeal to emotion was nice too (key word “innoncnce” just to help you).

    My stance is for Romeo and Juliet laws that recognize teenage sexuality, short version. Also, just to give you how morally bankrupt I am on sexuality, I think a 40 year old cop (or any other female that age) having sex with an 18 year old girl should go to prison. I’m a lot more prudish on this than you, especially given your profession’s predilection to have sex with girls or boys; I had to add this just because you likely wouldn’t be able to understand how “girls or boys” also includes 18 year olds.

    Read the article again and try, man, try to think out of your little box.

    Further reason for my comment across posts. I did it across posts because I knew all of you would give me fodder. Moral agent, no, law enforcer, yes.

  • t.

    Right. So you are for 17 year old boys screwing 13 year old girls. Morally bankrupt. That example has been your consistent stance all along. You call it innocent teenage sexuality. I call it predatory behavior. The elected legislatures…seem to all to be more in agreement with me than with you. Why? Its a reasonable approach. Honor is talking about 15-15, 16-15. But if you aren’t bright enough to understand that an 18 year old is far more developed and hopefully mature than a 15 year old….there is nothing else you say. I painted the exargerated picture to ,ure you out, and there you stood. Your moral bankruptcy is readily apparent. Made all the worse by your claim to victimization by a sexual predator in your own family. While certainly not the same, still similar types of behaviors. Predator and Prey.