Quote:
Originally Posted by Dottore
Tough crowd.
Speeder: Sorry. I don't see it that way. Her consent (or lack of it) was the proper issue here. Not her age. In every other civilized country such consent would have been a question of fact to be decided by a court of law—not presumed by an absurd and outdated statutory rape law.
|
Sorry. Her consent was irrelevant - she was 13. The law, and I believe it is a reasonable one, says minors cannot consent to having sex. While I disagree with calling "consensual" sex with minors rape, I do contend that many, if not most, of them do not have the capacity to make such an adult decision. Might some of them? I don't know. Neither do you nor Roman Polanski. It is entirely unreasonable to expect a horny guy to make an informed, honest and reasonable determination of whether the 13 or 16 year old that he's hot to bone is capable of consenting to have sex. If he's really serious about this person he'll consent to having a psychological evaluation of both himself and the child and abide by the opinions of the experts. Somehow I don't see that happening a lot. I think the law is right to conservatively say keep your hands off or else.