General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPlea deal deadline looms for Kaitlyn Hunt
If she rejects the plea deal, she will head to court next month. The standing deal would label her as a child abuser instead of a sex offender.
Kaitlyn was charged earlier this year with lewd and lascivious battery on a minor, after she admitted to having a same-sex relationship with her 14-year-old girlfriend.
Thursday evening, at Riverview Park in Sebastian, dozens of people purchased "Stop the Hate, Free Kate" shirts. Some held signs with messages like "Don't waste my tax $ on nonsense."
"Let Kaitlyn come out here and see the supporters, not think about that for an hour," said Kaitlyn's mother, Kelley Hunt Smith. "Just to be able to come out here and breathe a little bit. Give it a last go-around, and just keep praying."
Her girlfriend's attorney, Charles Sullivan, Jr., said the family hasn't been swayed by the intense national scrutiny, or Kaitlyn's attorney's insistence that she has been treated unfairly.
http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/region_indian_river_county/state-attorneys-deadline-looms-for-18-year-old-kaitlyn-hunts-decision-on-plea-deal
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
pacalo
(24,721 posts)Steven Hunt, Jr.'s statement on the petition:
Kailtyn’s girlfriend’s parents are pressing charges because they are against the same-sex relationship, even though their daughter has stated that this is a consensual relationship. The two girls began dating while Kaitlyn was 17 but her girlfriend’s parents blamed Kailtyn for their daughter’s homosexuality. They waited until after Kaitlyn turned 18 and went to the police to have charges brought against her.
Kaitlyn was a highly respected student at Florida’s Sebastian River High School with good grades and participation in cheerleading, basketball and chorus. She was even voted “most school spirit.” Now she’s been expelled from school and is facing serious felonies - all because she is in love. If convicted, she could end up in jail or live under house arrest, will have to register as a sex offender, and live her life as a convicted felon.
Our family will do everything we can to stop these people from ruining our daughter’s promising life. This is unjust and unfair - and we need your help to stop it.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)
shawn703
(2,702 posts)An 18 year old took advantage of a 14 year old. Furthermore, the parents of the 18 year old knew about the relationship and didn't put a stop to it, even though the father was a former police officer and knew what the law was.
And the way the accused's parents are smearing the parents of the victim is sickening:
"Kailtyn’s girlfriend’s parents are pressing charges because they are against the same-sex relationship"
No, Kaitlyn's girlfriend's parents are pressing charges because they didn't want their 14 year old daughter violated by an adult. Do they really expect people to believe they would have thought having an 18 year old man taking advantage of their daughter would have been okay in their book? Give me a break.
Then they flat out lie for sympathy:
"The two girls began dating while Kaitlyn was 17 but her girlfriend’s parents blamed Kailtyn for their daughter’s homosexuality. They waited until after Kaitlyn turned 18 and went to the police to have charges brought against her."
Kaitlyn turned 18 in August. They started dating in November according to the arrest affidavit. They had sexual encounters starting around Christmas (on school grounds, maybe that's the cause for the expulsion, hmm?) and again in January when the girl ran away and spent the night at the older girl's house. February was when she was arrested, so there was no "waiting until Kaitlyn turned 18", Kaitlyn was 18 when she started dating the girl and when she decided to break the law with the girl.
Arrest affidavit:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/05/21/us/hunt-arrest-affidavit.html?_r=0
http://www.cbs12.com/news/top-stories/stories/vid_7523.shtml?wap=0
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)I don't have enough information to know that it is a lie. Dating does not necessarily include sexual activity - and many school activities start before the school year (cheerleading, band camp, varsity sports for example). The two could have started dating in the month before school started.
As for waiting until Kaitlyn turned 18 - well, if there had been a sexual relationship between the two prior to 18 it would not have been a crime so in that sense it is an accurate sentence. It is misleading though, and her family has been clear in - and tried to correct - earlier statements that left people with inaccurate impressions.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)According to *both* girls, they started dating in 11/12 and had their 1st sexual encounter in 12/12 shortly before Christmas.
Both of them made corroborating statements: dating in 11/12, sex 12/12 onward. Arrest was in 2/13 after the 14 year old ran away, was picked up by the 18 year old, taken to the 18 year old's home to sleep with, where they had sex again.
Also according to the affidavit, the accused's DOB is 8/14/94.
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)The affidavit addresses the police's summary of what he believed the younger woman said about when they began dating. It does not address what Kaitlyn said about when they began dating, nor does it contain the direct statement of the younger woman.
And, I have seen enough police affidavits (after having been present during the interview, so I know first hand what was actually said) to know that it is not uncommon for them to have some of the details wrong. I'm not saying the details are wrong in this case - just that I don't take an affidavit of one person reporting what they believed said as inherently accurate.
Their dating may well have begun in November - or it may have begun earlier. And it may be that at the time the father made the statement his understanding of the relationship he saw between the girls before school started, which may not have been the girls' understanding.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)Page 1: the detective interviewed the victim, who stated the sexual relationship started "before Christmas 2012."
Page 2: the detective arrested and interviewed Kaitlyn, who stated that the sexual relationship began "after Christmas 2012."
