Do you REALLY believe that Kaitlyn Hunt is a SEXUAL PREDATOR?

[jazzimov]

Yes, "the law" says that yadda yadda yadda.

But WHY was this law enacted in the first place?

There are older persons that will take advantage of the naivete of a younger person in order to have sex with them. That is what I believe the law was enacted to guard against.

But what if that older person was considered a peer of the younger person, and the older person did not intend to take advantage of the younger person but was indeed "in love" with them? The younger person may have truly been in "love" with the older person - or, as may of us know, it may have just been an infatuation in which the younger might have done anything to please the older person. Would the older person interpret this as youthful indiscretion, or would they merely take it as evidence that the younger person really "loved" them?

Ages such as "18" or "under 16" are merely guidelines, because the "line" has to be drawn somewhere. But before such laws are carried out, the intent of the "adult" has to be taken under consideration. Simply because one has a birthday doesn't mean that one magically gains new insight.

This relationship has gained National scrutiny because it involved a same-sex relationship. Which is sad, because it is a discussion we should have regardless of the gender of the parties involved.

This is the bottom line: Do you honestly believe that Kaitlyn was a sexual predator taking advantage of her victim's relative age and naivete, or was she "in love" and her intentions were pure?

Kaitlyn may have been stupid for doing what she did - but was she a predator? Should she be branded with that for the rest of her life?

For the record, I support the harshest punishment possible for true Sexual Predators who take advantage of our children. But is Kaitlyn one of those?

[we can do it]

1. No I do not. And I am sick of the nasty people who do.

[jazzimov]

2. Thank you!

[we can do it]

3. No problem

[dlwickham]

54. amen and +1

[pacalo]

55. That, plus jazzimov's OP, says it all for me.

[Art_from_Ark]

62. +1

I wonder what the "she's a sexual predator" crowd would think if it were their own kid who was being labeled a sexual predator?

[Ed Suspicious]

96. If an 18 year old were coming onto my somewhat emotionally immature14 year old daughter, I would

not be happy with said 18 year old.

[Art_from_Ark]

100. But, if that *18-year-old* were your daughter,

what would you think then?

[Ed Suspicious]

102. I would tell her to wise up and find hobby if she is unable to find interest in more emotionally

mature potential partners. I don't hold a double standard about it. I would not want my child to go to jail over it, but I would hope she would have the good sense to realize that 14 year old kids are children.

[Art_from_Ark]

104. Some 18-year-olds are still children, too

When I was 18, I might have been technically an adult (for most things, at least), but I certainly wasn't a *man*. I had quite a sheltered life and matured very little between 14 and 18.

Would I have gotten mixed up with a 14-year-old girl when I was 18? It's hard to say. I certainly wouldn't have initiated the relationship. But if the 14-year-old had initiated it, I really can't say what I would have done. Four years age difference wouldn't have seemed like so much, since it is feasible that we could have been attending my high school at the same time.

[Ed Suspicious]

108. I understand the impulse, it is a fuzzy thing. Some kids are more emotionally mature than others,

I'll grant you that. And hey, I'm not saying throw the book at the 18 year old necessarily, but I do object.

My daughter was being pressured into sex, sexting, sending pictures of here body over text by a more advanced 16 year old. She was "In Love" with him and he reciprocated that love. When I talked to her about thwarting his sexual advances until she had a chance to step back and evaluate his intentions, she took my advice. He, who was so in love, left her. She explained how she wasn't ready for that level of sexuality. He persisted for a week or two, but that was as far as this "love" would carry him. She was hurt and felt foolish that she could be so persuaded by a boy who would profess his love and in the end not hold those feelings. It was so cut and dried to me, but to her inexperienced mindset, this was a real slap in the face. She was dumbfounded that someone who she shared so much with could profess love and when the sex didn't follow, coldly dump her while telling her friends that he was just trying to use her for sex.

14 year old children in my experience are not qualified to make good decisions about sex.

[Art_from_Ark]

114. I don't disagree that

"14 year old children... are not qualified to make good decisions about sex."

What I do disagree with is the assumption that just because someone turns 18, they are automatically mature. Some are, but I certainly wasn't. Fortunately, I never had to deal with this sort of situation when I was 18, although when I was 14 I did have a chance to go out with a 17-year-old girl. Nothing ever came of it, but if something had come of it, especially after she had turned 18, would I have wanted her to go to jail, or even get in non-legal trouble over it? Hell no! Being responsible for someone going to jail for something like that would have been a horrible emotional burden for me to bear.

[we can do it]

149. and an unfair burden. There were quite a few senior-freshman couples when I was in HS.

It wasn't a big deal. Then the anti-sex, religiously insane crowd started labeling all sex as bad and we have kids doing what kids do naturally, experiment and suddenly they are criminals.

[we can do it]

148. How do you know it's not the 18 y/o who is immature and the 14 more mature?

Also- do you realize the lesbians almost always form emotional attachment before sexual? We are women, not men, so don't project how men act onto women.

[FreeState]

87. +1 n/t

[backscatter712]

126. +1000!

Fuck the authoritarian trash who want to wreck Kate's life with their scarlet-lettering.

[liberal_at_heart]

4. To me there is a big difference between a 14 year old and an 18 year old.

I was in love with an 18 year old when I was 14. I realize now that we were both wrong. I was too young and naive. He was also an alcoholic and pressured me to have sex until I gave in. I don't know the circumstances in which this 14 year old gave consent but I don't believe a 14 year old comprehends all the consequences involved in consenting to have sex therefore it is not consent.

[jazzimov]

11. Perhaps not,

but do you feel that you deserved to be branded a Sexual Predator for life?

Now that you are older you can see more - does that mean that for the rest of your life you should be Branded and forced to perform the same acts as those who purposely took advantage of younger victims - simply because they were too young to know better?

Would you place yourself in that same group?

[liberal_at_heart]

18. I was the one being taken advantage of. I would classify the guy I had sex with when I was 14 as a

sexual predator. Although I didn't press charges and neither did my parent, legally he was guilty of statutory rape. And yes there were physical, emotional and psychological effects for me due to this relationship. When I was old enough to figure out what had happened to me was statutory rape(which by the way was about the same time I turned 18, became an adult and started learning about the world around me) I felt very violated, dirty, and angry at the man who took advantage of me.

[jazzimov]

28. I am so sorry - I misread your post.

But, would you classify Kaitlyn's actions as the same as the person who took advantage of you?

What happened to you is the purpose of the laws as I interpret them. As a young 14yo, yes, I can see that you were vulnerable and that was manipulated.

But you cannot allow your personal experience to cloud perceptions.

And. please, don't beat yourself up because you made a bad decision when you didn't have the experience to know any better.
You have friends. :hugs:

[liberal_at_heart]

31. claiming to be in love is no excuse in my book. If you know someone is too young to have sex with

don't have sex with them. Be friends or even continue to date, but wait to have sex. I know us liberals can be pretty free wheeling when it comes to sex, but we have to protect our children. There are emotional and psychological consequences to having sex so young. That is why there are laws in place to protect them.

[jazzimov]

36. But what if you don't know?

18 is just an arbitrary age. We would hope that someone who is 18 would know better, but why would they?

Why would their feelings change overnight between the night that they are 17 yrs and 364 days old and when they wake up the next morning and are suddenly 18 yrs old?

Instead of arbitrary ages, they should be judged on their state of mind.

[liberal_at_heart]

40. If the 14 year old were instead 17 or 16 I might agree with you. But almost everyone understands

at 18 that you stay away from 14 year olds. It's one of those things that is just socially unacceptable, creepy, and icky and for good reason. Because you are dealing with a 14 year old child who does not understand what is happening to them.

[uppityperson]

53. Since you keep coming back to Kaitlyn, did she know?

[LadyHawkAZ]

37. There are emotional and psychological consequences to having sex

when you are not ready to have sex- this is true of any age and any amount of experience, not just for teenage virgins. I'm very sorry yours happened when you weren't ready for it, and that it caused you so much pain. Many teens are ready for it and do it with no negative emotional impact, though, and I don't feel that abstinence-or-jail is the proper thing to be teaching them.

[liberal_at_heart]

44. I don't think a 14 year old can be ready to have sex.

You may disagree with me, but the law does agree with me. We have laws for a reason, to protect the vulnerable. I'm getting out of this conversation. It just disgusts me that so many people don't think that 14 year olds should be protected from statutory rape.

[LadyHawkAZ]

46. We accept that a 14 year old should be able to decide

if they want birth control or an abortion. The law used to be against them, too. Cases like this, getting the attention of the public and changing public perceptions, are how laws like that get changed.

I was ready at 14. I'm not a special snowflake, either; there are teens who are ready at that age. And 15. And 16. And 17. I'm not willing to feed high schoolers to the (for-profit) prison system for having consenting sex with other high schoolers. They're vulnerable teens, too.

[zeemike]

72. I was ready at 13 if you would have asked me.

And I scored then with a 14 year old...You would have never convinced me then that I was to young....I consented and so did she...but neither of us was ready and it did have an effect on our emotional development...
There are 10 year old that are ready if you ask them...and are the prey of pedophiles.

[LadyHawkAZ]

82. There are 18+ year olds that aren't ready

Maturity differs. Do you think your 14 year old girlfriend should have gone to prison on a felony charge?

[zeemike]

93. For what?...neither of us was of the age of consent.

So we were both victims...and we we were both stupid, but to be fair I talked her into it, and she thought that she should do it if she loved me....don't you get it?....kids with so little life experience can be made to believe anything...and 18 year old has what, like 30% more life experience as a 14 year old...
That is why we have the laws we have...and why we say they cannot consent to sex.

[Ed Suspicious]

98. Very good response. nt

[LadyHawkAZ]

99. IIRC, the law regards two underage teens having sex

as being both in violation of the stat rape law, against each other, unless otherwise specified. So do you think you both should have gone to prison on a felony charge?

