what advice to give to an 18 year old

SkyHog

SkyHog

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
18,512
Location
Middle of nowhere Texas
Display Name
Everything Offends Me
Home Airfield
KLUD
Who just got arrested via a sting operation because he was trying to have sex with a 15 year old girl? Turns out, the cops thought he was like 40 until he arrived...but its still illegal and he is in jail right now.

It was one of those deals where the cops acted like a 15 year old girl online and convinced him to come meet her. He is dumb, because his instructions were to park across the street from the apartments and flash his lights and she would come over. Who the hell falls for that?
 
No advice other than the phone number of a good lawyer.
 
Stay the hell off of the internet. Get out of the house and meet real girls.
 
I remember when I was young, the saying was 17 will get you 20. We were more worried about the girls that lied and said they were older. An 18 year old should know better, but I suppose it is true what they say about the little head doing the thinking for the big head at that age.
 
wabower said:
Stay the hell off of the internet. Get out of the house and meet real girls.
Click to expand...

If he isn't in school then there aren't many places for 18 year olds to meet girls. Ask me how I know.
 
RJM62 said:
Get a good lawyer.

-Rich
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

Also, take the fifth, do not volunteer to be interviewed even if they just want to "clear up the misunderstanding" or some BS like that. No interview unless the lawyer is present.
 
I hate that **** so much. Fight it to the end. I'm not a fan of dudes trying to F 15 year olds no, but I hate that entrapment crap.
 
Do you think the guys who are older skipped that age? In your case it's understandable, but if you lived in a city with a major university it might be different.

DavidWhite said:
If he isn't in school then there aren't many places for 18 year olds to meet girls. Ask me how I know.
Click to expand...
 
SCCutler said:
Shut up, lawyer up, and straighten up.

40 might be creepier, but 18 on 15 is still statutory rape.
Click to expand...

I think that's pretty much what he's doing. I probably won't get a chance to talk to him until he's out, but I'm sure he'll ask my advice, since he generally trusts my opinion.

The unfortunate reality is that 3 weeks ago, it would have been fine...that's where these laws upset me a bit. He's not a predator or a rapist, he thought he was going for consentual fun-time with a girl.

He's still dumb as hell for falling for it, but he's just a teenager that made a stupid decision.
 
Advice? 15 will get you 20. But I suppose it's too late for that advice.

18/15 is creepy. I bet if it were a "real" situation, her dad wouldn't be wondering what advice to give the little Casanova looking to meet up with random strangers on the internet.
 
bartmc said:
Advice? 15 will get you 20. But I suppose it's too late for that advice.

18/15 is creepy. I bet if it were a "real" situation, her dad wouldn't be wondering what advice to give the little Casanova looking to meet up with random strangers on the internet.
Click to expand...

Would you say that 17 and 364 days is less creepy? Because the law does.
 
SkyHog said:
Would you say that 17 and 364 days is less creepy? Because the law does.
Click to expand...

For random sex agreed upon via the internet yes. When that last 24 hours clicks over, you become an adult. it's not a surprise. Best you be prepared for it BEFORE 18 happens.

Now if this was a loving relationship that had been going on for a couple of years and they decided to "consummate" it, I might offer a little leeway if the charges were brought up by a POed dad "finding out about it". at 18, you s'posed to know better. "15 will get you 20" and "Jailbait" aren't new terms.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I hate that **** so much. Fight it to the end. I'm not a fan of dudes trying to F 15 year olds no, but I hate that entrapment crap.
Click to expand...

It's actually less ethical than trapping a predator by baiting a trap with something they like to eat- at least they get the real thing, however briefly.:rolleyes:

There's just something disturbing to me about arresting someone for intent to do something with someone who actually doesn't exist. I realize he was prepared to knowingly break the law, but... there was no girl, so no crime could have been committed.
The ultimate expression of this would be to monitor people's thoughts, and arrest them for having thoughts that they might never act upon... even thoughts they could not act upon.
Also:
If people want their teen daughters to be safe from statutory rape, they should make sure they can defend themselves, and/or make sure they understand that it's actually NOT cool for a minor to be a total skank on the Internet.
When a real 15-yr-old girl arranges a hookup with someone she believes is old enough to be charged with rape in that state, who exactly is victimizing who? :dunno:
 
rottydaddy said:
If people want their teen daughters to be safe from statutory rape, they should make sure they can defend themselves
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said but this one piece. Statutory rape is not violent rape - there's no "defending" themselves.
 
rottydaddy said:
If people want their teen daughters to be safe from statutory rape, they should make sure they can defend themselves, and/or make sure they understand that it's actually NOT cool for a minor to be a total skank on the Internet.
When a real 15-yr-old girl arranges a hookup with someone she believes is old enough to be charged with rape in that state, who exactly is victimizing who? :dunno:
Click to expand...

