ScreamingMeemie upset that lezzie pedophile is charged with felony

[Tucker]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022879941

Tue May 21, 2013, 04:36 PM

Star Member ScreamingMeemie (60,847 posts)

ACLU of Florida Statement on Prosecution of 18-Year-Old Kaitlyn Hunt

Last edited Tue May 21, 2013, 05:18 PM USA/ET - Edit history (3)
http://aclufl.org/2013/05/21/aclu-of-florida-statement-on-prosecution-of-18-year-old-kaitlyn-hunt/


snip-

he following is a statement from the ACLU of Florida on the case of Kaitlyn Hunt, a Sebastian, Florida high school student who faces felony charges for having a relationship with a 15-year-old female schoolmate.

The ACLU of Florida condemns the prosecution of 18-year-old Kaitlyn Hunt. The facts as we understand them suggest that the state is prosecuting Kaitlyn for engaging in behavior that is both fairly innocuous and extremely common. Such behavior occurs every day in tens of thousands of high schools across the country, yet those other students are not facing felony convictions (and, in Florida, the lifetime consequences of a felony conviction) and potential lifelong branding as sex offenders. This is a life sentence for behavior by teenagers that is all too common, whether they are male or female, gay or straight. High-school relationships may be fleeting, but felony convictions are not.

While effective laws are certainly needed to protect Florida’s children from sexual predators, one cannot seriously maintain that Kaitlyn’s behavior was predatory. Application of this law to Kaitlyn’s conduct is another example of the troubling trend in Florida and across the country of criminalizing teenagers. The school-to-prison pipeline is filled with students whose behavior is better addressed by school officials and parents, not by a criminal justice system that turns ordinary teenagers into convicted felons who are prevented from meaningfully contributing to society because of their unjust convictions. Even if Kaitlyn is able to avoid sex-offender registration, a felony conviction will harm her for the rest of her life, catastrophically damaging her employment prospects and even her right to participate in her community as a citizen and vote.

Her promising future could be ruined merely because she engaged in behavior that countless other students in every school operating under the state attorney’s jurisdiction also engage in. This prosecution does nothing to protect Florida’s young people but instead causes a great deal of harm.

-snip

http://www.change.org/petitions/assistant-state-attorney-brian-workman-stop-the-prosecution-of-an-18-year-old-girl-in-a-same-sex-relationship


On edit: It has also come out today that the state attorney has dropped charges in a similar case (same ages/same district) just today.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/FreeKate/

http://www.freekate.net/


Her mother's words on how this came about, for those concerned about the facts:

As the summer of 2012 came to an end, the future looked bright for 17-year-old Sebastian River High School senior Kaitlyn Hunt. Voted the student with "Most School Spirit" by her peers, Kaitlyn was an active cheerleader, a basketball player, a camp counselor and cheering coach, and a medical assistant training to join the nursing program at Valencia College after graduation. She looked forward to a career helping others and a memorable final year of high school.

"At the beginning of the school year, Kaitlyn made friends with a 14-year-old freshmen girl in Sebastian River High's IB program who played varsity sports and took classes with upper classmen. The girls were peers in the same social circle, and as happens every day high schools across America, their friendship eventually developed into more. In September, shortly after Kaitlyn's 18th birthday, the girls began dating, and they eventually expressed their affection for one another in intimate ways.

When the girls' basketball coach found out that two of her players were dating, she kicked Kaitlyn off the team and informed her girlfriend's parents that their daughter was in a same-sex relationship. The parents then conspired with police to entrap Kaitlyn and press charges.

The police recorded a phone conversation between the two girls, who today are 18 and 15, in which they discussed their relationship. Kaitlyn was arrested and charged with two counts of felony lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12-16. Kaitlyn's girlfriend denies that Kaitlyn ever pressured her and is adamant that their relationship is entirely consensual, but her parents are out to destroy Kaitlyn's life. After two separate judges ruled that Kaitlyn could finish her senior year with her peers, her girlfriend's parents appealed to the Indian River County School Board, who expelled Kaitlyn sent her to the alternative school.

The law is designed to protect our children, but the law does not serve its purpose when it is applied to consensual behavior between peers."

Response to FLyellowdog (Reply #1)

Tue May 21, 2013, 04:54 PM

Star Member ScreamingMeemie (60,847 posts)
4. There is a window of opportunity that was used here...