That is why our laws need to make sense. Also, situations like yours are why kids need to stop being taught that sex = love and be taught to make the decision to have sex when they are ready for sex, not before, and not just because they think it will make someone love them. We don't do that because we prefer to pretend teens have no hormones until their 18th birthday, so we give them abstinence education and guilt instead. Parents sometimes aren't mature, either.

[zeemike]

174. Do you think that 14 years old are adults?

We don't blame our children for things like this...we blame society for creating the situation that influence children, who have not yet developed emotionally or mentally to be able to see that it is wrong or harmful.
Perhaps 18 is an arbitrary age...but laws cannot be made and enforced by emotion and what one or some of us think...we cannot have law by unanimous consent...just as we cannot let children decide when they are ready for sex....well I guess we can, but it leads to disaster.

[LadyHawkAZ]

177. I'll put that down as a "No"

Let's review. The law in many places, which you are touting as absolute, considers what you two did as a crime against each other. Regardless of age, you were both at fault in the eyes of the law.

You don't think you ought to be, or have been, looking at felony charges for having sex with another teen. Even though the law considers what you did a crime, and you are saying that the law trumps all.

You don't think your partner ought to be, or have been, looking at felony charges even though she was the older of the two and theoretically more responsible, and should have just said no to you. Even though the law considers what she did a crime, and you are saying that the law trumps all.

Are you getting this point yet?

Do you think you can maybe try to extend some of the compassion, tolerance and excuses you're willing to use on yourself to other people's teenagers? These are not 5 year olds we're discussing, in spite of you, and others as well, trying to paint them as infants at 14 and quinquagenarians at 18. They are teenagers. Teenagers have sex in their teens around the world, and always have. There are countries who will kill them for it: that's the law there, nonmarital sex can result in lashings or stonings. Do you think that is a good law because it protects children? It is, after all, the law, and we can't let laws be enforced by emotion etc.

Your poor and underinformed judgement as a teenager, however tragic it is, should not be the justification for imprisoning other teenagers, nor should anyone else's, is the point I'm trying to make. That's allowing law to be influenced by emotion, if anything is.

I'll recommend this book to you, as I did to someone else last night.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0064TQDG6/ref=oh_d__o00_details_o00__i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Read and digest. The author has dumbed-down article-length versions of her research and its conclusions available online if you can't afford to buy the book, or your local library may carry it. I'd definitely recommend the book rather than the articles, since a lot of the relevant data points got left out of the condensed article versions.

[zeemike]

179. Totally bogus argument.

First, if a 14 year old cannot legally consent to sex then neither of us could....so no we could not have been charged with statutory rape.
And had the law caught us they would have turned us over to our parents because juvenile law is different because kids are by definition subject to "poor and underinformed judgement "....and is the reason the law protects them from the manipulations of older and more informed judgments of adults.

I am not passing judgment....the legal system does that...or at least is should as best it can....but if there is a law broken it needs to be addressed by the legal system...a law that protects children from being manipulated into sex or any other thing that may harm them then I want it enforced for all and do not want to carve out some special category because they were in love.

That is bullshit, and in my mind it reflects badly on progressives...
But I will look at that book...but my guess is that she will tell me what I already know...that kids have sex...obviously you know that I am a perfect example of that...and that happened to the sound of "Blueberry Hill" when Fats Domino made it popular.
This has nothing to do with those facts of life...but adults have an obligation to hold stuff like that to a minimum to keep children from getting progressively more sexualities at a younger and younger age....and that is where the real danger lies for many different reasons.

[LadyHawkAZ]

180. Unless the state has a Juliet exception

then your criminal offense was against each other- are you not understanding that? The way the law is written in some states (I know California is one, Utah another), it is also illegal for two underage teens to have sex with each other. You both broke the law, since your partners were legally unable to consent. You are both considered, by the law, to be the predators the law is supposedly protecting teens against. It's a rare prosecution but it does happen from time to time.

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_4783650

Did that 13 year old girl deserve jail time? Did you? Did your girlfriend? Because that is what you are supporting. You think that is a progressive value?

I'll let the book address your last points, she's able to do a much better job than I am.

[zeemike]

181. We broke juvinal law...that is what you are talking about.

And I was 13 and she was 14....and the law for juvinals is much diferent than adult...for reasons that are obvious...or should be.

But when you have an adult the law is diferent...and the law says that 18 is an adult...and as an adult they are suposed to know it is against the law and not do it...love or ignorance is no excuse.

What you are trying to do is emancipate a 14 year old to excuse the behaviour of an 18 year old that should have known better and stoped when she was first warned to stop.

[LadyHawkAZ]

182. It's still the law

Milder in punishment but still the same law. Depending on how the law is written, in some states she would be facing a harsher sentence because she was older- in some states 13 and under is child molestation, while 14 and over is statutory rape.

But you're trying to say the law applies only to other teenagers, not to you and your particular situation. And anyway you didn't know it was illegal. Ignorance of the law...

You're not getting the point, and I suspect it's deliberate. It was different when it was you. Other teenagers need to put an aspirin between their knees or go to jail. This is not a rational line of argument, you realize that? This is letting emotion dictate law- exactly the thing you were arguing against.

Here's another line of thought. When we teach teenagers, in defiance of the evidence of their own senses, that their normal feelings of desire and and their judgement of their own readiness are invalid and must be left to someone else to judge, do you realize what we are teaching them? Rape culture! That is the very definition of rape culture: the denial of the right to say either yes or no solely on their own account and based on their own judgement of what they need, without reference to what other people want from them. The teen years are when they are supposed to be learning that very basic human right and applying it to themselves and to others, BEFORE they reach adulthood and do something completely stupid and harmful to themselves or someone else, and instead we want to teach them just the opposite. There are reasons, very good ones, why we have fought so hard to teach comprehensive sex ed to teens, and it wasn't for the sheer fun of telling them not to use any of it. Abstinence-only has failed miserably for a reason, and it baffles me to see it touted here as a supposedly progressive value. The way to stop poor and underinformed judgement is with good and informed teaching, not with jail time, more bad information, and fear.

Like it or not, Kate Hunt and her girlfriend were doing what teens do, within their peer group and with someone they loved, with the full and enthusiastic consent of both parties. This is exactly how sex is supposed to happen, and one of them should not be facing prison time or the ridiculous label of predator for it.

Somewhere in Florida right now is a 15 year old girl who, last time anyone bothered to check with her, was still frantically trying to take responsibility for her choice and convince someone, anyone, that she is not a victim, and she has been ignored and infantilized. This is the part I find sad and victimizing. She has shown more maturity and responsibility than some of the grown men and women who are so certain they are fighting for her best interests, and that is a crying shame.

And I am done with this conversation, and this issue as well. There is no cure for willful ignorance.

[zeemike]

183. There is a difference between not knowing it is illegal

And immaturity...we punish people that knowingly or unknowingly break the law....we do not punish immaturity the same way...again for reasons that should be obvious.

And I am getting the point...it is just that it is bogus and I know that because of my experiences with it...And then you suggest that I am a hypocrite because I got away with it and now want others to be punished for it....bull fucking shit...you missed the point so I will say it again...I know it was wrong and harmful because I did it and I experienced it...and I now support the law because of that...I now know why the law is made and I could not have known then.

A 14 year old does not have the maturity to judge their readiness for sex...because they have little life experiences...and that is why we have them in the care of parents who should be, and are responsible for them.'
And It is bizzaro that you try to link this to "Rape Culture"...totally bazaar...
And with that I will end this....obviously there are other issues you have with this that I don't want to get into.

[LadyHawkAZ]

184. Jesus H...

fuck I am so not in the right mood for this today.

Fine. Fine. Blueberry Hill came out in 1956, this makes you right about 70 years old. That's more than old enough to understand that anecdote equals neither evidence nor universal experience but... ok, I'll accept that one experience equals all experiences. Because when I was 14, I hooked up with a random kid of 17 for a one-day stand and oh holy hell it was awesome, truly fucking mind blowing fantastic. I would not say this was necessarily the experience that every teenager would have at that age, but... ok. Because I had a great experience, that means all teens would have a great experience. Fine. Therefore the law should mandate all 14 year olds hook up with 17 year olds for a day, and it will be totally awesome for them too. Because me, in 1986. Fine. Left to myself I would prefer they wait until they individually thought they were ready but... fine, ok.

I'll accept your assertion that teaching kids that their "yes" and "no" are meaningless and the decision to have sex should be left to another individual is totally not rape culture in any way. I will even go so far as to not point out that this message is aimed primarily at young girls, or that male culture leans heavily toward getting as much sex as possible however possible and even shames young boys for not doing so, since that couldn't possibly be rape culture either. Silly me. It must be the porn's fault. Fine, ok.

So I guess I will have to also accept your idea that all teens should be ordered to remain virgins til their 18th birthday, or jailed. Fine, ok. Abstinence-only. No problem. Just... I'm sure you have some evidence laying around to show how well your idea works? Some kinds of studies and stuff that show, oh, let's say a drop in teen pregnancy and STD rates or a rise in the age of first experience in the areas where abstinence is taught? Because those first two ideas of yours are highly subjective stuff, but the wild success of abstinence-only is provable, right? Blind me with science, sir. You have our ear.

Oh and also: yes, I do have issues with conservative ideas like abstinence-only. It's why I'm on a progressive board, or at any rate thought I was on a progressive board. I gotta wonder some days.

[zeemike]

185. So now progressive means it is OK to fuck a 14 year old?

Now I know why we always lose.
A 14 year old can not legally consent....that means they can't say yes but it don't mean the can't say no...it means that they should say no, and be taught to say no...and that it is OK to say no...and to say that is teaching them their yes and no are meaningless is really silly...

