Skip to comments.Judge Orders 17-Year-Old Girl Not To Have Sex [also prohibited tattoos, body piercings...
Posted on 09/30/2005 7:42:20 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Judge Orders 17-Year-Old Girl Not To Have Sex
POSTED: 10:16 am EDT September 30, 2005
SHERMAN, Texas -- No sex. That's part of a sentence imposed on a 17-old-girl by Texas state district judge Lauri Blake.
She's ordered the young drug offender not have sex as long as she is living with her parents and attending school, as a condition of her probation.
It is one of several unorthodox rulings Judge Lauri Blake has imposed since she was elected 10 months ago in the district court that covers Fannin and Grayson counties.
She has also prohibited tattoos, body piercings, earrings and clothing "associated with the drug culture" for those on probation.
Lawyers are also subject to her rulings. Blake has the told female attorneys not wear sleeveless shirts or show cleavage in her courtroom.
Blake agreed to an interview but later declined through her court coordinator.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnbc.com ...
That will hold up on appeal...
Who is going to check to see if she is having sex? and who is going to pay to find out if she is having sex?
Looks like to me that this self-righteous judge is pandering for votes.
By the time an appeal goes through, it won't matter.
Maybe the judge is doing his job. I doubt he needs to "pander" for votes. Judges often attach special conditions to probation. If she doesn't like it, she can always go to jail. If it was my daughter, I would be very happy with the judge.
Seems to be in direct conflict with the recent ruling by the Oregon Sup Ct that public sex is a protected form of expression and therefore not to be prohibited in any way. I can hear the TX ACLU chomping at the bit on this one.
Also, it's not always the parents' fault. Some people are always going to do what they want to do and no one is going to stop them.
If she is one of those, she WILL land in hot water.
Judges should tell people when (or when not) to have sex? Judges are in charge of who can have a tattoo?
Do we love judicial activism so much that we want it down to such low level personal decisions? Be aware: I hope the girl follows the judge's advice -- it's good advice. But not something I think should be handed down by a court of law.
Again who is gonna check and see if she is?
Who is gonna prove is she is or not?
Who is gonna pay for the checkups you and me?
How can that possibly be Constitutional? I mean, I know it's feel-good and moral and all. But what about when judges on the other side come up with moonbat rulings like the defendent is required to read Karl Marx or something? Judges don't have the power to stop people from having sex. And if they do, they shouldn't.
Oh well. I'm sure she'll be fine now.
How can she ever get an abortion if she doesn't have sex? Silly judge.
How do they actually know if she's having sex?
Solitary confiement would satisfy all these requirements.
You obviously don't know much about probation, which is probably a good thing.
Under probation a judge can attach special conditions. If she wasn't on probation he couldn't. Simple really.
""How can that possibly be Constitutional? I mean, I know it's feel-good and moral and all. But what about when judges on the other side come up with moonbat rulings like the defendent is required to read Karl Marx or something? Judges don't have the power to stop people from having sex. And if they do, they shouldn't.""
I believe you are missing the issue - the defendent has 2 options, to go to jail (juvenule detention?) or to remain free under conditions set by the judge. There are conditions to either option. It is up to the girl.
Looks like to me that this self-righteous judge is pandering for votes
I tell my 16 year old daughter not to have sex and I'm not a judge pandering for votes. In fact I think this judge has great courage giving this ruling knowing that that some anti-family lawyer will try to overturn it on appeal.
who cares what an oregon socialist MASTER says - this is TEXAS!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.