Both state that the sexual relationship started sometime around Christmas 2012. Now it may be that the detective got the year 2012 or the holiday wrong, but I seriously doubt it.
The stories essentially corroborate, except one says the sexual relationship started before Christmas and the other says after.
And this is not 'awkward wording.' It is a lie:
"The two girls began dating while Kaitlyn was 17 but her girlfriend’s parents blamed Kailtyn for their daughter’s homosexuality. They waited until after Kaitlyn turned 18 and went to the police to have charges brought against her.
Kaitlyn turned 18 in August, 2012. The parents brought charges against her in February, 2013, a full 6 months later and after she ignored 2 requests that they stay away from their daughter. The parents turned to the police after their daughter ran away and spent the night with Kaitlyn.
Kaitlyn's parents have also claimed that the victim is 15, when she is only 14. They have lied on a number of points and have smeared the victim's parents with homophobia on their blog. They certainly are bringing their own characters into serious question with their behavior, imho.
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)"According to *both* girls, they started dating in 11/12 and had their 1st sexual encounter in 12/12 shortly before Christmas"
There is nothing in the affidavit which attributes any statement to Kaitlyn about when they started dating.
Should I call your statement a lie because you read too quickly and believed something was there that actually was, or give you the benefit of the doubt because you are obviously emotional about this issue and may have stated something a little more strongly - or clumsily - than the evidence supports?
I'd suggest that you are a bit too quick to call Kaitlyn's parents liars when you are making similar mistakes when you have the documents in front of you so you can review them multiple times before you make public statements - and you are not under the pressure of time to get word out quickly to people who might be able to help your daughter by bringing attention to the matter while it might still actually do some good.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)
I expect that any public statements they make are reviewed and approved by their lawyer, or at least a staff member. I don't have, nor do I need, that luxury since it is not my daughter's future at stake. I'm just reading and posting between housework on a day off.
Kaitlyn's parents claimed the victim was 15 and their daughter 17, when in fact the victim was still 14 when the arrest took place. Even if the relationship started when their daughter was 17, that would mean the victim was likely only 13 at the outset. The bottom line is 4 years between them, not just the 2 they tried to imply.
The parents smeared the victim's parents on their blog and put outright lies on their petition.
That speaks far more to their characters than the victim's parents.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)magical thyme
(14,881 posts)"The two girls began dating while Kaitlyn was 17 but her girlfriend’s parents blamed Kailtyn for their daughter’s homosexuality. They waited until after Kaitlyn turned 18 and went to the police to have charges brought against her."
That is a barefaced lie. And I have a serious problem with that. It weakens all petitions when people just make shit up to sucker people in.
The accused was over 18 years old when they started dating, never mind when they started having sex. The victim's parents most certainly did not wait until she turned 18 to go to the police.
The victim's parents went to the police after their 14 year old daughter disappeared. I imagine they were frantic looking for her, and probably furious that the 18 year old that they had repeatedly asked to leave their daughter alone had picked her up and taken her home to sleep and have sex.
Their wonderful daughter knew she was having sex with an underage girl. She told the police she didn't think about it because the she "acted older." If an 18 year old man tried that claim, he'd be excoriated.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/05/21/us/hunt-arrest-affidavit.html?_r=1&
pacalo
(24,721 posts)She's been expelled in her senior year -- that is devastating enough; unless they had sex on school property, it was over & beyond.
Kaitlyn is the victim of a vindictive, mean mother.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)or be potential felons themselves. They don't decide what charges to bring, nor do they choose the punishment. But they are legally require to report.
I agree that the punishment is far too harsh for the crime. Unfortunately, 18 is considered an adult. It is the minimum age to enter into contracts and the age of majority in many, if not most, states. By 18, we are expected to consider and understand the consequences of our actions.
This was not vindictiveness, nor meanness on the part of the parents. The victim's parents were advised of the relationship by school officials, who also required by law to report:
"In 2012, House Bill 1355 was passed into law and shall be referred to as "Protection of Vulnerable Persons" Ch. 2012‐155 of the Laws of Florida....The bill also
requires any person to report known or reasonably suspected sexual abuse of a
child by any person. The bill requires the central abuse hotline to accept any call reporting child
abuse, abandonment, or neglect by someone other than a
caregiver and to forward the concern to the appropriate sheriff’s office for further investigation.
The bill also states that the knowledge and willful failure of a
person, who is required to report known or suspected child abuse, abandonment,
or neglect is elevated from a first degree misdemeanor to a third degree felony.
As a result, the potential prison sentence is raised from 1 year to 5 years,
and the potential fine is raised from a maximum of $1,000
to a maximum of $5,000."
http://www.dcf.state.fl.us/programs/abuse/publications/mandatedreporters.pdf
pacalo
(24,721 posts)She was a good, well-rounded student with a promising future & to have been expelled in her senior year ruined her chances of any scholarship. Now they want to put her in jail, brand her permanently as someone who "molests children", which will follow her wherever she goes.
That's why I was glad to sign the petition.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)removed the child molester/registered sex offender charge.
She wasn't expelled until she defied the earlier punishment of removal from the team and the victim's parents request that she stay away from their daughter.