And it is not my idea "that all teens should be ordered to remain virgins til their 18th birthday"...and that kind of hyperbole and the characterization of what I said that signals that this conversation is over....nothing further can be gains by it...other than to work you up into a lather trying to convince us that it is OK for an 18 year old to fuck a 14 year old if they love each other...and the parents should stay the fuck out of it, cause the kid knows best...and what is more disturbing to me...that if you don't believe that you must be a conservative...

Sometimes I wonder if I am on a progressive board too...but then I don[t think progressives means abandoning the right and obligation of parents to protect their children from being manipulated into sex by someone older...at least it did not use to.

[LadyHawkAZ]

186. No proof that teaching only abstinence works, then?

Dammit, and you had me so convinced, too.

Hyperbole is making statements like "So now progressive means it is OK to fuck a 14 year old?" as though someone had said it was open season on 14 year olds. Is it OK for you? No. Should it be legal with someone in their own age and peer group? Yes. Should they be taught that it's OK to say no, and also OK to say yes when they are ready, as well as how to avoid pregnancy and STIs? Hell yes, we've been fighting for that program for years.

Should they be taught abstinence and nothing but abstinence, and should that be enforced by jail time? Hell to the no! Sorry, that is a known conservative ideal, yes it is, and does not pass the progressive smell test, no it does not. You are trying to claim that all teens should abstain until adulthood and that's all we should tell them, but at the same time and in the same post claim you never said that. That's nonsense.

ETA: go to the library, pick up that book I just recommended, and have a look at how a genuinely progressive society deals with the problem. It doesn't agree with you and you won't like it, but maybe it will open your mind a bit.

[zeemike]

187. What does teaching abstinence only have to do with it.

Other than being a red hearing.

And if you can use hyperbole to make your point then why can't I?

And 18 year old is not in the same age group as a 14 year old....and in most cases when an 18 year old starts hanging with a 14 year old it is considered creepy by adults and kids alike... there is a vast difference in those ages...it is not the same as 20 and 24.

And I only claim that older kids should not take advantage of younger kids...and this is what it is about...and if you want to claim that they should be allowed to do that you can, but don't tell me that it is progressive...in fact it is the opposite of that...regressive IMHO...and makes progressives look like a bunch of libertines.

Well we are not libertines...we have moral principles we live by, and one of them is protecting the vulnerable from being taken advantage of...and respecting the laws that protect them, not finding excuses for those that break them.

[LadyHawkAZ]

189. You're the one claiming that no and only no until 18

is all teens need to know, and there should be no sexual contact allowed at all for them. It's not a red herring, it's your claim. You know what that's called? Hint: It starts with an "A", and is part of the RNC platform.

An 18 year old and a 14 year old are indeed in the same age and peer groups. It's called high school. That's what the whole Hunt case is about. The girls were teenagers in high school. That's an age group. They were classmates. That's a peer group. If you don't want the two to mingle, end high school at 17, or 16 just to be on the safe side, since the age of consent varies from place to place and some 16 year olds would be too old for their 15 year old peers.

NO ONE should take advantage of ANYONE, sexually or otherwise, at ANY AGE. That has zero to do with the case under discussion. You are trying to stretch the definition of "take advantage" as written for small children, or teenagers pursued by 40 year olds, to fit all consensual contact between teenagers. You do not get to co-opt the term "moral principles" and try to pretend it covers sending a teenage girl to prison, or a teenage boy for that matter, for having sex with another teenage schoolmate unless the case involved non-consent. This case didn't. I will say the same thing to you that you tried to push at me: don't even try to tell me any of that's progressive. It's not.

As I said, go have a look at how real progressives deal with it, and try to learn something.

[zeemike]

190. Where did you go to school where the freshmen and seniors

Were in the same peer group?
But hell things must have changed then....cause I never saw that....a senior pursuing a freshmen was considered creepy....now I guess you can get em as young as you want and it is OK with your peers?....is that what you are saying?...I don't know really....I lost my thrill on Blueberry Hill and so am far removed from teenage society of today....

And I hear you saying that an 18 year old cannot take advantage of a 14 year old?...you got to be kidding me...have things changed that much that now a 14 year old is as mature as an 18 year old?....if that is the case then can a 14 year old have sex with a 10 year old?...because 10 is the new 14?

Send kids to prison?...it is done all the time...but most of the time the judicial system knows that they don't need to ruin a kids life to get justice and correct the actions...and if the law was violated actions must be taken...Like ignorance of the law is no excuse neither is love.

[LadyHawkAZ]

191. High school. Ordinary public high school.

In California, roughly thirty years closer to the present day than you did. My daughters attended much more recently, with the last one graduating in '10. A lot depends on the group you're in with. Some social groups mix ages more than others. It appears in the Hunt case that the group they were in was the sports crowd, which do mix.

Yes, an 18 year old can take advantage of a 14 year old. It's possible and it happens, and no one has claimed it doesn't. You know what fixes that? Education and openness with their parents, two things that don't happen when all you are telling them is "Aspirin between your knees till you're 18". Again, that book presents some very good options, but they do require getting over the virginity fetish that America is so fond of and letting our teens mature naturally during their teens, rather than after.

If we're sending kids to prison all the time, as you say (and I agree), that's a pretty good indicator that there's something wrong with the ADULTS in charge of the system, don't you think? Two judges just went to prison in PA recently for sending underage kids to a for-profit juvenile prison for minor offenses, because they got paid to do so. If you think money, politics and personal prejudice don't play a massive part in who gets arrested or jailed for what, think again.

[zeemike]

192. You bet I think the adults in charge are at fault.

But you don't need to look at judges in the news to know that...just look in the mirror....the problem is us.
For instance...you say you know a 18 year old can take advantage of a 14 year old but yet in this case you tell us it did not happen....now how could you know that unless you were personally involved?...but yet you came down on the side of the perp with certainty....how is that?
Cause that is the exact purpose of the law...to prevent that...and education has never fixed a sexual predator that I have ever heard of...and an 18 year old going after a 14 year old is likely to be a sexual predator cause that is what they do, go after younger kids.
And the facts show that...she took the 14 year old from her home and kept her over night after being told to stay away from her..
And you don't have any idea what the younger girls parents told her...or the older girls parents ether...but you bypass all of that and make your judgment based on what?

Yep it is the adults fault for sure...and we can start with the person in the mirror...then we can stop making excuses for breaking the law when it deals with children safety...because when we don't it gives licence to other predators to do what they want, because they can stand behind love as an excuse and know that you have your back..

[LadyHawkAZ]

193. Unlike most people seem to have done

I bothered to read the early news reports of what the unnamed "victim" had to say and didn't automatically invalidate her claims because she's "only" 14 and "only" a freshman, and she has apparently claimed she was a willing participant. Had she claimed otherwise, my opinion on the case would be completely different. Do I know for sure what happened? No. Do I know for sure that Charles Manson took part in Tate-LaBianca? No. But I can look at the evidence as presented and make a reasonable judgement based on that, and my judgement based on the evidence presented so far is that this was consenting sex between teenage peers, and no harm was done to the younger girl. You've come down hard on the side of there being some kind of harm done and Hunt being a child predator- leaving aside your own experience for a minute, on what evidence do you base that?

And you don't have any idea what the younger girls parents told her...or the older girls parents ether...but you bypass all of that and make your judgment based on what?

You have the same information I do, and you appear to have based your judgement solely on your own bad experience over half a century ago. I just got done raising four girls, and I recognize a lot of similar behaviors, particularly between my oldest girl and the "victim". I also recognize that teenagers aren't mindless infants who suddenly turn 50 on their 18th birthday; they are young adults trying to learn independence and self-sufficiency in spite of the way adults treat them, and they need to be loved, educated, guided and allowed to grow up, not terrorized or jailed.

I liked the way one blogger put it:

So we wind up with a situation where a senior who has turned 18 and has a boyfriend or girlfriend who is a freshman (and we can really leave gender and homosexuality out of it for this part of the discussion) can wind up in jail for a decade and on the sex offender registry for life, but a 23 year old can go cruising the parking lots and get a 16 year old “girlfriend” to go back to their hotel if they “consent.” It’s a pretty crazy system, and there doesn’t seem to be any easy fix to it.

^That, FYI, is a description of an actual predator. Perfectly legal, though.

I can think of one good easy fix: make it legal for the high school age group (14-18) within 4 years of each other's ages, which covers their likely peer group within that setting. Then take that money, effort and time and put it into chasing actual predators. Or you can start pushing to have the 16-18 age group separated completely from the younger teens, because that is what you will need to do to put a stop to situations like Hunt's. Of course, there's always the option of chastity belts, which I think might prove to be cost-prohibitive and wouldn't stop oral sex, anyway. But feel free to suggest it.

Yep it is the adults fault for sure...and we can start with the person in the mirror...then we can stop making excuses for breaking the law when it deals with children safety...because when we don't it gives licence to other predators to do what they want, because they can stand behind love as an excuse and know that you have your back.

Your solution to adults putting kids in jail seems to be "put more kids in jail!", which isn't a help.

[zeemike]

195. You still ignore the basic facts.

A 14 year old cannot legally consent to sex...even though they tell you they wanted to do it they cannot legally do so...so her saying she wanted to makes no freaking difference at all...for reasons I have covered pretty well in previous posts....you are trying to use the statement of an immature child who has been victimized by an older person as proof that the law does not apply to them...because YOU think a 14 year old should make that decision for themselves and the parents should have no say in the matter.

Just try to sell that to the American public...tell them we are progressives and that we think 14 year old should be emancipated for sex...and if you elect us we will change the law to make it legal....see how far that gets you politically...their would be many progressives that would be shocked by such a thing....and most certainly withdraw support of any party that tried to pull that shit on them.

