Florida strikes again- on teen sex- selective prosecution?

[pappyjohn99]

Those who are equating it with rape are going for nothing more than an emotional plea, just as the OP is going for the emotions and be damned with facts in the case.

CME- I disagree. The facts of the case are well defined. Those who want the child molester freed are playing the emotion card. The law is simple, and young people know it. (Or they did when I was that age. We discussed it durring smoke breaks at school.)

Because this is a girl, they want laws that have been on the books years waived. NO.NO. NO. Equal application of the law is fundamental in our country.

[Deleted]

How do you know it is she and her parents that are lying?  The young girl's parents very well could be lying to the police about WHEN the relationship took place. 
I support them in going public.  I hope that they DO get a hung jury.  This girl should not be considered a sex offender for the rest of her life. Yes, I would say the same thing if it were a boy. 

[pappyjohn99]

Because I read the police report. I think that it is repulsive to defend child molesters. 

[Deleted]

You do realize that people can lie in police reports...right?  It happens all the time. 

I think it is repulsive that someone wants to label an 18 year old high school student that was involved in a consensual relationship a child molester for the rest of her life. 

[cme1201]

May 24, 2013 15:48:34 GMT -5 imanangel said:

She did not start the relationship AFTER she turned 18.  According to the interview she gave on TV, she started the relationship when she was 17 and the other girl was 14.  The parents waited to press charges until she turned 18 and the other girl was 15.  The one girl turned 15 before the othe girl turned 18 according to the reports I read on FB.
Why did the parents wait until the one was 18?  I don't know about you, but if I do not want my 15 year old to date an 18 year old, then they don't date the 18 year old.  I am the parent.  If they want to go behind my back then they do not go ANYWHERE other than school!

Out of the mouth of her own defense attorney on her not accepting the plea deal ...

If this incident occurred 108 days earlier when she was 17, we wouldn’t even be here.

Read more: www.wjno.com/articles/1290-wjno---local-news-120981/audio-kelley-hunt-smith-says-child-11311817/#ixzz2UJ36JrQb

as a Floridian I have kept abreast of this situation, please pay attention to facts and not feelings.

[cme1201]

May 25, 2013 0:28:33 GMT -5 pappyjohn99 said:

Those who are equating it with rape are going for nothing more than an emotional plea, just as the OP is going for the emotions and be damned with facts in the case.

CME- I disagree. The facts of the case are well defined. Those who want the child molester freed are playing the emotion card. The law is simple, and young people know it. (Or they did when I was that age. We discussed it durring smoke breaks at school.)

Because this is a girl, they want laws that have been on the books years waived. NO.NO. NO. Equal application of the law is fundamental in our country.

pappyjohn99,

I understand where you are coming from but, the facts in this case are very well defined, and it is more than you have seen on the prime time news and read in fish wrappers. That is why I posted Florida's law that she was charged under AND our R&J Laws, she is guilty by admission of L&L:B o12u16 and she is by appearance available to use the R&J statue to remove the requirement to register (freeing her of the life sentence).

[pappyjohn99]

and she is by appearance available to use the R&J statue to remove the requirement to register (freeing her of the life sentence).

Thanks CME. Could you explain this statement above? I thought R&J did not apply, how does appearing in court remove the right to register?

[EVT1]

May 25, 2013 7:20:18 GMT -5 cme1201 said:

May 24, 2013 15:48:34 GMT -5 imanangel said:

She did not start the relationship AFTER she turned 18.  According to the interview she gave on TV, she started the relationship when she was 17 and the other girl was 14.  The parents waited to press charges until she turned 18 and the other girl was 15.  The one girl turned 15 before the othe girl turned 18 according to the reports I read on FB.
Why did the parents wait until the one was 18?  I don't know about you, but if I do not want my 15 year old to date an 18 year old, then they don't date the 18 year old.  I am the parent.  If they want to go behind my back then they do not go ANYWHERE other than school!

Out of the mouth of her own defense attorney on her not accepting the plea deal ...

If this incident occurred 108 days earlier when she was 17, we wouldn’t even be here.

Read more: www.wjno.com/articles/1290-wjno---local-news-120981/audio-kelley-hunt-smith-says-child-11311817/#ixzz2UJ36JrQb

as a Floridian I have kept abreast of this situation, please pay attention to facts and not feelings.

It seems these two are just about 3 years apart in age- so WTF with the rape and pedophile comments? This should not be criminal- just some sex- big deal.

[pappyjohn99]

For those that keep stating that the victims parents only waited until the pedophile turned 18 to begin case against her-

Earlier this week, the younger girl's parents, Jim and Laurie Smith, told CBS-12 News in West Palm Beach that they twice warned Hunt to stay away from their daughter.

www.gopusa.com/news/2013/05/25/case-of-high-school-lesbian-headed-to-trial/?subscriber=1

[cme1201]

May 25, 2013 7:44:10 GMT -5 pappyjohn99 said:

and she is by appearance available to use the R&J statue to remove the requirement to register (freeing her of the life sentence).

