Male teen Has Consensual Sex with Female Teen. He Gets 25 Years as Sex Offender, Banned from Interne

[Steinlight]

Pretty horrific. But no one cares and the story will be forgotten. This is just a statistic for the DA to prove he is "tough on crime" and earn political points. Feel sorry for the kid, life is ruined because a girl lied to him.

Will she face charges for her deception? Doubt it.

 

[Noomi]

The judge who sentenced the boy also gave a 10 day prison sentence over the Xmas break to a woman who swore while paying a fine. The judge ignored the requests from the girls parents to drop the case. The judge is the problem here. What an asshat.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Computer science student Zach Anderson, 19, met a girl, 17, on the "Hot or Not?" app. He was from Elkhart, Indiana. She was 20 minutes over the border in Niles, Michigan. They hooked up. Once.

But it turned out the girl was really 14. She'd lied to Anderson and also in her profile. Now Zach sits in a Michigan jail, serving 90 days. When he gets out he will be on the Sex Offender Registry for 25 years...

In this excellent South Bend Tribune article, the mom told a reporter that she didn’t just ask the judge for leniency, "we asked him to drop the case."...

Now, in addition to registering as a sex offender, Anderson will spend five years on probation, during which time he will not be allowed to live in a home where there is internet access or a smart phone. He will obviously have to change his major. And he is forbidden to talk to anyone under age 17, except his brothers....

Male Teen Has Consensual Sex with Female Teen. He Gets 25 Years as Sex Offender Banned from Internet. - Hit Run Reason.com

One problem is that this 14 year-old girl searching sex through the "Hot or Not?" app.

And the next, the young man's sentence is a true miscarriage of justice. The criminalization of the resultant act and the destruction of this young man's future is the true crime. This kid got sex offender status for making a judge sadface about kids these days.

How long the judges will be allowed to screw up people as they want?

That's pretty bad treatment, but not really news. In many states you will go on a sex offender for pissing in public - even if you don't expose yourself in the process (meaning if you have trouble controlling your bladder you could become a sex offender)


It varies considerably by state. I know a guy who was in a similar situation in Louisiana, the age difference was even less. He did probation, no prison, and did not have to register as a sex offender. (He was also a tech genius, hmmm).

In Louisiana it used to be that convicted prostitutes had to register - but convicted Johns did not. The laws are really all very different and mostly fucked up regarding who registers - its so bad the registry is fucking useless. LIke I give a crap if there's a dude down the street who was convicted of pissing in public.

 

[Steinlight]

Computer science student Zach Anderson, 19, met a girl, 17, on the "Hot or Not?" app. He was from Elkhart, Indiana. She was 20 minutes over the border in Niles, Michigan. They hooked up. Once.

But it turned out the girl was really 14. She'd lied to Anderson and also in her profile. Now Zach sits in a Michigan jail, serving 90 days. When he gets out he will be on the Sex Offender Registry for 25 years...

In this excellent South Bend Tribune article, the mom told a reporter that she didn’t just ask the judge for leniency, "we asked him to drop the case."...

Now, in addition to registering as a sex offender, Anderson will spend five years on probation, during which time he will not be allowed to live in a home where there is internet access or a smart phone. He will obviously have to change his major. And he is forbidden to talk to anyone under age 17, except his brothers....

Male Teen Has Consensual Sex with Female Teen. He Gets 25 Years as Sex Offender Banned from Internet. - Hit Run Reason.com

One problem is that this 14 year-old girl searching sex through the "Hot or Not?" app.

And the next, the young man's sentence is a true miscarriage of justice. The criminalization of the resultant act and the destruction of this young man's future is the true crime. This kid got sex offender status for making a judge sadface about kids these days.

How long the judges will be allowed to screw up people as they want?

He was a legal adult, she was a minor - and not just slightly a minor. The only person who screwed up this kid was himself.

So, a 19 yr old, naive KID has sex with a 14 yr old girl who lied about her age, and his life is now ruined. That's justice?

You sir have the morals of an alley cat.

You, sir, have the morals of a 1800s schoolhouse teacher. The year is 2015. A 19 yr old going to prison for having sex with a 14 yr old passing herself off as a 17 yr old is way wrong and over the top. If he were 40? Yeah ok. But 19? That's fucking ridiculous. This country is way too prude.

Actually, to the contrary, in the 1800s it was perfectly acceptable for a 19 year old to marry a 14 year, it was very common. My great grandmother got married at 15. It is an issue of maturity, age of consent laws should reflect the changing cultural norms of the society. The fact is, while people biologically mature at the same rate, they mature much slower emotionally. Whereas people in the old days were adults by their teens, prolonged adolescence now lasts into one's mid-twenties in some cases.