I don't really like arresting someone on the whole intent thing, but 15 year olds have a different maturity level then 18 year olds. They get with their friends and do stupid things. Even at 18 there is a creepy factor here.
 
SCCutler said:
Shut up, lawyer up, and straighten up.

40 might be creepier, but 18 on 15 is still statutory rape.
Click to expand...

mmm depends on the state. In PA Statutory Sexual Assault is when the older person is over 18 and the younger is under AND more than 4 years younger than the older person. So in the scenario Nick presented in PA it would not be stat sexual assault ( stat rape) but could be Corruption of Morals of a Minor.

In PA like I assume many states Statutory Sexual Assault is a did it or didn't do it crime. Meaning it doesn't matter how old the younger person looks, or how old they told you they were.

In the situation Nick presented you could have a High School Senior in deep doo for having a relationship with a High School Sophomore. Tough situation.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I hate that **** so much. Fight it to the end. I'm not a fan of dudes trying to F 15 year olds no, but I hate that entrapment crap.
Click to expand...

It is NOT entrapment. For it to be entrapment the idea and the intent must derive from the official.
This is done all over the country. It is easier than most may think to not plant the idea or the intent into the perp. People say we (LE) sitting in the median at night blacked out running radar is entrapment. How does that give someone the idea to speed. Just wanted to clear that up.

Ps. This info is based on the GA definition. I cannot testify in court that it is the same across the states but I am sure it is very close if not the same.

As far as the individual charged...a good lawyer can be a tremendous help.
 
An 18 year old trolling for sex from an 18 yo is still creepy, it just happens to be legal. Either way, he needs a really good lawyer. Nothing like being labeled a sex offender to ruin the rest of your life.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I hate that **** so much. Fight it to the end. I'm not a fan of dudes trying to F 15 year olds no, but I hate that entrapment crap.
Click to expand...

Corpsmaide said:
It is NOT entrapment. For it to be entrapment the idea and the intent must derive from the official.
This is done all over the country. It is easier than most may think to not plant the idea or the intent into the perp. People say we (LE) sitting in the median at night blacked out running radar is entrapment. How does that give someone the idea to speed. Just wanted to clear that up.

Ps. This info is based on the GA definition. I cannot testify in court that it is the same across the states but I am sure it is very close if not the same.

As far as the individual charged...a good lawyer can be a tremendous help.
Click to expand...

If we want to compare it to speeding, it would be more in tune with a UC telling someone who wants to speed where a great empty bit of road is. The "speeder" shows up and not only doesn't speed, but there isn't even a road yet still gets a speeding ticket.

Now in places where attempted stat rape, or what ever is a crime then game on.
 
This really sucks... My first real girlfriend was a senior in high school, and I was a freshman. Same age spread we are talking about here.

What doesn't make sense is that it can be totally legal for, as an example, a 16 and 17 year-old to be going at it, then when the 17 year-old turns 18, it's suddenly illegal, and then finally, when the younger person turns 18, then it's legal again.

I get where these laws come from, and I want to protect kids against sexual predators, but I think it's kooky to lock up high school kids for, well, being high school kids. The law where there's a "18 and X years difference" test make much more sense to me.

All that said, your friend made a mistake, and his situation sounds a little closer to the "sexual predator" end of the spectrum than the "high school kids being high school kids" end of the spectrum. I had a relationship like that, many moons ago, but it did NOT start by meeting in a hotel room.
 
I really don't quite understand how they can convict anyone who hasn't actually committed a crime. He could claim that he was showing up to personally try and change her ways.
 
SkyHog said:
New Mexico.
Click to expand...

The obvious advice is "don't do that."

But beyond that, he needs a lawyer. I'm not a lawyer, by any stretch, but it doesn't look like he actually broke the law.

