Age of consent laws in PA?

[cbg]

deleting message

 

[acmb05]

Then I suggest that perhaps YOU need to "read right".

So you are saying NO ONE said that?

 

[davew128]

Why on Earth would you argue so hard in favor of pedophilia?

A 17-18 year old having sex with a 16 year old is not a pedophile. It's a senior in high school with a sophomore or junior......

 

[acmb05]

Great you all think what you want to think. I posted what the law said and also posted the law itself.

From what the OP posted and the question asked he would not be in any trouble. YET.

 

[cbg]

deleting message

 

[Aunt♥Bunny]

You see, her father isn't the sharpest tool in the toolbox, However I did need to know if this could be considered Corruption of a Minor.

My friend Sydney always said "Nobody can be so amusingly arrogant as a young man who has just discovered an old idea and thinks it is his own.”

Oh dear now I have to apologize to my old friend. I told him he was wrong, well obviously I'd never met bonez here

 

[Bonez]

Well... this is been interesting... I didn't expect 4 pages to come of this.

And as i read earlier on, I realize I'm not going to find someone who says that its legal to be "schtupping" my girl.

And to all who say I have stopped at 18, They were right.

About the corruption of minors. The law is based off of the age of consent for that state, which in Pennsylvania is 16.

However, I am still trying to find out one thing.

Can me and my girl friend be free to-do what we please without the law interfering?

(Yes, I do realize that this subject is very indirect about how the system works, It dosen't exactly tell you what you can do, however it tells you what you can be charged with.)

 

[proud_parent]

About the corruption of minors. The law is based off of the age of consent for that state, which in Pennsylvania is 16.

You didn't read the actual law that was cited, did you?

However, I am still trying to find out one thing.

Can me and my girl friend be free to-do what we please without the law interfering?

If 'what you please' includes sexual intercourse or other activity that the minor child's parents do not approve, don't count on it.

 

[cbg]

No. You can't. Because if the parents of a minor child do not approve, they can take steps to prevent it EVEN IF THE ACTION IS LEGAL UNDER STATE LAW. Until she is 18 (not 16, not 17, but 18) her parents are God. If they say no, then it is no. And the law will back them up. There are NO circumstances when the law is going to force the parents of a minor child to allow her to see or have any kind of contact with, someone they do not want her to see or have contact with.

 

[proud_parent]

No. You can't. Because if the parents of a minor child do not approve, they can take steps to prevent it EVEN IF THE ACTION IS LEGAL UNDER STATE LAW. Until she is 18 (not 16, not 17, but 18) her parents are God. If they say no, then it is no. And the law will back them up. There are NO circumstances when the law is going to force the parents of a minor child to allow her to see or have any kind of contact with, someone they do not want her to see or have contact with.

Yep. Despite OP's contention that Dad "isn't the sharpest tool in the toolbox", both OP and the girlfriend would be foolish to ignore Dad's legal authority until she is 18.

OP might also consider what other types of conduct PA courts may consider to be corrupting. See United States v. Galo, 239 F.3d 572, 582 (3d Cir. 2001):

18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann.. §6301 (emphasis added). It is readily apparent that although the statute can include conduct relating to the sexual exploitation of children, it pertains with equal force to conduct such as gambling, underage drinking or drug use. The statute is aimed at conduct of any nature that tends to corrupt children. It is broad enough to include allowing a minor to view an “R” rated video.
In deciding what conduct can be said to corrupt the morals of a minor, the common sense of the community, as well as the sense of decency, propriety and the morality which most people entertain is sufficient to apply the statute to each particular case, and to individuate what particular conduct is rendered criminal by it.

 

[Bonez]

You didn't read the actual law that was cited, did you?

Actually I did

§ 6301. Corruption of minors.
(a) Offense defined.--
(1) Whoever, being of the age of 18 years and upwards,
by any act corrupts or tends to corrupt the morals of any
minor less than 18 years of age, or who aids, abets, entices
or encourages any such minor in the commission of any crime,
or who knowingly assists or encourages such minor in
violating his or her parole or any order of court, commits a
misdemeanor of the first degree.

I understand that its corruption if I was encouraging her to break the law however, There is no crime to be committed, Statutory rape has been repealed in Pennsylvania, and Statutory sexual assault is classified as someone (age 18+ also being older than the victim by 4 years) "doing it" with someone under the age of 16.

However since we would not be committing a crime.... and therefore I don't believe that I'd be corrupting her.

 

[proud_parent]

Actually I did

§ 6301. Corruption of minors.
(a) Offense defined.--
(1) Whoever, being of the age of 18 years and upwards,
by any act corrupts or tends to corrupt the morals of any
minor less than 18 years of age, or who aids, abets, entices
or encourages any such minor in the commission of any crime,
or who knowingly assists or encourages such minor in
violating his or her parole or any order of court, commits a
misdemeanor of the first degree.

I understand that its corruption if I was encouraging her to break the law however, There is no crime to be committed, Statutory rape has been repealed in Pennsylvania, and Statutory sexual assault is classified as someone (age 18+ also being older than the victim by 4 years) "doing it" with someone under the age of 16.

However since we would not be committing a crime.... and therefore I don't believe that I'd be corrupting her.

You aren't reading the statute correctly. Look again, and this time note the use of the word "or" separating each of the main clauses.

Whoever, being of the age of 18 years and upwards, by any act corrupts or tends to corrupt the morals of any minor less than 18 years of age,


or who aids, abets, entices or encourages any such minor in the commission of any crime,


or who knowingly assists or encourages such minor in violating his or her parole or any order of court,


commits a misdemeanor of the first degree.

As noted by the court in U.S. v. Galo, that first part is broadly worded. A talented prosecutor could make a case that any number of acts in which you engage with your girlfriend tend to corrupt her morals, particularly if her parents oppose such conduct.

 

[Bonez]

I see, so basically what is said here is that yet again the law speaks over a broad range to the point that almost any interaction with a minor could be considered corruption of a minor?

 

[acmb05]

I see, so basically what is said here is that yet again the law speaks over a broad range to the point that almost any interaction with a minor could be considered corruption of a minor?

If you are 18 or older yes. The way the statute is written is that the minute you turned 18 you could be charged with corruption if you do any of the things you are thinking of doing with her.

 

[Bonez]

I see, I'm not sure but are romeo and Juliet laws active in Pennsylvania?

Also I did a little reading, and most cases in pa involving corruption of a minor were for the most part people who were ages 20-60 and people 10-15 years old in rape cases, I could not find one case of an 18 year old and a 16 year old.

So what I wonder is, are corruption of a minor laws in place to simply protect minors against sick older individuals or are they supposed to give parents a way to put their daughter's boyfriend away?