So while their should be age of consent laws, they will very from society to society, nation to nation, state to state, and locality to locality, and this is the way it should be. Maybe it should be an age of 18, some places have it 16 in the US, some places in Europe like Germany have it at 14. I don't know exactly what the age should be, that is why it should be decided at the local level as much as possible. But what happened in this case is unacceptable.

In this case, the charge, let alone the sentence, is ridiculous. She lied about her age, and the parents of the girl don't want charges pressed, this should open and shut case and dropped. This is the point where the legal system becomes bureaucratic, inhuman, and irrational and the ruling should be reversed. It law as it was designed doesn't reflect the reality of the situation in this case.

 

[Steinlight]

he should be punished for the act, as it was statutory. However the labeling him as a sex offender is over the top. His purpose was to have sex with a 17 year old, which is legal, not a 14 year old. He shouldn't be lumped in with people who intend to have sex with 14 year olds.

We only have his word for it he didn't know she was 14.

What happens the next time he tries it and no one identified him properly.

Sorry, not getting upset over this guy.

She admitted she lied you obtuse dipshit.

 

[JoeB131]

I agree in part. However, the boy did not harm the girl, or threaten her. He didn't force himself on her, and treated her well. He isn't the same as other sex offenders simply because he didn't prey on this child. He deserves to be punished, but to have his life ruined for the next 25 years for an act which didn't harm anyone? I don't agree with that.

Okay, but the law says otherwise.

And, no, he didn't treat her well. He had sex with a girl who our laws says isn't able to make those kinds of decisions.

 

[Politico]

Computer science student Zach Anderson, 19, met a girl, 17, on the "Hot or Not?" app. He was from Elkhart, Indiana. She was 20 minutes over the border in Niles, Michigan. They hooked up. Once.

But it turned out the girl was really 14. She'd lied to Anderson and also in her profile. Now Zach sits in a Michigan jail, serving 90 days. When he gets out he will be on the Sex Offender Registry for 25 years...

In this excellent South Bend Tribune article, the mom told a reporter that she didn’t just ask the judge for leniency, "we asked him to drop the case."...

Now, in addition to registering as a sex offender, Anderson will spend five years on probation, during which time he will not be allowed to live in a home where there is internet access or a smart phone. He will obviously have to change his major. And he is forbidden to talk to anyone under age 17, except his brothers....

Male Teen Has Consensual Sex with Female Teen. He Gets 25 Years as Sex Offender Banned from Internet. - Hit Run Reason.com

One problem is that this 14 year-old girl searching sex through the "Hot or Not?" app.

And the next, the young man's sentence is a true miscarriage of justice. The criminalization of the resultant act and the destruction of this young man's future is the true crime. This kid got sex offender status for making a judge sadface about kids these days.

How long the judges will be allowed to screw up people as they want?

She was a minor, he was not. He was just plain stupid.

Question answered.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I agree in part. However, the boy did not harm the girl, or threaten her. He didn't force himself on her, and treated her well. He isn't the same as other sex offenders simply because he didn't prey on this child. He deserves to be punished, but to have his life ruined for the next 25 years for an act which didn't harm anyone? I don't agree with that.

Okay, but the law says otherwise.

And, no, he didn't treat her well. He had sex with a girl who our laws says isn't able to make those kinds of decisions.

Our laws are our laws, but not scientifically sound or morally proper. Nor are they they so consistent that saying "too young to make that deicision" stands up to any scrutiny as exceptions to those ages exist.

Via Romeo and Juliet close in age exceptions, sometimes it's legal to have sex below the usual age of consent. In a state say where the aoc is 16, a 13 year-old may be allowed to have sex with another 13 year-old legally. But if a 13 year-old is 'too young to consent' to sex with an 18 yo, why are they magically old enough to consent to sex with other 13 year-olds?

Morally, what's the better scenario: two 13 year-old virgins trying sex for the first time, or a 13 year-old and older more experienced sex partner who uses condoms, lubricant, and knows how to make his or her partner climax or orgasm?

Besides, if we're going to use a 'too young to make that decision' as a basis for our sex laws, we have to come up with a 'why they're too young.' Can a 13yo decide they wanna blow $70 for a videogame? Isn't the $70 better-spent on other things?

And if we use the oft-cited braind evelopment doesn't end until about age 25, then we have to ask why the aoc's aren't 25. And why we allow people to operate 2 ton metal death machines (you call them cars) at 16. A 16yo is old enough to not play demolition derby but not old enough in many states to have seX? That doesn't make a lot of sense. Afterall which is more of a public health threat? An immature 16yo behind the wheel of a big truck texting and turning to look at friends in the vehicle with them entering another's lane causing people to swerve to avoid and accident and possibly causing an accident; or a 16 yo having sex? I'd much rather the 16yo stayed home to have sex then left home to screw around in their car.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

As the judge in this case illustarted well sharing his opinion of morality, our sex laws have nothing to do with public health and safety, and are entirely about moral judgement.

