The girl ruined that girl's life. 
Posted on 09/22/2007 6:21:10 AM PDT by Jim Noble
WEARE – A father attacked his daughter's boyfriend last week after learning the boy had sex with the underage girl, police said.
It was about 1:30 p.m. Monday, Sept. 10, when the man stormed onto the grounds of John J. Stark High School and beat up the 17-year-old from Henniker. School was just letting out, and many students witnessed the attack, said Detective Lou Chatel.
The boy suffered bruising and later received two stitches to his face.
The father was charged with simple assault, a Class B felony.
Police said the boy is dating the man's 15-year-old daughter.
The man discovered the two had had sex earlier that day, during school hours but not on school property, police said.
Under state law, a 15-year-old cannot consent to sex; therefore, police are investigating the allegation as a sexual assault.
The New Hampshire Union Leader has a policy of not identifying sexual assault victims. For that reason, the newspaper is not identifying the father.
Both students attend John Stark High School. The girl lives in Weare.
Chatel said there have been no arrests in the sex case, but he expects there will be.
Bottom line, the 17 year old won’t be messing with the 15 year old again.
I'd submit, as the father of two daughters, that if this kid was 'man' enough to screw the guy's 15 year old daughter........he's no "child".
Good point ...it a rough time after the initial anger and the rationality occurs.
On that definition, neither is your daughter.
Being raped is not funny
He acted like a child .
His daughter is no longer a virgin she had consensual sex with her boyfriend , Oh Boo Hoo schedul me on Oprah
Judging from the posts here cheering on the father's assault of a minor, and the statistics of teen promiscuity, I would expect thousands more of these cases to occur daily. The reality, fortunately, is that most of us aren't that stupid.
Cool with me.
The girl ruined that girl's life.
It is mine. And the guy is not going to prison. Please.
And yet, when I was sixteen, these laws were enforced by the State of New York, and they were clear, comprehensible, and didn't cause any major social disruption.
Almost every attempt to lower the age of consent in US jurisdictions fails, so the People, at least to the extent that they speak through their representatives, favor age of consent laws.
As they used to say, "Fifteen will get you twenty".
Easy to understand, it's the law.
What's the problem?
My dad also expected all of his children to take responsiblity for their actions. I'm sure you do, too.
By that definition, a boy of 13 would also have been 'man' enough as well. Would the father also have been justified in whaling on a 13 year old, just because his junk works?
You just don't know how a court or jury is going to rule. I wouldn't want my family's security to ride on it.
“And yet, when I was sixteen, these laws were enforced by the State of New York, and they were clear, comprehensible, and didn’t cause any major social disruption.”
In what percentage of the cases of teen sex between sixteen or seventeen year-olds and fourteen or fifteen year-olds do you think those laws were enforced?
You have cases of a boy and girl in the same grade, only a few months apart in age. Do you think in such cases someone should be charged with statutory rape?
I’m not saying the age of consent should changed, but it should protect teenagers from adults, not from other teens and schoolmates who freely choose to date each other.
If one level headed person on the jury votes innocent there will be no prison.
He's not going to jail, the kid will not press charges, the kid is looking at a long jail term for rap of a minor.
The purpose of age of consent laws is not "to protect teenagers from adults", any more than the purpose of no driver's licenses for fifteen year olds is to protect them from adults.
The laws are to protect them from themselves.
And dating fifteen year olds wasn't illegal when I was sixteen - having sex with them was.
I understand that "dating" has become a euphemism for vaginal intercourse, but it was not always the case.
I'm prepared to listen to arguments why these laws should be repealed - but not to arguments that they shouldn't be enforced.
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.