13-16 years olds screwing...nothing new there heard about it all the time in school and still do today,
Posted on 08/21/2003 7:32:39 PM PDT by mhking
When an Oak Creek woman found her 14-year-old daughter nude in the woman's bed with a 14-year-old boy, the teens didn't strike her as being overly concerned.
"They both freely admitted that their intention was to 'have sex,' " records quote the woman as saying. They "were confrontational and remorseless."
The teens even "challenged" the woman to call police. So she did.
Now, the couple's would-be sexual encounter in October has both of them facing serious criminal charges.
Their case takes a course through the intersection of morals and law, a bustling crossroads at a time when sexuality has become a greater focus of youth culture. While authorities say their prosecution is meant to help, not punish, the teens, a lawyer for one of them contends 14-year-olds have a right to privacy that allows them to consent to sex with each other, and has challenged the constitutionality of the law.
The boy is being held in secure detention on a charge of attempted second-degree sexual assault, a felony that carries a possible juvenile prison term.
The girl pleaded guilty to fourth degree sexual assault, a misdemeanor, but is charged with violating her probation; a warrant has been issued for her arrest.
Neither is being named because of their ages.
Don Linke, the boy's attorney, argues that children's privacy rights include the right to make "important decisions."
"One of those types of decisions is whether to engage in sexual relations," says Linke, who will argue his position today at Milwaukee County Children's Court. If Circuit Judge Tom Donegan rules against Linke, the case could go to trial.
But prosecutors say children have no right to have sex.
"Sex between kids is not legal," said Assistant District Attorney Lori Kornblum, who is prosecuting the case.
According to the law, "Whoever has sexual contact or sexual intercourse with a person who has not attained the age of 16 is guilty of a Class C felony." There is no mention of consent.
Linke suggests the statute is intended to prevent older teenagers or adults from abusing or exploiting younger, more vulnerable children, not to prohibit consensual sex among teenagers.
Kornblum said that while many instances of consensual sex among minors get handled informally, she felt compelled to bring charges in this case.
"The reason I charged this case was because of their attitude," Kornblum says. "I believe they had to be brought before an authority."
Not to punish the children, she said, but to help them through various court-ordered services.
Linke says there are other ways for the court to intervene without the children having to be found delinquent, such as filing a petition for protection or services.
Beyond the teenagers' sexual activity lurk a host of other problems.
Court records reveal that both come from troubled backgrounds and struggle with the same issues, such as attention deficit disorder and parental abandonment.
Prosecutors did try to cut the teens some slack.
The boy - originally charged in October - secured a "deferred prosecution agreement" in March. All he had to do was stay out of trouble until Aug. 6 and the charge would have been dismissed. But not long after the agreement, his father reported that the boy "refuses to follow rules." That prompted prosecutors to reissue the charge.
The girl - who was not given deferred prosecution because all parties involved agreed she needed services - was placed on probation, and ordered into Wraparound, a monitoring and treatment program designed to help emotionally disturbed youths at home instead of at costlier institutions.
But after she repeatedly spent the night out without permission, a warrant was issued for her arrest Aug. 5.
It could not be determined Wednesday if she had yet been arrested.
13-16 years olds screwing...nothing new there heard about it all the time in school and still do today,
There would have been no police call in my home. There may have been one from a neighbor reporting "shots fired".
If that is true then the law is a ass.
Explain to me how being preyed upon and exploited by someone your own age is different?
Sexual assault? Call me silly, but I kinda associate assault with force, or at the very least adult guile used to unfairly breach an innocent child's defenses.
If these little delinquents wind up on a sexual offenders/predators list for life, a horrible miscarriage of justice has been done. Whatever happned to being charged with plain Jane deliquency?
You couldn't be father from the truth and/or reality. Fourteen year olds, even when phyically well developed, have no , NO " right " to engage in sexual intercourse. They can't drive, they can't vote, they can't go into the military, can't get a job ( except for baby sitting or snow shoveling or some such ) without their parents' permission, they can't legally wed, they can't buy alcohol nor tobacco legally, can't sign a contract of any sort and yet YOU think it's pkay for them to engage in sexual activities ?
And, " knowing the consequences of a teen pregnancy " is one of the least prerequisits of the matter. These children are belligerent, have lawyers who blame it all on ADD, parental abandonment ( my guess iis children of divorce ), and a passel of other garbage. They are incorageables. And yet, YOU want to " let them just do it " ? Are they base animals, or human beings ? You act as though they are wild beasts.
I have a feeling that these two teenagers are going to have problematic lives.
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.