 

[Stan Fan]

I agree in part. However, the boy did not harm the girl, or threaten her. He didn't force himself on her, and treated her well. He isn't the same as other sex offenders simply because he didn't prey on this child. He deserves to be punished, but to have his life ruined for the next 25 years for an act which didn't harm anyone? I don't agree with that.

Okay, but the law says otherwise.

And, no, he didn't treat her well. He had sex with a girl who our laws says isn't able to make those kinds of decisions.

Police officers arriving at the scene of a domestic dispute, where a woman, (or in some cases a man), has been assaulted (not even saying sexual assault here), just regular assault, and they observe bruises, automatically, whether the victim wants to prosecute or not, takes the perpetrator into custody. The State's Attorney than also goes forth with a prosecution, whether the victim wants to or not. Many times, later, in court, the victim doesn't want to proceed with the prosecution, women are notorious for sticking with abusive men (until they kill em). Remember the girlfriend who the NFL player cold clocked in the elevator? Professional football player strength, hit her with everything he had, and she went down like a ton of bricks. The dumb girlfriend sticks with the guy later and lots of people say she attacked him, and deserved the punch ???? She will become another sad statistic eventually.

So, whether the girls parents wanted the boy prosecuted for having sex with their minor daughter or not, means absolutely nothing whatsoever, and the girl, by law, is incapable of reasoning correctly on sexual matters like this. At age 18, people become adults, although they still, in many states, have to wait until they are 21 for some priviledges. You can't purchase a drink - but you can join the military, obtain a driver's license - change your name, drop out of High School, etc.

What you can't do, once you become 18-years old, is have sexual relations, of any type, groping, penetration, assault, with a child UNDER the age of 18. That clear fact seems to be escaping a lot of poster's here. If the girl was 17, he couldn't do it. With a child of 14, absolutely not, and I know of a school teacher who went to jail here for having relations with a 16 year old student. Also, two school security guards, ages 19-20, went to jail, back-to-back one day. First one observed kissing a 15-year old HS student on the CCTV, was arrested when he arrived for work in uniform the next day, and if that wasn't warning enough, his partner was observed on the CCTV, letting a 14-years old HS student (both were female), get in his car at the end of the school day. He was arrested and joined his co-worker on arrival at school the next day. Both got 3-years jail time, the teacher is doing 10 -20 years, and he had the girls consent, in fact, was dating here for quite awhile. She couldn't give consent legally.

One doesn't raise the age of consent on sexual matters, based on the fact that the times have changed and juveniles are exposed to much more than in previous times. The human mind and maturity hasn't changed. Despite the long lives of some of our Founding Father's, the lifespan during colonial times only averaged about 35 years, with all the diseases. Modern teenagers mature biologically, much faster than they do intellectually. Therefore, we have an age of consent law in just about every state, and 18 seems to be the cut off age. Is there any adult on this forum that would put much stock in the opinions and comments of 14 year old posting? I doubt it. You would know they are a child just by reading their words.

What that judge is doing in putting the 19-year old on the Sexual Predator's register, is protecting the next 12-13-14-15-16-17 year old girl he or any other 19-60 year old decides to go after, for the next 25-years, and sending a message to everyone in his state that this type of behavior will NOT be tolerated. Whether the parents wanted the case dismissed, means nothing, and the girls opinion isn't valid either, she can't make that decision - by law. The judge rightly dismissed the opinion of the parents and the girl, because he is protecting society from this type of behavior by others in the future.

That is why we have laws, and why laws have to be obeyed. Teenage girls can make themselves up to look older than they are, and very provocative - but it is the responsibility of the male to insure they are of age, otherwise, you are going to get hit with the full weight of the law, if you even touch them. She might have looked 22 on her web page - but you can't tell me once they met, that the guy couldn't tell she was a minor, all you have to do to determine that is listen to their speech in most cases. Also, what happens when this girl repeats the offense with another stupid 18-19-20 plus year old boy, or man? You think she is going to stop having sexual relations for the next four years, until she turns age 18?

Some people in here are living in a liberal cloud - change the law and let the guilty go, instead of protecting the innocent, that is the 14 year old, and every minor child under the age of 18, and whether she solicited the engagement or not, we follow the law, because the message is clear - hands off, they are children.....

 

[Montrovant]

I agree in part. However, the boy did not harm the girl, or threaten her. He didn't force himself on her, and treated her well. He isn't the same as other sex offenders simply because he didn't prey on this child. He deserves to be punished, but to have his life ruined for the next 25 years for an act which didn't harm anyone? I don't agree with that.

