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.


Well duh. Values voters and all. Nebraska is a hotbed of 'em. The man's not an idiot, he's giving the people what they want to hear in order to further his own cause. According to law, he has every right to prosecute this case. Just because I find it personally to be replusive situation, doesn't mean I think it should be illegal, but it is. They had sex before the marriage. He was 22, she was 13. It's a clear case of statutory rape according to law. That's illegal. End of story. Doesn't matter if they're married now, that's what happened. I believe the term for it is "per se crime," it doesn't matter what the circumstances, the fact that the act took place means a crime occurred. The girl could consent and it'd be a crime. She could lie about her age, or show him ID that says she's of age, and it'd still be a crime. Her mother could give consent for the girl to have sex, hell, her mom could be in the room with them, cheering them on, taking photos for the family album, and it would still be a crime. Notice he's not going after him for anything happening after the marriage. Much harder to convict on, as while it still qualifies for the Nebrask statutory rape law, it gets a lot stickier because the state of Nebraska must honor a legal marriage from ano0ther state, even if their own laws forbid it. So on one hand, it can be looked at as John Bruning just doing his job, technically he is, but we all know it's motivated by his own wants. And no, this isn't helping anyone besides him.

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.


Actually, her mom did file for a protective order before she got pregnant. It is mentioned here (bug me not login [email protected] regsucks). She dropped it and was all for marriage when she turned up pregnant (the real WTF in all of this to me). Actually, it's not just this dude. This isn't even the worst of the laws out there (and many more being drafted) giving the state jurisdiction to interfere on personal matters. Hell, they're trying to pass laws right now making medical records of women who've visited facilities that perform abortions accessible to any prosecutor who may want them (regardless of what they're there for) for any reason. I'm sure someone out there is trying to cook up new laws stating what position married couples can have sex in (in some states, anything but missionary is prosecutable). People are trying to get birth control pills banned because they think they work by causing abortions (there is no scientific evidence of this). They've tried making it a crime to have a miscarriage and not report to the policewith in 12 hours (who the fsck does that one benefit?) My pussy is everyone's business in this country, and they have more rights to impose their morals on my use of it than I do, didn't you know that?

I wonder what they'll think of next?


Edited by Heather (01/08/2005 15:26)
_________________________
Heather

"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." -Susan B Anthony