Posted on 08/20/2017 2:21:03 PM PDT by ARGLOCKGUY
SAN ANTONIO - A San Antonio woman has been arrested and charged with aggravated sexual assault of a child after a 4-year-old came forward and reported the incident. The woman, 18-year-old Esmeralda Marie Medellin, was arrested on Thursday just after 6 p.m. and is currently being held at the Bexar County Magistrate’s Office. Police say the child, who remains unnamed due to the nature of the crime, stated that Medellin performed sexual acts on him. He also said that she made him perform sexual acts her as well.
(Excerpt) Read more at khou.com ...
Point.
The age of consent varies from state to state-but I’ve never heard of it being below 15 anywhere. Parents who encourage their minor child to be transgender should be arrested for child abuse immediately-they are probably affected with Munchausen by proxy, in my opinion-and I don’t think anyone under the age of 18-the accepted age at which one is an adult-should be able to get sex change surgery, hormones, etc, with or without parental permission-make it a prosecutable offense...
On a 4 year old, sorry guilty no matter what!
Would you like to tell us where you got that?
I agree.
Why are you sorry she has to be considered “guilty”?
Unless I missed a post or posts I have NEVER seen a FReeper get upset w/ someone expressing sympathy for the victim. Never.
Ignorant of history, I suppose-Columbus may have paved the way for mass exodus from Spain, but Cortez really started it when he brought all those Spanish soldiers here-more of them than not saw a fine deal in staying in New Spain, setting themselves up on some land with a Native American woman, making a living and having a bunch of kids-better than going back to old Spain-where maybe they were a 3d son in a poor family, or-like many of my ancestors-a Basque rebel from the Pyrenees ripe for hanging if caught who joined the army, got on a Mexico bound ship and decamped with haste...
I can imagine how they felt. My grandfather was the 13th child on a farm in Northern Ireland not much bigger than my suburban house lot. Only the oldest son stayed: the other 12 children moved all over the English-speaking world.
“She has since been released on $75,000 bail.”
I wonder who paid bail? I’m assuming an organization?
Really? I wouldn't call it "upset," exactly ... more like "sneering contempt" that someone views an adolescent boy who got laid - by anything - as a "victim." And they do feel so sorry for the woman who is convicted ... she's the real victim of a Puritan society, or something, when she should be considered to be a social heroine.
It's revolting. Makes conservatives look like s**t-heads.
It’s basically rape, even if the boy is 17 or 18, since the monster masquerading as the hot teacher has power over him.
Its easy to get emotional about such matters and believe that criminal justice like prison time or probation will fix everything, not to mention castration or violence against perps.
It won’t fix the victim and it won’t fix the perp who was I strongly suspect sexually abused herself. She thought that behavior was normal behavior because of what happened to her, I believe in my gut.
The victim will need help to deal with notions that what happened is normal and inclinations and thoughts to ‘do unto others’ what was done to them.
There are programs of recovery for those who are insane about sex.
Everything from 12-step meetings to residential treatment programs for the “sex addict-sexaholic” etc. etc.
I will agree on that.
Our law makes a distinction between forcible rape and statutory rape because we recognize that a person who is too big to be thrown to the ground and raped can, nonetheless, be persuaded into acts that are against his or her best interest. The “confusion” arises when people believe that, for a male over 16 ... or 14 ... or 12 ... or 10 ... well, some age ... any sexual act is in his best interest, because there is nothing to him other than his priapic appetite.
That was probably the driving force for leaving all over Europe and the British Isles starting as soon as Europeans and Brits started flocking over in the 16th-17th century-the laws of primogeniture only gave the oldest kid an inheritance-so it made sense for the rest of the kids to get passage to the new world-as a soldier, sailor, domestic servant or whatever other way they could get there-much easier to get established in a new place-with a new identity, too if you had the King’s attention by being a rebel from Spain, Scotland, Ireland, France, etc-nobody here cared why you were here as long as you worked and didn’t do bad things to your neighbors...
Yes, the primogeniture was a big thing in many countries. In Scandinavia, on the other hand, they divided the land among all the sons, until nobody had enough land to grow a turnip stew.
The United States is still awfully empty, as my daughter found when she drove from Seattle, WA, to Wilmington, NC.
Legal or illegal?
That is the question?
Easy to see why northern parts of the US and some of Canada was more appealing to the Scandinavians, too-enough land to grow food...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.