Instead, she persisted in the illegal relationship and now, instead of accepting a plea that does *exactly* what you wish by eliminating jail and keeping her off the sex offender registry, her parents have mounted a smear campaign against the victim's parents.
Quite frankly, if her parents were aware that she brought the victim home in January and slept with her, then they are guilty of a 3rd degree felony under Florida laws and should be charged as well.
Her lawyer is using her to try to get the age of consent laws changed. And her lawyer is using everybody who signed that petition by allowing their client to misrepresent the facts and smear the victim's parents.
The more I read about this case, the more appalled I am by the parents of the accused and their lawyer.
pacalo
(24,721 posts)I disagree with the way this young girl has been persecuted. I'm not going to change my mind & neither or you. Let's leave it at that.
AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)I rarely post, I am much more of a lurking reader, but this situation has compelled me to say something.
I don't have a teenage daughter so I don't know how either family feels. However, I know hypocrisy when I smell it and many defenders of this young woman are being very hypocritical. The argument breaks down two ways.
1. These are just two dumb kids, they don't know any better, why they are children and how can WE expect children to have any common sense and know how to deal with a situation like this. Shucks, these kids are just answering their emotions and WE as adults need to let the kids be kids and not trouble them with adult concerns.........HOWEVER we burden these same 18 year old CHILDREN with the most important thing they can ever do and implore them to vote in overwhelming numbers because WE want to win. If they are children and can't understand right from wrong on relationships, why on earth do we expect them to understand Tax policy, Foreign Policy, Affordable Health Care, Social Issues. Yet, we push them to vote, to register every 18 year old they can and have them vote also. I don't know much but I smell rank hypocrisy when we give them a pass when it suits some peoples agendas and we hold them accountable when it serves our agenda in a far different way.
2. This is a short argument: If this was a male, the lynch mob on this site would perhaps stretch down the road quite a ways. But it is not a male, it is a female that is a lesbian. I have no problem with who she is and the way she was born, it's a damn shame that we don't have national gay marriage laws, HOWEVER, she is an adult, gay or straight she is an adult. Adults have consequences put on them when they break laws. I was in the military with plenty of 18 year old's that were held accountable for being 18 and sleeping with 14 and 15 year old's. If the law if Florida is written the way it looks, then she has committed a crime. If she refuses a plea deal, which is in essence the system going easy on her, then she must go to trial and a jury of her peers (not her peer group in high school, a jury of her peers, i.e. adults will judge her as they see fit when the evidence is presented). The day she turned 18 she was held to a different standard, and the ability to be considered a child went away.
Now all my hyperbole aside, I have nothing personal against this young woman, she seems like a great student and someone who could do something with her life. However, she did break the law in the state of Florida, I will never sign a petition to excuse her behavior because I don't want her behavior excused. I want her to face the fact that she broke the law and must be held accountable if it is proven that she did in fact do so. I also think Florida needs to change this law because it is a stupid law that needs to be written more clearly. However I cannot condone an 18 year old that can vote, that can fight and die for their country, that can buy cigarettes, that can own property, and that can enter into contracts if they choose to sleep with a child......And that other girl is a child. No matter how you want to spin it, an adult molested a child. An adult took a child from her parents home without the parents permissions, an adult refused to abide by the demands of the legal parents of a child to stop seeing that child. There is a word for someone like that, a criminal......Personally I ope the young lady takes the plea deal, does her punishment and moves on with her life wiser and more cognizant of the responsibilities of adulthood.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Under the state attorney's deal, Hunt would have been labeled a sex offender and placed on two years' house arrest, according to NBC affiliate WPTV.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/24/kaitlyn-hunt-refuses-plea-deal-gay-teen-charged_n_3331434.html
Prosecutors have offered Hunt a plea deal that would allow her to avoid registering as a sex offender if she pleads guilty to lesser charges of child abuse. State Attorney Bruce Colton said he would recommend two years of house arrest followed by one year probation if she takes the deal.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57586072-504083/kaitlyn-hunt-update-plea-deadline-is-today-for-fla-teen-charged-over-same-sex-underage-relationship/
Kaitlyn Hunt, the 18-year-old high school student facing felony charges in connection to her arrest after she had a same-sex relationship with a younger student, was offered a plea agreement of two years house arrest and one year probation.
She has refused the plea deal.
Had she taken the offer, she would be have labeled a "sexual offender" and agreed to two years' house arrest.
http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/pulp/2013/05/kaitlyn_hunt_refuses_plea_deal.php
These are three different news sources that prove what you are saying is not true. You are the one misrepresenting the facts.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)both state she would have *avoided* registering as a sex offender, with 2 years house arrest and one year probation. That is the deal that I have seen, now in the source you cited, the OP and possibly other sources. IIRC, one article I saw stated a description of what being a "child abuser" would mean.
"Prosecutors have offered Hunt a plea deal that would allow her to avoid registering as a sex offender if she pleads guilty to lesser charges of child abuse. State Attorney Bruce Colton said he would recommend two years of house arrest followed by one year probation if she takes the deal.
Oh, and I just realized one place where I saw the same reference. Re-read the OP. It states the same thing. The Hunt would avoid sex offender registry and jail if she takes lesser charge of child abuse.
