Letourneau

It would obviously be more wrong. More wrong. That does just sound weird, but it's the truth. Maybe it should be, maybe it shouldn't. She was punished for her actions, perhaps not as long as a man would have been, but she was punished. As for them getting back together now, I'm a little surprised. I really would have thought he would have moved on by now. Must be fairly agile for a 42 y/o.
 
PuterTutor said:
It would obviously be more wrong. More wrong. That does just sound weird, but it's the truth. Maybe it should be, maybe it shouldn't. She was punished for her actions, perhaps not as long as a man would have been, but she was punished. As for them getting back together now, I'm a little surprised. I really would have thought he would have moved on by now. Must be fairly agile for a 42 y/o.
Click to expand...

That is where you fail in your analysis. A crime has been commited, and the punishment is skewed in favor of the criminal. What if she had murdered the young man? Would you be for a lighter sentence then? How about if she rammed a broom up his rectum? I guess you'd say that would be different, but this is okay...
 
I don't know, I think in every case there has to be an analysis of each case. Surely murder doesn't always deserve the same punishment. If you catch your wife cheating on you and kill the other guy, does that deserve the same punishment as if he were to kill you for walking in on them? There has to be an individual assessment of these types of crimes and punishment delivered based on that assessment. Any time the other party is willing and is deemed able to make that type of decision that needs to be taken into consideration.

I'm certainly not saying that this kid was able to make that type of decision when he was 12. Perhaps he was by the time he was 14, maybe 16.
 
PT, you are arguing the wrong way.

Fact. She did the same crime, with the same person, more than 2 times. That makes her a serial/repeat offender. She was ordered, by the courts, to have no contact with the victim, and she ignored those court orders. That makes her crime worse. For that reason alone, she should've served the maximum. How can there be extenuating circumstances in this?
 
OK, I guess my point in all this is that although the boy was the victim in this, he also was a big part of the relationship. This was seen as rape in the eyes of the law, but was certainly not rape in the eyes of the two involved.

If the roles were reversed, that is that the girl was now 21 and wanted to marry the 42 y/o that had been convicted of raping her, I guess I wouldn't feel too upset about it. She can make that choice on her own now. She must not have been too traumatized by this guy if that was the case.
 
PuterTutor said:
OK, I guess my point in all this is that although the boy was the victim in this, he also was a big part of the relationship. This was seen as rape in the eyes of the law, but was certainly not rape in the eyes of the two involved.
Click to expand...

So if I had sex with a willing 12 year old girl, who actively pursued me, it would be okay? Following your logic, it would. After all...what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander...
 
On the one hand... I agree with PT, but on the other.... who knows what kind of emotional shit the "victim" went through to now believe that this woman is the "one". I just don't know if his 'love' for her is geniune love, or if he's just fucked in the head from having a relationship with this woman. Would he still be in love with her if this relationship had never developed?
 
Would it be ok? NO. You would probably go to prison for it. When you got out if she wanted to marry you and she was legal age to do so? Sure, go for it.
 
BeardofPants said:
On the one hand... I agree with PT, but on the other.... who knows what kind of emotional shit the "victim" went through to now believe that this woman is the "one". I just don't know if his 'love' for her is geniune love, or if he's just fucked in the head from having a relationship with this woman. Would he still be in love with her if this relationship had never developed?
Click to expand...

At last...someone who sees beyond the hype. :winkkiss: This woman was his teacher for goodness sake. She had an obligation to protect him from what she did to him. She was in a position of authority over him, and abused that position.


PT said:
Would it be ok? NO. You would probably go to prison for it. When you got out if she wanted to marry you and she was legal age to do so? Sure, go for it.
Click to expand...

And I would deserve to go to prison for it...but for how long? 7 1/2 years? More? Suppose I did it twice, as she did, doesn't that make it worse? Let's cut to the chase. She is/was guilty of statutory rape, a class 'B' felony. She is/was a repeat offender, and showed no remorse for what she did. In fact, she celebrated it. How can you say that, if she was a man, it would be more wrong?

Same catagory...same crime...same sentence.
 
Ok, perhaps it's not "more" wrong. Perhaps they are both wrong, but I don't feel that 7 1/2 years is too little for what she did. This guy has said he was a part of it. Yes, she should have known better and said no, either to him or to herself but she didn't. She then served the time for her offence. I'm trying really hard to envision the roles reversed and if I would be more upset and I just can't say that I would be.
 
PuterTutor said:
Ok, perhaps it's not "more" wrong. Perhaps they are both wrong, but I don't feel that 7 1/2 years is too little for what she did. This guy has said he was a part of it. Yes, she should have known better and said no, either to him or to herself but she didn't. She then served the time for her offence. I'm trying really hard to envision the roles reversed and if I would be more upset and I just can't say that I would be.
Click to expand...

Read that first link I put up about the male offender...the one who got 53 years...or the second one...the man who got 10 years...or how about this one...Just to add to this a bit, Kobe Bryant was facing 5 to 25 years, and the woman who accused him of rape was over 18. If one were to follow the Federal sentencing guidelines, her first offense would've given her a '17' (15 for the basic offense plus 2 for being an authority figure)...
 
Gato_Solo said:
At last...someone who sees beyond the hype. :winkkiss: This woman was his teacher for goodness sake. She had an obligation to protect him from what she did to him. She was in a position of authority over him, and abused that position.
Click to expand...

Holy cripes on a stick... I'm agreeing with gato? :lloyd:

'course I'm just doing it to get in your pants. :devious:

Nope, nope, nope, what this woman did was wrong. Just cos she's a she, and not a he, doesn't make it any more or less palatable. This guy has been emotionally AND sexually fucked with. I don't believe he's in love with her any more than I believe in the tooth fairy. :shrug:
 
Inkara1 said:
Then again, whcih is better: a dollar under your pillow, or a slice of poontang pie?
Click to expand...

Once again, Inkara1 ducks, and the ball goes sailing over his head...

It's not about the dollar under the pillow, or the slice of poontang pie. It's over the consequences of eating the pie before it's ready...

:lloyd:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top