Okay, but the law says otherwise.

And, no, he didn't treat her well. He had sex with a girl who our laws says isn't able to make those kinds of decisions.

Police officers arriving at the scene of a domestic dispute, where a woman, (or in some cases a man), has been assaulted (not even saying sexual assault here), just regular assault, and they observe bruises, automatically, whether the victim wants to prosecute or not, takes the perpetrator into custody. The State's Attorney than also goes forth with a prosecution, whether the victim wants to or not. Many times, later, in court, the victim doesn't want to proceed with the prosecution, women are notorious for sticking with abusive men (until they kill em). Remember the girlfriend who the NFL player cold clocked in the elevator? Professional football player strength, hit her with everything he had, and she went down like a ton of bricks. The dumb girlfriend sticks with the guy later and lots of people say she attacked him, and deserved the punch ???? She will become another sad statistic eventually.

So, whether the girls parents wanted the boy prosecuted for having sex with their minor daughter or not, means absolutely nothing whatsoever, and the girl, by law, is incapable of reasoning correctly on sexual matters like this. At age 18, people become adults, although they still, in many states, have to wait until they are 21 for some priviledges. You can't purchase a drink - but you can join the military, obtain a driver's license - change your name, drop out of High School, etc.

What you can't do, once you become 18-years old, is have sexual relations, of any type, groping, penetration, assault, with a child UNDER the age of 18. That clear fact seems to be escaping a lot of poster's here. If the girl was 17, he couldn't do it. With a child of 14, absolutely not, and I know of a school teacher who went to jail here for having relations with a 16 year old student. Also, two school security guards, ages 19-20, went to jail, back-to-back one day. First one observed kissing a 15-year old HS student on the CCTV, was arrested when he arrived for work in uniform the next day, and if that wasn't warning enough, his partner was observed on the CCTV, letting a 14-years old HS student (both were female), get in his car at the end of the school day. He was arrested and joined his co-worker on arrival at school the next day. Both got 3-years jail time, the teacher is doing 10 -20 years, and he had the girls consent, in fact, was dating here for quite awhile. She couldn't give consent legally.

One doesn't raise the age of consent on sexual matters, based on the fact that the times have changed and juveniles are exposed to much more than in previous times. The human mind and maturity hasn't changed. Despite the long lives of some of our Founding Father's, the lifespan during colonial times only averaged about 35 years, with all the diseases. Modern teenagers mature biologically, much faster than they do intellectually. Therefore, we have an age of consent law in just about every state, and 18 seems to be the cut off age. Is there any adult on this forum that would put much stock in the opinions and comments of 14 year old posting? I doubt it. You would know they are a child just by reading their words.

What that judge is doing in putting the 19-year old on the Sexual Predator's register, is protecting the next 12-13-14-15-16-17 year old girl he or any other 19-60 year old decides to go after, for the next 25-years, and sending a message to everyone in his state that this type of behavior will NOT be tolerated. Whether the parents wanted the case dismissed, means nothing, and the girls opinion isn't valid either, she can't make that decision - by law. The judge rightly dismissed the opinion of the parents and the girl, because he is protecting society from this type of behavior by others in the future.

That is why we have laws, and why laws have to be obeyed. Teenage girls can make themselves up to look older than they are, and very provocative - but it is the responsibility of the male to insure they are of age, otherwise, you are going to get hit with the full weight of the law, if you even touch them. She might have looked 22 on her web page - but you can't tell me once they met, that the guy couldn't tell she was a minor, all you have to do to determine that is listen to their speech in most cases. Also, what happens when this girl repeats the offense with another stupid 18-19-20 plus year old boy, or man? You think she is going to stop having sexual relations for the next four years, until she turns age 18?

Some people in here are living in a liberal cloud - change the law and let the guilty go, instead of protecting the innocent, that is the 14 year old, and every minor child under the age of 18, and whether she solicited the engagement or not, we follow the law, because the message is clear - hands off, they are children.....

You may not be familiar with the differences in state age of consent laws, but the law is not universal in this country that an 18 year old cannot legally have sex with an under-18 year old. Some states have age of consent at 16, some have different rules for 18-20somethings than for older adults, etc.

As to the idea that a 19 year old must know that a 14 year old is not 17, that's ridiculous. Utterly asinine. Different people mature at different rates, some people may present themselves in a more adult fashion as children than others, and different people have varying abilities to determine the age of others. Without knowing either individual involved, it's nearly impossible to say whether the 19 year old should have known, simply through social interaction, the age of the 14 year old. Have you never known a particularly immature adult that could pass for a child? Hell, most teens on television are played by 20-somethings, and very often they do it fairly convincingly. The same can be true, at least to some extent, in the other direction. It is entirely possible that the girl did a good enough job presenting herself as a 17 year old to pass casual inspection both physically and emotionally.

