Reports of sex in classroom investigated

Dallas Star-Telegram ^ | 10-31-2003 | Mary McKee

[B4Ranch]

WE had a bit of snow last night, just enough to cut the fire warnings back. Do you know anyone like this old boy?

Farmer

[tessalu]

I think the girl is a danger to herself and the community and should be locked up as well, even if she is 12.

[tessalu]

I think the girl is a danger to herself and the community and should be locked up as well, even if she is 12.

[gitmo]

nor according to the population in general

[Iowa Granny]

#1 Due to an sincere effort at soil conservation we do not use moldboard plows here, as this ole' boy is doing.

#2 Farmers at my house work 19-20 hrs a day to get the fall work done before hunting season. Mr. IG is currently in the White Nat'l Forest on Colorado's western slope chasing Elk and Mule Deer up and down the mts.

He would not leave the harvest undone to go hunting and we do not do fall tillage for purposes of soil conservation. So when harvest is done, and the machinery's in the shed, he's free to go.

[B4Ranch]

I'd start by locking up her MOTHER!

[Rodney King]

I'll bet the girl doesn't have a dad at home. But that's ok, males are just useless appendages to the development of women.

[nicmarlo]

Then good thing the law, as written, doesn't take into account a person's weight or height, but, rather, a persons's age.

[StriperSniper]

Girls under a certain age, depending upon the state, cannot consent to any sexual activity. Therefore, the male, no matter his age, is charged with the crime.

What if the boy was 12 and the girl was 14?

[lonestar]

This little 12-year-old will probably receive a "Barbie" for Christmas and be happy about it.

Or could look like Brittany Spears.

I've heard of 10 year olds getting pregnant at recess. Years ago!

It's horrible.

[nicmarlo]

What if the boy was 12 and the girl was 14?

According to Texas law, "consent" to any sexual act is irrelevant if a child is under the age of 14 ("child" applies to both genders in Texas).

[Terry Mross]

It says they were involved in oral sex. It doesn't say which was the performer and which was the performee.

[Bubba_Leroy]

At least this time it was a boy and a girl and not a group of boys.

[TheCrusader]

"Automatically considered to be "without consent" in Texas is sexual access obtained:"

Texas law sucks, (pun intended).

Any "law" that removes the Judge and jury from the individual facts and merits of the case, and 'automatically' condemns the accused is corrupt to the core. That depraved girl who was giving the boy oral sex in front of the entire class is as guilty as he is, even more so. Based on the limited article content, it appears that the boy did not touch the girl's sexual body parts in any way; indeed, she orally stimulated his genitalia through the persuit of her own little desires and passions; and quite possibly not even at the boy's solicitation or invitation.

So now, according to Texas "law", a minor male child must physically drive off his female classmate as she pulls his zipper down in order to avoid the "automatic" conviction of statutory rape. In which case he could surely be charged with assault if she gets a bruise or scrape. All this legalese and cool-headed handling of such a sitution puts way too much social responsibility on the shoulders of a 14 year old boy, while allowing the female all sorts of wiggle room to employ her little game without any ramifications for her.

I can just hear the boy now: "Your Honor, I had to beat her about the head and shoulders, she was trying to have sex with me". Yeah, that'll work.

[nicmarlo]

The laws are designed to protect children: younger children from older children, young children from adults, and young/older children from perverts.

In New York, a 7-year-old cannot be considered a murdered, even if he/she kills someone. The younger the age, the less accountability. And a 12 year old, boy or girl, cannot be held to the same accountability as a 21 year old, or even an older teen. That is the reasoning behind the law.

It is still illegal for two minors to engage in sexual activity. But the older child "should know better" and, therefore, has higher expectation/accountability than the younger child.

Regardless, the law regarding age of consent is designed to protect children. Obviously, there is something wrong with both these children, and both children and their families should be investigated as to why they are behaving this way.

[TheCrusader]

"The laws are designed to protect children: younger children from older children, young children from adults, and young/older children from perverts."

When I see two classmates in a sexual situation, the boy a little more than a year older than the girl, I cannot fathom it being an "age" thing, especially at their age. It is a biological fact that girls mature in all areas of life faster than boys at this stage. In all liklihood the girl in this case was more physically mature than the boy, as well as more emotionally and intellectually developed. This is nature, and this is why the statutory rape issue between these two classmates is a feminist sham and an outrage. I won't be so easily duped.

So often older women, (especially teachers), seduce highschool kids, some of them barely at puberty. These women rarely, if ever, get charged with any form of rape.

[nicmarlo]

Crusader, read the law I posted. It says CHILD under 12. It doesn't say GIRL. The only one who's putting FEMINISM into the law is you.

[TheCrusader]

"Crusader, read the law I posted. It says CHILD under 12. It doesn't say GIRL. The only one who's putting FEMINISM into the law is you."

I know what it says, but what I'm more concerned about what it means under the surface. You seem to be unable to grasp this concept. You and I both know that no girl in Texas, at age 14, will be charged with statutory rape for having sex with her 12 year old classmate, now dont we?

[nicmarlo]

And no 14-year-old boy can be charged with statutory rape, either.

[nicmarlo]

SEXUAL ASSAULT PC 22.011

It is an offense for a person to intentionally or knowingly:

cause the penetration of the anus or female sexual organ of a child by any means;

cause the penetration of the mouth of a child by the sexual organ of the actor;

cause the sexual organ of a child to contact or penetrate the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of another person, including the actor;

cause the anus of a child to contact the mouth, anus or sexual organ of another person, including the actor; or

cause the mouth of a child to contact the anus or sexual organ of another person, including the actor.

For purposes of this statute, "child" means a person younger than 17 years of age who is not the spouse of the actor. By virtue of the victim’s age, Texas law recognizes the child as a victim regardless of consent. Certain defenses are provided by law in cases involving victims 14 – 16 years of age, as well as actors no more than three years older than the victim. Certain defenses are also provided for legitimate medical procedures. Refer to the complete text of PC 22.011 for further information.

SEXUAL ASSAULT involving a child victim constitutes a second degree felony.

---

HOWEVER, because the boy in this case is a child himself, he is NOT being charged with a felony.

With both children, they are looking at their ages. Any child under the age of 14 CANNOT give consent, even if they're a willing participant; this law pertains to boys and girls. This is to protect them and to help the police arrest those who would have sex with a child. Had the 14-year-old-boy done the same thing/had the same thing done to him (and we don't know who did what to whom) with a 14-year-old girl, then they're on the "same playing field" and both could be charged, equally, for illegal sexual activity.