Thanks CME. Could you explain this statement above? I thought R&J did not apply, how does appearing in court remove the right to register?

First I would need to  know why you believe the statue would not apply to this case

[pappyjohn99]

I was under the impression that R&J applied to those with a three year age gap. I assume ( yea I know) that that gap would not be subject to variance. I would be grateful to know if my assumption is incorrect.

[pappyjohn99]

It seems these two are just about 3 years apart in age- so WTF with the rape and pedophile comments? This should not be criminal- just some sex- big deal.

Let me help. 18 - 14 = 4

You're welcome.

[EVT1]

So is 3.2 is closer to 4 or 3?

No matter how you look at it it is <4 years apart in age- not anything in the realm of pedophilia or rape. 

[Deleted]

May 25, 2013 7:20:18 GMT -5 cme1201 said:

May 24, 2013 15:48:34 GMT -5 imanangel said:

She did not start the relationship AFTER she turned 18.  According to the interview she gave on TV, she started the relationship when she was 17 and the other girl was 14.  The parents waited to press charges until she turned 18 and the other girl was 15.  The one girl turned 15 before the othe girl turned 18 according to the reports I read on FB.
Why did the parents wait until the one was 18?  I don't know about you, but if I do not want my 15 year old to date an 18 year old, then they don't date the 18 year old.  I am the parent.  If they want to go behind my back then they do not go ANYWHERE other than school!

Out of the mouth of her own defense attorney on her not accepting the plea deal ...

If this incident occurred 108 days earlier when she was 17, we wouldn’t even be here.

Read more: www.wjno.com/articles/1290-wjno---local-news-120981/audio-kelley-hunt-smith-says-child-11311817/#ixzz2UJ36JrQb

as a Floridian I have kept abreast of this situation, please pay attention to facts and not feelings.

Please explain to me how one is supposed to pay attention to the FACTS when the FACTS change according to which report you read or watch?
Just because someone says something in a police report, that doesn't make it true.  IF it is indeed a FACT that the parents warned the girl to stay away from their daughter, then yes, I agree they have a right to press charges.  Up until this point those facts were not being reported.  Every report I read or watched stated that they knew about the relationship and didn't do anything until after the girl turned 18. The reports stated that the relationship started when the girl was 17 not 18.  So I guess you have to decide which report is true. News is always biased depending on which direction the paper/channel leans.  

[pappyjohn99]

So an adult was molesting a child. EVT and Angel think that is OK. Please tell me if I am reading this wrong.

[zibazinski]

14 and even 15 are still trying to find themselves. An 18 year old has no business hanging around them. Do I agree with the laws? Not really but change them or live with the consequences. Funny her parents had so little control. Or not so funny. Does the 18 year old have any parents? I'd have talked to them about keeping their adult "child" away from my minor. I talked to a young mans parents about staying away from DD or else and guess what? His dad told him DD wasn't worth the hassle and it was obvious I was a mom who was going to make trouble. He was SO right! He moved onto other prey. Yes, he was over 18 and she was 14 at the time. I also dated seniors when I was in high school but they weren't  pressuring me for sex. Times have changed.

[cme1201]

May 25, 2013 18:49:39 GMT -5 pappyjohn99 said:

I was under the impression that R&J applied to those with a three year age gap. I assume ( yea I know) that that gap would not be subject to variance. I would be grateful to know if my assumption is incorrect.

Assumption is the mother of all fuckups ...

I placed the applicable statues for those who actually cared about what the law said in post 41

943.04354 Removal of the requirement to register as a sexual offender or sexual predator in special circumstances.—

(1) For purposes of this section, a person shall be considered for removal of the requirement to register as a sexual offender or sexual predator only if the person:
(a) Was or will be convicted or adjudicated delinquent of a violation of s. 794.011, s. 800.04, s. 827.071, or s. 847.0135(5) or the person committed a violation of s. 794.011, s. 800.04, s. 827.071, or s. 847.0135(5) for which adjudication of guilt was or will be withheld, and the person does not have any other conviction, adjudication of delinquency, or withhold of adjudication of guilt for a violation of s. 794.011, s. 800.04, s. 827.071, or s. 847.0135(5);

(b) Is required to register as a sexual offender or sexual predator solely on the basis of this violation; and

(c) Is not more than 4 years older than the victim of this violation who was 14 years of age or older but not more than 17 years of age at the time the person committed this violation.

The above is the statue meaning 1, she is charged under one that allows use of law. 2. 4 year age difference between 14 and 17 so by appearance she qualifies.

