OnlyNDaUsa said:

DesireeNevermind said:

ya know?

Did he force this girl? Sounds like she willingly laid with him then got mad when she found out he wasn't a year younger than her. I wouldn't necessarily classify that as rape unless he flat out seduced her knowing full well she was under age. In that scenario it is statutory rape not a sexual assault. Sexual assault implies a situation where one person is forced or a person who is unaware or incapable of consenting to a sex act. Meh...what do I know. There is such a difference between the law and what's right and sensible.

Force is not needed for rape.

So says the law.................I don't agree with this but it is what it is.

DesireeNevermind said:

I agree that he should be deported but 20 years in prison? Hell no. I hate rapists but given this scenario I cannot include him in the same category as say those green bay packers players accused of sexual assault or even that mary kay letourneau (sp), the teacher that seduced her student had his kid and married him.

what does the one case have to do with the other?

If this Guerdwich fellow had really been 15, he would not be in jail and neither would she as they would have both been minors having consentual sex. Since he is 22 and she didn't like that he was 22, or somebody else perhaps didn't like it, he gets the rape charge added. Frankly I think it's a bit of a set up. There is probably no harsh punishment for impersonating a high schooler and leading your team to the play offs. What's happened here is sheer embarassment so they had to find something more dirty and sticky and indeed criminal. They get this teen girl who says she had sex with him and sex with a minor even though said minor consents is illegal. My argument is that what happened between this dude and his 16 year old booty call should have a different defintion other than rape. If we're going to call sex between two consenting persons, one of whom tells a lie about who they/where they came from/how old they are, then hell everybody has been raped at least once in their lives.

I am at a loss as to how anyone can defend him. He took the risk when he lied and the had sex with a child. He gets what he gets I hope it is the max sentence.

And before we say she couldn't consent to sex simply because she was 16...what if she had committed murder? Her age would probably be moot. She could be charged as an adult. Why is it nonconsentual when it involves sex but consentual when it involves every other type of illegal action like drugs, murder, speeding, stealing or jay walking? I don't want to eliminate the law of statutory rape mind you but I just think that for this particular situation...it's bullshit. They just want to humuliate and punish this dude for making asses out of them.

she did not commit a crime so that comparison is invalid.

p.s.

If I had a 15 year old daughter stupid and whorish enough to want to sex up a 40 year old man I'd probably have her committed to a mental institution or at least beat her ass.

would you want him charged if they had sex?

Graycap23 said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Force is not needed for rape.

So says the law.................I don't agree with this but it is what it is.

So if someone is passed out then it is okay to have sex with them as there is no force involved?

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DesireeNevermind said:

I agree that he should be deported but 20 years in prison? Hell no. I hate rapists but given this scenario I cannot include him in the same category as say those green bay packers players accused of sexual assault or even that mary kay letourneau (sp), the teacher that seduced her student had his kid and married him.

what does the one case have to do with the other?

Aren't you the one saying rape is rape no matter consent? I would think it's quite obvious.

If this Guerdwich fellow had really been 15, he would not be in jail and neither would she as they would have both been minors having consentual sex. Since he is 22 and she didn't like that he was 22, or somebody else perhaps didn't like it, he gets the rape charge added. Frankly I think it's a bit of a set up. There is probably no harsh punishment for impersonating a high schooler and leading your team to the play offs. What's happened here is sheer embarassment so they had to find something more dirty and sticky and indeed criminal. They get this teen girl who says she had sex with him and sex with a minor even though said minor consents is illegal. My argument is that what happened between this dude and his 16 year old booty call should have a different defintion other than rape. If we're going to call sex between two consenting persons, one of whom tells a lie about who they/where they came from/how old they are, then hell everybody has been raped at least once in their lives.

I am at a loss as to how anyone can defend him. He took the risk when he lied and the had sex with a child. He gets what he gets I hope it is the max sentence.

In that sense then yes, he took the risk and deserves what he gets. My argument is that the rape charge is punishment for him lying to the school officials about his age and living status and citizenship...not for him lying about his age to his so called girlfriend. It's not about defending him but pointing out how the justice system can be fucked up. Think about it...if it were not for this rape allegation...what punishment could be given to him that would appease the school?

And before we say she couldn't consent to sex simply because she was 16...what if she had committed murder? Her age would probably be moot. She could be charged as an adult. Why is it nonconsentual when it involves sex but consentual when it involves every other type of illegal action like drugs, murder, speeding, stealing or jay walking? I don't want to eliminate the law of statutory rape mind you but I just think that for this particular situation...it's bullshit. They just want to humuliate and punish this dude for making asses out of them.

she did not commit a crime so that comparison is invalid.

