Quote:
Originally Posted by IPSKeith
The double standard is total BS. In the end he had sex with a 13 year old. Forced or not, personal tragedies placed aside, burn the Mother Fuc**r!!!
|
its not called "having sex" in court ;)
its called rape. which is what he did.
Lawyers always say these things better than I can:
Quote:
“A male is guilty of rape in the second degree when, being eighteen years old or more, he engages in sexual intercourse with a female less than fifteen years old. Rape in the second degree is a class D felony.”
That is the current law in New York. When I was prosecuting these cases in Queens in the 70’s the law required that the child be less than 14. The legislature tightened it. But there is no doubt that California had the same protections for children when Polanski was prosecuted in California for having intercourse with a 13-year-old girl. It still does.
This is the definition of statutory rape. Notice, it doesn’t talk about force and it doesn’t talk about consent. Neither are needed. The statute is meant to protect children. A 13-year-old can’t consent to intercourse with a man over 18, and certainly not with a man in his 30’s.
|
that about says it all...
http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.c...lanski-uproar/