Imanangel said: Please explain to me how one is supposed to pay attention to the FACTS when the FACTS change according to which report you read or watch?

Facts: By admission in police report she had sex with a person under age 16 in the state of Florida, She was over the age of 18 at the time the sex act took place, the parents of the minor asked police to step in, police choose to charge her with Lewd & Lacivious: Battery person over 12 under 18 which was written into Florida Law in 1943, it has been law in the state for many years, just because it has finally been applied to a cute lesbian doesn't mean that it is wrong. It is designed to protect minors from bad decisions. 1000 of men (18-19) college students are hit with it because of young girls attending college parties. Unfortunatly for this girl she doesn't have a legal leg to stand on

[pappyjohn99]

I care. Thanks CME.

[Virgil Showlion]

evt1: Suppose a male swimming instructor, 18, develops a relationship with a girl, 14, wherein he provides her with an additional half hour of swimming instruction in exchange for fifteen minutes of oral sex in the locker room. There is no formal agreement or quid pro quo, just an implicit understanding that the instructor only persists in the arrangement because of the sex. Furthermore, the girl is infatuated with the man and indeed prides herself on her ability to please him.

Given this, a judge may take all of this into consideration when sentencing, but supposing we changed the "sexual battery" laws (stat rape laws, by another name) so that the cutoff was 18 and 13 rather than 18 and 14, this man's clear abuse of his position would be entirely beyond the reach of the law.

The relationship is entirely consensual. The fact that he's her instructor may get him into professional trouble, but the laws don't stipulate "statutory rape can only occur if the older party is in a position of some kind of instructional authority over the younger". The laws don't differentiate between 'skeevy' relationships and plain vanilla relationships. They don't care where the sex takes place. And all of these facts are good, given the law can't reasonably make these kinds of distinctions. We'd end up with a million esoteric rules on what does and does constitute statutory rape.

As it stands, the law says 18 and 14 is statutory rape (or the legal equivalent in the case of homosexual women). Do you wish to change this? Do you wish to put conditions on it? What would those conditions be? How would you personally define the law so that the perpetrator in the OP couldn't be charged while the man in my example could be?

It's clear you're upset by this case because you believe homosexual women are being persecuted, but have you found any evidence of legal malfeasance, and have you (for even a moment) considered the implications of loosening up the laws?

[pappyjohn99]

Interviews with the parents of the people involved.

www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/25/parents-of-kaitlyn-hunts-alleged-victim-we-had-no-choice-but-to-report-lesbian-relationship/

[billisonboard]

I am, and think we all should, send out our best wishes to the prosecutor and judge in this difficult case; a case made all the more trying now that it has become a media circus.

[Virgil Showlion]

I am, and I think we all should be, not wasting any more time analyzing an unremarkable criminal case in Florida.

For interested parties, some real news going on right now: Russian Plans for BRICS to Dismantle the Dollar System

Just in case I'm accused of not providing an alternative.

[EVT1]

May 26, 2013 11:01:37 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

evt1: Suppose a male swimming instructor, 18, develops a relationship with a girl, 14, wherein he provides her with an additional half hour of swimming instruction in exchange for fifteen minutes of oral sex in the locker room. There is no formal agreement or quid pro quo, just an implicit understanding that the instructor only persists in the arrangement because of the sex. Furthermore, the girl is infatuated with the man and indeed prides herself on her ability to please him.

Given this, a judge may take all of this into consideration when sentencing, but supposing we changed the "sexual battery" laws (stat rape laws, by another name) so that the cutoff was 18 and 13 rather than 18 and 14, this man's clear abuse of his position would be entirely beyond the reach of the law.

The relationship is entirely consensual. The fact that he's her instructor may get him into professional trouble, but the laws don't stipulate "statutory rape can only occur if the older party is in a position of some kind of instructional authority over the younger". The laws don't differentiate between 'skeevy' relationships and plain vanilla relationships. They don't care where the sex takes place. And all of these facts are good, given the law can't reasonably make these kinds of distinctions. We'd end up with a million esoteric rules on what does and does constitute statutory rape.

As it stands, the law says 18 and 14 is statutory rape (or the legal equivalent in the case of homosexual women). Do you wish to change this? Do you wish to put conditions on it? What would those conditions be? How would you personally define the law so that the perpetrator in the OP couldn't be charged while the man in my example could be?

It's clear you're upset by this case because you believe homosexual women are being persecuted, but have you found any evidence of legal malfeasance, and have you (for even a moment) considered the implications of loosening up the laws?

Nope- it doesn't matter that she is gay- I only questioned if she is being treated any differently because of it- that would be wrong.  I asked the question in the OP if it was SOP in FL to charge people like this with felonies and we are only hearing about it because of the gay/pretty thing much like we hear about the pretty teachers banging their students, and the pretty white girls who go missing thanks to the media whores.