So there are 2 sources that say one thing -- one right in the OP -- versus 2 sources that disagree. Because you failed to read either the OP or your own citation does not mean I am misrepresenting the facts.
And I re-iterate: Personally, I believe the charges are excessive. But I also believe her parents actions in smearing the victim's parents, misrepresenting the ages and possibly making other false claims are harming her.
I am aware that other cases have not had such harsh sentences...once the deals were actually reached. I also don't know the details of those cases versus this one, other that in this case the parents decided to try to have her tried in the public arena. I think that was foolish and irresponsible as well and both girls stand to suffer more as a result.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)The first and third said if she had accepted the plea deal, then she would have had to register as a sex offender. Why the differences between the articles? I don't know. I tend to believe the intent of the prosecutor IS to have her register as a sex offender for the rest of her life. This is what is being pushed by the prosecution and the parent's of the other girl.
I still strongly believe any charges are complete bullshit. The whole thing is a vindictive anti-gay bigoted crusade by the other girl's parents who were shocked that their daughter was with another female.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)from her records after completion of her sentence. *If* so, then she was foolish to turn down the plea because it's probably the best offer she was going to get.
Prosecutions often push for the most extreme charges in order to pressure the defendant into taking a plea.
From everything I've read, she stands little chance in a trial in such a conservative area and there are a couple sticking pointsin Romeo/Juliet laws that don't make that an automatic way out either.
I don't think the victim's parents are on an anti-gay crusade. I think they are angry that she didn't back off after getting punished by her coach and then asked by them to leave their daughter alone. After all, there was nearly 2 full months before the first sexual encounter and when she was arrested. It wasn't until after their daughter ran away that the police were involved, yet they were aware of the situation well before that. I think they blame her for their daughter's "acting out" and running away, and certainly for spending the night with their daughter instead of sending her home.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)From what I understand, the judge makes those kind of decisions, not the prosecutor. The prosecution could as part of the deal recommend not classifying her as a predator or eventually expunging the record, but the judge can apparently say no to those things.
Im not a lawyer, so I dont know how judges typically rule on such matters. Considering its a very conservative area, perhaps the judges are very conservative and Kaitlyn's lawyers think they actually have a better shot with a jury than a judge.
In Florida, state attorneys and many judges are elected. So they tend to reflect the population. 60% of Indian River County went to Romney in the last election. So that tells you what's being elected there. Had this incident occurred in Palm Beach, Broward, or Dade county.... we may be looking an entirely different case altogether.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)It is possible that it is mandated for any felony sex charge to register as a sex offender. Florida seems to have some pretty strict laws. If that is the case, in either situation the judge would have no discretion in the matter.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)If she was 17, maybe. I believe whether or not she takes the deal she will be forced to register as a sex offender. As I said below, depending on Florida law it may be mandatory (the judge would have no discretion). Florida is known for having tough laws.
The other girls mother apparently made a fairly lengthy tirade against homosexuals and there are witnesses (school employees) that this occurred. If this is the case (and in a trial this would come out), I'd take their word over the mother's word.
One of the things people don't comprehend is the other girl does not want charges pressed against her, it is her parents that are pushing to put Kate in prison.
Honestly if you asked me about a year or two ago, I probably would have either been on the fence or on the opposite side for a multitude of reasons (which I won't discuss).
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)The courts don't care about the teen's opinion on any of it. According to the law, she doesnt have the mental capacity to understand, therefore her opinions are non-admissible. Which is kind of stupid since Florida last year tried a 13 year old as an adult in a murder case. So apparently he had the mental capacity. I think Florida has even attempted to try an 11 year old too as an adult. I remember a case several years back but I dont remember the specifics of it or what happened.
And it could end up being a pretty sad situation because in 3 years this 15 year old can leave home and never look back. That will continue to be an issue for that girl. If she is in fact gay/bisexual, she's in for a rocky 3 years. I've known several LGBT people who didnt have accepting parents, and they said it got ugly at times.
But back to the plea deal... I believe the deal was that instead of two counts of lewd and lascivious battery, it was for 2 counts of felony child abuse. Now, Im not certain she would have to register as a sex offender for that or not. Perhaps she would since the abuse is considered sexual. Either way the felony stays on the record for life. So wont be able to buy a gun, won't be able to vote for quite some time (convicts voting in Florida is a major controversy every election), won't ever be able to adopt children, may have trouble getting into college, will definitely impact employment opportunities, and in fact she may be barred from having any contact with her own younger siblings.
So it's not necessarily all that great of a deal considering what a judge could do. Seems the only benefit of the plea would be avoiding the jail time.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)I don't think colleges would accept a student if they knew they were convicted of a felony, and certainly not if they were classified as a sex offender. It would be too large of a risk for the school. The child abuse is still part of a sexual offense so I think she could still fall under the law requiring her to register.
Add to all those finding a place to live. Most people won't rent to a convicted felon. The apartment complexes run by large management companies will run a background check. If she can't work or find a place to live, then she would either have to rent a room from someone or find a private owner who would be willing to over look the felony and rent to her. I'm not even sure McDonald's would hire a felon. Anything having to do with money or that requires a bond for employment would not be possible.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)I say this from direct experience. A registered sex offender moved into my condo complex back in the 90s, into the unit above mine, apparently straight from jail or wherever he had been. He worked at Applebee's and I believe the complex managers were family. To keep it short, as soon as his probation ended he and his gang of thugs harassed me 24x7 for three years with impunity because I refused to have sex with him. On the advice of the police, who told me their hands were tied by Massachusett's laws, I sold my condo and left the state. My health was severely damaged, my career lost and I was financial wrecked as well.