Wasn't she under the impression that she was having sex with a 15 year old? If the age of consent in Texas is 17 and she is just shy of 17 and having sex with an alleged 15 year old then what type of person does that make her? She didn't commit a crime only because this guy turned out NOT to be 15.

Again...she told the officials she had sex with this guy at a home when she thought he was 15. According to the article posted...she didn't say he raped her. She seems to be coming forward only because she found out he wasn't who he claimed to be. I don't think he should do 20 years in prison for that. He should have some punishment yes....maybe a few months.

p.s.

If I had a 15 year old daughter stupid and whorish enough to want to sex up a 40 year old man I'd probably have her committed to a mental institution or at least beat her ass.

would you want him charged if they had sex?

If we are going to look at this realistically. No sane 15 year old would have sex with a 40 year old man. The attraction (physical ) is not likely to be there on behalf of the 15 year old nor would they have met under conventional circumstances like teen groups, sports clubs, or even school unless he was her teacher and in which case he would be breaking the law by abusing his authority as an educator. Also, if this were my child and she sought out some random 40 year old man then obviously I would be sorely lacking as a parent and should probably be put in jail my damn self for allowing such a thing to happen - the situation would be believeable as I would have been a teen parent and not able to provide a child with life coping skills and an adequate knowledge of right and wrong. But at face value if I just had a regular ole 15 year old girl who had sex for whatever reason with a 40 year old man I'd want him jailed on a matter of principal...40 is far different from 22 and he would know better. Would I want him jaield for 20 years? Probably not because the girl bears some responsibility for willingly having sex with him knowing that he could go to jail. Still sending her to the psych ward.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Graycap23 said:

So says the law.................I don't agree with this but it is what it is.

So if someone is passed out then it is okay to have sex with them as there is no force involved?

Stick 2 the FACTS.

Graycap23 said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

So if someone is passed out then it is okay to have sex with them as there is no force involved?

Stick 2 the FACTS.

Please tell 'em!

who says this girl was passed out? she said she had sex with ole boy. she didn't say he drugged her, forced her, held her against her will, threatened her, intimidated her or any of that. If he did any of those things in order to get her to have sex against her will and better judgement then fine....fry his ass. But that didn't happen did it...

DesireeNevermind said:

Graycap23 said:

Stick 2 the FACTS.

Please tell 'em!

who says this girl was passed out? she said she had sex with ole boy. she didn't say he drugged her, forced her, held her against her will, threatened her, intimidated her or any of that. If he did any of those things in order to get her to have sex against her will and better judgement then fine....fry his ass. But that didn't happen did it...

Graycap23 suggested that without force it is not rape. I am suggesting that without consent it is rape. If she is passed out, drunk, drudged, or under age.

There are 3 questions:

1) did they have sex yes

2) was she under 17 yes

3) was he an adult Yes

that is rape.

defend the child rapist all you like.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DesireeNevermind said:

Please tell 'em!

who says this girl was passed out? she said she had sex with ole boy. she didn't say he drugged her, forced her, held her against her will, threatened her, intimidated her or any of that. If he did any of those things in order to get her to have sex against her will and better judgement then fine....fry his ass. But that didn't happen did it...

Graycap23 suggested that without force it is not rape. I am suggesting that without consent it is rape. If she is passed out, drunk, drudged, or under age.

There are 3 questions:

1) did they have sex yes

2) was she under 17 yes

3) was he an adult Yes

that is rape.

defend the child rapist all you like.

I can't believe someone is actually defending that man. He's the one that lied to her and had sex with this girl, even if she did consent to it. It's not fair, it's not like she knew about his actual age.

NastradumasKid said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Graycap23 suggested that without force it is not rape. I am suggesting that without consent it is rape. If she is passed out, drunk, drudged, or under age.

There are 3 questions:

1) did they have sex yes

2) was she under 17 yes

3) was he an adult Yes

that is rape.

defend the child rapist all you like.

I can't believe someone is actually defending that man. He's the one that lied to her and had sex with this girl, even if she did consent to it. It's not fair, it's not like she knew about his actual age.

This ^^

He shoulda known better than to have sex with young girls like that, he coulda gone the right way about it and asked for their I.D before slipping it in just kidding.

