Yikes...

[wisco]

Just found out today that a friend of mine is in some serious trouble. I use the term "friend" loosely... he's not someone I hang out with, but I've known him since high school.

Anyways... he was arrested last week for Repeated Sexual Assault of Same Child. Felony C here in WI, up to 40 years. The girl was 15, he's 28. The girl was also his wife's little sister.

From what I hear, it was consensual, but WI does not see it that way. 17 and 364 days is still a child and therefore they cannot give consent.

His wife (yes, she's still with him ) seems to think he won't get a very severe punishment because "she did it to him" as she put it. I'm fairly certain she was referring to oral sex. I didn't say anything to her but I highly doubt that matters.

Or does it?

[Rlong1985]

15 is not consensual, and for good reason. Are you seriously trying to justify and defend this guy?

Your "friend" is an idiot, and most likely is going to pay with a good deal of his life.

[wisco]

Are you seriously trying to justify and defend this guy?

I don't know how anything I said could be skewed as to give the impression I'm defending this guy, but no I'm not. I'm asking a question.

[Rlong1985]

The youngest age of consent across the US is 16 unless married. Yes you can get married in some states younger than 18,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age

AGE OF CONSENT CHART FOR THE U.S.

[wisco]

The youngest age of consent across the US is 16 unless married.

I know that. That wasn't the question. The question was whether the wife was right or wrong in her assumption that the punishment would be less severe since the girl in question performed the acts while the guy did not reciprocate.

I don't think it matters, but I don't know. I wouldn't put myself in a position to find out.

[Rlong1985]

To answer your question directly, yes in the state of Wisconsin under the legal definitions of terms used in the laws, the definition of "Sexual Intercourse" includes "cunnilingus" which is oral sex.

Wisconsin Criminal Code - Chapter 948 Crimes Against Children 948.01 Definitions:
"Sexual intercourse" means vulvar penetration as well as cunnilingus, fellatio or anal intercourse between persons or any other intrusion, however slight, of any part of a person's body or of any object into the genital or anal opening either by the defendant or upon the defendant's instruction. The emission of semen is not required.

948.09 Sexual Intercourse with a child age 16 or older.
Whoever has sexual intercourse with a child who is not the defendants spouse and who has attained the age of 16 years is guilty of a Class A Misdemeanor.

The reason I posted the age of consent chart was not that I did not understand your question but it shows that you are not able to have any sexual contact with a minor and if you do its in your court. It does not matter if the minor started the contact; it is your responsibility as an adult to say no. No one forced this guy to get Oral by a very young teenager.

[retdetsgt]

In Oregon, it would be a class C felony.....

You never know who's going to do something like that.

[Safety Steve]

The wife is wrong!


Be Safe.

[phantasm]

In NY, it would be a different charge, but still the same level of felony.

[retdetsgt]

In NY, it would be a different charge, but still the same level of felony.

Here, they call it Rape III. The element of the crime is an adult having consensual sex with someone between the ages of 14 and 16 and is a class "C" felony. With mandatory sentencing in Oregon, it's automatic prison time. Sex with a 17 year old is a class A misdemeanor called Sex with a minor.

[wisco]

The guy was indeed in the wrong, I don't condone his behavior at all. IMO the "she started it defense" is nothing other than a cop-out. I just didn't know if it changed things from a legal standpoint.

He's out right now on $25,000 signature bond. I'm honestly surprised he was released - would that be because he didn't force sexual activity?



RDS - After some reading, it's similar here. Under 13 is a Class B felony - up to 60 years. 13-15 is Class C - up to 40 years. 16-17 is a Class A Misdemeanor.

Personally I think that the age of the offender should be taken into consideration. There were a ton of 18/17 year old couples when I was in high school - I was one of them. In my case though, SHE was actually the older one

Kids are bound to have sex. 15 and 28 is unacceptable, but I really don't see an issue with HS couples. I know a line has to be drawn somewhere, but I'll admit I don't know where that line should be.

I knew a couple in HS that dated all 4 years through HS. He was 15, she was 14 therefore when he was 18 she was 17 - and got pregnant. Both sets of parents didn't object and supported them, but the state stepped in and charged him against the will of the parents. He had to serve a year in prison. They were married when he got out, and still are today. However, he's now labelled a sex offender. That there is just one instance I don't agree with.

[ChevySSP]

In Texas you have whats dubbed the "young love" defense.

Our AoC is 17, and if the couple is within 3 years of each other than they are good to go. Its not an exemption from prosecution, so if the State wanted to be a d*** about it then the ability to press charges is still there.

[MPI1]

He's out right now on $25,000 signature bond. I'm honestly surprised he was released - would that be because he didn't force sexual activity?

Personally I think that the age of the offender should be taken into consideration. There were a ton of 18/17 year old couples when I was in high school - I was one of them. In my case though, SHE was actually the older one

1. Yes it was probably because he did not FORCE the sex could be the reason he was released. They don't typically release Violent sexual assault suspects.

2. They do take into consideration the age of the suspect/victim. I know here in Wisconsin (where I live anyways) the DA will not prosecute anyone within 3 years of age of each other as long as there is NO question it was consensual, and the parents don't raise a stink. I know however if the parents raise a stink, then the DA looks at a more narrow age limit.

[retdetsgt]

Personally I think that the age of the offender should be taken into consideration. There were a ton of 18/17 year old couples when I was in high school - I was one of them. In my case though, SHE was actually the older one

It is taken into consideration. The law states that a less than three year difference in ages is a viable defense. It was never intended to send a 16 year old to jail for having sex with a 14 year old. It's for the 25 year old that has sex with a child.

[MikeG]

I know that. That wasn't the question. The question was whether the wife was right or wrong in her assumption that the punishment would be less severe since the girl in question performed the acts while the guy did not reciprocate.

I don't think it matters, but I don't know. I wouldn't put myself in a position to find out.

As has been stated, according to the legal definitions in Wisconsin, he had sexual intercourse with a child. He was basically charged with the "consentual" version of sex with a child. If he had forced himself on her, it would be a whole lot worse (class B felony).


Reciprocation probably isn't a factor for guilt. Wisconsin defines oral sex as sexual intercourse. He had sexual intercourse with a child. Ejaculation is not a factor either. The fact that it happened more than once is going to aggravate his sentence. If he participated "minimally" it might be considered mitigating at sentencing according to the guidelines below.

The prosecutor doesn't have to abide by the victims wishes but cooperating witnesses are much better than non-cooperating ones. The prosecutor also has to keep in mind the safety of the public and whether justice is served.

The fact that it 1) was discovered and 2) reported to police with charges filed doesn't look good for him. And if it was the parents, I think he's looking at prison as well as lifetime registered sex offender.

Did they get a restraining order against him? That's another way to tell exactly how they feel about it.

Here's the Wisconsin sentencing guidelines for the underlying crime (lesser included offense?) (2nd degree sexual assault of a child). Since he did it more that 3 times, it's probably going to be worse than that. The middle of the road box is 5-14 years confinement.