I'm not going to speculate too much on what a judge would or would not do; my guess is they would tend to stick to the terms of plea deals because if they don't then nobody will ever take them. It also would seem that if they changed the deal, then it would become a different deal that the accused had not agreed to. But I'm relying on combined intuition and logic here, not experience.
I don't question whether the mother is homophobic, just that that is the reason she pressed charges. I do think that had the accused been a male, she would have pressed charges, and possibly as soon as she learned of the sex, simply because of the high risk of pregnancy and STDs. Whereas with homophobia, she may have waited longer in hopes the older girl would back off and she could convince her daughter (and herself) if was "just a phase" and "experimentation." While simultaneously keeping it secret. Most families prefer keeping their "dirty laundry" secret and have to be pretty well pressed to air it in public. At least in my experience
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)employers have the ability to find out more about potential applicants. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if most restaurants contracted out to some service that did the background checks for them. I've never worked in HR, but as an applicant usually you have to sign a form consenting to the background check and agreeing that you will not hold them employer liable for anything resulting from the background check. In most states it seems as though employers can also run a credit check as well.
As to whether someone would take them at their word about plea deals, it's actually kind of funny, I just completed a course through Coursera that was called Property and Liability taught by a really nice professor from Wesleyan University. One of the models specifically had to do with the idea of plea deals and the probability of taking them vs not taking them. Right now I'm taking one on international criminal law. Now ask my why. I have no flipping idea really. It's interesting and I like learning about law. I've took business law and labor and employment law for my master's and international law for my doctoral level classes a few months ago. All of the classes were very interesting, but they can only teach you so much in 10-12 weeks. The courses through Coursera are free and I thought, why the hell not. If you go look at the classes there are plenty of different law classes. I'm starting two more this week (and I'm only half way through the one I'm in). I need to be careful I don't overload myself and blow a circuit.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)"Lerman says for that reason, it's very likely Hunt would be convicted. And jurors are instructed they cannot find someone not guilty out of sympathy.
He says if Hunt were his client, he'd advise her to take the plea bargain, plead guilty to child abuse, and take two years of house arrest."
Again, not sex offender. Child abuse. And not jail. House arrest.
You may also want to take a closer look at the blog you quoted. There is a clear editing error in the critical sentence.
"...she would be have labeled..."
Since there was a clear error while writing or editing the piece, it is entirely possible that the blogger meant to type "she would not have been labeled." Editing errors on computers can do very strange things. We can see two words were reversed and 2 letters deleted. We don't know if any words were simultaneously deleted.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)depending on the law and how much discretion the judge has. It is a moot point though because I believe the deadline has or is near passing and her family has said she will not take it.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)Thanks for spreading the word
pacalo
(24,721 posts)We're back to the Scarlet Letter days & hocus-pocus state laws.
backwoodsbob
(6,001 posts)would there be petitions to free him?
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)can plead down to a misdemeanor charge in these cases. The deal Kaitlyn was offered is still a life-destroyer for an honor student.
It has nothing to do with gender or preference: it's about using the law for vengeance... and that is never right.
WeekendWarrior
(1,437 posts)that people wouldn't be so enthusiastic to support him?
I find it a little disconcerting that an 18 year old is having any kind of sexual relationship with a fourteen year old. If she were male, people here would be screaming to throw him in jail.
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)While I don't think senior-freshman sexual relationships are a good thing, I think it is a matter that requires better parenting - and potentially classroom education - rather than the police intervention. I think statutes age related offense statutes should always make exceptions for relationships among the same peer group (in this case high school).
LisaL
(44,973 posts)In similar stories when males were accused, most here would scream "off with their heads."
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)How about some DU links to similar situations - two teens attending the same high school, freshman and senior, with a male senior.
I spent 11 years as a rape crisis center volunteer, and am a rape survivor - and am a strong advocate for lack of consent being presumed in cases where it is warranted (through age 12 or so when the activity is with anyone not in the same school group, sexual activity by a minor with someone in power (babysitter, priest, teacher who is only a few years older than her students).
But sexual activity between peers - regardless of the age or age difference should not be presumed to be no-consensual, or a matter for the courts unless the survivor (not the parents) says the activity was non-consensual. We haven't heard from this young woman.
If she says it was non-consensual then let the courts figure out who is telling the truth. This statute presumes there was no consent, regardless of what her partner says about the activity.
WeekendWarrior
(1,437 posts)you can't deny that this country and even DU has a different mindset when it comes to males involved in such relationships, even when the gap in age isn't that wide.
It's disingenuous to say otherwise.
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)I actually don't think they do, or if they do the different mindset (on DU at least) is in the other direction. I have been appalled at the number of people who believe this should be treated as criminal activity. A couple of them have said things like, "look at the discussion every time this comes up on DU with a heterosexual couple" and I have asked for links to discussions of similar situations (18 year old senior dating a 9th grade student), and no one has produced a single link.