The girls met on the same basketball team when Kaitlyn was 17 and the other girl was 14. The basketball coach (I might add "Coach of the Year" in FL this year) kicked Kaitlyn off the team and called the other child's parents. the parents (Pentecostals, I might add) called the police instead of Kaitlyn's parents (which is what normal parents would do if face with a situation and they didn't want their child dating someone older), and had Kaitlyn arrested when she turned 18.

They felt that Kaitlyn had "turned their daughter gay."

Just when we think we're getting somewhere.

When she turned 18, she became an adult. She had two options, either wait until the other girl turned 18 or find another adult to taste.

Response to ScreamingMeemie (Reply #4)

Tue May 21, 2013, 05:45 PM

Yo_Mama (3,670 posts)
11. This law is often used against older boyfriends of whom the parents disapprove


This is their law:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0800/Sections/0800.04.html

If you're 18, you cannot have sex with a person under 16. It's a second degree felony. Yes, most parents won't report it, but threatening to report it allows them to stop a consensual relationship of a 13, 14 or 15 year-old with an older person of whom they disapprove.

I don't think the age of consent is going to be lowered in Florida

Seems clear to me.

Response to ScreamingMeemie (Reply #16)

Tue May 21, 2013, 07:32 PM

Bully Taw (87 posts)
18. do you believe that...

this woman did not know the child's age? Of course she did. Going to school together (18+ and under age kids) does not mean they have to have sex. Restraint is the word I'm looking for. Some students graduate when they are 19, and they go to school with freshmen who often are 15. Because they go to school together does not mean that they can have sex. If my 15 year old daughter came home with an 18 year old boyfriend/girlfriend, i would most certainly have a problem with it. these laws are in place to protect children that do not have parents that are looking out for their well being.

Not in a liberals vocabulary.

Response to ScreamingMeemie (Reply #16)

Tue May 21, 2013, 07:39 PM

shawn703 (1,666 posts)
22. Freshmen are generally 14-15 years old

An 18 year old senior doesn't need to see proof of age to know that someone in the freshman class should be off limits by subtracting three years from their own age.

I think most people can get through their senior year of high school without taking advantage of freshmen, so there's no need to kick them out once they reach 18.

A DUmmy and math don't go together.

Response to shawn703 (Reply #22)

Tue May 21, 2013, 07:46 PM

Star Member ScreamingMeemie (60,847 posts)
27. My son's freshman class is made up of 14-17 year olds.

I think most parents don't flip out and call the police when their children have relationships with fellow classmates. (My son went to homecoming with a girl 2.5 years older than him) They speak with the child or the parents if they have a problem. It really is that simple. I think most of the time we don't hear about this because most parents aren't idiots.

In case you question the age differences in my son's class, Bush's Texas NCLB EOC testing has led to major age discrepancies, along with ending age restrictions on public school attendance.

Bullshit.

Response to Bully Taw (Reply #26)

Tue May 21, 2013, 09:02 PM

Star Member ScreamingMeemie (60,847 posts)
33. Please reread our discussion.

Last edited Tue May 21, 2013, 09:03 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)
Here is how I would handle it when it involves two high school kids (no, she isn't an adult).

1-I don't like it that my son is seeing an 18 year old in his class or in his group of friends so I...

2-Tell him to stop. And if he doesn't stop I then...

3-Talk to the child and his/her parents...

I would then...if this does not end (and it rarely comes to this)

contact the school and then the police to issue a warning.

Sorry, but they're peers.

I'm not in the habit of ruining the future of a good student, etc.

I would also not demand that the school board expel her once a judge has put a restraining order in place and said she could return to school.

Sorry. But, I'd rather the courts prosecute actual adult criminals.

And that, as the facts state, is NOT what happened here.

The police are not going to issue a warning. They are going to arrest her as a sexual deviant.

[delilahmused]

Well, bitch slap if you must, but I find this ridiculous, too. Plenty of freshmen girls date seniors who are or turn 18 while they're together. Whether we like it or not, even if our children wouldn't do it, they are having sex. I dated a senior when I was in 9th grade and our middle schools are grades 7-9. Every gay person I know, knew they were gay when they were teens. Honestly, most people don't think twice about some cute little freshman cheerleader dating a senior football player. The two started dating when one was 15 and the other was 17. Now, the parents may have not liked their daughter dating another woman but they should have at least talked to their daughter first, especially since the dating was consensual.

Cindie

[marv]

I think the operative phrases were "age of consent" and "intimate relationship".

