16yo boy could not have been raped - Fox

[Stephanie]

gawd give us a frikken break

obsess over your party, point out some the stupid and dumb they say and and do for a change

come on I dare ya

good ole luds back leading the charge of trash scraped out of the sewer

Stephanie can't handle any criticism of her party peers...no matter how utterly absurd they sound.

who's my party peers? I don't run in a herd like you and your peers..I stand on my own

and you really expect us to believe that title? and know it's another thread with more ranting and wailing over a news channel because, it's FoooooooooooooooooooooNeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwws..you people never tire of it do you...how many ways can you hate on a news channel...we hope you all near the end of them

 

[Noomi]

Did you know there is something called digital penetration and it is considered rape too? Females and males can be victims. Rape does not need to use just a real penis, fake ones can be the same.



Sexual Assault and Rape | Health Services

Statutory rape is statutory rape. boys and girls. Females can't get away with breaking the laws because a boy may find them attractive. The same way males cant get away with statutory rape if he had sex with his 13 year old infatuated student.

I did know that there was such a thing as digital penetration, which is classed as rape in my country. I have been a victim of this.

I believe that a 16 year old is mature enough to decide to have sex.

I'm sorry to hear of your plight.

The law is the law though. If 16 is not the age of consent then its rape. Not to mention the position of authority she was in being his teacher.

I understand that. I just find it whacked that a kid, one day before they turn 18, cannot consent, but in less than 24 hours, suddenly they become mature enough?

 

[BobPlumb]

Was the relationship legally statutory rape? You betcha it was!
Is such a relationship between a teacher and a student wrong? Yep!
Should the teacher be prosecuted? Yes!

That being said, males and females are different! Does anyone dispute that point?
Does the male student suffer the same damage as a female student if the sexes are reversed? Probably not.

 

[DriftingSand]

Fox?s Tucker Carlson: ?Whiny? teen couldn?t have been raped by teacher because he?s a boy

Where's trannysteve and the other RW liars? They should be all over this with their "libtard" crap.

Oh wait - its Fox and Tucker Carlson - ultra right wing nutters, so of course, the RWs here will agree with Carlson.

Oh wait,

Well let's see if Luddly's premise sticks in ALL cases of statutory "rape" -- shall we? Let's see what Luddly thinks of the LGBT/NAMBLA "superstar," Harvey Milk, and his escapades:

Milk was 33 when he got together with his next partner – 16-year old Jack McKinley. At one point, Milk tried to “open an investment account as a guardian for a younger man who [he tells the broker] was his ward” – McKinley. The investment broker looks at Milk and says, “What you’re really talking about is opening an account for the boy you’ve got living with you. Right?”

The Life and Times of Harvey Milk | CitizenLink

 

[Chuckt]

Well I don't agree with him.
Now this kid wasn't forced and held down like we normally think of rape, but as far as the law goes, he was underage so it was rape.

And as I've been saying over and over in numerous threads like this, it's completely innapropriate to screw your students.

Fire her, then throw her ass in jail !!!

If it happened once but they allegedly had sex on multiple occasions. How is it rape if he didn't say anything about it the first time?

Charge them both.

Yeah, blame and punish the victim.

If the boy brought a gun to school, he would be charged as an adult.

He didn't call 911 after the first time.
Give me a reason why he wasn't complicit and wasn't a party to the crime.

He could have called 9-11 so he could later brag about it and maybe he can get a book deal.

If you ddon't start holding them more responsible then it will keep happening.

 

[Fang]

Based on what I read of the OP's snippet, Tucker is 100% correct.

 

[Mertex]

gawd give us a frikken break

obsess over your party, point out some the stupid and dumb they say and and do for a change

come on I dare ya

good ole luds back leading the charge of trash scraped out of the sewer

Stephanie can't handle any criticism of her party peers...no matter how utterly absurd they sound.

who's my party peers? I don't run in a herd like you and your peers..I stand on my own

Sure you do....Tea Partier.....

and you really expect us to believe that title? and know it's another thread with more ranting and wailing over a news channel because, it's FoooooooooooooooooooooNeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwws..you people never tire of it do you...how many ways can you hate on a news channel...we hope you all near the end of them

It is what it is....Fox News just doesn't know when they are wrong and the sheeple follow along...

 

[Mertex]

I did know that there was such a thing as digital penetration, which is classed as rape in my country. I have been a victim of this.

I believe that a 16 year old is mature enough to decide to have sex.

I'm sorry to hear of your plight.

