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.
What consequences? The risk of a hijacking of their flight to the "Jerry Springer Show"? Or the risk of a well tanned strap across the arse? Oh that's right, silly me! Forget the strap for that would just create more issues that these poor kid's would have to cope with.
Maybe your wrong! If they knew the consequences of a teenage pregnancy nowaday's, they may tell their friends and then they ALL would be working on getting pregnant at an early age just for the money and notoriety.
My reply is conveyed with sarcasm of course.
A fatherless girl already in trouble??
They were not succeesful in servicing each other.
Now they're fixin' to get serviced by the state.
One is a violation of person without consent. The other is a consensual sex act with someone under the age of consent.
Can minors commit sexual assault rape? Yes. Should they be held legally accountable for their actions? Yes.
Why is statutory rape any diffent? Because "both" participants are minors? In states that have Romeo & Juliet laws (that permit sex within age differences of 4 years) this is not the case, 18 year olds and 14 or 15 year olds can legally have sex. There are many on FR who defend this practice.
Just wait a few weeks; this is going to be on Jerry Springer!
The teens even "challenged" the woman to call police
This should be about where a 14 year old boy gets run out of the house with a whip/belt, pistol and buck naked screaming for the mean daddy to stop.
No, absolutely NOT, am I suggesting that the above is a good idea; it isn't ! I am just following your lead. :-)
The people who talk about their grandparents getting married at 14&15 make me wonder just when and WHERE that happened.Those ages were NOT the " norm " in America, England, or even in Hungary in the 20th century. And just because it happened, at some point in time, some place, doesn't mean that today's American 14 year olds should engage in illicit sexual conduct !
I've heard of businesses in the 1940s/1950s that preferred to have married staffers (the belief that they would behave more responsibly; getting work done, showing up on time, etc. since they had commitments to meet).
100 years ago, a job could be working in the family business (a store, warehouse, or farm). Get married and get to work. If it's a farm, the sooner you start having kids, the sooner there will be more hands to put to work.
Even in the '40s & '50s, the American farm was " BIG BUSINESS " and there were not a majority of small farms doing the business. Historical proof of this, goes back to the mid 19th century. The DUST BOWL and the GREAT DEPRESSION, did in a lot of small farmers too.
Also,100 years ago, even though some indulged in sexual promisquity, our culture frowned on it and made those caught ( primarily the females ) objects of scorn, contempt, and ridicule; not to mention outcasts.
That's how old my daughter was when I used high-strength epoxy to permanently seal her bedroom windows shut. That's how old she was I first parked the axe-handle next to the head of my bed.
Fourteen...
You can't stop the wind from blowing, but you can plant a tall hedge and put up a nice, solid fence to cut down on the amount of trash that blows into your own yard...
If that happens to me the kids get dropped on the steps of the orphanage. If at 14 they are stupid enough to want their total independence they will get it from me.
Actually that was the colonial era. Back in the Victorian era, they had more common sense than at anytime, before or after .
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.