[thundley4]

Well, bitch slap if you must, but I find this ridiculous, too. Plenty of freshmen girls date seniors who are or turn 18 while they're together. Whether we like it or not, even if our children wouldn't do it, they are having sex. I dated a senior when I was in 9th grade and our middle schools are grades 7-9. Every gay person I know, knew they were gay when they were teens. Honestly, most people don't think twice about some cute little freshman cheerleader dating a senior football player. The two started dating when one was 15 and the other was 17. Now, the parents may have not liked their daughter dating another woman but they should have at least talked to their daughter first, especially since the dating was consensual.

Cindie

I still wonder if the parents of the younger girl tried to break them up before the older one turned 18.  If the other parents didn't go along, maybe they just waited until it became illegal.  Supposedly they didn't complain before, but  how many times have gays or lesbians claimed victimhood when it didn't exist?

[98ZJUSMC]

Response to shawn703 (Reply #22)

Tue May 21, 2013, 07:46 PM

Star Member ScreamingMeemie (60,847 posts)


In case you question the age differences in my son's class, Bush's Texas NCLB EOC testing has led to major age discrepancies, along with ending age restrictions on public school attendance.

You retards do realize that the author of that piece of legislation was the drunken Oldsmobile salesman, right?

Right?  Sure.  The liberal whoremonger who drives off bridges. Drunk.  At night.  Was he from Texas, too?

Ringing a bell yet?

[diesel driver]

You retards do realize that the author of that piece of legislation was the drunken Oldsmobile salesman, right?

Right?  Sure.  The liberal whoremonger who drives off bridges. Drunk.  At night.  Was he from Texas, too?

Ringing a bell yet?

You left off the "...with his secretary in the car, who he leaves to suffocate in a submerged car." part that goes between "bridges" and "Drunk".

Did you mention he was married at the time?  (Not to the dead secretary).

[jtyangel]

I agree with Cindie. My daughter is dating a senior now, well as few opportunities we and his parents allow as a date and they met when he was 17. They went to prom together. I

disagree on the gay thing though. I knew some that I would say I knew were gay in high school bit two very close gay friends were interested in females as teens. Both went on and were preyed and groomed as late teens by older gay men and both lacked a good male role model growing up. It's why I don't fully subscribe to the 'born that way' theory.

In this case I do happen to agree with some duers that this is probably more about the parents objection to the same sex relationship then the age however the adult ie 18 year old should always be cognoscent that once they turn 18 they are taking a risk with over zealous parents.

[miskie]

If this were a story about a stright couple, and the senior was male, there would have been a ton of posts about 'abusing a position of power'

Where are all those posts now ?

[Tucker]

If this were a story about a stright couple, and the senior was male, there would have been a ton of posts about 'abusing a position of power'

Where are all those posts now ?

Exactly.

Their double standard is showing.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Illegal, maybe; paedophilia, definitely not.  It's an extremely misused word on this board for some reason.

[jukin]

Exactly.

Their double standard is showing.

BINGO!!

[Rebel]

If this were a story about a stright couple, and the senior was male, there would have been a ton of posts about 'abusing a position of power'

Where are all those posts now ?

What position of power does a senior hold?

[DefiantSix]

Illegal, maybe; paedophilia, definitely not.  It's an extremely misused word on this board for some reason.

I disagree; in fact, due to personal experience with this breed of pervert, I really think the identifier probably isn't used often enough.

My sister was 14 when her 20-year old "boyfriend" impregnated her with my niece. Because of the "kids will be kids" mindset, the state of Washington declined to prosecute the lad for statutory rape, a crime for which he was clearly guilty, and in fact, later granted him joint custody of my niece. Well, come to find out later, that his predilection for younger than legal poontang didn't end when he "became a daddy"; starting about the time my niece was 12, the lad's neighbors were filing complaints that he was molesting her. It took until she was 17 before the prosecutor's office was willing to step in and charge him - they charged him with 2nd degree molestation, and my niece was prepared to testify that he'd raped her as well. Then, the day before she was supposed to appear in court to testify against him, he had her disappeared - with the assistance of his father, a county sheriff's dispatcher. Surprise; prosecution's key witness isn't there to testify, the judge "was forced" to dismiss the case. Two years after my niece reappeared, we're still waiting for the prosecutor to pull his head out of his ass and do his job, and my niece's sperm donor has skipped the state.

Point of the story is that the lad was a pedophile when he committed his original act of statutory rape, and if the hand wringers had only properly identified him as such and prosecuted him on it instead of looking the other way, a whole lot of heartache might have been avoided.