I think the 4 year law with a little judicial lattitude is appropriate.  Sex between minors can be handled under the juvenille system.  It is just a small matter of the 'adult' when the adult is barely an adult and like in this case a fellow student.  The same problem could arise if the two had started dating earlier and the girl was now 20 and in college while her GF was still in HS. Circumstances matter.

In no case do I believe these types of cases deserve a permanant record or felony charge. In your case I wouldn't charge the guy with a felony either- maybe some abuse of authority- if an 18yo somehow had a job at the school- and of course you fire the idiot.

People just have a hang-up on sex- to the point where we are willing to jail someone because they gave another human being a little pleasure.  I know sex-ed isn't very popular in some of these states like FL- but here is an idea- include statutory rape laws in the first year of HS.  You think about it for a minute there are a shitload of people 18 dating other people under 16- apparently the age of consent there- so tell me- do we have a shitload of rapists and pedophiles in our schools as pappy thinks?  

[Virgil Showlion]

People just have a hang-up on sex- to the point where we are willing to jail someone because they gave another human being a little pleasure.  I know sex-ed isn't very popular in some of these states like FL- but here is an idea- include statutory rape laws in the first year of HS.  You think about it for a minute there are a shitload of people 18 dating other people under 16- apparently the age of consent there- so tell me- do we have a shitload of rapists and pedophiles in our schools as pappy thinks?

Obviously you're preaching to an audience that has 'a hang-up on' sex.

If your 14-year-old child sticking his/her face in adults' genitals is nothing more than "[giving] another human being a little pleasure", it will almost certainly go unreported unless you report it. That's your prerogative as a parent.

Pappy claims your attitude disgusts him. I'll just say that I'm glad you aren't a lawmaker and equally glad that you aren't my parent.

[EVT1]

You are hung up 'adult'- what I would do if I caught my child having sex is another matter.  I would not involve the police unless there was some other reason than some arbitrary age limit. 

Of course '14yo in an adult's genitals' sounds bad- because when we think of adults- we do not think of high school kids.  In reality it is not any  different than if it was a 17yo's genitals.

I wouldn't want to be a lawmaker- but at least those out there have figured out that HS kids have sex and it isn't worth ruining their lives over.  What would you do?  Leave it like the good old days where whomoever turns 18 first in a realtionship is automatically guilty of statutory rape if they have contact again? 

Where is your line?  Abstinence or hand cuffs unless both parties are over 18?  How would you as a judge handle this situation?  Maybe I am as glad you aren't a judge as you are that I stay out of politics.


BTW on the jail for pleasure thing I was referring more to prostutition because most of these HS cases do not involve jail.

[EVT1]

Interesting- the laws are all over the map- not a crime at all in other states:

www.cga.ct.gov/2003/olrdata/jud/rpt/2003-r-0376.htm

Booking photo and rotten plea deal:

www.firstcoastnews.com/topstories/article/314772/483/Florida-teen-rejects-plea-deal

Looks like a HS kid to me

     Under the deal offered by a Florida state attorney, Hunt would have to submit to house arrest for two years. She also would be labeled as a convicted felon and be required to attend sex offender counseling.

Fight like hell on this- no way I'd plead to a felony. 

[Virgil Showlion]

Even if the ages were 14 and 17 instead of 14 and 18, I can tell you that if my wife and I told our daughter to stay away from Joe Badnews, we told Joe Badnews to stay away from our daughter, and they insisted on defying us, I would prosecute Joe to the fullest extent of the law, his bright future be damned.

Having said that, i) a three-year difference in age wouldn't summarily disqualify Joe as boyfriend material in my mind, and ii) Joe would be history at any age if he wanted to have sex with my 14-year-old daughter.

If you want to do your parenting differently, go right ahead. Just be sure to let your kids know there are hardliners like me out there who will "ruin their lives" if they refuse to respect limits.

[billisonboard]

May 26, 2013 18:31:20 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

... How would you as a judge handle this situation? ...

If it were me, I would work to talk to each of the females involved. I would work to talk with friends, classmates, and teammates. I would work to talk to both of their parents, teachers, and coaches. I would seek social media information. I would then take all the information I had gained, run it through my fifty plus years of experience on the planet, and make the decision that I felt was in the best interest of the two young ladies.

[Virgil Showlion]

Under the deal offered by a Florida state attorney, Hunt would have to submit to house arrest for two years. She also would be labeled as a convicted felon and be required to attend sex offender counseling.

And yet she persisted in the relationship despite the parents' threats. Making her either criminally ignorant or pathologically stubborn. I suppose it will be up to the judge to decide which.

[EVT1]

That's assuming a jury would convict- would be kind of hard I think- especially as fickle as FL juries seem to be.  There is always jury nullification in cases like this.  I wonder how many would vote to convict if a misdemeanor was not available to fall back on.