Thread: 12 year olds Statutory Rape Conviction overturned by Ohio Supreme Court
View Single Post
  (#7 (permalink)) Old
Age of Ignorance Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
Age of Ignorance's Avatar
 
Name: Mitch
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posts: 1,365
Points: 22,859, Level: 21
Points: 22,859, Level: 21 Points: 22,859, Level: 21 Points: 22,859, Level: 21
Blog Entries: 32
Join Date: February 3rd 2009
Re: 12 year olds Statutory Rape Conviction overturned by Ohio Supreme Court - June 22nd 2011, 02:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Man And XX Master View Post
The above was from the article and even though both parties agreed it was consensual, I can understand how the above could be spun to suggest it truly was not consensual. After all, the older boy gave the younger one a "gift" to calm him, then started the activity. Plus, if the younger one disobeyed, the older one could intimidate by strength and size. This suggests the younger boy's testimony was incorrect and all of it is based on recollection of previous cases, where the rapist is stronger or has some advantage over the victim. Overall, it's bending the idea of statutory rape so far, its definition became falsified.

I'm not sure why it was even allowed to go through to trial because the seemed to be no evidence to disregard the younger boy's testimony as well as state the older boy was clearly the offender. It was all loosely implied.

The only thing I'm glad about is the issue is being examined before the older boy turned 21.
Whilst the younger boy had strength and size, intimidation to initiate sexual activity is rape; not statutory rape. If he was charged with rape and found guilty of it, I can understand the court's ratio. Better yet, why was the boy even charged? I would've thought the police or the prosecution would've seen the facts of this case and thought to themselves "charging a minor with statutory rape? WTF?!"