Cop gets 20-day sentence for sex with girl, 15

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Iginla

If you actually believe that then you're a sick person who needs help. A 15 year old is a child, Barely out of junior high.

Unless they live in Bountiful.........

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by Iginla

If you actually believe that then you're a sick person who needs help. A 15 year old is a child, Barely out of junior high.

Dude, just chill. No need to start insulting people.

[Traditional_Ale]

I got drunk and screwed a 15 year old once. I think I was about 15...

[kevman]

Originally Posted by Iginla

Under the law nobody under 16 can consent to sex.

Just curious... would you have been cool with this 5 years ago then?

The Tackling Violent Crime Act took effect on 1 May 2008, raising the age of consent to 16 from 14.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by kevman

Just curious... would have have been cool with this 5 years ago then?

The Tackling Violent Crime Act took effect on 1 May 2008, raising the age of consent to 16 from 14.

5 years ago she was only 10 so that's much worse.

[nfotiu]

He's a cop, and should be held to a bit of a higher standard, and he lost his job, so seems appropriate. At the same time he didn't use his influence as a cop to sleep with her so it shouldn't factor in to his criminal case. All things considered, 20 days in jail and 10 years on the sex offender list seems appropriate to me. I see that as substantially more than a slap on the wrist.

[AR_Six]

It seems to me that the bulk of the penalty in cases like these is imposed in the form of a serious social stigma.

[Senator Clay Davis]

^ That's truly the incalculable part. Any time a potential future employer, or anyone for that matter, pokes his name into Google this is going to come up.

[MaDMaN_26]

So how does the sex offenders list in Canada work... do you have to inform your neighbors when you move in? How far do you have to be away from kids? If he doesn't does his time on the list get extended?

So much of the TV we see is American... I'm honestly not too sure what being on the list in Canada actually means to his day to day life over the next 10 years...

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

^ That's truly the incalculable part. Any time a potential future employer, or anyone for that matter, pokes his name into Google this is going to come up.

I dont think they have to Google it, isnt he required to inform them?

This guy is going to live the rest of his life as a security guard with crippling child support payments.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

He's a cop, and should be held to a bit of a higher standard, and he lost his job, so seems appropriate. At the same time he didn't use his influence as a cop to sleep with her so it shouldn't factor in to his criminal case. All things considered, 20 days in jail and 10 years on the sex offender list seems appropriate to me. I see that as substantially more than a slap on the wrist.

huh?

In one sentence you say he should be held to a higher standard because of his employment, then in another you say his employment shouldn't matter.

Cops should be held in a higher standard period.

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by iginla

under the law nobody under 16 can consent to sex with a person over 18.

fyp

[SeeGeeWhy]

This "age of consent" argument is a joke. If I had to guess why the age of consent is what it is, it probably has more to do with preventing one half of a young couple (say a 16/17 year old dating a 15/16 year old) from being prosecuted as a sex offender if they ended up having sex while the younger person was still not of the age of consent. Yet when something like this newsbite happens, there will be people in the crowd that will hold up the stated law as if it is that black and white, and argue that it is a great idea for a 40+ year old man to sleep with a 16 year old girl "because it is legal". Give me a break. For instance, even though OilKiller is on my ignore list I would be anyone $5 that his post in this thread is along those lines.

Defending that law as if it were the only law to ever be infallable is basically just a thinly veiled announcement that you are a pedophile or are the kind of person who has the same sort of desires but is able to control them. What mature man would defend the right of a child to have sex? I'll answer you - the man that wants to have sex with that child, or watch them have sex with each other. Its friggen twisted. There is no reason that children should be in a rush to have sex the way our society works.

As an aside, why do we never see older women defending this position?

All people, especially children, can be manipulated. Can anyone in this case say that the girl was of sound and mature mind when they had sex? Was the consent valid (regardless of age)? This cop probably wasn't the only person she did this with either (not that that is necessarily true or overly relevant, I am just saying). She is just at fault here as anyone else and to me that does not show that she understands the potential consquences of her actions and shouldn't be judged to be capable of giving proper consent. What she did was reckless and immature.

I agree with the posters who are saying his consequences go well beyond what the judge passed down. His life as he knew it is destroyed. Consentual sex regardless of the age of the participants can have extremely powerful consequences in many areas of one's life. Neither one of these people considered that before going through with their actions and will have to deal with it accordingly. It is probably fair, though, that the child escapes the same sort of public branding that the police officer will in order to give her a chance to heal and mature properly before being crushed by the weight of public judgement. Is that guarnateed to happen? No... and it probably won't given her other circumstances, which is truly sad, but at least she has a chance. This guy should have known much better and therefore has a harder road back to redemption.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by SeeGeeWhy

This "age of consent" argument is a joke. If I had to guess why the age of consent is what it is, it probably has more to do with preventing one half of a young couple (say a 16/17 year old dating a 15/16 year old) from being prosecuted as a sex offender if they ended up having sex while the younger person was still not of the age of consent. Yet when something like this newsbite happens, there will be people in the crowd that will hold up the stated law as if it is that black and white, and argue that it is a great idea for a 40+ year old man to sleep with a 16 year old girl "because it is legal". Give me a break. For instance, even though OilKiller is on my ignore list I would be anyone $5 that his post in this thread is along those lines.

.

Doesn't work that way I don't think. AFAIK minors have their own rules for age of consent. The age of consent being 16 only applies when the other partner is over 18.

I think if they're both under 18 then there are different rules but I'm not 100% sure what they are.

[octothorp]

Definitely a complex case. To me, a few of the important details are that the police officer and his friend provided alcohol to everyone involved, which probably further hindered the judgement of both adults and minors in this instance; and that he never even bothered to inquire as to the youth's age. Like SebC says, the line is an arbitrary one, but IMO that doesn't mean it's not an important line. He, more than most people, should understand the importance of these arbitrary lines, and I would assume that as a police officer, he's been taught not to assume anything about the people he encounters through his work.

I do think it's a significant factor if he never used his position of authority, but it seems from the article that the girl was aware of his position regardless, and it may have played a role, even if the cop didn't actively push it. In my opinion, the moment she asks 'are you a cop?' is authority position is a factor.

I'm not sure how I feel about the fact that there's a distinction between 'predatory' and 'opportunistic' behaviour. I suppose that sort of distinction allows for much harsher penalties to the worst people, those who actively try to make such an encounter happen, but it just doesn't feel right that 'the opportunity just presented itself' should be a mitigating factor.

[Hemi-Cuda]

what gets me is imagine how different the tone of this thread would be had it been a female cop having sex with a 15 year old boy

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Thor

One of my cousins was 15 when she hooked up with her teacher, they are married and have been together for 10yrs with 2 kids.

I think judges should have the leeway to judge harshly or lightly depending on situations, and I am thankful I am not the one making those calls.

That is far too big a can of worms. Wold never work in the system and could be taken advantage of.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by SebC

The line he crossed is an arbitrary one. Just saying.

I'll remember that when I'm caught going 10 KM over the speed limit.

Numbers are put there for a reason.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

what gets me is imagine how different the tone of this thread would be had it been a female cop having sex with a 15 year old boy

Wieser Wonder have you hacked Hemi-Cuda's account?

[Luder]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

what gets me is imagine how different the tone of this thread would be had it been a female cop having sex with a 15 year old boy

Luckiest kid ever!!!!