[Undies]

Stone the lesbian.  The Religion of Peace demands it. While you've got the stones out - stone the DUmmie goons too.  Logic demands it.

[DefiantSix]

Stone the lesbian.  The Religion of Peace demands it. While you've got the stones out - stone the DUmmie goons too.  Logic demands it.

Just tell the DUmmies "let's go get stoned", and they'd show up in droves.

[Big Dog]

I disagree; in fact, due to personal experience with this breed of pervert, I really think the identifier probably isn't used often enough.

In this case, the 18 year old woman did not commit acts of pedophilia, as the 14 year old had reached puberty. She did commit statutory rape even though the 14 year old was participating voluntarily.

My sister was 14 when her 20-year old "boyfriend" impregnated her with my niece. Because of the "kids will be kids" mindset, the state of Washington declined to prosecute the lad for statutory rape, a crime for which he was clearly guilty, and in fact, later granted him joint custody of my niece. Well, come to find out later, that his predilection for younger than legal poontang didn't end when he "became a daddy"; starting about the time my niece was 12, the lad's neighbors were filing complaints that he was molesting her. It took until she was 17 before the prosecutor's office was willing to step in and charge him - they charged him with 2nd degree molestation, and my niece was prepared to testify that he'd raped her as well. Then, the day before she was supposed to appear in court to testify against him, he had her disappeared - with the assistance of his father, a county sheriff's dispatcher. Surprise; prosecution's key witness isn't there to testify, the judge "was forced" to dismiss the case. Two years after my niece reappeared, we're still waiting for the prosecutor to pull his head out of his ass and do his job, and my niece's sperm donor has skipped the state.

Point of the story is that the lad was a pedophile when he committed his original act of statutory rape, and if the hand wringers had only properly identified him as such and prosecuted him on it instead of looking the other way, a whole lot of heartache might have been avoided.

Although you wrote "he had her disappeared", your niece, at the age of 17, voluntarily left and was unavailable to testify. She returned later and now wants to testify. Is that correct?

[Big Dog]

Just tell the DUmmies "let's go get stoned", and they'd show up in droves.

The National Anthem of DUmmytopia:

[youtube=425,350]BI-H_27NptM[/youtube]
"Everybody must get stoned!"

[Tucker]

Just tell the DUmmies "let's go get stoned", and they'd show up in droves.

Mention that you'll supply the rocks and DUmmydom would shut down as there would be no one left to post.

[DefiantSix]

Although you wrote "he had her disappeared", your niece, at the age of 17, voluntarily left and was unavailable to testify. She returned later and now wants to testify. Is that correct?

No, she did not "go voluntarily", BD. She was taken, and held against her will by "a third party", for about 3 months. According to my sister's attorney, if the sperm donor ever shows up on the grid again, they have enough evidence to add kidnapping to his list of charges.

[Toastedturningtidelegs]

Illegal, maybe; paedophilia, definitely not.  It's an extremely misused word on this board for some reason.

I think some are confused by the actual definition of pedophilia.

[NHSparky]

Sorry, I'm having a hard time getting worked up over this one.  The parents of the younger child did in fact overreact. 

[BlueStateSaint]

Sorry, I'm having a hard time getting worked up over this one.  The parents of the younger child did in fact overreact. 

Yeah, that's how I see it, too.

[Big Dog]

No, she did not "go voluntarily", BD. She was taken, and held against her will by "a third party", for about 3 months. According to my sister's attorney, if the sperm donor ever shows up on the grid again, they have enough evidence to add kidnapping to his list of charges.

Thanks for clarifying.

If the state has sufficient evidence to add a kidnapping charge, why is there currently no arrest warrant for the ex-boyfriend or the third party?

[DefiantSix]

Thanks for clarifying.

If the state has sufficient evidence to add a kidnapping charge, why is there currently no arrest warrant for the ex-boyfriend or the third party?

The "third party" got a deal in exchange for "testifying" against the lad.

As for the lad himself, two words.

"He skipped."

I know there is a warrant for his arrest, but the word is they have no idea where to serve it.

[Big Dog]

Two words.

"He skipped."

I'm not being an asshole, but that doesn't make sense.

If the police have sufficient evidence that he committed the felony to meet the legal standard of "probable cause", then why is there no arrest warrant? The suspect's presence in, or absence from, the jurisdiction does not matter.

An arrest warrant for a felony would cause the suspect to be held after any traffic stop in the United States, and be extradited back to Washington.