Disrespecting Jessica (Bill O'Reilly)

Jewish World Review ^ | February 26, 2007 | Bill O'Reilly

[freespirited]

I am pretty sure that the word "child" as used in Jessica's Law means a person under the age of 12.

[pandoraou812]

I am not sure about that. I do know that sex is happening in some form or another as young as the middle schools. I by no means agree with it either. I am just worried about the situations I posted. I don't want to see a life ruined due to one dumb mistake. I wish more parents knew what their children were doing. In the middle school in the town where I live we had a girl caught under the table giving her boyfriend oral sex. Both were in the 7th grade! Why they would do that there or be doing it at all is beyond my scope of thinking. We have a serious problem with judges who are letting repeat offenders out and it drives me crazy. I support Jessica's Law. I just worry that some will be jailed for stupid mistakes. We don't need to do that in the quest to get sex offenders. ~P~

[fish hawk]

I take it you are a lawyer or a judge. Sticking up for pond scum is not cool.

[freespirited]

Yup, I googled it. The original Jessica's Law is specific to those who molest a child under the age of 12. When I have heard O'Reilly talk about it, he has said the same thing.

I know what you mean about teenagers. The idea that a 17 year old who engaged in consensual sexual actvity with a 15 year old needs to be treated like a criminal trivializes real child molestation. (I imagine some number of FReepers would be on sex offender registries under this definition.)

http://jessicas-law.blogspot.com/

[pandoraou812]

Thanks for clearing that up for me. Sometimes good laws tend to have some parts which are unclear. And thats when the problems begin. I don't understand the judges who let repeat offenders out or who give light sentences out to guys who rape little children. That makes my blood boil. ~P~

[Zeroisanumber]

I take it you are a lawyer or a judge. Sticking up for pond scum is not cool.

Actually I'm a mid-level hospital administrator. I do, however, believe that all men are innocent until proven guilty, and that judges are in the best position to decide punishment.

[getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL]

13 year old woman?

[Lancey Howard]

One for two isn't bad.

The defense lawyers need to do whatever they can to be effective advocates for their clients, no matter how repugnant those clients are, and no matter how heinous their crimes.

On the other hand, there absolutely MUST be a firewall for society at large against criminal-coddling, corrupt, scumbag liberal Democrat judges. Mandatory sentencing laws provide the rest of us with that firewall.

[Fluke Codewriter]

RunningWolf wrote Think 19yr man, 14yr woman and my reply was to RunningWolf so I used the same terminology.

[getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL]

Sorry... I should have addressed that to all. It was made as a general statement, and not pointedly to you.

[Fluke Codewriter]

Let me also add...

The difference between a Girl and Woman is Physical Appearance. If she Looks like a woman - breasts, hips, you get the idea. And in the case I cited, it came out this 13 year old woman was quite sexually experienced - no word on whether proscuters would be going after the other males she's had sex with.

News isn't about informing us about soemthing. It's about telling us the thing They think will generate the most outrage and opinion.

[RunningWolf]

If you rape or sexually brutalize a child or worse, that child will never fully recover. For the rest of that person's life, the crime will be played out in a variety of ways.

Yes, a valid true statement. But it does not have to be the whole story.