Posted on 05/21/2005 2:04:22 PM PDT by Poser
I'm very sorry to hear about what happened to your dear friend. Because she was driven both to and from the party by her parents, and because "party parents" were believed to be chaperoning, I assume she was not at a college age party, but a high school one. Her circumstances are very unfortunate, and very different from the circumstances of these two 17 year old girls, who were at a college age party.
Seventeen year old girls have no business at a college frat party. Fraternities are not unreasonable to assume all guests at their parties are at least of college age, if not students at their campus. They also have absolutely no reason to want 17 year old girls at their party, and therefore probably had no idea of these girls' age.
If the father of two 17 year old girls was at my frat house demanding his daughters, we'd want them the hell out of there every bit as much as he, especially if they'd been drinking, seeing as how we probably didn't know they were 17. Therefore, I'd assume the fraternity brothers surrounding him was a result af his demeanor, which was probably very volitile and threatening, seeing as how he's the type to pull a gun on a house full of strangers.
If a middle aged man, or woman for that matter, whom I'd never met before approached my fraternity house during a party brandishing a gun, the fact that he believed his/ her daughters were present at my house would immediately become completely irrelevant. Law enforcement would certainly be called, and I would expect the man to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
John M. Lohnes needs to contact an attorney. He should have the attorney sue the fraternity officers for interfering with parental rights by giving the underage girls alcoholic beverages. He should also have the attorney help him swear out a complaint against each member of the fraternity who might have circled around him. In New Hampshire that act constitutes assault if it is threatening and kidnapping (which by the way is still a capital crime in New Hampshire) if it is meant to prevent an individual from exercising his free will to leave. Once the complaint is filed, the Durham police will have 24 hours to act upon it. If they refuse to act upon it, Lohnes can file the complaint with the New Hampshire state police along with an additional complaint against the Durham Police Department. If the New Hamsphire state police refuse to act, he can file a complaint against the New Hampshire state police with the New Hampshire attorney general. I can assure you that neither the fraternity nor the Durham P.D. nore the New Hampshire state police want the trouble their actions have caused them. Oh, by the way, it's not really credible that the Durham P.D. was not able to determine if Lohnes had a valid carry permit. If the computer was down -- a common excuse which is usually in the vernacular a lie -- the Durham P.D. could have telephoned -- yeah, I know it's New Hampshire, but there are telephones there -- the Manchester P.D. Were I Lohnes, I would also get as many names of the individuals my daughters came into contact with and find out precisely what happened. Any in appropriate touching -- since the age of consent in New Hampshire is 18 -- is statutory rape.
I totally agree with you. I was responding to a post from Melas. See post 71.
"since the age of consent in New Hampshire is 18 -- is statutory rape"
It is 16 in New Hampshire. I believe I read somewhere that it is actually 15 1/2 or older (they round up).
It is a university town in a blue state. What do you think? I'd say slim to none.
The world needs more dads like this.
Excuse me, but I never mentioned their appearance. This father has some serious problems with his daughters is what I was saying.
I think he was justified in pulling the gun, and, if they were mine, I would have gotten the kids also.
Okay. You have made it clear. You are more concerned with your ability to drink and hang with your buds then care a whit about two young girls.
You responded to this quote by saying, " Exactly. These "girls' left home on the 17th. They hadn't just left that afternoon."
I took that to mean that you agreed with the entire quote. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
The age of consent is 16 for male-female sex if both individuals are emancipated. It is 18 if the individual is not emancipated. The twins being 17 and living at home are not emancipated.
Let's see. Providing alcohol to minors? If they had a sip of beer that'll stick. Corrupting morals of a minor? If they had a sip of beer and anything untoward happened(it's a frat party remember). Somebody smoked a joint, did a line, had a fight, porn on tv or made lascivious comments to the girls. That'll stick.
Kidnapping and false imprisonment? The girls have been reported missing and the parents don't know whether they are alive or dead for at least 3 days. Someone took them to a party 40 miles away without parents knowledge and wouldn't give them a ride home and they are minors. If they were a few years younger there would be no question.
Let's add another: felony threatening. Surrounding the father and putting him in fear of his safety and that of his daughters.
What's sick is this father being charged at all. You don't seem to have a problem with those bogus charges.
It is easy to monday-morning-quarterback this one. As the father of a young lady who was 17 not too long ago, I would have moved heaven & hell to get her home ASAP. Reading the article I was asking myself why he didn't simply call Durham police and ask them to retrieve his daughters and he could meet them at Durham PD. But when fathers get calls like this one, the reflex reaction is to drive 90 MPH to Durham and rescue the girls yourself. I can sympathize with this father's plight.
It's okay, I get cranky sometimes.
"The age of consent is 16 for male-female sex if both individuals are emancipated. It is 18 if the individual is not emancipated. The twins being 17 and living at home are not emancipated."
The only statute I could find went as follows:
IV. Engages in sexual contact with the person when the actor is in a position of authority over the person and uses that authority to coerce the victim to submit under any of the following circumstances:
(a) When the actor has supervisory authority over the victim by virtue of the victim being incarcerated in a correctional
institution or juvenile detention facility; or
(b) When a probation or parole officer has supervisory authority over the victim while the victim is on parole or probation or under juvenile probation.
Source. 1975, 302:1. 1981, 415:4. 1985, 228:4, eff. Jan. 1, 1986. 1997,
220:3, eff. Jan. 1, 1998.
This statute doesn't support your position. Perhaps there is another that I can't find.
Make Dad think??
Your comment is a clear symptom of what is wrong in this country...
It is.
18 USC § 2421Whoever knowingly transports any individual in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, with intent that such individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.
Not at all. As a former New Englander, I can appreciate MTR's comments. I wouldn't go back there for 10 million bucks.
You left out the part where their dad shows up and you and your friends surround him to prevent him from taking the girls home when they are requesting to go with him.
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.