F. Criminal sexual penetration in the fourth degree consists of all criminal sexual penetration:
(1) not defined in Subsections C through E of this section perpetrated on a child thirteen to sixteen years of age when the perpetrator is at least eighteen years of age and is at least four years older than the child and not the spouse of that child;
 
the last few cases from police stings like this locally have resulted in not guiltys. the last guy, a former high school football coach, made the exact same argument that Steingar mentioned. He was only going over to give her money etc etc.
 
steingar said:
I really don't quite understand how they can convict anyone who hasn't actually committed a crime. He could claim that he was showing up to personally try and change her ways.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Trust me, I have no love for statutory rapists, but I can't convict someone for a thought crime.
 
steingar said:
I really don't quite understand how they can convict anyone who hasn't actually committed a crime. He could claim that he was showing up to personally try and change her ways.
Click to expand...

Even if he didn't claim that, I'm wondering if there was any actual 15 year old involved. If not, then it seems like one of the elements of proving statutory rape would be missing. I'm just a layman speculating though.
 
Palmpilot said:
Even if he didn't claim that, I'm wondering if there was any actual 15 year old involved. If not, then it seems like one of the elements of proving statutory rape would be missing. I'm just a layman speculating though.
Click to expand...

Doubt the charge is rape...there are others like soliciting a minor, or criminal attempt, a bunch more I'm sure.
 
steingar said:
I really don't quite understand how they can convict anyone who hasn't actually committed a crime. He could claim that he was showing up to personally try and change her ways.
Click to expand...

They refer to these cases as traveller cases beacuse the defendant usually travels to a pre arranged meeting location. They are not charged with the crime of statutory sexual assault itself but rather Attempt to commit Statutory Sexual Assault because the law can deem their traveling to the location along with the online conversations as a substantial step in committing the crime. Some people show up to these meets with a bag full of condoms or sex toys. It gets pretty skeevy. Remember that show "To catch a Predator" Thats the samething.
 
In this case, he is being charged with something like "Solicitation of a minor using a communication device."
 
SkyHog said:
In this case, he is being charged with something like "Solicitation of a minor using a communication device."
Click to expand...

Sounds right...different states have different ways of saying the same crime.
 
SkyHog said:
In this case, he is being charged with something like "Solicitation of a minor using a communication device."
Click to expand...

Add an "attempted" and I buy it as he actually solicited a police officer and those aren't minors.

So from the postings here, it seems that it is a crime to use a computer as a 18yo to ask a 15yo for sex, but not to actually do the deed.

I love legalies
 
Here's my advice

Here's my list for your friend:

1. What you did was really uncool from a legal perspective, and you need to do everything possible to mitigate the situation so that you do not have to live with the "sex offender" label for the rest of your life.

2. What you did was also not cool from a ethical/societal/human perspective. If you were not so young, I would say that you deserved all of the legal crap that is coming your way, but at 18, you probably don't fully understand why this is so wrong, and you still have time to learn.

3. I hope we can get you out of the legal trouble and keep you out of prison so that I and your other friends can lovingly kick your ass nine ways 'till Sunday until you get your head on straight.
 
OK - here's the exact law he's being charged under:
NMSA 30-37-3.2:
Child solicitation by electronic communication device

A. Child solicitation by electronic communication device consists of a person knowingly and intentionally soliciting a child under sixteen years of age, by means of an electronic communication device, to engage in sexual intercourse, sexual contact or in a sexual or obscene performance, or to engage in any other sexual conduct when the perpetrator is at least four years older than the child.

B. Whoever commits child solicitation by electronic communication device is guilty of a:

(1) fourth degree felony if the child is at least thirteen but under sixteen years of age; or
(2) third degree felony if the child is under thirteen years of age.

C. Whoever commits child solicitation by electronic communication device and also appears for, attends or is present at a meeting that the person arranged pursuant to the solicitation is guilty of a:
(1) third degree felony if the child is at least thirteen but under sixteen years of age; or
(2) second degree felony if the child is under thirteen years of age.

D. In a prosecution for child solicitation by electronic communication device, it is not a defense that the intended victim of the defendant was a peace officer posing as a child under sixteen years of age.

E. For purposes of determining jurisdiction, child solicitation by electronic communication device is committed in this state if an electronic communication device transmission either originates or is received in this state.

F. As used in this section, "electronic communication device" means a computer, video recorder, digital camera, fax machine, telephone, cellular telephone, pager, audio equipment or any other device that can produce an electronically generated image, message or signal.
History: Laws 1998, ch. 64, § 1; 2005, ch. 295, § 1; 2007, ch. 68, § 3.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top