The law is the law though. If 16 is not the age of consent then its rape. Not to mention the position of authority she was in being his teacher.

I understand that. I just find it whacked that a kid, one day before they turn 18, cannot consent, but in less than 24 hours, suddenly they become mature enough?

There's got to be a cut off date. But, even at 18, they are not the brightest crayons in the box. Still, as a parent, I wouldn't want some teacher taking advantage of an 18 year old's weaknesses. Even if they are old enough to be considered adults, a person of authority over them is more to blame than if the 18 year had been seduced by a 20 year old student.

 

[Mertex]

If it happened once but they allegedly had sex on multiple occasions. How is it rape if he didn't say anything about it the first time?

Charge them both.

Yeah, blame and punish the victim.

If the boy brought a gun to school, he would be charged as an adult.

He didn't call 911 after the first time.
Give me a reason why he wasn't complicit and wasn't a party to the crime.

He could have called 9-11 so he could later brag about it and maybe he can get a book deal.

If you ddon't start holding them more responsible then it will keep happening.

That's not the point Chuck....the 18 year old could have started the whole thing, but as a minor, they are not bright enough to realize they are being taken by an adult and need to be protected from themselves.

You can't hold teens responsible, especially at 18 when their hormones are raging and they can't control them. The teacher was taking advantage of that situation....she's the adult, she should know better.

 

[Impenitent]

I guess it's not rape here in Texas. In my hometown, a young female teacher had a relationship with a high school boy. The onl;y things to happen were - her engagement to a grown up was called off, and she was reassigned to the elermentary school.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

It's a quibble.

In a world where words retain their actual meaning, a woman cannot, in fact, "rape" a male since that would require the woman to have a penis and the male to have a vagina capable of being "penetrated."

It is possible for an adult woman to have sexual relations with a minor male "child" however. And that can still be quite criminal. But not a rape, unless the legal definition of "rape" has been re-tooled to mean something different than its original meaning. And I suppose SOME jurisdictions might have done that.

But what difference does it make. An adult having sex with a minor is still a criminal act. And a teacher (a person in a position of trust in our society) doing it to a student is still wrong on one or two levels beyond merely meeting the legal definition of one crime or another.

The case in question, though, comes under the NY State law. So, call it whatever you wish, but the truth remains. What she did was NOT "rape." And just to be clear, the woman is not CHARGED with rape, either.

The crime of rape includes both male and female offenders and does not require penetration. Here is how the state of New York defines the crime of rape:

S 130.25 Rape in the third degree.
A person is guilty of rape in the third degree when:
1. He or she engages in sexual intercourse with another person who is
incapable of consent by reason of some factor other than being less than
seventeen years old;
2. Being twenty-one years old or more, he or she engages in sexual
intercourse with another person less than seventeen years old; or
3. He or she engages in sexual intercourse with another person without
such person`s consent where such lack of consent is by reason of some
factor other than incapacity to consent.
Rape in the third degree is a class E felony.

S 130.30 Rape in the second degree.
A person is guilty of rape in the second degree when:
1. being eighteen years old or more, he or she engages in sexual
intercourse with another person less than fifteen years old; or
2. he or she engages in sexual intercourse with another person who is
incapable of consent by reason of being mentally disabled or mentally
incapacitated.
It shall be an affirmative defense to the crime of rape in the second
degree as defined in subdivision one of this section that the defendant
was less than four years older than the victim at the time of the act.
Rape in the second degree is a class D felony.

S 130.35 Rape in the first degree.
A person is guilty of rape in the first degree when he or she engages
in sexual intercourse with another person:
1. By forcible compulsion; or
2. Who is incapable of consent by reason of being physically helpless;
or
3. Who is less than eleven years old; or
4. Who is less than thirteen years old and the actor is eighteen years
old or more.
Rape in the first degree is a class B felony.

Article 130 - New York State Penal Law - Sex Offenses

I have a JD (Juris Doctorate) and I have never heard of any state which currently restricts the crime of rape to male offenders. According to the above Statute, Section 130.25(2), a person commits rape when: Being twenty-one years old or more, he or she engages in sexual intercourse with another person less than seventeen years old. Under the laws of the State of New York the female teacher is guilty of rape in the third degree which is a Class E Felony.

Contrary to what you say, the teacher WAS charged with rape. In your own post, you described that she was charged with a Class E felony (see your post at permalink 15). If you had bothered to check, you may have discovered that this charge was was rape in the third degree (what did you think it was?). I am disappointed that you made the claim that she wasn't charged with rape when you never bothered to check out what she was charged with. At any rate, let me set the record straight:

“According to the station, 39-year-old Joy Morsi left her arraignment in Queens Criminal Court on Tuesday after being formally charged with rape, criminal sexual conduct, and endangering the welfare of a child for her alleged acts with a 16-year-old male student. Prosecutors said the affair began in June of last year.”

