Fred Hall wrote:
> "Morpheus" <Morpheu@Dreamland.org> wrote in message
> news:0001HW.C1A9700100047868F0284530@news.easynews.com...
> > On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 18:54:56 -0800, TednAlice@gotcha.net wrote
> > (in article <5bm6o2d62vcf0s84ltqb4rji5p2vg2m18c@4ax.com>):
> >
> >> On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 00:11:20 GMT, Mephistopheles
> >> <no-fixed@address.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 23:43:15 GMT, Morpheus <Morpheu@Dreamland.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 02:59:37 -0800, Mephistopheles wrote
> >>>> (in article <tqu4o25equ51ghu7pq4h0btqb6lvg1udt9@4ax.com>):
> >>>>
> >>>>> In case you missed it, I'll repost verbatim a post made here today by
> >>>>> Baal. It fills one with despair.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> REPOST OF MESSAGE BY BAAL
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ***************************
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >>>>> Hash: SHA512
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.denverpost.com/ci_4783650
> >>>>> nation / world
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Girl, 13, charged as sex offender and victim
> >>>>> By Pamela Manson
> >>>>> The Salt Lake Tribune
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Article Last Updated:12/06/2006 01:12:35 AM MST
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Salt Lake City -- Utah Supreme Court justices acknowledged Tuesday
> >>>>> that they were struggling to wrap their minds around the concept
> >>>>> that a 13-year-old girl could be both an offender and a victim
> >>>>> for the same act -- in this case, having consensual sex with her
> >>>>> 12-year-old boyfriend.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The Ogden, Utah, girl was put in this odd position because she
> >>>>> was found guilty of violating a state law that prohibits sex with
> >>>>> someone under age 14. She also was the victim in the case against
> >>>>> her boyfriend, who was found guilty of the same violation by
> >>>>> engaging in sexual activity with her.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "The only thing that comes close to this is dueling," said Associate
> >>>>> Chief Justice Michael Wilkins, noting that two people who take
> >>>>> 20 paces and then shoot could each be considered both victim and
> >>>>> offender.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And Chief Justice Christine Durham wondered if the state Legislature
> >>>>> had intended the "peculiar consequence" that a child would have the
> >>>>> simultaneous status of a protected person and an alleged perpetrator
> >>>>> under the law.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The comments came in oral arguments on a motion asking the high
> >>>>> court to overturn the finding of delinquency -- the legal term in
> >>>>> juvenile court for a conviction -- against Z.C., who became pregnant
> >>>>> after she and her boyfriend engaged in sex in October 2003.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> State authorities filed delinquency petitions in July 2004, alleging
> >>>>> that each had committed sexual abuse of a child, a second-degree
> >>>>> felony if committed by an adult.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The girl appealed the petition, saying her constitutional right to
> >>>>> be treated equally under the law had been violated.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Her motion noted that for juveniles who are 16 and 17, having sex
> >>>>> with others in their own age group does not qualify as a crime.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Juveniles who are 14 or 15 and have sex with peers can be charged
> >>>>> with unlawful conduct with a minor, but the law provides for
> >>>>> mitigation when the age difference is less than four years, making
> >>>>> the offense a misdemeanor.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For adolescents under 14, though, there are no exceptions or
> >>>>> mitigation and they are never considered capable of consenting to
> >>>>> sex.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A juvenile court judge denied the motion by Z.C., who then admitted
> >>>>> to the offense while preserving her right to appeal to a higher
> >>>>> court. The boy did not appeal.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The Utah Court of Appeals last December upheld the judge's refusal
> >>>>> to dismiss the allegation, saying the law's "rigorous protections"
> >>>>> for younger minors include protecting them for each other. Z.C. then
> >>>>> appealed to the state Supreme Court.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> At Tuesday's arguments, Matthew Bates, an assistant Utah attorney
> >>>>> general, argued the prosecution of the girl was not unreasonable. He
> >>>>> said the statute in question is designed to prevent sex with
> >>>>> children who are 13 and younger, even if the other person is in the
> >>>>> same age group.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> By passing that law, legislators were sending a message, Bates
> >>>>> said: Sex with or among children is unacceptable.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Randall Richards, the girl's attorney, argued that prosecuting
> >>>>> children under a law meant to protect them is illogical.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "A child (victim) cannot also be a perpetrator in the exact same
> >>>>> act," Richards said.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The Utah Supreme Court will issue a ruling later.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> END OF MESSAGE
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *****************************
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You really could not make it up!!!!!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Over here in the UK, young boys & girls are in rut on a daily basis.
