Abe_user: “’ve been reading about the whole R. Kelly indictment:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020605/ap_en_mu/r__kelly_accusations_14

And it occurs to me that since statutory rape crimes are ‘strict liability’ (i.e. the older person’s knowledge/lack thereof does not affect the criminal charge), how can you hold a man responsible for doing 14-17 y.o girls who look, act and dress like 18-19 y.o. s

These laws were written at a time when girls didn’t pretend to be older women, so perhaps its time for a change. Yes, it is difficult to prove that a guy ‘knew’ she was 17 not 18, but really…but if its ok for companies to sell thongs to 12 y.o., how’s a dude to know if he is commiting a crime??”

Sengkelat: ”Blaming the victim” always sounds like a bad thing to do. But if a 17 year old girl chases after and ends up sleeping with an older man, is she a victim?
My sister, when she was 16, dated a 22 year old guy. She was stoked that she got this guy. Both parties were pretty happy with the arrangement, and she wasn’t traumatized or permanently scarred. I certainly wouldn’t say she “entrapped” him, since he had the power to decline anything she offered, but at the same time I would say she’s 50% responsible for any statutory rape that occurred. Or possibly more, if she lied about her age. Am I now “blaming the victim”?
As for the laws, it’d be nice if there was a better way to define if a person is capable of giving consent other than their age. I know 25 year olds that don’t have the maturity to understand the consequences of their actions, and I have known minors who had better judgment than many adults.”