Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Gordongekko909

So if she was 26 (instead of 29) and he being 17 (she being less than 10 years older than he is, and he being between 16 and 18), means she couldn't be charged?


63 posted on 01/25/2006 8:14:03 PM PST by CedarDave ("If I wanted to break the law - why was I briefing Congress?" -- W, 01/23/06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]


To: CedarDave
Ah, missed that one. Ten years? Damn, that's one hell of a Romeo and Juliet exception.

For those of you who don't know, a Romeo and Juliet exception is a clause usually written into statutory rape laws that basicallys says that if the perp and the victim are sufficiently close in age, then it's not statutory rape. Normal sexual assault laws and such still apply if the sex was non-consensual, of course. This is there to prevent totally illogical situations from happening: say, a thirteen year-old boy and a fourteen year-old girl have consensual sex. It just doesn't make sense to charge either one of them.

Louisiana has a two-year Romeo and Juliet exception. The biggest one I've ever heard of until now was a four-year.

Of course, this isn't exactly a "pure" exception, because it only applies when the victim is 16-17. It'll definitely be shorter if the victim is younger than that.

But yeah, this would be the statute that our Teacher of the Week is going to be charged under.

101 posted on 01/25/2006 9:08:02 PM PST by Gordongekko909 (I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson