17 year old and 15 year old: Stachatory Rape?

[JBizz89]

What is the name of your state? CA

A 17 year old boy (18 in August) had sexual relations with a 15 year old girl. (Were having relations since boy was 16 and girl was 14). They are about pretty much exactly 2 1/2 years apart. They have COMPLETELY stopped communication at this point but the father says he will press charges on the boy the second he turns 18. If they boy and girl have completely NO CONTACT whatsoever for this period and until the girl is 18 can the boy still go to jail once he is 18 even though the act was committed before he was 18?What is the name of your state?

 

[outonbail]

Are you saying that the father of the girl is aware his daughter had a sexual relationship, but he hasn't reported this to the police, because he wants the boy to turn eighteen first and then he plans to file a report, by claiming it was an adult who had this relationship??

Sounds kind of screwy (no pun intended)

Since your in California, Carl would be a good authority to answer your questions. I'm sure he'll see your post within a day or so and chime in.

He may be out arresting bad guys at the moment,,,,

 

[Zigner]

Well, it wouldn't be statutory rape - but I'm sure there are other charges which can (and should) be brought against the boy starting now...

 

[Zigner]

Well, it wouldn't be statutory rape - but I'm sure there are other charges which can (and should) be brought against the boy starting now...

However, he is guilty of a misdemeanor and may be fined civilly up to $5,000.....

 

[CdwJava]

A 17 year old boy (18 in August) had sexual relations with a 15 year old girl. (Were having relations since boy was 16 and girl was 14). ... If they boy and girl have completely NO CONTACT whatsoever for this period and until the girl is 18 can the boy still go to jail once he is 18 even though the act was committed before he was 18?What is the name of your state?

Yes, he has committed the crime of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor (aka Statutory Rape).

CA makes it a crime for a PERSON (not just an adult) to have sexual relations with a party under 18. And the way the law is written, it is generally the male that will get in trouble if both are under 18.

261.5. (a) Unlawful sexual intercourse is an act of sexual
intercourse accomplished with a person who is not the spouse of the
perpetrator, if the person is a minor. For the purposes of this
section, a "minor" is a person under the age of 18 years and an
"adult" is a person who is at least 18 years of age.
(b) Any person who engages in an act of unlawful sexual
intercourse with a minor who is not more than three years older or
three years younger than the perpetrator, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

It is unlikely the case will be pursued in some counties, but in others they have vertical prosecution units that aggressively pursue these kinds of cases.

- Carl

 

[Zigner]

Then I will add a footnote - he is not guilty of a felony...that's what I was getting at but I was very vague. Also, the phrase "statutory rape" can be interpreted in different ways. I was thinking along the lines of "felony statutory rape"

Edit:

Carl - would the fact that the girl is under 16 also come in to play here in California?

 

[CdwJava]

Carl - would the fact that the girl is under 16 also come in to play here in California?

No. Because of his age, it wouldn't be an issue. If she were under 14, or he were more than three years older, or if he were 21, then it could be an issue.

- Carl

 

[johnysmith1128]

If the law in california prohibits anyone under 18 not married to have sex, then both parties would be guilty of a misdeameanor. I would advise the parents of the male to file a harassment/threat against the girls father about turning him in when he is 18. It will not stick but when he turns 18 and if the father goes through with this, they will know he is lying. That must be the most broken law in california, b/c kids are having sex at 13 and 14 these days, pretty sick, but it is true folks.

 

[CdwJava]

If the law in california prohibits anyone under 18 not married to have sex, then both parties would be guilty of a misdeameanor.

Oddly - maybe even sadly - it has been the common interpretation that when both parties are underage that it is the MALE that is committing the act of intercourse since HE is the one that has to enter the woman. It may be a throwback to a Victorian ideal where women were weaker and less capable of standing up for themselves, but with few exceptions that is how the prosecutions tend to pan out.

I would advise the parents of the male to file a harassment/threat against the girls father about turning him in when he is 18.

The girl's father is probably saying that because he believes it is NOT a crime to have sex if both are under 18.

If the boy's parents call the police to report this threat (which is not unlawful), then they will be putting their son on the chopping block for 261.5.

It will not stick but when he turns 18 and if the father goes through with this, they will know he is lying.

Huh?!?

Why is that?

Proof will be an issue no matter when it is reported, or by whom.

That must be the most broken law in california, b/c kids are having sex at 13 and 14 these days, pretty sick, but it is true folks.

Nah, smoking or drinking probably are the most broken laws.

All because people are breaking the law does not mean it should not be pursued or discouraged. People shoplift to the tune of billions of dollars each year - I doubt we will legalize theft anytime soon.

- Carl

 

[outonbail]

Personally, I have to believe that if the father hasn't brought the police in this already, I don't think he'll be doing so in five months.

I'm sure he was angry when he discovered that his darling daughter isn't as innocent as he may have believed. He will have calmed down quite a bit in five months and my bet, is that he'll have some other boy(s) to chastise for the early deflowering of his little angel by then anyway.
He can blame it all on this boy now, but chances are, that it won't take five months before his little princess will be filling her need for attention and flaunting her popularity in front of her girlfriends by manipulating a whole new boyfriend with her promiscuous powers. Once people have experienced a sexual relationship, they'll be including it in every new relationship from that point on. Were human, it feels too good to stop, it's more addicting than crack. (no pun intended)

So dad better get used to the fact that his daughter will be meeting a constant stream of boyfriends who will be trying to get her pants off, from here on. So he can waste his time verbally castrating each one for violating his little floozy,,,, but he'd be allot better off getting her on birth control before she becomes another teen age baby making machine.

I wouldn't take any action and I wouldn't worry about dad's threats to do so in the future, the guys just blowing off steam. His daughter will give him plenty more to deal with over the next five months and this boy will become the least of his worries.

However, I think I'd be having a little talk with this boy about birth control as well.

 

[CdwJava]

Personally, if it were my daughter, the little princess would be on a tight leash for a very, very long time ... there would not even BE an opportunity for this sort of hanky panky for a very long time!

- Carl

 

[outonbail]

Personally, if it were my daughter, the little princess would be on a tight leash for a very, very long time ... there would not even BE an opportunity for this sort of hanky panky for a very long time!

- Carl

and if it were your son?

 

[CdwJava]

and if it were your son?

Flogged, grounded for life, given the "I am horribly disappointed" speech, and forced to listen to his mother rant for 12 hours.

- Carl

 

[The Occultist]

Flogged, grounded for life, given the "I am horribly disappointed" speech, and forced to listen to his mother rant for 12 hours.

- Carl

I was gonna say give a wink and a high-five...

 

[CdwJava]

I am 100% positive that they have to be 4 years apart in age for it to be illegal...

What state do YOU live in? We had been talking about California - in CA it is illegal if they are underage - period. If there is a three year age difference, and one is an adult, then it can be a felony - otherwise it is a misdemeanor.

Check PC 261.5:

261.5. (a) Unlawful sexual intercourse is an act of sexual
intercourse accomplished with a person who is not the spouse of the
perpetrator, if the person is a minor. For the purposes of this
section, a "minor" is a person under the age of 18 years and an
"adult" is a person who is at least 18 years of age.
(b) Any person who engages in an act of unlawful sexual
intercourse with a minor who is not more than three years older or
three years younger than the perpetrator, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(c) Any person who engages in an act of unlawful sexual
intercourse with a minor who is more than three years younger than
the perpetrator is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony, and
shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one
year, or by imprisonment in the state prison.
(d) Any person 21 years of age or older who engages in an act of
unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is under 16 years of age
is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony, and shall be punished
by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by
imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years.​

he cannot get in any trouble if it was consensual for both of them...

That is patently NOT true under CA law. It MIGHT be true that the DA will not charge the crime, but it is certainly NOT true that they "cannot" get in trouble.

you can rub that in the fathers face....what does he want his son to turn out gay or something???!

Lovely ... just lovely.

If you aren't going to try to post something remotely consistent with state law, why did you even try to add something to a thread more than 6 months old?

- Carl