"When you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao, it ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow."
The point of that is never turn over a revolution or any political party to radicals, because they will sabotage it, knowingly or not by making the movement itself look foolish and dangerous in the eyes of the public.

But let me share some more of my dirty past sense you don't seem to get it....at age 15 I was seduced by my friends mother....she was 30 something...and if you would have asked me then I would have told you I was in love and that I had willingly consented to it, and would have lied my ass off to protect her...and at that time I wold have said no harm came to me...in fact it made me a man and was all about love.

After I was 18 I realized just how I had been manipulated and that my childhood and teen age years were stolen from me and left me with many scars that will never heal.
So my point is the same here...a 14 or 15 year old cannot make good decisions at that age and the law is there to protect them from that kind of manipulation...and parents have every right to be concerned and every right to insist that the law be followed....no excuses for ignorance or love or anything else.

And BTW...you know damn good and well my solution was not "put more kids in jail!", and you even put it in quotes as if I had said it...that is false witness.

[LadyHawkAZ]

196. Sigh...

Bradley Manning. Daniel Ellsberg. Martin Luther King Jr. Rosa Parks. The D.C. suffragettes. Code Pink activists. Occupy. Every single person who has ever taken a single hit off a joint. All lawbreakers. All supported by progressives. Tell me again about the necessity of being law-abiding in the face of injustice?

And actually, I have helped tell the American public that. I am part of the reason that states have begun to adopt Juliet laws and are starting to ban abstinence-only sex education in favor of comprehensive. I am part of the reason for the Becky Bell laws and the availability of contraception to teenagers. The message is getting across, and the public is slowly beginning to buy in.

If you'd like to talk about ignoring things, I'll point out that you just ignored most of what I wrote. I asked you what evidence you had, independent of your bad experience, that harm had been done to the supposed victim, and you responded with... your bad experience. Anecdote =/= evidence nor universal experience. I am sorry that you were taken advantage of in your teens, and that it caused so much pain to you. I do not find this sufficient reason to punish someone else who did not take part in what happened to you and is in a completely different situation.

I slept around a lot in my teens. Some of the people were adults. Most were at my initiation, I even went so far as to lie about my age a couple times. Was I taken advantage of? No; my choices were my choices, good and bad, then as now, and as such are my responsibility. Do I feel that I was harmed at all by those choices? No, although I took a lot of emotional damage from the slut-shamers who thought I shouldn't be having sex. We had completely different reactions at similar ages, yet you invalidate my experience while expecting me to validate yours. I respect your experiences and agree that teens shouldn't be coerced or preyed on by much older people, and have advocated giving them the tools they need to prevent it; I even recommended to you a well-reviewed book by a sociologist that gives a good template for doing just that. You in turn have given my experience, both as a teen and a parent, no respect at all, will not recognize that you are not representative of all teens, and have advocated giving teenagers nothing but complete abstinence until whatever arbitrary birthday their state happens to recognize, a state of affairs that progressives have long fought against and that is actually written into the Republican Party platform.

But I'm the bad guy with the non-progressive ideals. Right.

then we can stop making excuses for breaking the law when it deals with children safety...because when we don't it gives licence to other predators to do what they want, because they can stand behind love as an excuse and know that you have your back.

Those were your words. You are welcome to explain how this didn't mean "put more kids in jail!", or to expand on that, "Put more kids in jail just in case some pervert in his/her 40s suddenly thinks its OK for them to have sex with a 14 year old if other teenagers can do it". If the only response you're going to bother with is still your own bad experiences, then please just go away. I do feel for you and what happened to you as a youth, but what you are advocating for other teens who do NOT share your experience is dangerous and a proven failure. I do not want my granddaughter, or any of her future siblings and cousins, growing up in the environment you push for.

[zeemike]

198. WTF?

Are you saying that an 18 year old fucking a 14 year old is an act of civil disobedience comparable to Bradley Manning. Daniel Ellsberg. Martin Luther King Jr. Rosa Parks. The D.C. suffragettes. Code Pink activists. and Occupy?
I can't believe I ham hearing that...it is ridiculous at best.
And I have not ignored what you wrote I have disputed it...sorry you can't see the difference.

And then you tell me that my experienced and the experience of others like me don't mean shit...well I tell you that they are the only thing that means anything...and are what the law that you want to change is all about...and you are wrong to dismiss them.

And the link to the book was to sell me a book...and it had book reviews....so what?....I should run out and by a book that is going to say that kids have sex at an early age so we should just let them?....would you go out an buy a book that says we should not?

But this is the last post in this thread...and it has been a long one...and I have done this before and it is always the same pattern...constantly changing target...always a justification....and false interpretations of what I said...and I am expected to keep trying to hit the target, disputing the justifications. and defend myself from false interpretations of what I said...and it produces nothing of any value.
I know full well I can never convince you...so I will stop trying.
Good luck on your quest to make 14 year old legal...but I hope you never get the Dem party to accept this kind of thing as a platform...cause it is a loser big time with the majority of Americans.

[melissaf]

201. Christ almighty,

did you just invite someone who was a victim of sexual predation as a teenager to go away? Is that your position on all this--if you don't agree with me, get the hell out and take your awful story of statutory rape with you? What if you were faced with, say, a victim of priest sexual abuse? Is that what you'd say to them, too? "I wish you'd just go away"? 'Cause I don't see much of a difference here, except that lots of people on the Internet really like Kaitlyn Hunt, and not so many people like child rapist priests.

Despite what you may think, you do NOT know Kaitlyn Hunt's mindset when she had sex with her 14-year-old "girlfriend." You do NOT know if they were in love. Unless you're a personal friend or relation, you do NOT even know what these two girls are like in person. Why do you think you're the best person to stand in judgment of this case?

[LadyHawkAZ]

202. "Please stop conversing with me" was what I meant

It was badly phrased as I have lost patience with the direction the conversation has gone. I feel for him as I feel for all victims, but it cannot be used as an excuse to do harm to others, ever. Teaching teenagers abstinence-only does documented harm. Jailing teenagers in adult prisons does documented harm. I have a young granddaughter, and I do not want her growing up in the same godawful repressive and uninformed environment that I did.

I don't know anyone's mindset and neither do you. I can make a reasonable guess of what went on based on the evidence that has been reported so far and especially on the fact that the younger girl claimed it was consensual on her end. I can accept from that that this was not a case where coercion or rape was involved or harm was done, that it was likely just consensual sex between peers who cared for each other, and there should be no criminal charges involved.

[Ms. Toad]

70. I think 14 year olds should be protected from rape

And being pressured until you give in when you don't want to have sex is rape.

If that is what happened in this case, Kaitlyn should be prosecuted under the regular rape statute where all of the gray areas can be weighed. The issue, as far as I am concerned, is that making all sexual activity among high school (even when it is truly consensual) criminal merely based on the day one happened to be born doesn't do much at all to protect the vulnerable - and it makes criminals out of one of two participants in a mutually desired high school romance.

[we can do it]

150. Assume much?

[zeemike]

69. All 14 year old are young.

Some may be more mature than others in the way they act but 14 years of experiences equals 14 years of experiences.

Are you saying that boy on girl sex is dirty and girl on girl OK or better in some way?

The law should apply equally to all...and the law is there for a reason....just the reason that has been given...Children should not be sexualities at 14...for physical as well as emotional reasons.

[dkf]

5. Mary Kay Letearnou probably wasn't a sexual predator either.

I bet a lot of people who get caught in this sort of thing aren't.

[BainsBane]

10. Why is that?

Is a thirty something man who has sex with a young teen a predator?

[dkf]

17. Well she did marry the kid and they are convinced they are soul mates.

I think she probably did love him. Still it was illegal and she broke the law.

Funny thing but I think women get the benefit of the doubt that they are in love while men are assumed to have less than pure motives.

[BainsBane]

21. marriage was a way for rapists to escape

prosecution for their crimes for centuries. That does nothing to mitigate her culpability. The only difference between Letourneau, Kaitlyn, and the run of the mill statutory rapist brought up on charges is their gender.

[dkf]

25. But Letourneau escaped no penalties and incurred more.

The OP thinks being in love exempts Katelyn but that didnt work for Letearnou

[BainsBane]

29. well, to be fair

There is a big age difference between Letourneau and Kaitlyn. The fact is, however, prosecutors would charge an 18 yr old male in that situation. I don't see why women should be exempt from prosecution.

[dkf]

30. The law is the law. All should be prosecuted if caught.

[jazzimov]

32. I'm not talking about Letourneu

I'm talking about Kaitlyn.

2 entirely different scenarios. 2 entirely different circumstances. 2 entirely different people.

I am saying that each case requires different scrutiny.

[Bonobo]

19. Is an 18 year old man one?

If he has sex with a 14 year old?

You really wouldn't claim that he seduced or coerced her? Really? Honestly?

[BainsBane]

22. You're arguing with the wrong person

For decades I have argued that female statutory rapists should be treated just as men are. Psychological studies show male victims are just as traumatized as young girls.

[dkf]

27. I do think Letearnou should have been prosecuted because she broke the law.

I'm not giving her a pass and I'm not giving Katelyn Hunt a pass either as the OP is trying to do.

[jazzimov]

33. I think you are missing the entire point.

[dkf]

35. The point is the law is explicit in what is and isn't legal.

It doesn't matter if anyone personally thinks its okay.

[LadyHawkAZ]

39. Actually, it kinda does matter

because that is how laws get changed- look at how we've been dealing with the marijuana laws, for example. If the law is unjust, you begin the battle to change the law. That's how activism works.

[jazzimov]

41. the law is a GUIDELINE.

Every case is different. Every case is unique.

The law uses arbitrary ages because it needs to set definitions. But we have to look at the intent of the law, what it was trying to accomplish.

Unless, of course, you are a "strict constructionist" in which case we REALLY need to talk!

