Statutory

Pallidity · Post by **Pallidity** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:06 pm

Each state has their own laws, so it depends on where they are what the law is. I think, although I'm not positive, it may even vary based on county. Don't quote me on that though. I know around here it's as follows

Under 14 - No sex. The end
14-18 - Sex with someone within the same four year age range is fine assuming both parties are consenting.
18 and up - Sex for everyone! =P

Most states don't believe guys can be raped, which is totally idiotic if you ask me, but typically men are thought of as being more dominant and more likely to sway towards rape. Their body types tend to sway a lot of people to believe that they could easily fend off any woman, as well. And you never hear of gay rape except in relation to prisons. *shakes head*

Anyway, like Misty said, it's hardly ever enforced anywhere really. Typically it's the legal guardian of some young girl offended that she's having sex already that bring it up.

Nieriel.Manwathiel · Post by **Nieriel.Manwathiel** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:37 am

to avoid freaking anyone out, i shall bleep a certain word for sexual acts... (just tonight, my mom who's been a victim for the first 20 years of her life kinda had a breakdown, so i'm a lil sensitive to others in that position)

according to my state, the victim is classified as either being ----- or the one ------, as long as it's statutory.

:looking over the laws for regular rape:

whew. lemme copy and paste what it says on the site (i'll bleep the word)

Regular rape (not sexual bettery or anything; too tired to be doing much legal jargon this late) is, defined by my state, as "unlawful sexual ------- a victim by the defendant or of the defendant by a victim"

woohoo, TN finally got something right!

yepooda · Post by **yepooda** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:31 pm

WTF??

Aponi · Post by **Aponi** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 5:12 pm

yepooda wrote:WTF??

Kind of what I was thinking...

Spades · Post by **Spades** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 8:50 pm

Uhhh, what is that?

Reb · Post by **Reb** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 5:30 am

Statutory rape laws seems really over complicated....here the age of consent is 16 and that is that if you are over you can have sex under you can't and if you are over 16 and you sleep with someone under 16 then that is statutory rape. Though prosectution probably wouldn't happen unless the older people was 19+

rupaZer0 · Post by **rupaZer0** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 9:31 am

sack36 wrote:We have no evidence that Bree was not in a state of mind to give consent. She was going in and out of lucidity when last we saw her interaction, but we hadn't seen anything to measure her progress for several days. Her lucidity seemed stable enough that she convinced Jonas she was back to her old self. That's circumstantial and hearsay at best, but is a more likely scenario than the full rape one.

ETA: Here's the pertinent California Law:

§ 261.5 Unlawful Sexual Intercourse: Any person 21+ who engages in sexual intercourse with a person under 16 (Felony or misdemeanor); or, any person who engages in sexual intercourse with any person under 18 and where defendant is more than 3 years older than victim (Felony or misdemeanor); or, any person who engages in sexual intercourse with any person under 18 and where defendant is not more than 3 years older than victim. (Misdemeanor).

Not complicated at all. Very simple.

Kelly · Post by **Kelly** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 7:15 pm

Honestly...if Jonas is 19 and she's 17...that's only 2 years difference. They're best friends. Even then...doesn't someone have to press charges in this type of circumstance? I mean, considering what's been going on, and that Bree's not a complete idiot (brainwashing aside), she's not likely to persue Jonas on this one even if it is illegal.

P.S. It's only 14 in Canada? I live in Canada and I didn't know that. :p Not that it matters much to me...XD

onsweetavenue · Post by **onsweetavenue** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 7:47 pm

As said before, Jonas is only 19, and only 2 years older then bree. It is not what we commonly know as statutory rape, which is a felony.

Apparently California would call that a misdemeanor. Jonas could also be liable for an amount not exceeding 2,000 for engaging in sexual conduct with underage bree.

As for the fact she might be brainwashed, that isn't really something he could be convicted for. They would have to say he knew she wasn't able to consent due to diminished capacity and it appears Jonas thought she was fine when she had sex with him, and that she was over her brainwashing.

onsweetavenue · Post by **onsweetavenue** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 12:17 am

By the way, when is Bree's birthday? It's been a year since Lonely Girl started, right?

Lurker · Post by **Lurker** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 12:18 am

onsweetavenue wrote:By the way, when is Bree's birthday? It's been a year since Lonely Girl started, right?

October 26.

onsweetavenue · Post by **onsweetavenue** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 12:37 am

Thank you! I am sure at one point I knew that.

as long as the age difference isn't more then 2 years there's nearly no penalty. Unless jonas turns 20 before October 26th I think they're in good shape, lol.

I think this whole thing is silly, but with such a minimal age difference and Bree so close to 18 I think Jonas wasn't wrong to do her.