Jackson Man, 22, Gets Suspended Sentence for Sex Act with Girl, 13, at Summer Camp

Jackson (MS) Clarion-Ledger ^ | 05-14-03 | Gates, Jimmie E.

[Theodore R.]

A 22-year-old Jackson man has been given a five-year suspended sentence after pleading guilty to sexual battery on a 13-year-old girl during a summer camp where he worked in 2001.

Derrick Aaron Casher was a team leader at the 100 Black Men Village when he was accused of engaging in a sex act with the teen at the camp hosted by the 100 Black Men of Jackson, Inc.

[Theodore R.]

The ages and dates are unclear. Was he 20 in 2001 and the girl 13 or 11? Either way, it is statutory rape. Is MS also lenient on crime?

[ElectricStrawberry]

Sounds like something from up here in MA and the Ebony (kidnapping/attempted rape of a ute) case with Judge(loosely used term) Lopez.

What's the point of having laws if they don't follow through with the punishment? Or did they not wanna send a "good" AmeriCorps-boy to jail?

[ClearCase_guy]

"We don't believe we did anything wrong," said Robert Gibbs, president of 100 Black Men. "We did everything possible to ensure the safety of every child."

Well, since the group's leader feels that there is no way to protect the children from sexual assault, I guess I wouldn't advise people to send their children to this camp.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Hard to tell. From the story I would say the girl was 13 and the guy 20.

I may get flamed but there are way too many 13 year old girls who are sexually promiscuous and agressive. All fault probably doesn't lie with the guy. (Thanks to clintoon.)

[Pete]

All fault probably doesn't lie with the guy

I understand what your saying and I am sympathetic. However, when you are dealing with a 20 year old and a 13 year old, all fault does fall on the 20 year old. It doesn't matter what the 13 year old says or does, the 20 year old still has a responsibility to act appropriately.

I would say that goes for any age. As adults, we are all responsible for our own actions regardless of what those around us are doing. This is a lesson that parents through out history have tried to teach their children.

[WKB]

Don't forget this is the state that gave a woman 6 months for killing her 2 year old son.

[WKB]

Godd ole boy Ms bump

[Nachoman]

So is this going to make 99 black men?

[JimRed]

...there are way too many 13 year old girls who are sexually promiscuous and agressive...

Inappropriate but, here goes anyway...A guy in a bar picks up a great looking young woman. The get back to his apartment and are going at hot n' heavy foreplay. He asks "how old are you?" "Thirteen", she replies.

"Put on your clothes and get out of here!"

"What's the matter, you superstitious?"

;^)

[Blood of Tyrants]

Up until the latter half of the 20th century, there were many 13 year old girls who MARRIED. People don't change, just laws. If a 13 year old acts in a promiscuous, she shouldn't be allowed to hide behind her age when someone takes her up on her offers. (This is of course assuming that the male's attention was sought out.)

[Blood of Tyrants]

There was a young girl in my apartment complex about 15 years ago who looked very much like an adult (tall, well formed, adult face, most people would have guessed she was at least 16 or 17) but was only 12. I stayed far away but there were MANY 17-20 year old guys that 'sought her attention'. Her mom was out of the picture and her dad was oblivious. I saw her after she had turned 18 and suprisingly enough she had never become pregnant.

[Dionysius]

She was first prize in the three-legged race.

[hellinahandcart]

He pleaded guilty to sexual battery, not "statutory rape", so why assume there was any level of consent on the part ofand I seriously doubt he was asking for her hand in marriage out in those woods,so why speculate that there was any level of consent on the part of the girl? Couldn't the counselor have simply been a total pervert, and the girl unwilling?

[Pete]

Up until the latter half of the 20th century, there were many 13 year old girls who MARRIED. People don't change, just laws. If a 13 year old acts in a promiscuous, she shouldn't be allowed to hide behind her age when someone takes her up on her offers. (This is of course assuming that the male's attention was sought out.)

Someone reading your above response might assume that you would have no problem having sexual relations with a 13 year old if that 13 year old sought you out.

If that is not your position, why not? The answer to that question should sharpen the point. If that is your position, then read on. (And good luck on the rest of this thread).

Regardless of her 'hiding behind her age', the law TODAY makes such relations a crime. You can debate whether it should be or not or whether it was in the past and I am sure there are many here who would be willing to argue with you.

[hellinahandcart]

Either way, it is statutory rape.

Um, no. Statutory rape is at least a consensual act, even though the minor cannot legally give consent. That's why it's called statutory rape instead of rape. The act is "consensual" but committing it violates statutes.

He plea-bargained on sexual assault charges. And the charge he pleaded to, sexual battery, still implies some level of force.

[hellinahandcart]

Why has this thread suddenly turned into a discussion of statutory rape, when that was not what this man was charged with?

[Revelation 911]

If a 13 year old acts in a promiscuous, she shouldn't be allowed to hide behind her age when someone takes her up on her offers. (This is of course assuming that the male's attention was sought out.)

A 13 yr old is not of legal consent in most states - Her saying "yes" means nothing - what an asinine thing to suggest. Its a period of puberty and precocious gender indentification - Its not a free pass to bag the kid.

FYI Joseph Smith of Mormon fame married a fourteen yr old named Helen Marr Kimball - It was pedophilia then - Its pedophilia now

any justification of it is sick

[Pete]

Why has this thread suddenly turned into a discussion of statutory rape, when that was not what this man was charged with?

My point was not the legal question of statutory rape but the more general question of culpability. I contended that a 20 year old should be held fully responsible for any sexual contact with 13 year old.

Note that he was charged with sexual battery. That means it was not sodomy or intercourse. Regardless, he admitted to "engaging in a sex act with the teen at the camp". Whether it falls under statutory rape or not is not the point. The point is that he is responsible for his behavior regardless of what the girl did or didn't do.

[dixiechick2000]

Thanks for the ping!

What idiot would send their young daughter to a camp named "100 Black Men"? It seems to me that if you want your daughter to be safe, you send her to a camp that is run and staffed by females. Even then, there's no guarantee that she will be safe, but the odds are better.