Also, according to at least one of the articles, there is a provision in the law of this state that allows for leniency for offenders under the age of 21 (I believe). This was a 19 year old, first time offender, and the girl admitted to lying about her age. Add in the girl and mother both asking for the charges to be dropped and I seriously question the judge's decision.

As always, this is based on the facts available, there could well be further information which would change the situation.

 

[Papageorgio]

I agree in part. However, the boy did not harm the girl, or threaten her. He didn't force himself on her, and treated her well. He isn't the same as other sex offenders simply because he didn't prey on this child. He deserves to be punished, but to have his life ruined for the next 25 years for an act which didn't harm anyone? I don't agree with that.

Okay, but the law says otherwise.

And, no, he didn't treat her well. He had sex with a girl who our laws says isn't able to make those kinds of decisions.

Police officers arriving at the scene of a domestic dispute, where a woman, (or in some cases a man), has been assaulted (not even saying sexual assault here), just regular assault, and they observe bruises, automatically, whether the victim wants to prosecute or not, takes the perpetrator into custody. The State's Attorney than also goes forth with a prosecution, whether the victim wants to or not. Many times, later, in court, the victim doesn't want to proceed with the prosecution, women are notorious for sticking with abusive men (until they kill em). Remember the girlfriend who the NFL player cold clocked in the elevator? Professional football player strength, hit her with everything he had, and she went down like a ton of bricks. The dumb girlfriend sticks with the guy later and lots of people say she attacked him, and deserved the punch ???? She will become another sad statistic eventually.

So, whether the girls parents wanted the boy prosecuted for having sex with their minor daughter or not, means absolutely nothing whatsoever, and the girl, by law, is incapable of reasoning correctly on sexual matters like this. At age 18, people become adults, although they still, in many states, have to wait until they are 21 for some priviledges. You can't purchase a drink - but you can join the military, obtain a driver's license - change your name, drop out of High School, etc.

What you can't do, once you become 18-years old, is have sexual relations, of any type, groping, penetration, assault, with a child UNDER the age of 18. That clear fact seems to be escaping a lot of poster's here. If the girl was 17, he couldn't do it. With a child of 14, absolutely not, and I know of a school teacher who went to jail here for having relations with a 16 year old student. Also, two school security guards, ages 19-20, went to jail, back-to-back one day. First one observed kissing a 15-year old HS student on the CCTV, was arrested when he arrived for work in uniform the next day, and if that wasn't warning enough, his partner was observed on the CCTV, letting a 14-years old HS student (both were female), get in his car at the end of the school day. He was arrested and joined his co-worker on arrival at school the next day. Both got 3-years jail time, the teacher is doing 10 -20 years, and he had the girls consent, in fact, was dating here for quite awhile. She couldn't give consent legally.

One doesn't raise the age of consent on sexual matters, based on the fact that the times have changed and juveniles are exposed to much more than in previous times. The human mind and maturity hasn't changed. Despite the long lives of some of our Founding Father's, the lifespan during colonial times only averaged about 35 years, with all the diseases. Modern teenagers mature biologically, much faster than they do intellectually. Therefore, we have an age of consent law in just about every state, and 18 seems to be the cut off age. Is there any adult on this forum that would put much stock in the opinions and comments of 14 year old posting? I doubt it. You would know they are a child just by reading their words.

What that judge is doing in putting the 19-year old on the Sexual Predator's register, is protecting the next 12-13-14-15-16-17 year old girl he or any other 19-60 year old decides to go after, for the next 25-years, and sending a message to everyone in his state that this type of behavior will NOT be tolerated. Whether the parents wanted the case dismissed, means nothing, and the girls opinion isn't valid either, she can't make that decision - by law. The judge rightly dismissed the opinion of the parents and the girl, because he is protecting society from this type of behavior by others in the future.

That is why we have laws, and why laws have to be obeyed. Teenage girls can make themselves up to look older than they are, and very provocative - but it is the responsibility of the male to insure they are of age, otherwise, you are going to get hit with the full weight of the law, if you even touch them. She might have looked 22 on her web page - but you can't tell me once they met, that the guy couldn't tell she was a minor, all you have to do to determine that is listen to their speech in most cases. Also, what happens when this girl repeats the offense with another stupid 18-19-20 plus year old boy, or man? You think she is going to stop having sexual relations for the next four years, until she turns age 18?

Some people in here are living in a liberal cloud - change the law and let the guilty go, instead of protecting the innocent, that is the 14 year old, and every minor child under the age of 18, and whether she solicited the engagement or not, we follow the law, because the message is clear - hands off, they are children.....

