04-08-2013, 12:31 PM
Racer X wrote:
[quote=hal]
[quote=swampy]
Most states don't recognize consensual sex at the age of 12 which was the age of the girl in the judges case ruling. Most states see that as statutory rape.
So...
What does that have to do with birth control? Why are you assuming that the father is 18+? Why does it matter?
The dangerous age spread in 48 months. So a 19 yo and a 14 year, 11 months, and 30 day old can't legally have sex, even if the age of consent in that state is 14. As long as one is under 18, and more than a 4 year spread, it is legally statutory rape. Many states don't even make exceptions if they are married.
I was just looking into this yesterday as my partner's oldest, a 17 yo boy, has been having sex with his 15 yo GF. In Washington state, the age of consent is 16. Since there isn't a 4 year spread, it isn't automatically statutory rape. BUT, under 16, she is legally a child in our state. Even her father can't legally give her permission to have sex. The state won't go after him, but the girl's father can have him drug into Family Court and he'll be screwed and likely charged with sexual assault. Since she, nor any one else can give permission, it is by deffinition without consent, hence assault.
And don't forget, that boy would be labeled as a "sex offender" for the rest of his life - regardless of their actual relationship.