[COLGATE4]

57. Your understanding of how the law works

in these cases is incorrect. Intent is irrelevant to the issue of statutory rape. This is one of a set of laws which are known as 'Strict Liability', i.e. the only defense to a charge under them is that you did not do it. You are not allowed to argue intent, or lack of knowledge of age or any other factors as a defense. There is no wiggle room at all. Guilty or not. Period.

[dkf]

143. Interesting.

I didn't know that explicitly but it makes sense it would work that way.

[Ms. Toad]

71. Do you really not understand the special nature of this law?

It really is as simple as sexual activity + age = felon.

Just like 21 for alcohol, and 18 for cigarettes. Those are not guidelines, they are absolutes - in the same way that statutory rape laws are. If this case goes to a judge the judge will have no option but to convict. If it goes to a jury and the jury obeys the law, it will have no option but to convict (a jury can ignore the law in what is known as a jury nullification but when they do that they are essentially refusing to do the job they agreed to do.

The only real option is the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. No prosecutor ever charges everyone s/he comes across who has committed a crime with every crime they have committed. We'd be waiting years for criminal court dates if they did. But that is why the massive PR campaign - the only chance of addressing the unique circumstances is in convincing the prosecutor to drop the charges.

[RC]

43. Quite often the traumatizing comes after the fact, either from an prudish authority figure, laying a

guilt trip on one or both participants, or from one or more parents doing the same thing. You'd be surprised the number of people that think that "children" do not and should not or can't have any sexual feelings until they turn 18, or at least be the late teens. The hormones kick in well before puberty starts to show.

It is not the sex act itself that causes the trauma, but the reactions of so-called adults, laying guilt trips on acts they disprove of.

[pacalo]

67. Mary Kay Letourneau was 34 -- quite a difference between her age & Kaitlyn's (18).

[dkf]

68. But she was in love which the OP says should be the determining factor in classifying a sexual

predator.

[pacalo]

73. Letourneau was "mature" enough to stop herself from crossing the line.

This particular case we're discussing involves two high school students. I believe it was a big deal to the younger girl's parents because they were of the same sex. Florida's law was a convenient avenue for the parents to use as a way to separate them.

The problem is, the law that is being used against Kaitlyn was intended for actual sexual predators -- those who prey on the weaker & use them against their will. The feelings these two high school students had for each other is, in effect, being prosecuted as the result of one set of disapproving parents throwing up their hands. If those parents would not hesitate to ruin Kaitlyn's life & promising future by having her thrown in jail & labeled as a child molester for the rest of her life, it says a lot about their (lack of) character.

[AtheistCrusader]

79. Special pleading.

Why is Kaitlyn assumed to be NOT mature enough to stop herself from crossing a line?
I don't automatically agree with your assessment of the Parent's motives. For one, they are legally compelled to report it.

"The feelings these two high school students had for each other is"
Unproven.

"being prosecuted as the result of one set of disapproving parents throwing up their hands."
Unproven.

This type of crime/law does not allow for the line of reasoning you are employing. Even if the feelings you claim between them are real and provable, that is not an affirmative defense to the crime.

Who wants to write a law, and or vote for one that opens up 14 year olds to sexual contact with adults? Not me. If you can argue for 14, why not 13? Or 12? Is their status as high school students your bar? How about the grey margins where you might have an advanced placement 13 year old freshman, and a 19 year old senior? Still ok?

[pacalo]

120. "Why is Kaitlyn assumed to be NOT mature enough to stop herself from crossing a line?"

Because Kaitlyn is a child herself.

If the law insists that every 18-year-old is as fully mature as the rest of the adult population; if the law determines that every 18-year-old deserves to be jailed & labeled at an early age as a sexual predator for the rest of their lives for having a puppy-love relationship with a freshman classmate, then the state should take some responsibility for preventing future horrifically-sexual acts by separating the "adults" from the children.

[Ms. Toad]

74. I disagree with that -

but I also disagree with the law which converts a high school romance into a crime.

[AtheistCrusader]

76. You're going to have a hard time getting people to keep that in mind.

Totally agree with your line of logic though. This seems to be an instance of special pleading.

[burnodo]

124. She was a sexual predator

This comparison is nonsensical

[Iggo]

6. ...

...

[uppityperson]

7. To me, there is a big difference between a 14 and an 18 yr old. I don't know where the "peer" thing

is coming from as even if they are in band together, or in sports together, they still are (generally) years apart.

I have not read enough about this one particular case to be able to judge it beyond my take on the age difference BUT I thought she'd been offered a plea bargain that would make it NOT part of her permanent record. Aside from that, I don't know either of the young women involved so can not say what the feelings between them were, what the motivations were.

[jazzimov]

13. So, it's all about age to you.

I understand that Laws require a "cut-off" point, but to you it is all about physical age.

Interesting.

[uppityperson]

52. Age as a cut off point is how the law is.Interesting how you miss that and attribute it to me.

What "cut off" point would you like?

[AtheistCrusader]

80. That is not in the State Attorney General's affadavit offering the plea bargain.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/05/25/indianriverreport.pdf

[pacalo]

91. Thanks for the link.

I'm glad that I was wrong. I'm self-deleting the error.

[AtheistCrusader]

94. Well, two more people below made the same statement.

The affidavit doesn't define 'child abuse'. Possible it is weasel words for felony?

I think only a defense attorney from the state in question could explain it for sure... So you may not be wrong. I'm not sure now.

[pacalo]

109. Thanks, AC.

The affidavit was interesting & nothing I read changes my mind. It's a case of disapproving parents using the state to put an end to their daughter's relationship with another kid (of the same sex).

[AtheistCrusader]

146. Question with regard to the "disapproving parents".

Kaitlyn's parents have repeatedly alleged that the victim's parents waited until she was 18 to report the issue to the police. This is a lie. Kaitlyn was 18 when she met the victim, when she started a relationship, and when she had sexual contact of an unspecified nature with her on school grounds. She was 18 when the school reported the issue to her parents. Her parents reported the issue to the police WITH the victim in the room, and the victim compliant with doing the 'baited' phone call with police on the line.

Right there, the story of Kaitlyn's parents, the narrative that has been so often repeated without question in the media, falls apart.

Kaitlyn's DOB: 8/24/94
That means she was 18 when she started that school year. (9/9/2012)
She was 18 when they met.
She was 18 when they started their relationship.
She was 18 when sexual contact occurred.

"It's a case of disapproving parents using the state to put an end to their daughter's relationship with another kid (of the same sex)."

In my opinion, this perception was fostered by Kaitlyn's parents by way of falsehoods. Do you base this perception on anything OTHER than Kaitlyn's parents claiming the victim's parents "waited until she was 18"?

[uppityperson]

154. Aw, you missed "they were the same peer group" thing.

I know, thanks for what you write. Looking at the dates given, what the parents allege and what the dates show of ages, it seems something is very off.

[AtheistCrusader]

156. If they were, then that indicates they met prior to Kate turning 18.

Which is possible, as another poster pointed out: some sports programs begin prior to the start of the school year. If that is the case, they began their relationship when the ages were 17/14.

But that doesn't change the accuracy of the claim by the parents of Kate that the parents of the minor waited until Kate turned 18 to call the police. They 'waited' until they got allegations of sexual contact, and then reported that. 6 months after Kate turned 18.

That doesn't change anything about Kaitlyn, or HER defense, it just calls into question her parent's allegations that the parents of the minor are doing this or that, for this or that reason, in the court of public opinion.


At the end of the day, I don't feel any of this points to Kaitlyn being a predator. In fact, I doubt she is, per the common understanding of the term. And there was nothing wrong with them dating or even falling in love. However, the law is quite clear on sexual contact with this age delta.

A side point, there are other issues one could examine. Let's say the minor borrowed $1,000 from Kaitlyn. Non-repayment would be a felony (over 500 in value, and assumed theft). Let's say they had a contract. Can Kaitlyn sue for repayment in small claims court based on that contract? Nope. At 14, without the parents being a party to the contract, the minor cannot consent to the contract, cannot consent to repayment terms. The minor would not be found guilty of a felony, and the contract would be null.

These laws exist to protect minors. They can seem harsh in some circumstances. I get that. But allowances and such tend to open cracks through with predators can gain access to children, so the law takes a very stiff approach to it. It could probably be done better, but it is beyond me to craft a comprehensive law that would cover all fringe cases. (I do think this is, or is approaching a fringe case)

[uppityperson]

157. They could have met long before they started dating as often happens. I agree with what you write.

[Ms. Toad]

85. No. What she was offered was still a felony.

Just a different felony that would avoid the possibility of lifetime registration of a sex offender.

The peer thing is coming because they are in the same activities together, and neither one has any inherent power over the other (in the way that a parent, or a teacher, or even an 18 year old who is out of high school living on his or her own has over a 14 year old) - and they are treated as equals by those in power (teachers, coaches, etc.).

To put it another way - while it is possible there might have been a certain amount of older kid worship - it was likely no more significant than a same age outsider who worshiped the captain of the football team or the head cheerleader. There are cliques and separations which naturally occur - some of those are by grade, some are by popularity, some are by affinity for certain activities which are perceived to be popular (or unpopular). But those separations don't inherently mean a relationship across one or more grade lines, or between a nerd and the head cheerleader are coercive.

[uppityperson]

153. "older kid worship". I am glad you understand that potential exists. And that is the problem.

"But those separations don't inherently mean a relationship across one or more grade lines," But THIS one was across grade lines.

[Ms. Toad]

155. You missed the tail end of that sentence

"But those separations don't inherently mean a relationship across one or more grade lines . . . {is} coercive."

