My son, 22, got a 17 yr old girl pregnant

[CdwJava]

I was actually thinking more along the lines of that making it a tad more likely that it was a scam.

This may sound odd...but if somehow my 16 year old daughter managed to get into a bar (fake ID or whatever) and ended up having sex with someone as a result, I would NOT even consider prosecuting the guy. Its my daughter that I would be angry with...and myself.

Ultimately, however, if she was actually underage it would not be your decision or even your daughter's. Once underage (criminal) sexual intercourse is revealed to the authorities, it is out of everyone's hands but the police and the prosecutor.

While it MAY be a scam, there has not yet been a demand for money to end the problem (i.e. claiming to have an abortion) or even to scam the OP's son into marriage. If that comes to pass, my opinion on this may well change, but, as it stands, this could very well be an instance of junior thinking with the wrong head and getting jammed up for it.

 

[Ladyback1]

I was actually thinking more along the lines of that making it a tad more likely that it was a scam.

This may sound odd...but if somehow my 16 year old daughter managed to get into a bar (fake ID or whatever) and ended up having sex with someone as a result, I would NOT even consider prosecuting the guy. Its my daughter that I would be angry with...and myself.

So....what you are saying is SEX is completely one-sided??
How about the bartender and/or door person that did not even look at her ID, just served her (allowed her in)?

There is plenty of blame to go around, and focusing solely on one person's actions/behaviors. But, ultimately? The adults involved (bartender, 22 y/o male, door person/bouncer) are the ones who face criminal charges, and should have known better.

 

[CdwJava]

It is doubtful that the police will be able to investigate who allowed the girl in and whether or not she presented any idea - fake or otherwise. There will be but one suspect in trouble here - the adult who impregnated a minor female.

 

[Alex1176]

It is doubtful that the police will be able to investigate who allowed the girl in and whether or not she presented any idea - fake or otherwise. There will be but one suspect in trouble here - the adult who impregnated a minor female.

So this is not true?

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/can-i-be-convicted-statutory-rape-if-my-partner-told-
Historical view: Mistake of age was no defense

Until 1964, the rule throughout the U.S. was that a statutory rape defendant’s mistaken belief that the underage sex partner was over the age of consent was no defense to the charge. The view was that a “state of mind” defense (such as a mistaken belief about a fact) is unavailable to a defendant charged with a strict liability crime such as statutory rape. But, California led the way to a change in that view.
Reasonable, good-faith mistake of age

The California Supreme Court ruled in a 1964 case that a statutory rape defendant’s reasonable, good-faith belief that the victim was over the age of consent and had consented to sex was a defense to the charge of statutory rape. (People v. Hernandez, 393 P.2d 673 (1964).)

 

[Proserpina]

So this is not true?

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/can-i-be-convicted-statutory-rape-if-my-partner-told-
Historical view: Mistake of age was no defense

Until 1964, the rule throughout the U.S. was that a statutory rape defendant’s mistaken belief that the underage sex partner was over the age of consent was no defense to the charge. The view was that a “state of mind” defense (such as a mistaken belief about a fact) is unavailable to a defendant charged with a strict liability crime such as statutory rape. But, California led the way to a change in that view.
Reasonable, good-faith mistake of age

The California Supreme Court ruled in a 1964 case that a statutory rape defendant’s reasonable, good-faith belief that the victim was over the age of consent and had consented to sex was a defense to the charge of statutory rape. (People v. Hernandez, 393 P.2d 673 (1964).)

Does this apply to lesser charges? Or is it all-encompassing?

 

[Alex1176]

Does this apply to lesser charges? Or is it all-encompassing?

I think that it's all encompassing.
As far as I know, after talking to some lawyer friends in California, if a person thought in good faith that a girl is young adult, he is off the hook. Off course this good faith needs to be established in the court and determined by the judge. So, if she told him that she is 18 but looks 14 and he met her when she left the school bus - he is guilty as the devil. But if he met her in the bar holding an alcoholic drink and she looks 21, he is off the hook.
My advice to the parent is to take the guy and to go to a first free consultation with a lawyer to get some info.
Anyway, I agree with all the other members who advice to get knowing the girl better first to avoid this kind of situations.

 

[cbg]

I think you'll find that it's VERY situation specific and is not an across the board get-out-of-jail-free card.

 

[LdiJ]

I think you'll find that it's VERY situation specific and is not an across the board get-out-of-jail-free card.

While I agree absolutely, in this case there is an actual picture of the girl, which OP's parent, at least, said that the girl looked 27.

My thoughts on this issue directly reflect the fact that when I was 21, I had a 15 year old cousin who came to visit me at college for a weekend. I spend the whole darned weekend chasing guys away from her because she actually looked (not dressing provocatively or anything) older than me...and was a very beautiful girl, she even walked into a liquor store and bought booze (against my wishes) and didn't get carded.

