Formus said:
...while it can be argued that 10-year-olds can't make decisions like that as well as older people, it can never be explicitly proven. If she was reasoned, not inebriated, etc, then the fact that this was consensual goes a long way.... 10 years old may be pushing the envelope, but the spectre of consensuality is enough for me to step back and be more reasonable about the punishment if I'm a judge.
And then you say this...
Secondly, it's much better for young sex offenders to be rehabilitated ... After all, they're still kids, and they're still in their formative years when behavioral patterns are most easily malleable\
Talk about your warped double standards. So the girl was old enough (maybe) to .. give consent?
And yet the rapists... who were older than her, were too young to be punished!?!?
Are you serious? Please, there's no way this could rationally be argued. Wow... just... wow.
I bet he feels vindicated now. He seems like that kind of fucktard.
31
_margot_
Los Angeles, CA
December 2007
DEC 10, 2007 09:53 PM
BlastProcessing said:
I bet he feels vindicated now. He seems like that kind of fucktard.
Agreed. He pissed all over almost ever active thread in almost every active topic last night. He knew what he was doing, for the second time, if not third.
Wow. I just read through all this, and let me say, if any 26-year-old came near my 12-year-old, I'd kill him. Consent doesn't exist below the age of 16-18 when a 26-year-old is involved. I wonder if I'd get as light a sentance as these boys did? I mean, obviously if I did it again, I might have to go to jail, but...
skeeve
Boston, MA
September 2006
DEC 10, 2007 08:53 AM