General Discussion

abelenkpe

(9,933 posts)

52. Whoa really?

Thu Jun 21, 2012, 02:41 PM

Jun 2012

I didn't start until sixteen. That would have been a real bummer in jr and high school....Why are girls starting so soon?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

121 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Wait! Whut?! Judge's instructions to Sandusky jury (unbelieveable) [View all] Are_grits_groceries Jun 2012 OP

that makes no sense. nt xchrom Jun 2012 #1

Nothing a jury does anymore surprises me. Look at the first OJ trial. Look at the Anthony killing southernyankeebelle Jun 2012 #2

The jury was correct in the Anthony case obamanut2012 Jun 2012 #16

Are you talking about Jeff Ashton? Baitball Blogger Jun 2012 #36

You're both right Hugabear Jun 2012 #47

The jury had the option of finding Anthony guilty of a number of lesser charges csziggy Jun 2012 #89

The jury did the correct thing obamanut2012 Jun 2012 #93

Um, re the first OJ trial: Mark Fuhrman, the LAPD cop who coalition_unwilling Jun 2012 #22

Speaking as a lawyer, the OJ case was never hifiguy Jun 2012 #26

Thank you for saying that. TheWraith Jun 2012 #81

Listen I am not here to retry the trial. I just saying nothing surprises me any more that people southernyankeebelle Jun 2012 #27

I agree 100%. Well said. n/t PCIntern Jun 2012 #30

Don't be daft. WinkyDink Jun 2012 #83

Rape is rape Aerows Jun 2012 #3

What about a 11 year old girl and a gynecologist? AngryAmish Jun 2012 #6

OMG Aerows Jun 2012 #8

Maybe I explained this wrong AngryAmish Jun 2012 #13

We don't go to gynecologists until we reach puberty, after we get our periods, just for clarity. robinlynne Jun 2012 #15

My daughter started at 9 and most in the neighborhood by 10. Lionessa Jun 2012 #25

Whoa really? abelenkpe Jun 2012 #52

I didn't start until 14 Aerows Jun 2012 #79

It is due to body mass. Young girls are heavier, with more body fat LuckyLib Jun 2012 #113

One theory is that it's because of hormones in food. freedom fighter jh Jun 2012 #64

Probably food... hunter Jun 2012 #68

Does that mean it is fine and healthy? robinlynne Jun 2012 #84

No. hunter Jun 2012 #88

I've personally known a 10 year old pregnant with her 2nd child Nevernose Jun 2012 #106

You are right. Still he is a big man on campus. I use to respect the head coach thinking southernyankeebelle Jun 2012 #33

If Sandusky gets off I'm going to lose all faith in our justice system. Auntie Bush Jun 2012 #55

I lost faith in justice a while back. There really is a 2 tier system in america. If you are rich southernyankeebelle Jun 2012 #69

Jury instructions explain the law to the jury AngryAmish Jun 2012 #4

Instructions = Guidelines KharmaTrain Jun 2012 #23

Or, in Illinois, if you find an honest judge, you can infer that they are a tourist. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #31

That's not right--is that a "Not guilty by reason of insanity" loop hole? MADem Jun 2012 #5

I t kind of makes sense to me. Hassin Bin Sober Jun 2012 #58

Ahhh--yes, I see what you mean! That makes (horrific) sense--sort of like the pervert who lives MADem Jun 2012 #80

WTF vankuria Jun 2012 #7

Yes. Rape often has nothing to do with sexual desire RedCappedBandit Jun 2012 #62

Has the defense actually proven that he didn't act out of sexual desire? sadbear Jun 2012 #9

How could they prove that? Aerows Jun 2012 #10

Yep. sadbear Jun 2012 #12

i think the defense is alleging that he has a disease, some sort of temporary insnity thing. robinlynne Jun 2012 #18

The defense is not required to prove that. former9thward Jun 2012 #63

There is no sexual desire component needed for a rape charge obamanut2012 Jun 2012 #11

Yes there is certainly need to be an intent element to the crime. AngryAmish Jun 2012 #21

Yes, but the intent does not have to be sexual desire obamanut2012 Jun 2012 #29

But..... soccer1 Jun 2012 #103

that is crazy. mercuryblues Jun 2012 #14

Rape is a crime of violence not sexual desire. WTF Judge? Bonhomme Richard Jun 2012 #17

Actually the word rape is also used in statutory cases when one is a minor lunatica Jun 2012 #119

That's an appropriate charge... Whiskeytide Jun 2012 #19

I agree with you, that is indeed unbelievable slackmaster Jun 2012 #20

This is what happens when one relies on tweets by non experts onenote Jun 2012 #24