> >>>>> It's their hormones, stupid! (LOL)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And any under-age girl who ends up pregnant will be given the full
> >>>>> resources of Social Security. Financial support for her child, housing
> >>>>> or a flat if necessary, & unquestioned facilities to bring her baby
> >>>>> along with her to her local school if desired. I've seen it with my
> >>>>> own eyes. The days of Dickens' Oliver Twist being shamefully dumped in
> >>>>> the Workhouse are long gone. But an Utah State Penitentiary. Whew!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> God above us...... Juliet was 12, Chaucer's Wife of Bath was 12 (& had
> >>>>> already had 5 husbands. LOL), the Virgin Mary, tradition states, was
> >>>>> 12...... all these would have gone on the Sex Offender's List in Utah,
> >>>>> or Life in a State Penitentiary. What the fuck is happening out in
> >>>>> them Colonies!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Mephi
> >>>>
> >>>> You are right. The mind boggles.
> >>>>
> >>>> There are many cases where young boys and girls more or less innocently
> >>>> exploring each others' bodies (which I think is completely natural)
> >>>> being
> >>>> labeled 'sex offenders' . They are thus labeled for life as the lowest
> >>>> kind
> >>>> of criminal for committing what is a completely normal act ....
> >>>>
> >>>> It's in the name of religion, of course, but it is not particularly
> >>>> religious....it has more to do with some sort of social pathology.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> It's the same mind-set of a century ago when a man & a woman living
> >>> together without being "legally" married were said to be "living in
> >>> sin"!!!!!
> >>>
> >>> As if a couple who loved each other needed "permission" from some
> >>> cadaverous, bespeckled registrar or cleric, telling the pair "You can
> >>> now start tonight!" Big deal, mate, & thanks for letting us do it!!!!
> >>>
> >>> Put that against a damn sight more "legal" couples who hate each
> >>> other's guts & so are far more meaningfully living in sin.
> >>>
> >>> Mephi
> >>
> >> This is what happens when legislators pass bad laws in moments of
> >> public hysteria, something that has become a peculiar trait of our
> >> Yank brethren over the last several years. This type of situation is
> >> not uncommon at all, stateside. There was a case a few years ago of a
> >> 12 year old boy who put his hand down his little sister's pants while
> >> they were in the yard, and a nosey neighborhood wife saw it and called
> >> the police. The boy was arrested and charged, but I never learned the
> >> outcome. Of course, Amerika does not suffer from this hysteria
> >> alone--I recall a British mob attacking and severely beating a man
> >> because he looked like the image the authorities had released of a
> >> so-called child molester.
> >>
> >> *Oh well--mistakes will be made. At least their intentions were
> >> good.*
> >>
> >> I think assistant attorney general Matthew Bates' comment describes
> >> the problem perfectly. The Americans are so busy "sending a message"
> >> that they aren't receiving any.
> >>
> >> I agree with Mephi. It is a social pathology. I recall as a boy we
> >> children privately [and very CAREFULLY not to be caught by our
> >> parents, because we already had learned it was NASTY] prodded and
> >> probed and showed off our private parts, boys and girls. As kids,
> >> butts were the favorite--the funniest of the parts for some reason. I
> >> suppose American kids still do, but they'd best be careful. Before
> >> long they'll be subjected to the trauma of arrest and detention, a
> >> hearing before a juvenile court judge infront of their mortified and
> >> upset parents, a year of sex-offender counseling [and yes, the Yanks
> >> DO have juvenile level sex-offender programs that they require these
> >> young "perps" to go to] a long regime of mood altering drugs, years of
> >> therapy, and the ultimate and undying stigma of being so branded as a
> >> "homo" or a "pervert." Well, the message MUST be SENT!
> >>
> >> It has been a real treat to exchange ideas with you both.
> >>
> >> Hmmm ... In stark contrast to the aforesaid ... I wonder where
> >> Naughtzee Boy went?
> >>
> >> T&A
> >>
> >> [Hmmm ... "T" and "A"! Now that doesn't sound too wholesome, does it?
> >> *blush*]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Unfortunately it is not a matter of 'before long' as you indicate. I can
> > assure you it is happening now. Where is the pschiatric/psychological
> > community??
> >
> > Making a ton of money "treating" the little offenders, that's where.
>
> They are probably as disgusted with you kiddie fuckers as the rest of
> society.
>
They truly are hated worldwide.......
> >
|
|