Posted by: JeffS
Man Charged For Sex With Wife - 29/07/2005 11:15
. . . who is 13. Strange all around, if you ask me. Not sure who's benifitting from this prosecution . . .
Quote:
Not sure who's benifitting from this prosecution . . .
Quote:
Not sure who's benifitting from this prosecution . . .
Quote:Oh, no doubt. I guess I'm just looking at putting the father in jail as not really doing much in the way of being helpful to anyone. Instad of a young mother and father, the child will now have a young mother and a father in jail. It seems the father was at least trying to do the right thing. Too little too late, perhaps?
Most people, like me, probably find this diisgusting.
Quote:Probably she's just doing what she can to "make it right". Some further reading from the forum discussion above pointed out that the mother actually had a restraining order against the guy before she got pregnant, but had it lifted after they were married. Both the girl and the guy were in "special needs" classes, but you can't really known what it means except that they were definitely too young to be doing anything of the sort.
I really have to wonder about the parent of a 13 year old girl who thinks this is a good idea, that's the more disturbing part.
Quote:
I think the "What's The Matter With Kansas" author now has more than enough material for a sequel.
Quote:
What I find repugnant is the idea of this district attorney, who in all likelihood doesn't give a damn one way or the other about the people involved, using this as fodder to get re-elected. IMHO that's what this brouhaha is all about.
Quote:
If any of the parties actually involved (parents, bride, groom) had initiated the complaint, I might feel more charitable towards this self-appointed guardian of our morals. But given the circumstances, it is none of my business, none of your business, and most certainly not the business of that district attorney out there in the trenches crusading for his version of the common good.
Quote:Yeah, but he doesn't HAVE to:
According to law, he has every right to prosecute this case.
Quote:Here's a case where people are "violating the law" all the time and no one does anything about it. Prosecutors can choose whether or not to pursue a case.
in some states, anything but missionary is prosecutable
Quote:
I wonder what they'll think of next?
Quote:
But I'm not sure that this is a good enough reason to leave this child fatherless (for up to 50 years) in an already difficult situation.
Quote:
The question I can't answer: is this 22 year old man dedicated to his new family by getting married, or he merely trying to escape justice for sexually abusing a 13 year old girl? If it's the latter, go head and lock him for the next 50 years, but if it's the former, I think we need to be looking out for the child more than anyone else (and by child, I meant the newborn).
Quote:
One point a lot of the coverage here has missed is that both the wife and the husband are educationally subnormal
Quote:Oh, well I guess we are in violent agreement then (which reading back is exactly what you said in your first post). I think the prosecutor is definitely serving selfish motives here. I do the case for setting a bad precident can be made, but I don't really buy it.
I still maintain this benefits no one but the prosecutor.
Quote:
Apparently in some states, it's illegal to obtain or perform female sterilisation without a husband's consent. No marriage, no tubes tied. Estranged or violent husband, still no tubes tied. The amount of owner/chattel baggage still present in a law such as that is dizzying.
Quote:
It's been getting steadily worse too, and these assholes are all getting more and more protection from the law.