In other words - they can be (and there can be older kid worship, and cool kid worship, and sports jock worship), and each of those power differentials can carry some measure of coercion - but none of them necessarily do. The statute does not take into account the cases where there truly is a consensual relationship across whatever power boundaries exist within a school setting

I don't believe statutes which say sexual relationships between two high school kids are always criminal, regardless of the facts in a particular situation, merely based on relative ages, should exist. Because kids are different, their capacities to enter into relationships are different, and the law needs to be able to take those into account. Statutory rape laws don't.

I would not extend that flexibility to look at circumstances where we're talking about much older adults, or to college age students who begin relationships with younger high school students after the older person has graduated from high school, or to relationships between high school students and middle school students (again, unless that relationship started when they were both in middle school). My issue is solely with putting kids in a situation where relationships are likely to develop, and then making those relationships, regardless the reality of how the participants in the relationship interacted with each other.

[burnodo]

125. How about 24 and 28?

Do you really think there's a fundamental developmental difference between an 18 and 14 year-old?

[uppityperson]

152. 24/28, 34/38/ 44/48 not so much but 14/18? Yes. Big difference between 8th and 12th grader, or

even 9th and 12th grader. Many places 8/9 is in a different school than 10/11/12 grade and for a reason. Of course in general there is. Playing your game, how about 4 yrs old and 8 yrs old?

[Warpy]

8. This is just a typical teenage love affair

that would very likely have been over with had the parents not gotten into it.

The fact that it's a lesbian love affair is largely irrelevant except to the over reacting parents.

[jazzimov]

14. I suspect you're right! n/t

[Demo_Chris]

9. Nope. I respect someones right to say both no and yes.

I find it interesting that the trauma being inflicted upon the victim is coming from those screaming the loudest that their only desire is to protect her childlike purity. In any case, in my opinion things usually work out in life, we all make our own mistakes and experience our own adventures, sometimes with tragic results, but usually things turn out just fine. Which is why it's a good idea to chill over irrelevant stuff like fourteen year olds having sex. We did it, our parents and grandparents did it, the "virgin" Mary did it. It's not a federal offense, it's sex. Get over it.

One thing that rarely turns out fine is minding other people's business, regardless of the good intentions that always accompany the effort. Obviously the guardians of righteousness will flame me for saying as much, but that's okay.

[BainsBane]

12. Believe it or not

Whatever people say on this board have no impact on those girls' lives, one way or the other.

[jazzimov]

16. True, but it makes a big difference

to the people on this board.

[MattBaggins]

145. no it doesn't

[diabeticman]

15. These are 2 high school students. In fact my wife's first "real" boyfriend was

an 18 year old senior and she was a 14 year old freshman. there is a HUGH difference between those two teenagers and an adult (21- and older) who preys on a young teen.


This is just plan BS. If the 18 year old is still in high school than this shouldn't be treated like rape or anything OThER than two teens.

[jazzimov]

20. I agree -

it's about two teens in HS.

Leave it alone.

[liberal_at_heart]

26. just because they are both in the same school does not mean they are equally mature.

A 14 year old is very immature, inexperienced, and does not fully comprehend the world around them. They are also easily coerced and manipulated which is why there is a law to protect them and why having a sexual relationship with someone below the age of consent is considered predatory.

[laundry_queen]

118. I think it's disingenous

to talk about most 14 year olds being immature and not comprehending the world around them and saying in the same breath that an 18 year old should know exactly where the line is drawn and to not have a relationship with someone younger and to automatically 'know better'. Why is it not possible for an 18 year old to be immature and a 14 year old to be mature and be somewhat equals?

I was an extremely mature 14 year old. Looking back, I absolutely understood the world - better than a lot of 30 year olds I know now. Possibly that was a function of growing up in an environment with narcissistic parents where I was supposed to know how to do everything on my own and read minds from birth...but I was super mature. I had a few boyfriends that were 4, 5 and 6 years older. Most didn't guess my age - I looked 18, talked like an adult with a complex vocabulary that had friends telling me to stop talking 'like that' because they didn't understand 'all the big words', I was well informed with current events (and was an avid history buff), I held down 2 jobs, got straight a's, captain of the volleyball team...yadayada. No, they never guessed at all. I had to tell them and by then it was too late usually. I wasn't scarred by any of those relationships, I wasn't coerced into anything, I wasn't traumatized. There were plenty of 14 year old to 18 year old relationships in our small town - I never, ever, even now, saw it as predatory. We all hung around together, played slo-pitch together, went to the same parties together...

My daughter, who is 15, is in this afterschool drama club (for credit) with a bunch of older kids. Some are 18, even 19 (came back to get better marks to get into the university program they want) and they all hang out together, have cast parties together, have movie nights together.... I cannot see myself getting in a tizzy if she started dating one of those 18 or 19 year olds - and she's no where near as mature as I was (even physically she didn't mature as fast as I did). If they are in a peer group and there is no power imbalance, and it's consensual I just don't see the issue.

[LadyHawkAZ]

42. My first "real" boyfriend was 18

I was 13. We both lied about our ages- I told him I was a year older, he told me he was a year younger. It didn't last long, but we met up again years later, made our full disclosure about the age thing and had a good laugh about it.

We haven't talked in awhile, but we're still friends.

[orleans]

123. very similar circumstance with me too

i was 13, he was 17
he turned 18, and i turned 14 a couple weeks later
my first boyfriend
and i could hardly wait to get him in bed!
we broke up after he moved with his family out of state
he moved back here years later and we went out again--almost got married. almost.
we're still friends.
for the most part we've always had a very sweet relationship.
(and i was always more mature than him btw!)

[LadyHawkAZ]

178. It was the first experience for both of us

I was motivated more by curiosity than anything else, and found my first experience to be pretty damn dull. I counted ceiling tiles the whole time. It was some months later and after my REAL 14th birthday that I hooked up with someone I really found attractive and enjoyed the hell out of myself.

When I met up with the first boyfriend years later, I was 18 and he was 23 and we found the whole episode hilarious.

[AtheistCrusader]

86. Your objection does not follow the OP's criteria.

OP's criteria does not allow for age discrimination of the form you just accepted. It was predicated upon INTENT and or LOVE. Criteria a 21+ party could easily fall under.

OP is specifically disregarding age in favor of circumstance/feelings/intent. Something that would have to be weighed as we dial up the age of a hypothetical older person in the same manner.

[arely staircase]

23. who is kaitlyn hunt?

never heard of her and I visit DU regularly.

[HooptieWagon]

24. No. And she hasn't been charged as one.

But, the fact remains she is an adult who had a sexual relationship with a girl far younger...below the age of consent. She was asked several times to discontinue the relationship by the girl's parents, which is their perogative as parents. She not only did not end the relationship, she coerced the younger girl into having sex in the school restroom, and then helped her sneak out of the house and took her home for sleepover and sex.
IMO, she was getting off light by being offered a plea deal to contributing to the delinquency of a minor, no jail time, and no being classified a sexual predator. She should have taken it. She may not be treated as leniently by a jury axnd judge.

[davidn3600]

38. The plea was felony child abuse...not delinquency of a minor (misdemeanor)

[HooptieWagon]

81. You're right, my bad. Still not Statutory Rape.

Which all evidence and her own statement supports a case for. If she persists, she could be facing that charge if it goes to court. She'd then be looking at some jail time, and being labelled a sexual predator. She should have taken the plea deal.

[mbperrin]

105. This says it well. This is predatory coercive behavior.

Some case could be made for kidnapping, really.

No, and I mean no, 14 year old is ready for sex. Few 18 year olds are. I have 22 pregnant or delivered girls in my senior classes in high school. Each and every one has a boy who "loves" them. Until they get too big and round for sex, of course, then on to the next.

Most of the girls will live in poverty as a result of these poor decisions. And these are the 18 year olds making these horrible decisions.

Every generation thinks they invented sex, or that it's much more than grinding given body parts together to some end, dimly perceived as pleasurable. 7 TEN year olds gave birth in this county this year. These crazy ideas about sex and looooooooooooooooove and roooooooooooooomance are killing us.

Yes, some jail and permanent registration. Perhaps someone will get the message that these things are really against the law and that actions have consequences.

And for those painting the parents as the bad guys, they are a mixed race couple. And if you that was easy in that part of the country when they married, try again.

[RKP5637]

34. No! n/t

[sigmasix]

45. she induced a child to leave her home

Kate was warned to stop by the legal parents of the object of her adult affections. Instead of discontinuing her romantic advances, she induced the 14 year old to leave her parents' home against the express dictates of the parents. It doesnt matter to me what the sexual allignment of the girls is- adults have a responsibility to abide by the rules set-out by the parents of minors.
Is she a predator? No
Is she trustworthy around children with parents that disagree with her? No

The unimpportant aspects of this story keep changing, but the fact remains that Kate stole the child from her parents, even after being told to leave her alone. We really ought to dispel the nonesense accusations and moral relativism that has been flying around this case; just because you know someone that got away with this same behavior doesnt releave Kate of the legal responsibility to follow the rules of contact set out by the parents of minors.
Why can't we get Americans to accept responsibility for thier actions?

[pacalo]

63. Your choice of words are full of hyperbole, considering this is a teenager you're describing.

Many teenagers sneak out at night. Of course, it's a parent's nightmare for obvious reasons, so please don't misinterpret my stating the reality as condoning it.

"She induced a child to leave her home."

"Kate stole the child from her parents."

If you are able to recognize that she is not a predator, then why aren't you standing with her & opposing the fact that under Florida's law (which was meant for sexual predators who force themselves on weaker victims), she will be labeled forever as a sexual predator? Remember, these two kids attended the same school & liked each other a lot.

[mbperrin]

106. Charles Manson ran a school and everybody there loved him a lot.

Yet he's locked up. Go figure.

[pacalo]

110. Now this 18-year-old is comparable to Charles Manson!

Yeah, go figure!

[mbperrin]

170. I lined out the compares. You have any contrasts?

I'm trying to figure.

