Lumberjack
Come get some
only half the time
Lol
only half the time
Legally, he is considered a pedophile, he was in a position of authority and the boys were under 18.
pedophile is I believe a scientific term, not a legal term. Legally, he might be a statutory rapist. in reality though he is gay
pedophile is I believe a scientific term, not a legal term. Legally, he might be a statutory rapist. in reality though he is gay
thank this post if I proved legion incorrect
Grind should read this and get back to us:
http://law.justia.com/cases/illinois/court-of-appeals-third-appellate-district/1998/3970136.html
I'll understand if he doesn't.
thank you for understanding I have major ADD and wont be reading some boring as shit legal case
Although there is a medical definition of pedophilia, there also has to be a legal definition in order to have a standard by which to prosecute offenders.
After briefly reviewing the research on pedophilia, we argue that one major difficulty in conducting or interpreting such research lies in the different definitions "pedophilia" has received. Most important, much of the research has accepted a legal definition of pedophilia, treating all offenders convicted of "child molestation" as pedophiles, regardless of the age or appearance of the victim.
thank my post or suffer the consequencesI wouldn't say you proved him incorrect, but you offer more compelling evidence that Troll Twat.
How do you know he is not gay?
So why would he have sex with young men if he wasn't gay, that doesn't make sense?
How does IHA know he is?
He's a PED-O-PHILE.
How difficult is that to understand.
Pedophiles can't be gay?
The definition of paedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children. 17 year old young men are not children by any stretch of the imagination!! So it stands to reason that he is gay, only those with a political agenda would fail to see that.He's a PED-O-PHILE.
How difficult is that to understand.
Ask him. I asked you a question and you dodged it.