High school gym teacher Joy Morsi charged withThe

The legal definition of "rape" in NY state is, in fact, spelled out by the Penal Law.

And I was wrong in my recollection of the definition of rape -- at least as it pertains to "statutory" rape. As to statutory rape, I stand corrected. The Professor is correct.

Under the NY State Penal Law definition, where the adult has what would otherwise be "consensual" intercourse with a minor, the fact that the adult is having intercourse WITH a minor does, by definition, make it "rape."

ORIGINALLY, when I looked at the only case which appeared on the State's "Webcrims" site against that teacher, the charges against Joy Morsi did NOT include "rape:"

Case Details - Charges
Case Information Court Queens Criminal Court
Case # 2014QN032863
Defendant Morsi, Joy
Charge Detail Disposition/Sentence
PL 260.10 01 A Misdemeanor, 1 count, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Act Manr Injur Child < 17

PL 130.40 02
**TOP CHARGE** E Felony, 2 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Crim Sexact3:actor>21victim<17

PL 130.40 02 E Felony, 2 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Crim Sexact3:actor>21victim<17

-- https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcrim_attorney/Detail?which=charge&docketNumber=lhVHoZFsLj42N6Ng_PLUS_PEjnA==&countyId=MLoObCwRaAo7q7oAHSL3AQ==&docketId=8R/wlVhKAToYD0KjZtALaA==&docketDseq=o6PDyKIx4BvSfbvyCgDnHw==&defendantName=Morsi,+Joy&court=Queens+Criminal+Court&courtType=L&recordType=C&recordNum=6UgXW9m1sHuRqkRlwO7ruQ==

HOWEVER, the article quoted by the PROFESSOR is now, apparently, accurate. Another docket DOES now show up on the Webcrims site and it appears that on THAT docket she IS charged with a whole array of crimes, INCLUDING "rape."

Case Details - Charges
Case Information Court Queens Criminal Court
Case # 2014QN032460
Defendant Morsi, Joy
Charge Detail Disposition/Sentence
PL 130.25 02
**TOP CHARGE** E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Rape Intrcrse:fem<17,m>21

PL 130.25 02 E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Rape Intrcrse:fem<17,m>21

PL 130.25 02 E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Rape Intrcrse:fem<17,m>21

PL 130.40 02 E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Crim Sexact3:actor>21victim<17

PL 130.25 02 E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Rape Intrcrse:fem<17,m>21

PL 130.25 02 E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Rape Intrcrse:fem<17,m>21

PL 130.25 02 E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Rape Intrcrse:fem<17,m>21

PL 130.25 02 E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Rape Intrcrse:fem<17,m>21

PL 130.25 02 E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Rape Intrcrse:fem<17,m>21

PL 130.40 02 E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Crim Sexact3:actor>21victim<17

PL 130.40 02 E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Crim Sexact3:actor>21victim<17

PL 130.40 02 E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Crim Sexact3:actor>21victim<17

PL 130.40 02 E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Crim Sexact3:actor>21victim<17

PL 130.40 02 E Felony, 30 counts, Arrest charge, Arraignment charge
Description Crim Sexact3:actor>21victim<17
* * * *

-- an EXCERPT from https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcrim_attorney/Detail?which=charge&docketNumber=v10DTPzdAJajaFM922AoxQ==&countyId=MLoObCwRaAo7q7oAHSL3AQ==&docketId=P63SKqslbD8DiDJ6oTyBoQ==&docketDseq=o6PDyKIx4BvSfbvyCgDnHw==&defendantName=Morsi,+Joy&court=Queens+Criminal+Court&courtType=L&recordType=C&recordNum=6UgXW9m1sHuRqkRlwO7ruQ==

 

[JFK_USA]

Rape is rape. The teacher was an adult and legally the male victim is a child. This double standard is ridiculous.

 

[Politico]

They never heard of statutory rape in their life...

Oh please (insert rolling eyes smiley here).

Oh please what? It is statutory rape and she should be punished. The question is whether it was consensual. Since he is a male it had to be.

 

[Peach]

Fox?s Tucker Carlson: ?Whiny? teen couldn?t have been raped by teacher because he?s a boy



Where's trannysteve and the other RW liars? They should be all over this with their "libtard" crap.