[sigmasix]

171. one kid and one adult

Of course Kate stole the child from her home; that is the reason she is in trouble. The parents of the younger child had to call the police because they couldnt find their child. Law enforcement agents discovered that Kate and her mother had planned for the overnight visit, but never requested permission from the parents of the minor to take her from her home and initiate sexual contact. If this same thing happened with one of my daughters I would be interested in the maximum penalty being brought forth for an adult that steals a minor from parents.
Sometimes those that mean well end up hurting more Americans than they help.
All sorts of ways to excuse this behavior and knee-jerk reactions about the sincerity of the minors' parents and the fairness of the investigation and punishment.

[pacalo]

172. No, this is about two kids who went to the same school.

Unless Kaitlyn entered her friend's house & forced her to leave with her, she didn't "steal the child". Or do you regard "the child" as an imbecile who is unable to make her own choices?

Sometimes those that (who) mean well end up hurting more Americans than they help.

Americans? Interesting choice of words; does your stance on this issue make you feel like a......patriot?

[zeemike]

83. Exactly.

And this should be virtually unanimous among progressives...but for some reason some of us just want to take the other side of what should be a strait forward thing...making rules and sticking by them....and leave it up to the court to find a just conclusion.

[Loudly]

47. Not relevant. In the UK, persons who are observed breaking the law are cautioned.

The thinking is that having law enforcement authorities cautioning you should be enough to cause you to modify your behavior without ruining your life.

[alarimer]

134. That makes a lot of sense.

In this country, it's pretty much "Let's throw the book at them regardless of facts or circumstances and let them rot." Which is surely what will happen here.

No one's life should be ruined over this.

[msanthrope]

162. Which is what happened here, with the basketball coach who threw her off the team.

Granted, that's not the police, but it should have been a clue.

[burrowowl]

48. NO!

[jazzimov]

49. I have to say that I am dismayed

by the number of responders that feel this is a "black and white" situation.

"Only a Sith deals in absolutes". - Obi Wan Kenobi
IMHO, it is definitely NOT a Progressive trait. Thank you for your responses and exposing yourselves.

[liberal_at_heart]

50. I am dismayed that so many aren't willing to protect innocent children.

If having sex with anyone at any age, at anytime, under any circumstance is progressive then progressive I am not.

[AtheistCrusader]

90. I think your line of logic is entirely flawed, and does not respect Equal Protection Under The Law.

It is possible for a 13 year old and a 19 year old to occupy the same space and time and status as students in a high school. Still ok, as long as your impression is that they are in love?

These laws exist because gauging 'abuse', 'predation', and 'love' are incredibly difficult in court. It's all well and good that you feel it was ok, but that's not how the world works. There is not a damn thing 'progressive' about leaving minors undefended from predation.

If the case goes to court, and a jury nullifies it based on a solid belief the relationship was truly consensual, so be it. Till then, prosecution is exactly the correct path forward. Otherwise, we simply cannot have these laws at all.

[COLGATE4]

144. Not as dismayed as I am

with posters whose best argument seems to come from quoting a fictional character in Star Wars and who still refuses to recognize that, in a nation based on the rule of law, the law as it stands must be followed. Color me
"exposed".

[Starry Messenger]

51. No, since they were at school together.

If schools want to be serious about preventing this occurring they should make 18 year olds go to adult school. Frankly I'd be thrilled, since having quasi-adult students in a high school setting can be a pain for teachers and I've had students as old as 19.

But honestly? a young 18 isn't really that old and same sex couples aren't really at risk for the same kind of exploitation that hetero relationships can be with the risk of pregnancy, diseases, etc.

[LisaL]

58. Seriously?

The only way to prevent an adult from having sex with a child is to make sure they are not in the same building?

[pacalo]

89. It was a good point: If 18-year-olds can be sent to jail & be forced to wear a scarlet "A"

the rest of their lives if they fall in love with someone 3 years younger, then, by all means, separate seniors from freshmen. It makes more sense than adults believing they can legislate who are not allowed to have feelings for each other.

[DisgustedCynic]

111. 18 year olds can't be sent to jail,

or registered as sex offenders for falling in love. Legislation does not regulate who's allowed to have feelings for anyone. Adults can be prosecuted and convicted for engaging in sexual contact with minors.

[pacalo]

113. Then take the "adults" out of schools where kids attend.

Problem solved.

[El Fuego]

158. I agree. The school should be liable for putting the "children" at such risk.

The school would never encourage or allow fraternization between TEACHERS and students.

[alp227]

160. Including teachers? n/t

[Starry Messenger]

131. If that is your interpretation, that's on you!

[Ms. Toad]

167. I had a student who was older than I was the first year I taught

They were allowed to complete the school year in the year they turned 22, and my student turned 22 before I did. That was a trip - although she did end up dropping out before the end of the year. (And I regularly had 19-20 year old students.)

[LisaL]

59. She was offered a plea deal that involved no prison time and no sex offender registry.

She turned it down.

[HooptieWagon]

97. Yes, that was dumb.

One more in a long string of dumb things she's done.

[mbperrin]

107. Exactly. She reeks of entitlement.

Her parents probably feel she cut the younger girl a break.

Should have taken the deal, since there is no question as to the facts of the case.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

60. The law is being treated as an opportunity in this case to persecute being gay....

You know damn well this wouldn't even be an issue if she were dating a male.

[LisaL]

61. No. We know no such thing.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

64. Sure we do. They waited until she was 18 to pull this.

[LisaL]

65. You know none of the actual facts.

She turned 18 in August. Per police affidavit, they started dating in November. She was already 18 then. Police were contacted in February. So, nobody waited until she was 18 to pull anything.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

66. The way I heard it they were seeing each other long before she turned 18.

[shawn703]

84. Have you read the affidavit?

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/05/21/us/hunt-arrest-affidavit.html?_r=0

Take note of the defendants DOB, as well as the dates of the alleged incidents.

[HooptieWagon]

88. Thats not the case.

Kaitlyn turned 18 in August before starting her senior year. Other girl was still 14 beginning her freshman year. Relationship began in the fall, became sexual in Nov. It hasn't been specified exactly when the girls first met, but unlikely before school started as Kaitlyn had been in HS for 3 previous years, and the young girl hadn't started HS yet.

[HooptieWagon]

95. yes, 6 months.

Kaitlyn turned 18 in Aug, before school started. Younger girl was 14 yo freshman. Relationship began in fall, parents tried to halt it, Kaitlyn assisted the younger girl in sneaking out of house for a sleepover and sex (besides prior instances of sex at school), she was charged in February. There was no "ambush", charging her as soon as she turned 18. She was 18 the whole time. And 14 is below age of consent, no matter what the age of other party.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

103. That's not the story I heard.

[HooptieWagon]

115. It's in police affadavit. Her parents and supporters aren't being truthful. nt

[Spitfire of ATJ]

117. When something like this happens I suspect a setup....

Get a whole bunch of people riled up over an injustice and get their comments on the record and when it comes out the story is false you can throw their comments back at them.

Classic Nixonian tactics.

[DisgustedCynic]

112. No,

they didn't. The story you heard was incorrect. Hunt's parents have been shamefully dishonest.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

116. Sounds like a lot of advocates in the gay community were too quick to jump on this story...

I guess it was too tempting to paint this as a Juliette / Juliette tale.

[ZombieHorde]

75. No. nt

[Herlong]

77. I don't.

But as a parent of one black son, you have to know your child, who they know, and the law. When my kid turned 18, he knew the law, because I told him, single parent, to one black man.

Now if you think young love is cute, don't tell your children about the age of consent. See where that takes you.

[shawn703]

92. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt

And if you've read my posts on the matter, you'll know I'm someone that still believes this was a crime and that the DA is not wrong to prosecute this. She may or may not be a sexual predator, I don't have enough evidence to say one way or the other. But to say the age of consent laws are meant to apply only to sexual predators is like saying shoplifting laws are meant to apply only to kleptomaniacs and that someone who only did it once shouldn't have to face the consequences for it.

[pa28]

101. Her feet are a certainly a little white from playing close to the foul line.

Only those close to the situation know the facts. Maybe she truly is a SEXUAL PREDATOR. None of us on the outside REALLY can say for sure.

Regardless of orientation, if my 14 year old was involved with an 18 year old I'd be looking at the whole thing with a critical eye.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

119. I think that both "yes" and "no" are wrong, or at best misleading, answers.

It's a matter of degree.

She is not wholly innocent of sexual predation - an 18-year old is old enough to be expected to know that it's not OK to take sexual advantage of children, which she did - but she's probably a very mild example - there's no indication that this was part of a pattern of behaviour.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

161. how is 15 such a child in comparison to 18? she didnt have sex with an 11 year old

3 years difference is really something that is very commonplace in most relationships

[msanthrope]

164. 14 year old. Four year difference. nt

[La Lioness Priyanka]

165. most of the version say 15. they started dating when one was 14 and the other 17

and then had sex at 15 and 18

[msanthrope]

166. The affidavit indicates the parents of Ms. Hunt have lied. Ms. Hunt was 18 as of

September '12 and the relationship with the 14 year old victim started in the late fall and became sexual shortly thereafter.

Since the arrest, the 14 year-old has turned 15.

I generally find it's best not to take the Facebook postings of people who are facing their own felony charges as gospel truth.


http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/05/21/us/hunt-arrest-affidavit.html

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/05/25/indianriverreport.pdf

[AtheistCrusader]

176. The affadavit from the police shows the encounter occured at 14/18.

Dating is fine. Dating doesn't imply having sex with a 14 year old.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

168. I think that's a misleading comment too, I'm afraid.

The issue is not - of course - the absolute difference in their ages; a 27-year-old with a 31-year-old, or indeed a 17-year-old-with a 21-year-old, is nothing to raise eyebrows at (the victim was 14 and Hunt 18 when they had sex).