I completely ratted her out to her parents when they came to pick her up because I realized that she could get into all kinds of trouble...and this was back in the seventies when under aged drinking infractions were not taken nearly as seriously as they are today. While her parents believed me they still didn't take it as seriously as they should have, and she DID end up getting into some fairly serious problems.

 

[CdwJava]

As a note, I used to investigate these offenses as a primary job function. The reasonable mistake of age argument is exceedingly hard to make with a straight face because it often falls apart under cross examination or even in the initial investigation. Comments to friends, texts, bragging, side comments admitting to not asking, etc., all generally serve to hang the guy who claims he did not know her age. These claims almost universally fall apart. Defense attorneys promote them because it gives a client hope, and the client might then decide to bring them on. If the defense says, "You're hosed," you may not.

I never saw such a claim work. But, maybe the OP's son would be one of the few and truly dumb to have been duped into impregnating a girl in the first and only outing and able to show that she presented some form of false ID or claim to her age that he was unable to laugh off.

Ya know, once upon a time we had this time-honored tradition that prevented this sort of thing. We called it: "Dating."

 

[TigerD]

I never saw such a claim work.

I have. A trial by one of the leading criminal defense attorneys in Missouri. Truth or not, that is an I-have-nothing-else defense that requires admission to the facts of the incident to pull off. Very risky. It is a loser 99 times out of 100.

DC

 

[LdiJ]

As a note, I used to investigate these offenses as a primary job function. The reasonable mistake of age argument is exceedingly hard to make with a straight face because it often falls apart under cross examination or even in the initial investigation. Comments to friends, texts, bragging, side comments admitting to not asking, etc., all generally serve to hang the guy who claims he did not know her age. These claims almost universally fall apart. Defense attorneys promote them because it gives a client hope, and the client might then decide to bring them on. If the defense says, "You're hosed," you may not.

I never saw such a claim work. But, maybe the OP's son would be one of the few and truly dumb to have been duped into impregnating a girl in the first and only outing and able to show that she presented some form of false ID or claim to her age that he was unable to laugh off.

Ya know, once upon a time we had this time-honored tradition that prevented this sort of thing. We called it: "Dating."

I am 57 years old. I missed the sixties, by a decade. Even in my generation the whole "dating" concept pretty much went out the window when it came to sexual activity when booze or drugs were concerned. The difference NOW, that still boggles my mind, is that people actually have children, VOLUNTARILY, without benefit of marriage.

Heck, people today are more careful than people of my age when we were teens and young adults because we didn't have to worry about AIDS or HIV. It didn't exist in the seventies.

 

[CdwJava]

I have. A trial by one of the leading criminal defense attorneys in Missouri. Truth or not, that is an I-have-nothing-else defense that requires admission to the facts of the incident to pull off. Very risky. It is a loser 99 times out of 100.

DC

I've heard it referred to as the "I'm as dumb as a stump" defense. But, I guess if you're trying to avoid a felony, you're willing to admit to being stupid and a man whore.

 

[CdwJava]

I am 57 years old. I missed the sixties, by a decade. Even in my generation the whole "dating" concept pretty much went out the window when it came to sexual activity when booze or drugs were concerned. The difference NOW, that still boggles my mind, is that people actually have children, VOLUNTARILY, without benefit of marriage.

Heck, people today are more careful than people of my age when we were teens and young adults because we didn't have to worry about AIDS or HIV. It didn't exist in the seventies.

Oh, I'm from the same generation. We may not have recognized HIV/AIDS, but we did have all the other fun STDs! And, even then, "hookups" weren't the norm. You still would generally date. Today, people go out with the intent to get into a one night stand and then get surprised and even shocked when they are charged with rape, boffing a minor, get recorded en flagrante, get rolled/scammed/blackmailed, or otherwise get taken for a ride. It is easy to avoid most of those problems if someone can keep their pants on for a while and use their brain instead of their tiny head.

 

[justalayman]

I am 57 years old. I missed the sixties, by a decade. Even in my generation the whole "dating" concept pretty much went out the window when it came to sexual activity when booze or drugs were concerned. The difference NOW, that still boggles my mind, is that people actually have children, VOLUNTARILY, without benefit of marriage.

Heck, people today are more careful than people of my age when we were teens and young adults because we didn't have to worry about AIDS or HIV. It didn't exist in the seventies.

what do you mean you missed the 60's? Cryogenically induced stasis?

 

[CdwJava]

what do you mean you missed the 60's? Cryogenically induced stasis?

Probably the same as I did - missed being a teen or at least potentially "active" during the 60s. I was in grade school - not much opportunity but watch hippies and the peace & love crowd.