I just don't believe this situation was (from any statements made by the direct participants) child abuse or rape. This is two kids who were in the same peer group whose friendship turned romantic, and then sexual. Protestations aside, I really don't believe anyone would have batted an eyelash had this been a senior male and freshman female - because it happens all the time and no one does bat an eyelash.
But as a general rule about rape or sexual abuse (when we're not talking about a high school romance which has been criminalized) you are probably correct. We react more strongly to sexual abuse or rape by men than we do when a woman is the perpetrator (and that is true whether the survivor is a child or an adult man). All too often we treat it as a joke, which makes it harder for the survivors to recover.
thucythucy
(8,047 posts)When I was in high school there was a HUGE social and status gap between froshes and seniors. Seniors mostly didn't want to associate with froshes, and froshes mostly walked in virtual awe and even terror of seniors. They attended different classes, ate in different parts of the cafeteria. When I was an eighth grader seniors were intimidating, superior, different. I figured that's why they were called SENIORS. Seniors could drive cars, fresh people couldn't. Seniors were a year or less away from careers, college, the military. Eighth graders, not so much. The further into adulthood, the less significant a four year age gap became, but in high school that sort of age difference was a virtual chasm.
And I'm shocked at the behavior of this young woman's parents. If they knew their daughter had encouraged a fourteen year old to sneak out of her home, against her parents' wishes, with the intent of having sex with a minor, and did nothing to stop it, it would appear to me they were irresponsible in the extreme.
I also volunteered at an RCC for many years, and am also a survivor, and I agree: the most important voice here is that of the young girl. But under the law, her parents are entitled to act in her behalf.
It's too bad Ms. Hunt's parents evidently didn't think through the implications and possible consequences of their daughter's behavior, before the courts became involved. And I think their taking the case public (and evidently mis-stating some of its salient details) is hardly helping matters.
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)And when freshmen and seniors are in the same classes, and participate in the same sports, cheerleading, or other extracurricular teams/clubs they are in the same peer groups.
I don't personally think most high school students should be engaging in sex. I just don't think it should be criminalized, as a general matter, and I certainly don't think it should be a criminal matter unless the younger woman was an unwilling participant, and the law does not allow for that possibility.
thucythucy
(8,047 posts)during ninth grade, and even when we shared certain activities (band, for instance) that hardly made us "peers."
I agree that sex in high school is problematic, to say the least. I also don't think the courts, as a general principle, should be involved. But when a young woman is warned repeatedly to stop her behavior, when other sanctions (such as being kicked off a gym team for engaging in this relationship) have been attempted and failed, and when she finally takes a girl who has essentially run away from home into her own house for the purpose of having sex, this becomes somewhat different.
I hope there will be a sympathetic and understanding judge who will be able to weigh all the factors--most especially the needs and well-being of the girl involved--and render a just sentence--assuming this all goes to trial. Among other aspects of the decision I would hope there will be a complete evaluation of Ms. Hunt's mental state, perhaps with a recommendation that she seek counseling.
Even as an eighteen year old, I knew better than to pursue sex with a fourteen year old. And I'm hardly a paragon of wisdom or mental health.
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)or some of your classmates, if it wasn't your personal experience - particularly those freshmen who excelled at something so they earned roles which placed them working with older schoolmates. I was certainly peers with seniors in the band - where I came in as 3rd chair clarinet as a 9th grader so I was seated between another freshman as 4th chair, and a senior as second. And in the drama club, where we were often paired with older students for some of the events (which required practice outside of the school day with them) and we traveled long distances in buses or cars on a regular basis to meets so we had lots of time on the drives to become close, not to mention the school plays and musicals where the seniors who were not in lead roles had plenty of time to interact with the freshmen who were not yet really eligible for those roles.
I never knew specific ages - but one of my classmates had a relationship with (and eventually married) someone who was a senior when we were freshmen. I really am flabbergasted at all of the people who are outraged at what is really (both from my perspective as a teen and as a high school teacher for 11 years) a very common occurrence. I'm not saying they always involve sexual activity (and in most cases I don't know whether it does or not), but romantic relationships between freshmen and seniors are really nothing that raises any eyebrows in my experience.
And the problem with the statutes is that they don't let a judge weigh the factors. If sexual activity occurred, and it gets to the judge, s/he won't have any option but to convict based solely on the ages. The only real option for common sense to come into play is in prosecutorial discretion. Prosecutors always have the option not to prosecute, which is the reason for the public campaign. If it gets to a court, the discretion (other than jury nullification) vanishes.
thucythucy
(8,047 posts)for Ms. Hunt's alleged behavior? Not for ignoring repeated requests by the girl's parents to keep away from their daughter? Not for engaging in sexual activity in a high school bathroom? Not for taking a runaway into her home for the purpose of having sex (and allowing the girl's parents to think she'd been kidnapped, or worse)?
So what, in your view, should be the proper disposition of this case? Barring the involvement of the police (who were only called in, from what I've read, after the girl disappeared from her home in the middle of the night), how should such a case be handled?
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)you are reading a lot into the situation.