And the jury members are experts? Are_grits_groceries Jun 2012 #35

assuming you are correct, what is your proposed solution onenote Jun 2012 #37

No. Of course not. Are_grits_groceries Jun 2012 #54

You're going to consider facts instead of tweets? That's going to slow things down. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #44

thank you for that. Whisp Jun 2012 #66

You are correct. Lisa D Jun 2012 #74

IOW calm the fuck down everybody. Really. DevonRex Jun 2012 #75

Exactly. treestar Jun 2012 #108

SINCE WHEN IS RAPE SEXUAL???????????????? DearAbby Jun 2012 #28

Rape, as a legal concept, must be sexual. The intent of rape; however, is almost never sexual SlimJimmy Jun 2012 #32

see post #24 -- these were instructions about the other charges KurtNYC Jun 2012 #109

The judge did this so he can throw out the jury verdict if guilty for not following his rhett o rick Jun 2012 #34

You might try reading post #38. onenote Jun 2012 #59

Here is what the Judge said, according to an article on Pennlive... Spazito Jun 2012 #38

+1 cthulu2016 Jun 2012 #41

But all of that won't fit into a tweet, MineralMan Jun 2012 #112

Yep, they, from what I understand, receive the instructions both orally and in written form... Spazito Jun 2012 #114

We excuse a lot in this country, but child rape is not one of them ecstatic Jun 2012 #39

Do we have any reason to think the tweets are precisely accurate? cthulu2016 Jun 2012 #40

If it's on the Internet, IT MUST BE TRUE! slackmaster Jun 2012 #42

UPDATE!!! TWITTER IS DOWN FOR THE AFTERNOON!!! W@E MAY NEVER KNOW THE TURTH! slackmaster Jun 2012 #43

The jury really must conclude that if he molested the children, it was out of sexual desire. Bake Jun 2012 #45

Nothing surprises me anymore either ... Nifong anyone .... nt littlewolf Jun 2012 #46

It doesn't matter if he robbed your house it only matters if he meant to rob your house perdita9 Jun 2012 #48

Previous posters explained it pretty good. ieoeja Jun 2012 #78

Also, showering with a boy and lathering him up is not a crime... joeybee12 Jun 2012 #49

It's a crime if it's done to wash away evidence of sexual contact. rocktivity Jun 2012 #50

Lathering a boy who is not your son is criminal, IMHO joeybee12 Jun 2012 #51

My five year old can wash himself up just fine - TBF Jun 2012 #67

Sandusky may walk? abelenkpe Jun 2012 #53

He already walked, and he's been nominated to fill the next vacancy on the Supreme Court! slackmaster Jun 2012 #56

kitteh! :) abelenkpe Jun 2012 #76

does anyone have the FULL context of the statements? Blue_Tires Jun 2012 #57

Post #38 offers more context, if not full context onenote Jun 2012 #60

Rape Is More Than "Poor Judgement", It Is A Violent Crime DallasNE Jun 2012 #61

what the HOLY SHIT?!!!! Whisp Jun 2012 #65

The judge's jury instructions make sense to me........ soccer1 Jun 2012 #70

Yep. This thread's context-free kneejerk outrage. (nt) Posteritatis Jun 2012 #72

WTF? EFerrari Jun 2012 #71

This message was self-deleted by its author Lucy Goosey Jun 2012 #73

They were tweets by people Are_grits_groceries Jun 2012 #77

Maybe this judge is a wee bit simpatico, IYKWIM. WinkyDink Jun 2012 #82

Or maybe he's just stating the law. onenote Jun 2012 #86

Why would a man molest a child except out of a sexual desire for children? Lydia Leftcoast Jun 2012 #85

Please try reading the posts in this thread that put this in context. onenote Jun 2012 #87

Ready for the other shoe to drop - Sandusky's adopted kid just told the media that he was molested LynneSin Jun 2012 #90

Jury is sequestered for deliberations.... soccer1 Jun 2012 #102

If he walks, it won't be because of this. JoeyT Jun 2012 #91

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo a kennedy Jun 2012 #92

I'm certain Sandusky will be found guilty.... soccer1 Jun 2012 #105

I'm assuming that he had a stiff prick while he was in the act of molesting those boys... MrScorpio Jun 2012 #94

Apparently I could shoot someone cbrer Jun 2012 #95

I imagine establishing "intent" is important in any criminal trial....... soccer1 Jun 2012 #96

There are lots of non-intent based criminal laws AngryAmish Jun 2012 #97

Yes, I understand your point.... soccer1 Jun 2012 #99

You mean... cbrer Jun 2012 #100

Perhaps if establishing cbrer Jun 2012 #98

Actually, that is true provided that you are acting in legitimate self-defense as define by law slackmaster Jun 2012 #101

apparently you don't have a clue what your talking about onenote Jun 2012 #111

OK so I picked a bad example. cbrer Jun 2012 #115

Here's a clue for you. You still don't know what you're talking about onenote Jun 2012 #116

You twittered this? cbrer Jun 2012 #117

No. That's where the original story that you were commenting on came from. onenote Jun 2012 #118

That outta bring out the knee jerks. GeorgeGist Jun 2012 #104

jury instructions come from the law treestar Jun 2012 #107

Precisely. And not giving the proper instruction can be reversible error. onenote Jun 2012 #110

Sexual desire has nothing to do with rape. Zoeisright Jun 2012 #120

I disagree... soccer1 Jun 2012 #121