You may not be familiar with the differences in state age of consent laws, but the law is not universal in this country that an 18 year old cannot legally have sex with an under-18 year old. Some states have age of consent at 16, some have different rules for 18-20somethings than for older adults, etc.

As to the idea that a 19 year old must know that a 14 year old is not 17, that's ridiculous. Utterly asinine. Different people mature at different rates, some people may present themselves in a more adult fashion as children than others, and different people have varying abilities to determine the age of others. Without knowing either individual involved, it's nearly impossible to say whether the 19 year old should have known, simply through social interaction, the age of the 14 year old. Have you never known a particularly immature adult that could pass for a child? Hell, most teens on television are played by 20-somethings, and very often they do it fairly convincingly. The same can be true, at least to some extent, in the other direction. It is entirely possible that the girl did a good enough job presenting herself as a 17 year old to pass casual inspection both physically and emotionally.

Also, according to at least one of the articles, there is a provision in the law of this state that allows for leniency for offenders under the age of 21 (I believe). This was a 19 year old, first time offender, and the girl admitted to lying about her age. Add in the girl and mother both asking for the charges to be dropped and I seriously question the judge's decision.

As always, this is based on the facts available, there could well be further information which would change the situation.

Like he really could have known the girls age and didn't care and wanted a warm place to put it. All we hear is his defense, not what actually took place.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Computer science student Zach Anderson, 19, met a girl, 17, on the "Hot or Not?" app. He was from Elkhart, Indiana. She was 20 minutes over the border in Niles, Michigan. They hooked up. Once.

But it turned out the girl was really 14. She'd lied to Anderson and also in her profile. Now Zach sits in a Michigan jail, serving 90 days. When he gets out he will be on the Sex Offender Registry for 25 years...

In this excellent South Bend Tribune article, the mom told a reporter that she didn’t just ask the judge for leniency, "we asked him to drop the case."...

Now, in addition to registering as a sex offender, Anderson will spend five years on probation, during which time he will not be allowed to live in a home where there is internet access or a smart phone. He will obviously have to change his major. And he is forbidden to talk to anyone under age 17, except his brothers....

Male Teen Has Consensual Sex with Female Teen. He Gets 25 Years as Sex Offender Banned from Internet. - Hit Run Reason.com

One problem is that this 14 year-old girl searching sex through the "Hot or Not?" app.

And the next, the young man's sentence is a true miscarriage of justice. The criminalization of the resultant act and the destruction of this young man's future is the true crime. This kid got sex offender status for making a judge sadface about kids these days.

How long the judges will be allowed to screw up people as they want?

No, the problem is he didn't ask for id. Fuck em

I went to school with someone who had ID showing her as 19 at 14. (Though 5 years apart, she & her older sister could have passed for twins except for hairstyles.) She was getting into bars at 16...even got pulled over once, gave the cop her sister's license. He was none the wiser!

 

[Jarlaxle]

Computer science student Zach Anderson, 19, met a girl, 17, on the "Hot or Not?" app. He was from Elkhart, Indiana. She was 20 minutes over the border in Niles, Michigan. They hooked up. Once.

But it turned out the girl was really 14. She'd lied to Anderson and also in her profile. Now Zach sits in a Michigan jail, serving 90 days. When he gets out he will be on the Sex Offender Registry for 25 years...

In this excellent South Bend Tribune article, the mom told a reporter that she didn’t just ask the judge for leniency, "we asked him to drop the case."...

Now, in addition to registering as a sex offender, Anderson will spend five years on probation, during which time he will not be allowed to live in a home where there is internet access or a smart phone. He will obviously have to change his major. And he is forbidden to talk to anyone under age 17, except his brothers....

Male Teen Has Consensual Sex with Female Teen. He Gets 25 Years as Sex Offender Banned from Internet. - Hit Run Reason.com

One problem is that this 14 year-old girl searching sex through the "Hot or Not?" app.

And the next, the young man's sentence is a true miscarriage of justice. The criminalization of the resultant act and the destruction of this young man's future is the true crime. This kid got sex offender status for making a judge sadface about kids these days.

How long the judges will be allowed to screw up people as they want?

No, the problem is he didn't ask for id. Fuck em

And what if she has fake ID?

Then he was still having sex with a minor.

Age of consent in Michigan is 16.

 

[Jarlaxle]

So you want the gov't to require 5 dates before sex? lmao

Is there any part of our lives that you don't want regulated by the gov't?

No, i was being facetious.

The government already has a regulation dealing with this. If you are 19 and you have sex with a 14 year old, it's statutory rape.

The judge could have thrown this punk in jail. He should be glad he got off easy.

he should be punished for the act, as it was statutory. However the labeling him as a sex offender is over the top. His purpose was to have sex with a 17 year old, which is legal, not a 14 year old. He shouldn't be lumped in with people who intend to have sex with 14 year olds.