Rather, the issue is that a) a 14-year-old is too young to have sex, and b) an 18-year-old is old enough to be expected to know that, and to be held responsible for keeping their hormones in check.

Two 14-year-olds having sex is regrettable, but there's no sense in punishing them - if I were making the law I'd make it an offence to encourage or facilitate it, but not to actually do it. But I think it is reasonable to hold 18-year-olds to a higher standard.

I don't think that the possible maximum sentence is proportionate, and I hope Hunt avoids it. But I think a few hundred hours community service, or conceivably a very short (days or weeks rather than months) jail sentence if there are aggravating factors I don't know about, would not be inappropriate.

[arthritisR_US]

121. No

[Niceguy1]

122. she took the child at

Night for sex and refused to stay away.. she deserves equal punishment that an adult male would receive for the same behavior.

[burnodo]

127. She took? You mean she kidnapped?

[backscatter712]

128. Oh noes! A teenager snuck out of her own home! AMBER ALERT!

[burnodo]

129. Well, according to some around here

Kaitlyn seduced her young charge who didn't have the capacity to understand that her lover was too old for her.

[In_The_Wind]

130. An 18 year old should not be having sex with a 14 year old. Nuff said!

[MrSlayer]

132. Predator is a bit strong but she's still wrong.

A legal adult should not be having sex with a 14 year old kid. Nor should they remove said kid from their house without parental knowledge. Nor should they continue pursuit of the kid when repeatedly told to stay away.

Actually it is kind of like she's a predator.

[leftyohiolib]

137. predator is what any 18 male would be - no ifs ,and or buts

[TransitJohn]

133. Yes, by definition. She was over 18 and lured/groomed a 14 year old for sex.

Her orientation doesn't give her cover for that.

[leftyohiolib]

135. that's it right there people are willing to forgive this whole thing cause she's gay- does gayness

trump law here on du? - - here's another bit of ridiculousness "Yes, "the law" says that yadda yadda yadda." if op needed the police and they said that to him i doubt the op would be so understanding

[ScreamingMeemie]

136. Of course not.

[tavernier]

138. We actually went through it

with our daughter. The ages were about the same, the only difference being that they had not had sex. The older girl stalked our daughter, gave her gifts and attempted a very well thought out seduction. I immediately questioned the friendship, but my daughter said, "oh mom, she is just lonely, recently moved here, doesn't know many people" etc. but pretty soon it was obvious that this girl was actively pursuing a romance. Long story short, we sent our daughter away to live with her father in another state because we knew the girl did not have the means to follow her. It broke my heart to do this, but we had tried the alternatives but could not keep them apart. My daughter eventually moved back, married a lovely guy and has a great family, but I always wonder how emotionally screwed up she would have been had I not mAde the choice to remove her from the situation. And yes, I very much consider the 18 year old a predator, at least in our case.

[brewens]

139. At 13 I had 17 and 16 year old neighbor girls I was hanging out with.

I was a big jock type kid and they were trying their best to corrupt me. One night they were teaching me to smoke cigarettes and asked if they could see me naked. I was too freaked out that night, but knowing what I know now, I may have played that one differently if I had a do-over

Before that night I had no real desire to smoke cigarettes. I'd smoked a couple of cigars and wasn't opposed to smoking at all and it was likely I may have gotten started on cigarettes, even without their help. It shows what can happen though. If that was an excuse to hang out with cute older girls and they wanted me to smoke with them, I was going to do it. That was 1974. Some parents today might be more freaked out about the smoking than sex.

I got my first kiss one night from the 16 year old, who is still a good friend of mine. That part was good. A girl like that wanting to kiss me gave me a lot of confidence. I was kind of shy where girls were concerned before that.

Even with just the three year age difference, had the 16 year-old been sexually active and actually had sex with me, it would have been a dream come true but I can imagine it not working out well. We had a three year high school so I was still at the jr high and would have been for almost two more years. I doubt I would have actually been her boyfriend for any time at all and I would have been crushed. A cool older guy with a car would have had her before long and you couldn't blame a high school girl for that.

I'd say that's one of the things wrong with four year high schools. That four years is such a huge age difference between kids. When you put them together every day, things are going to happen.

I know of a guy that had about the same thing happen to him. He's from a small town where they have a k-12 school. He'd been dating a girl for some time and as soon as he turned 18, her parents came after him. I think the age difference was 15 and 18 in that case. He was really an okay kid but the girls parents just didn't like him. He got through his probation and avoided the sex offender tag but it still wasn't fair.

[LisaL]

142. Nobody waited until Kaytlin Hunt was 18 to turn her in.

She already turned 18 in August. Police were contacted in February.

[WinkyDink]

140. Look, the law is there for a reason. Hormones and emotions are not always proper judges of "right."

[Arcanetrance]

141. The law finds itself in a unique position if they don't prosecute Kaitlyn they provide

A defense to every person caught under this law in the future. Thus weakening the law from its original intent. Laws like this are written to be black & white for a reason and it's to avoid any misconceptions about what is considered okay not okay by society and we've as a whole said that 16 is the minimum age we are okay with. It's than up to the prosecutor to move forward as an advocate for the people. It sounds like the prosecutor has given her the best deal she can possibly give her in this situation and she's turned it down. Technically by the law she is a predator and if she decides to reject this deal and take her chances she may be stuck with that title forever. I know my view sounds cold and emotionless but as I said earlier you can't just not charge her under the law without creating a whole loop hole in the law that weakens the intent of it and leaves younger people unprotected.

[Ganja Ninja]

147. I really doesn't matter what anyone believes.

It'll be up to the court to decide. I just wonder if this case had involved an 18 year old male and a 14 year old male if there would even be any question? Would there be the same sympathetic reaction even here at DU?

[NaturalHigh]

151. Frankly, the more I read about the case, the more I think she might be.

The lies that her parents have told were what made me initially suspicious. Her decision to keep the girl at her home overnight when she knew that her parents were looking for her does not speak well for Ms. Hunt.

[treestar]

159. No.

These laws were not meant to apply to teenagers dating each other. The solution might be a presumption that can be overcome or a test that uses facts of the case to make the determination. It is absurd for a relationship to be legal one day and illegal the next due to a birthday. There should be a minimum age of consent and an age difference factor that leaves room for teens not to get caught up in this law when they are merely dating each other.

[alp227]

163. So what if Hunt was an honor student? The truth will come out eventually.

Roman Polanski: Talented film director...sadly also a sexual predator.
Jimmy Savile: Legendary entertainer in the UK. Sadly also a SERIAL sexual predator as was revealed before he could ever stand trial because the dirt came out nearly a year after his death.

In this world, smart people are very much capable of doing genuinely evil things. As I posted before, Katilyn's mother told two different versions of how Kaitlyn entered her relationship.

The first public version of the "Free Kate" Facebook group read:

At the beginning of this school year, she started dating a fellow student, who happened to be another female...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.

Was later revised:

At the beginning of the school year, Kaitlyn made friends with a 14-year-old freshmen girl...In September, shortly after Kaitlyn's 18th birthday, the girls began dating, and they eventually expressed their affection for one another in intimate ways.

And in the same post where I made the initial comparison of both versions, I said I couldn't find evidence of Hunt being in the basketball team with the younger girl. That also opens the door that something darker than what her mom says could have happened.

[LittleBlue]

169. Of course she isn't. This is a farce

Stupid law applied by stupid prosecutor and pushed by homophobic parents.

[sibelian]

173. Well, she turned me into a NEWT!

[randome]

175. Unless someone knows Kaitlyn Hunt personally, no one has any idea.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[mythology]

188. I don't have enough information to say

I haven't seen the evidence. She could have been getting the younger girl drunk, or taking advantage of a kid confused about sex, or this could have been completely consensual or at least as consensual sex with a 14 year old can be. The reporting in this case has largely been from interested parties, ie the parents of the two young women.

[craigmatic]

194. who is Kaitlyn Hunt?

[El Fuego]

197. What bothers me is 14 is too young for a girl to know if she's gay or straight.

I don't think Kaitlyn is a true predator because she's not old enough to understand. She may be a legal adult, but she doesn't have the benefit of the adult perspective that would enable her to recognize a 14 year old as a child.

That being said, I still think she had a power position over the 14 year old girl and used it. Kaitlyn was a pretty, popular cheerleader. Of course the younger girls are going to worship her. Is the 14 y/o truly gay, or did she just have a normal innocent same-sex crush on Kaitlyn? Did she want the teenage social status of being the older, pretty, popular girl's best friend? Did older Kaitlyn exploit these otherwise normal teenage girl tendencies?

A 14 year old girl doesn't know if she gay or straight. And she doesn't know that the doesn't know. While Kaitlyn didn't think she was acting as predator, I still think she may have leveraged the power disparity between them to bring the 14 y/o into the relationship. And she probably permanently screwed up the younger girl's head.

Yes, I KNOW it would be no different if the star high school male senior used their popularity and status to date a 14 year old girl freshmen. But in the boy/girl situation, the parents might have tried to forbid it from the get-go, whereas the same sex relationship was able to fly under the radar for a while.

[Initech]

199. Ever since I first heard about this story, something stinks about it.

I don't know what but I can't quite put my finger on it.

[AverageJoe90]

200. Absolutely not. But you know who I DO think ARE (non-sexual!) predators?

The parents of that other girl. BOTH of the fuckers. They apparently did all this, from all indications.....just because they had an issue with a same sex relationship.....and not to mention that the other girl seems to have mentioned possible problems in the family at one point(nothing specific, though I fear what the truth may be! ).

And if this is truly the case, that the LESBIAN relationship was the driving force, and it seems to be that it may be the case....then I would seriously look at possibly having these "parents" charged with hate crimes. There is just NO excuse for bigotry in this day and age, especially not to ruin someone's life.