Reminder: Roman Polanski raped a child

RStringfield said:
I will argue it. Stat rape, which implies consent, is different than forcible rape. If you don't understand that then you are clearly a retard.

If you drugged your victim, without her knowledge and even with her knowledge when we are talking about a child, then consent is in question. What's wrong with that?

Stat rape is a crime and should be, but it is not the same as forcible rape. With stat rape we are talking about a criminal that fails to control their impulses in a consensual act, consent is not given legally but in reality. In the other case we are talking about a violent criminal who does not care about consent. That's a distinct difference.

Your great grandmother may well have been married and bearing children before she was able to fully consent, by today's law. Due to culture we NOW take a dim view of that and, probably, rightfully so. But, It is still different than forcible rape.
Click to expand...

You can try to say I'm the one retarded; but all you're doing, is making yourself look foolish.

Let me spell it out for you:
T-H-E-R-E
C-A-N
B-E
N-O
C-O-N-S-E-N-T
W-H-E-N
T-H-E
O-T-H-E-R
P-E-R-S-O-N
I-S
U-N-D-E-R-A-G-E

Just curious, what does the long distant past have to do with today's laws??
 
Yurt said:
there are in fact "degrees" of statutory rape, in that the age of the minor is considered in sentencing....

statutory rape and forcible rape are not even close with regards to moral standards....statutory rape is malum prohibitum while forcible rape is malum in se....quite a difference
Click to expand...

True; but his argument is pivoted on CONSENT and children can not give consent.
 
RStringfield said:
Ad hom and an extremely despicable one.

Why did you put "technically" in caps? I can only guess that you understand there is a difference between consent by law and consent in reality.

I am not implying that it is not a crime (neither did water). It is a crime. But it is different than forcible rape, TECHNICALLY (i.e. legally) and in reality.
Click to expand...

I put it in CAPs; because you used in defense of trying to show that children can give consent.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Just curious, what does the long distant past have to do with today's laws??
Click to expand...

It demonstrates that the change in the law is largely based on culture. Unlike some other changes, this is not just a change from a bigoted past or some dark error of our past culture. Simply, longer life spans and greater wealth have changed how we view childhood.

True; but his argument is pivoted on CONSENT and children can not give consent.
Click to expand...

Legally, a child is not able to consent, that's why it is a crime. But, consent IS the difference between stat rape and forced rape. I don't understand your problem with that, because it is obviously true.
 
RStringfield said:
It demonstrates that the change in the law is largely based on culture. Unlike some other changes, this is not just a change from a bigoted past or some dark error of our past culture. Simply, longer life spans and greater wealth have changed how we view childhood.



Legally, a child is not able to consent, that's why it is a crime. But, consent IS the difference between stat rape and forced rape. I don't understand your problem with that, because it is obviously true.
Click to expand...
Some states make no distinction between the two. Colorado is one of them.
 
Damocles said:
Some states make no distinction between the two. Colorado is one of them.
Click to expand...

interesting law....different than california...i found this interesting:

18-3-402. Sexual assault.
(1) Any actor who knowingly inflicts sexual intrusion or sexual penetration on a victim commits sexual assault if:

(a) The actor causes submission of the victim by means of sufficient consequence reasonably calculated to cause submission against the victim's will; or

(b) The actor knows that the victim is incapable of appraising the nature of the victim's conduct; or

(c) The actor knows that the victim submits erroneously, believing the actor to be the victim's spouse; or

(d) At the time of the commission of the act, the victim is less than fifteen years of age and the actor is at least four years older than the victim and is not the spouse of the victim; or

(e) At the time of the commission of the act, the victim is at least fifteen years of age but less than seventeen years of age and the actor is at least ten years older than the victim and is not the spouse of the victim; or
Click to expand...

i couldn't find anything that talked about stat. rape if you're less than 10 years older than the "victim"....if you're not married

at least CO gives different punishments for each class...the above is only a misdemeanor
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
True; but his argument is pivoted on CONSENT and children can not give consent.
Click to expand...

in many states the consent is only about entering into legally binding contracts, don't forget that minors can consent to an abortion in some states...

and even in states of CO that have stat rape the same as rape, the punishment is far less for state rape of a certain age....
 
Are you sure Colorado doesn't make a distinction? I think forced rape of a minor probably goes into the aggravated rape category. If not all forced rapes go into that category, then they probably get sentenced much more harshly.
 
Watermark said:
Are you sure Colorado doesn't make a distinction? I think forced rape of a minor probably goes into the aggravated rape category. If not all forced rapes go into that category, then they probably get sentenced much more harshly.
Click to expand...

the distinction is in the class of sexual assault, but it is listed under the same heading as forcible rape....so i believe you're right, there is a distinction in terms of punishment....see post above yours where i cite co statute
 
Watermark said:
Nobody has the ability to drop charges for any crime. That's not how the system works. She filed a petition to drop the charges, and it's ultimately up to the prosecutor.
Click to expand...
She can refuse to testify and then what happens to the case?
 
froggie said:
We shall see what happens...
Click to expand...

He will continue to fight extradition. He will lose that fight. Then he will be sentenced to around 2-3 years in jail based on his flight. He will be out in 15 months for good behavior.

All of the above is just a prediction. It is purely my opinion on what will occur.
 
Superfreak said:
He will continue to fight extradition. He will lose that fight. Then he will be sentenced to around 2-3 years in jail based on his flight. He will be out in 15 months for good behavior.

All of the above is just a prediction. It is purely my opinion on what will occur.
Click to expand...
I just hope it happens soon, my heart goes out to his victim!
 
RStringfield said:
It demonstrates that the change in the law is largely based on culture. Unlike some other changes, this is not just a change from a bigoted past or some dark error of our past culture. Simply, longer life spans and greater wealth have changed how we view childhood.



Legally, a child is not able to consent, that's why it is a crime. But, consent IS the difference between stat rape and forced rape. I don't understand your problem with that, because it is obviously true.
Click to expand...

So if someone has sex with your child, it's going to make a difference if the perp says they consented or not.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
So if someone has sex with your child, it's going to make a difference if the perp says they consented or not.
Click to expand...

yes....are you telling me that is someone is 17.99 years of age.....that makes a moral difference between 18......

you do realize that during Jesus' time....before and after.....Women and Men married much younger, girls had children in their early teens.....look up Jesus' culture.....
 
Yurt said:
yes....are you telling me that is someone is 17.99 years of age.....that makes a moral difference between 18......

you do realize that during Jesus' time....before and after.....Women and Men married much younger, girls had children in their early teens.....look up Jesus' culture.....
Click to expand...

This conversation started with and should stay with a 13 year old.
Are you throwing out the 17.99 year old; because you can't defend your same comments when it's a 13 year old?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top