Oh wait - its Fox and Tucker Carlson - ultra right wing nutters, so of course, the RWs here will agree with Carlson.

Oh wait,

It's not 'rape, rape" As said by a ton of liberals when Polanski raped Samantha Gailey. In fact it is still said today.

Polanski was not guilty of 'rape-rape', says Whoopi Goldberg | Film | theguardian.com

He is accepted in liberal circles as one of the best and brightest. People like Harvey Milk, who enjoyed young lovers, and Ginsberg who appeared in films for NAMBLA are put on pedestals.

It's not 'rape rape'.

The OP is rape, just as the above situations are, period.

Polanski raped that girl and should be punished for his crime. Oh dear.....and I'm a liberal. Now what?

Lower the age of consent. It has only risen as humans reach puberty earlier. Tough thing for me to advocate, as I disapprove of teens having sex, but I accept the fact my likes & dislikes should not be law.

 

[Silhouette]

Fox?s Tucker Carlson: ?Whiny? teen couldn?t have been raped by teacher because he?s a boy

Fox News personality Tucker Carlson on Thursday called 16-year-old male victim of a statutory rape by a high school teacher “whiny,” complaining that he “tattled” to the police and “ruined her life.”

The topic of discussion was the case of Joy Morsi, a Queens high school gym teacher accused of having sex with an under-aged student approximately 30 times over a six week period in school storage closets and in her car. Since the first report, another student has also come forward claiming to have had sex with the teacher.

Addressing the issue with the all-female panel on Fox’s Outnumbered, Carlson dismissed the notion that the male student was raped, calling it “ludicrous.”

“It’s ludicrous that we are calling this a rape. Are you serious?” Carson explained.” I’m not joking a tiny bit. I’ll tell you what’s wrong to this extent: he went and tattled to the police and destroyed her life. Are you joking? What a whiny country this is.”

Carlson, who has previously stated that sexual situations between male students with teachers would be, in the student’s mind, “the greatest thing that ever happened,” said the notion of statutory rape with a male student defied “common sense.”

“You’re this boy, and all of a sudden you’re a rape victim? You pursue an older woman, and have a relationship with her, and you’re a rape victim?” he said. “It defies common sense. And anybody who’s being honest with himself knows exactly what I’m talking about. We all have to pretend.”

Carlson admitted that it would be a different matter if the victim was a woman, causing panelist Kimberly Guilfoyle to state, “That’s a double standard.”

Where's trannysteve and the other RW liars? They should be all over this with their "libtard" crap.

Oh wait - its Fox and Tucker Carlson - ultra right wing nutters, so of course, the RWs here will agree with Carlson.

Oh wait,

Ignorance abounds on boths sides of the aisle. The reason it is statutory rape is because an adult is supposed to fend off advances by a minor because they are hormone-charged, immature and incapable of making rational decisions when engaging for sex. Children are suppose to remain chaste, or at least discover their sexuality without an older person's influence. Older people become....habitual...manipulating...grifting in their nature. A child, we want to presume and protect, has not. So adults are to leave children alone sexually. And each state defines what a child is: at what age they can be exposed to the grifting world of sexual predators with some semblance of a spine and individuality to themselves.

It's coercion. That teacher coerced that minor by giving him the idea that she was for him, when she knew full well that she had no intentions of committing to him. She therefore, used him sexually. And that's against the law folks. Sorry to have to break it to you.

Where is Luddly's outrage at Harvey Milk sodomizing the 16 year old minor Jack McKinley for years? He coerced that boy in, made him believe he was a father figure to him [as he sodomized him] and then dumped him for younger boys as he aged. Jack killed himself in New York where the two met by jumping off a tall building.

You see, young Jack was mentally-frail, a disturbed teen runaway. Yes, he was engaging in sex on the streets for money when Milk met him. And that was precisely why manipulating him by saying he would become a father to him [to get him home to have sex with] was doubly a crime by Harvey Milk. He knew of the boy's frailty, his plastic and troubled mind. And Milk took full adult, conniving, calculating advantage of that.

What do you think of that Luddly?

 

[Yurt]

If it's technically rape because of the kid's age so be it.

What I'm wondering, perhaps Carlson also, is why the kid didn't report it after the first instance? Or the 2nd, 5th, 12th, or 27th time either?

For what it's worth if I was that age and the 'victim' of such treatment I wouldn't be thinking I'd been raped, repeatedly. I'd be thinking I'd hit the jackpot!

Said someone who has never been raped.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

you do know the difference between statutory rape and rape....right you lying sack of shit?