Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mike

Debra Lafave

Recommended Posts

are you crazy?! he was fourteen - that's barely a teenager and four years off becoming an adult. what she did was wrong, it's as simple as that. those 'draconian punishments' as you call them are in place for the protection of minors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

are you crazy?! he was fourteen - that's barely a teenager and four years off becoming an adult. what she did was wrong, it's as simple as that. those 'draconian punishments' as you call them are in place for the protection of minors.

Did I state what she did was right? Don't mince my words: I wrote something to the extent that the punishment far exceeds the crime, and, yes, there is a slight distinction between "child" and "teenager". That is why those words exist to define a person's stage in life, which gives the crime a different context. Well, there's that and the fact that she is a very attractive young woman and he is a teenage boy.

She will have to register as a "sex offender" for the rest of her life - just like child rapists,producers and collectors of child pornography, and offenders with multiple offenses in their past. It shouldn't be a surprise, I suppose, as this country was founded by Puritans and they'd punish every offense with the same axe - the rejects of good ol' England. Think about it, this is a country which has no qualms giving adult prison sentences to people under 18 and, at the same time, view the people in this range as "children".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as far as i understand it, sex with a minor is illegal whether both people involved are minors or one is not. therefore, the woman in question is a criminal. the distinction between child and teenager does not matter in this context. furthermore, this woman was in a position of trust and authority and she abused that trust. the sex offender register is in place for the protection of children, or should i say minors. she should have been aware that what she was doing was wrong and that there would be consequences. perhaps her crime was not as serious as others on the list but personally i would rather err on the side of caution than allow people who may reoffend to remain anonymous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as far as i understand it, sex with a minor is illegal whether both people involved are minors or one is not. therefore, the woman in question is a criminal. the distinction between child and teenager does not matter in this context. furthermore, this woman was in a position of trust and authority and she abused that trust. the sex offender register is in place for the protection of children, or should i say minors. she should have been aware that what she was doing was wrong and that there would be consequences. perhaps her crime was not as serious as others on the list but personally i would rather err on the side of caution than allow people who may reoffend to remain anonymous.

As far as I know, people under 18 are allowed similar rights to adults depending on their circumstances here in the US. You wanna view this as if it was black and white, but it's not that simple. Also, erring on the side of caution is what makes our prison population one of the biggest in the world. Trust me when I say people like Debra are not the re-offending kind and her punishment is in excess. Show me the statistics of female sexual offenders that say they're liable to re-offend and I'll agree with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You didn't help your argument by saying that the crime had a different context because she's attractive and he's a teenage boy. It sounds like you think it was okay because she has good genes.

The issue here may not be black and white, but the law certainly is. And how many criminals (of any kind) admit that they'll probably do the same thing again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

show me the statistics that say female sex offenders aren't liable to reoffend... and i'll still feel the same. how can i 'trust' you that she is not the reoffending kind?! unfortunately you can never trust that that is the case. it may be very unlikely but never a given. personally, if i had a fourteen year old son or daughter and i lived in the same area as her, i would like to know of her history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You didn't help your argument by saying that the crime had a different context because she's attractive and he's a teenage boy. It sounds like you think it was okay because she has good genes.

The issue here may not be black and white, but the law certainly is. And how many criminals (of any kind) admit that they'll probably do the same thing again?

lolz One at a time, one at a time :beatnik:

It is about common sense. The law is seldom black and white, which is why we have a very high per capita rate of lawyers willing to argue any and all points. Heck, just the fact that most women are not given prison sentences regarding these crimes is enough to side with what I am writing about... and what some of you are writing about as well. Anyway, the very basic biology can't be argued; prosecutors wouldn't have this case in an open court because they know a jury of 12 would not vote to convict unanimously. Yes, she has good genes, which make her attractive and he is a young teenage guy. That the chance came to him to have sex with her - willingly - is something that a lot of guys will not get past. Even with the knowledge that minors cannot give consent: Who, in their right mind, is gonna overlook that it was just a case of abuse of authority and power, but not one of physical/forceful abuse or rape or molestation? The root of the word "molest" is something like "bother"... who would be "bothered" by having sex with an attractive woman? Haha.

Edited by Guest
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

show me the statistics that say female sex offenders aren't liable to reoffend... and i'll still feel the same. how can i 'trust' you that she is not the reoffending kind?! unfortunately you can never trust that that is the case. it may be very unlikely but never a given. personally, if i had a fourteen year old son or daughter and i lived in the same area as her, i would like to know of her history.

Should we assume you possess no proof that females in such cases are repeat offenders? :beatnik:

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who, in their right mind, is gonna overlook that it was just a case of abuse of authority and power, but not one of physical/forceful abuse or rape or molestation?

An abuse of authority and power to initiate sex can't be considered rape? It doesn't matter if the boy consented. Just like it doesn't matter if a 16-year-old girl consents to having sex with her 18-year-old boyfriend - it's still, in the eyes of the law, statutory rape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, yes... it is statutory "rape", but not an actual rape in the common use of the word, which is getting sex by use of force. "Abuse of authority" does not equate to "getting sex by means of physical force"; I'm sure the guy could take this chick in a fight if that were the case ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rape can also mean "improper treatment".

You're walking quite a fine line by trying to distinguish between types of rape. It is abuse no matter how you look at it - mentally or physically.

Sure, a lot of 14 year old boys would have no problem sleeping with their 20-something teacher. But the bottom line here is that a 14 year old is a child, and a teacher is an adult. She took advantage of him. If a 30 year old man beat the living crap out of a 14 year old who was taunting or physically assaulting him, would you let the 30 year old go? Just because the kid was "asking for it" doesn't mean the adult is justified at all in acting on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rape can also mean "improper treatment".

You're walking quite a fine line by trying to distinguish between types of rape. It is abuse no matter how you look at it - mentally or physically.

Sure, a lot of 14 year old boys would have no problem sleeping with their 20-something teacher. But the bottom line here is that a 14 year old is a child, and a teacher is an adult. She took advantage of him. If a 30 year old man beat the living crap out of a 14 year old who was taunting or physically assaulting him, would you let the 30 year old go? Just because the kid was "asking for it" doesn't mean the adult is justified at all in acting on it.

Like I wrote before, I mean the common use of the word, which defines it as using physical force. As for your other question, what does a fist fight have to do with two people having sex?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to show what a forgiving guy i am i want to let this lady know that even though she is a registered sex offender she is welcome to live in my neighborhood.

Also, does she own a video recorder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...