Give him time served, a year or two probation, and tell him he's a dumbass.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Male Teen Has Consensual Sex with Female Teen. He Gets 25 Years as Sex Offender Banned from Internet. - Hit Run Reason.com

One problem is that this 14 year-old girl searching sex through the "Hot or Not?" app.

And the next, the young man's sentence is a true miscarriage of justice. The criminalization of the resultant act and the destruction of this young man's future is the true crime. This kid got sex offender status for making a judge sadface about kids these days.

How long the judges will be allowed to screw up people as they want?

He was a legal adult, she was a minor - and not just slightly a minor. The only person who screwed up this kid was himself.

So, a 19 yr old, naive KID has sex with a 14 yr old girl who lied about her age, and his life is now ruined. That's justice?

Yeah. That's exactly what it is.

How is justice served here? The kid thought he was bangin a 17 year old ho, not a 14 y/o one.

Meanwhile, the ho lied.

And I'm actually with D4E on one thing, I'd sue the fuck out of that app.

How

An adult had sex with a 14 year old child. That she lied does not make her any less a child. That is statutory rape under Michigan law. There is no question he did it and he could have gotten up to 2 years in prison for it. He didn't get prison. So I'd say that's justice served.

Did you not read the first post, are you illiterate, or are you just stupid?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Computer science student Zach Anderson, 19, met a girl, 17, on the "Hot or Not?" app. He was from Elkhart, Indiana. She was 20 minutes over the border in Niles, Michigan. They hooked up. Once.

But it turned out the girl was really 14. She'd lied to Anderson and also in her profile. Now Zach sits in a Michigan jail, serving 90 days. When he gets out he will be on the Sex Offender Registry for 25 years...

In this excellent South Bend Tribune article, the mom told a reporter that she didn’t just ask the judge for leniency, "we asked him to drop the case."...

Now, in addition to registering as a sex offender, Anderson will spend five years on probation, during which time he will not be allowed to live in a home where there is internet access or a smart phone. He will obviously have to change his major. And he is forbidden to talk to anyone under age 17, except his brothers....

Male Teen Has Consensual Sex with Female Teen. He Gets 25 Years as Sex Offender Banned from Internet. - Hit Run Reason.com

One problem is that this 14 year-old girl searching sex through the "Hot or Not?" app.

And the next, the young man's sentence is a true miscarriage of justice. The criminalization of the resultant act and the destruction of this young man's future is the true crime. This kid got sex offender status for making a judge sadface about kids these days.

How long the judges will be allowed to screw up people as they want?

Teens cannot have consensual sex. The prison term is justified and legal. Think about how the girl's father and mother feel about a boy violating their precious daughter.

You mean the parents that wanted the charges dropped? Read and understand before posting...otherwise, you will look REALLY stupid.

 

[Jarlaxle]

What are Facebook and Twitter good for? Nothing but gossip, bullying, sexual predators, beat down videos, and now people murdering others to impress their followers. ISIS is a big user....the feds keep track of every post. You can lose your job by posting drunk or ranting. So my question again.....what good is the "social media" doing and why shouldn't it all be shut down for good?

Are you in the right thread? The "I dream of North Korea" thread is someplace else.

 

[Jarlaxle]

he should be punished for the act, as it was statutory. However the labeling him as a sex offender is over the top. His purpose was to have sex with a 17 year old, which is legal, not a 14 year old. He shouldn't be lumped in with people who intend to have sex with 14 year olds.

We only have his word for it he didn't know she was 14.

What happens the next time he tries it and no one identified him properly.

Sorry, not getting upset over this guy.

Yeah, you being a statist thug is not news.

 

[Montrovant]

I agree in part. However, the boy did not harm the girl, or threaten her. He didn't force himself on her, and treated her well. He isn't the same as other sex offenders simply because he didn't prey on this child. He deserves to be punished, but to have his life ruined for the next 25 years for an act which didn't harm anyone? I don't agree with that.

Okay, but the law says otherwise.

And, no, he didn't treat her well. He had sex with a girl who our laws says isn't able to make those kinds of decisions.

Police officers arriving at the scene of a domestic dispute, where a woman, (or in some cases a man), has been assaulted (not even saying sexual assault here), just regular assault, and they observe bruises, automatically, whether the victim wants to prosecute or not, takes the perpetrator into custody. The State's Attorney than also goes forth with a prosecution, whether the victim wants to or not. Many times, later, in court, the victim doesn't want to proceed with the prosecution, women are notorious for sticking with abusive men (until they kill em). Remember the girlfriend who the NFL player cold clocked in the elevator? Professional football player strength, hit her with everything he had, and she went down like a ton of bricks. The dumb girlfriend sticks with the guy later and lots of people say she attacked him, and deserved the punch ???? She will become another sad statistic eventually.