If you look at the affidavit, there is nothing which suggests she was taken in "for the purpose of having sex." Yes - they had sex, but that is different from that being the motive for picking up a friend who had run away from home.
I have not heard anything at all about what the parents believed while their daughter was gone, or even whether they were aware until she returned the next day. Certainly I haven't read anything which suggests they believed she had been kidnapped. (And all of the suggestions that the affidavit says they warned Hunt, or Hunt's parents, are not backed up by the affidavit, and nothing in it ties the January 4 runaway event to the February 15 "controlled" phone call (more than a month later), or suggests the time of day the younger one ran away from home.
As for running away from home - I don't know why the younger woman ran away from home. I do know that it is very common for young LGBT folks to run away (or be kicked out) of their homes because the parents disapprove of their sexual orientation. It is so common that a large portion of older lesbians - and sometimes not so much older - have unofficial foster kids. I have two, and each of them was partnered at some point in their lives with someone else who also had "foster" parents because their own parents could not cope with their sexual orientation. It is getting better - but the reality is that, at a much higher rate than in the straight community, young gay kids find home intolerable and either run away from or are kicked out of their homes. In case you are not familiar with that phenomenon, here are some sobering statistics.
I don't know if that is what was going on here - but given what I know about being a young lesbian, and how often parents really heap on the verbal and sometimes physical abuse on learning about it - the characterization that Hunt enticed her to run away for sex (without any suggestion by the girls themselves that that was the motive for either running away or for taking the 14 year old in) really rubs me the wrong way.
They were two romantically involved schoolmates who made some bad decisions. But they were just that - stupid, irresponsible, naive, in the heat of the hormones of puberty decisions. Decisions I would hate for my daughter to have made at that age. But not decisions that should be criminal.
Presumably the school has rules against sexual activity in the bathroom - enforce those rules against both girls, and impose restrictions on the girls' easy access to the bathroom.
Different families have different rules - as a parent you just have to deal with that. Since this involves two families, it would be good for the parents to get together and agree to some ground rules about curfews, time alone, dating, etc.
If they can't agree - or Hunt's family won't agree, then the 14 year old's family needs to figure out how to enforce their rules with respect to their own child and keep their child from seeing the older child or limit their daughter's engagement to what they find acceptable. That isn't easy, but that is part of what you sign up for as a parent. Your values won't always match with those of the rest of the world and there will always be a tug from those cool kids whose parents are less strict than you are. And just because Hunt happened to be an 18 year old senior, rather one 108 days younger , shouldn't - from my perspective - change whose responsibility it is to keep the 14 year following the family rules.
It sucks being the strict parent - the one everyone hates. I know, since I'm always that parent. That doesn't make it a good idea to use really bad (in my opinion) criminal statutes to punish someone else's child because I can't control my own.
That said, if I had been Hunt's parents - and I knew what was going on (whether or not I knew how the other parents felt about it), there would have been some serious discussions about sexual activity and all that comes bundled up with it (emotionally, physically). Included in those discussions with my daughter would have been some serious exploration about the emotional maturity of the younger girl, how her parents felt about the relationship (to the extent my daughter knew), and about what I - as a parent - could do to make it easier to slow down the sexual aspects of the relationship - with a strong dose of "I don't think you or she are really ready yet."
If I knew the younger parents' family disapproved of the relationship (and the stories conflict on that point), I would have made sure we were not making it easier for their 14 year old to break those rules - with one exception. Our house would have still been available as a safe haven - for the reasons related to LGBT youth above. No questions asked. But we would also have imposed the same house rules that we would have applied for any mixed gender high school relationship - doors stay open at all times, and if the 14 needed a safe place to spend the night it would have been in a different room from my daughter.
And all of that may just mean the two end up being more clandestine about their activity. That's a choice many parents ultimately have to make: disapprove/punish and drive it underground, or have some serious conversations and figure out together how to make activity you wish your daughter wasn't involved in safer (from all aspects). My daughter has been an adult for more than 4 years and I still haven't figured that one out.
But bottom line - as long as I am convinced that there was not coercion involved (and I have not heard anything that suggests there was) - I don't believe punishment for being sexually active works (any more than I believe abstinence only works to prevent pregnancies).
thucythucy
(8,047 posts)into this situation. The implication, for instance, that the parents of the young girl are homophobes, that she fled her home because of their abuse, etc. All that may well be true, but at the moment the only evidence we have for any of it, as far as I know, are statements from the Hunt family. And as has been pointed out on this thread and others, several of their public statements have turned out to be less than accurate.
"Yes - they had sex, but that is different from that being the motive for picking up a friend who had run away from home."
I suppose. And not knowing the situation, or the people involved, I certainly don't feel comfortable making definitive judgments. But the dynamic makes me uneasy. You take a vulnerable fourteen year old, who has run away from home in the middle of the night. You offer her solace and protection, and that is for what? In exchange for sex? Or sex just happens, as part of the solace? This seems a step beyond "a bad decision" on the part of Ms. Hunt. It really smacks of being exploitative. As has also been pointed out on various threads, an eighteen year old boy taking in a fourteen year old runaway, and having sex with her as part of his TLC, would hardly go down well with many of the folks on DU.
But then again, not knowing the details, I'm not in a position to judge. Possibly you aren't either.
Only time will tell.
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)Most of these threads have been calling for Kaitlyn's head based on a recitation that they had sex and one was 18 and the other was 14. As far as I am concerned the situation is much more complex than that - and is far more a matter of family values and parenting than it should be a matter for the law. Largely because this particular criminal statute does not allow for any gray at all.
I am not assuming that they are homophobes, but I do know the very difficult circumstances in which many young LGBT individuals find themselves when they come out to (or are outed to) their families and some are just too afraid to try and act out in other ways.
So when I hear of an LGBT youth running away from home - regardless of where she ran to - the possibility that she just needed to get out is one of the top things that leaps to my mind. Because I think of G who, as valedictorian of her class was also on the verge of suicide because she was outed by the gym teacher and had nowhere to turn - until an intuitive fellow teacher told me I needed to reach out to her - (G was our first "foster daughter" a young woman who assumed her life would be a series of one night stands because she had never seen any other model for adult LGBT relationships). I think of M - another of my students - who took his own life before he got out of high school. I think of J who spent hours banging his head on the metal support post in our basement because the physical pain hurt less than the emotional pain of the male image he could not make vanish from his female body (our second "foster (then) daughter" - who at the time was staying with us during a semester off from college because it did not feel safe at home. I think of E - who discovered a lesbian book when he was babysitting our daughter, which let him feel safe enough to show up on our front step when his Evangelical Christian parents invited him not to come home for a while. Those are the ones I know personally, for whom I have played some flavor of parent when their own parents were unable to and they needed a safety net.
Straight teen relationships are pretty darn messy, and when you throw in the additional dynamics associated with being an LGBT youth it really makes criminal law not a good solution.
Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #64)
thucythucy This message was self-deleted by its author.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)having sex with a minor wouldn't get this much sympathy around this site.
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)and not just any minor - two students in high school together.
I haven't heard anyone saying that any random 18 year old having sex with minors should get a break. What I have heard expressed repeatedly is that the laws are wrong because they criminalize consensual activity between two people in the same peer group (i.e. going to high school together).
LisaL
(44,973 posts)There is nothing in the law that suggests being in the same school makes any difference regarding the age someone is legally able to consent.
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)Stories about 18 year olds who are in college or out of high school are not similar. The maturity level of someone who is still treated as a child for the school day - as 18 year olds in high school are - is vastly different from someone who is in charge of their own affairs. So how about some links to back up your assertions about how DU reacts about stories of opposite sex couples in similar situations?
(FWIW, at least one state law does distinguish based on school groupings - and I believe all such laws which do not should be changed.)
LisaL
(44,973 posts)thucythucy
(8,047 posts)between a high school senior and a college freshman is "vast," but the difference between a senior and an eighth grader less so?
An eighteen year old can legally drop out of school, without her parents permission. Not so an eighth grader (unless they go to court to become an "emancipated minor."
An eighteen year old can drive, can vote, can volunteer for military service. Eighth graders have nowhere near that level of personal autonomy, and for good reason.
And just for my own education, which state or states distinguish based on school groupings? It would be interesting to see how such laws are worded. Obviously, prep schools where eight year olds attend the same school as eighteen year olds would have to be dealt with, as well as religious schools, special education facilities, etc.
Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)I am addressing those 18 year olds who remain in a high school setting. I would not treat an 18 year old who is not in high school as a child for the purposes for this statute - and I never said anything at all about an 8th grader and a senior. That is not a standardbreak-point for public high schools, and private schools (and the parents of children at private schools) generally have much more effective enforcement of rules than public schools because they can always kick the student out very easily.
Here's a summary of the Arizona law, which differentiates on the basis of high school in a tiered approach (i.e. it isn't a flat out exception - but between 18 & 19 it depends on whether the older participant is in high school and on the age difference between the two.
(1) Any adult having sexual relations with a person under 15 years old is in violation.
(2) Any adult over the age of 19 years and 1 day old who is not in high school and has sex with a person under 18 is in violation
(3) Any adult who is more than 24 months older than the victim is in violation unless under 19.
(4) Any adult who is still in high school but is less than 24 months older than the victim is not in violation.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/5186879
thucythucy
(8,047 posts)
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)An 18 year old with a 14 year old isn't good at all, regardless of the gender. But in the case of the 18 yr old male, I think some people here would be demanding prison. Not so much with Kaitlyn.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)He's 18 raping a 14 year old girl!
He's a man old enough to kill in Afghanistan!
She can't consent, she's only FOURTEEN!
That's why you don't see the usual suspects in these threads because they damn well know if they condone this it will somebody will bring it up in the future.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)Because teaching teenagers that they absolutely positively must not have sex in any way until they are 18 or the police will be at their door in the morning is such a progressive cause!
This has been the weirdest, most non-progressive, wingnutty week on DU since the we're-totally-not-racist, we-totally-love-sex, we-just-don't-think-brown-people-should-fuck-white-women Aziz Ansari debacle.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)It's an ugly combination.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)She's got no chance at a trial being a lesbian.
Somehow I'm guessing if she promised to go to therapy for her homosexuality, then the trial wouldn't be necessary. 
LisaL
(44,973 posts)The law is the same for either gender.