So, whether the girls parents wanted the boy prosecuted for having sex with their minor daughter or not, means absolutely nothing whatsoever, and the girl, by law, is incapable of reasoning correctly on sexual matters like this. At age 18, people become adults, although they still, in many states, have to wait until they are 21 for some priviledges. You can't purchase a drink - but you can join the military, obtain a driver's license - change your name, drop out of High School, etc.

What you can't do, once you become 18-years old, is have sexual relations, of any type, groping, penetration, assault, with a child UNDER the age of 18. That clear fact seems to be escaping a lot of poster's here. If the girl was 17, he couldn't do it. With a child of 14, absolutely not, and I know of a school teacher who went to jail here for having relations with a 16 year old student. Also, two school security guards, ages 19-20, went to jail, back-to-back one day. First one observed kissing a 15-year old HS student on the CCTV, was arrested when he arrived for work in uniform the next day, and if that wasn't warning enough, his partner was observed on the CCTV, letting a 14-years old HS student (both were female), get in his car at the end of the school day. He was arrested and joined his co-worker on arrival at school the next day. Both got 3-years jail time, the teacher is doing 10 -20 years, and he had the girls consent, in fact, was dating here for quite awhile. She couldn't give consent legally.

One doesn't raise the age of consent on sexual matters, based on the fact that the times have changed and juveniles are exposed to much more than in previous times. The human mind and maturity hasn't changed. Despite the long lives of some of our Founding Father's, the lifespan during colonial times only averaged about 35 years, with all the diseases. Modern teenagers mature biologically, much faster than they do intellectually. Therefore, we have an age of consent law in just about every state, and 18 seems to be the cut off age. Is there any adult on this forum that would put much stock in the opinions and comments of 14 year old posting? I doubt it. You would know they are a child just by reading their words.

What that judge is doing in putting the 19-year old on the Sexual Predator's register, is protecting the next 12-13-14-15-16-17 year old girl he or any other 19-60 year old decides to go after, for the next 25-years, and sending a message to everyone in his state that this type of behavior will NOT be tolerated. Whether the parents wanted the case dismissed, means nothing, and the girls opinion isn't valid either, she can't make that decision - by law. The judge rightly dismissed the opinion of the parents and the girl, because he is protecting society from this type of behavior by others in the future.

That is why we have laws, and why laws have to be obeyed. Teenage girls can make themselves up to look older than they are, and very provocative - but it is the responsibility of the male to insure they are of age, otherwise, you are going to get hit with the full weight of the law, if you even touch them. She might have looked 22 on her web page - but you can't tell me once they met, that the guy couldn't tell she was a minor, all you have to do to determine that is listen to their speech in most cases. Also, what happens when this girl repeats the offense with another stupid 18-19-20 plus year old boy, or man? You think she is going to stop having sexual relations for the next four years, until she turns age 18?

Some people in here are living in a liberal cloud - change the law and let the guilty go, instead of protecting the innocent, that is the 14 year old, and every minor child under the age of 18, and whether she solicited the engagement or not, we follow the law, because the message is clear - hands off, they are children.....

You may not be familiar with the differences in state age of consent laws, but the law is not universal in this country that an 18 year old cannot legally have sex with an under-18 year old. Some states have age of consent at 16, some have different rules for 18-20somethings than for older adults, etc.

As to the idea that a 19 year old must know that a 14 year old is not 17, that's ridiculous. Utterly asinine. Different people mature at different rates, some people may present themselves in a more adult fashion as children than others, and different people have varying abilities to determine the age of others. Without knowing either individual involved, it's nearly impossible to say whether the 19 year old should have known, simply through social interaction, the age of the 14 year old. Have you never known a particularly immature adult that could pass for a child? Hell, most teens on television are played by 20-somethings, and very often they do it fairly convincingly. The same can be true, at least to some extent, in the other direction. It is entirely possible that the girl did a good enough job presenting herself as a 17 year old to pass casual inspection both physically and emotionally.

Also, according to at least one of the articles, there is a provision in the law of this state that allows for leniency for offenders under the age of 21 (I believe). This was a 19 year old, first time offender, and the girl admitted to lying about her age. Add in the girl and mother both asking for the charges to be dropped and I seriously question the judge's decision.

As always, this is based on the facts available, there could well be further information which would change the situation.

Like he really could have known the girls age and didn't care and wanted a warm place to put it. All we hear is his defense, not what actually took place.

It's certainly possible. But again, if the girl and mother both agree that she lied about her age, and wanted the charges dropped (this comes from the mother, not the 19 year old) it seems to me this sentencing was overly harsh.