[Edited 6/8/10 22:10pm]

NightwalkerDNB said:

NastradumasKid said:

I can't believe someone is actually defending that man. He's the one that lied to her and had sex with this girl, even if she did consent to it. It's not fair, it's not like she knew about his actual age.

This ^^

He shoulda known better than to have sex with young girls like that, he coulda gone the right way about it and asked for their I.D before slipping it in just kidding.

[Edited 6/8/10 22:10pm]

That reminds me of that line "Bump n Grind" remix...now you trying to turn this into some R Kelly shit.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DesireeNevermind said:

Please tell 'em!

who says this girl was passed out? she said she had sex with ole boy. she didn't say he drugged her, forced her, held her against her will, threatened her, intimidated her or any of that. If he did any of those things in order to get her to have sex against her will and better judgement then fine....fry his ass. But that didn't happen did it...

Graycap23 suggested that without force it is not rape. I am suggesting that without consent it is rape. If she is passed out, drunk, drudged, or under age.

There are 3 questions:

1) did they have sex yes

2) was she under 17 yes

3) was he an adult Yes

that is rape.

defend the child rapist all you like.

U sound like a fool.

I have not suggested anything. I'm sticking 2 the FACTS.

Graycap23 said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Graycap23 suggested that without force it is not rape. I am suggesting that without consent it is rape. If she is passed out, drunk, drudged, or under age.

There are 3 questions:

1) did they have sex yes

2) was she under 17 yes

3) was he an adult Yes

that is rape.

defend the child rapist all you like.

U sound like a fool.

I have not suggested anything. I'm sticking 2 the FACTS.

Adults and their anger. Classic!

Graycap23 said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Graycap23 suggested that without force it is not rape. I am suggesting that without consent it is rape. If she is passed out, drunk, drudged, or under age.

There are 3 questions:

1) did they have sex yes

2) was she under 17 yes

3) was he an adult Yes

that is rape.

defend the child rapist all you like.

U sound like a fool.

I have not suggested anything. I'm sticking 2 the FACTS.

If you say so:

Graycap23 said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Force is not needed for rape.

So says the law.................I don't agree with this but it is what it is.

NastradumasKid said:

Graycap23 said:

U sound like a fool.

I have not suggested anything. I'm sticking 2 the FACTS.

Adults and their anger. Classic!

I am not angry I am just confused as to how anyone would defend a child rapist?

OnlyNDaUsa said:

NastradumasKid said:

Adults and their anger. Classic!

I am not angry I am just confused as to how anyone would defend a child rapist?

The man should have known better. He's the one who lied, she didn't know.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Graycap23 said:

So says the law.................I don't agree with this but it is what it is.

I'm not repsonding 2 the "force" portion. Force of any kind related 2 this subject is rape. PERIOD.

My response is related 2 consent. A 15/16 year old knows what they are doing when they consent 2 sex. Consent is NOT rape. That fact that this fool lied about being 22 should land his dumb behind in jail but I have a problem with labelling him a "rapist".

Graycap23 said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I'm not repsonding 2 the "force" portion. Force of any kind related 2 this subject is rape. PERIOD.

My response is related 2 consent. A 15/16 year old knows what they are doing when they consent 2 sex. Consent is NOT rape. That fact that this fool lied about being 22 should land his dumb behind in jail but I have a problem with labelling him a "rapist".

Oh, I think I see were the mix up was. I was saying that Force is not necessary for rape. Like I said she could be passed out or be a seemingly willing child. But in both cases there is no force but there is not consent. Sex without consent is Rape. AND YOU said you did not agree with that as a matter of law. But I think that may have more to do with not liking the word rape.

I do not know what you mean by "Consent is NOT rape." Consent is the thing that makes sex not rape.

As far as not liking the word RAPE. I agree it has some weight to it, but, what word would you like to use?

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Graycap23 said:

I'm not repsonding 2 the "force" portion. Force of any kind related 2 this subject is rape. PERIOD.

My response is related 2 consent. A 15/16 year old knows what they are doing when they consent 2 sex. Consent is NOT rape. That fact that this fool lied about being 22 should land his dumb behind in jail but I have a problem with labelling him a "rapist".

Oh, I think I see were the mix up was. I was saying that Force is not necessary for rape. Like I said she could be passed out or be a seemingly willing child. But in both cases there is no force but there is not consent. Sex without consent is Rape. AND YOU said you did not agree with that as a matter of law. But I think that may have more to do with not liking the word rape.

I do not know what you mean by "Consent is NOT rape." Consent is the thing that makes sex not rape.

As far as not liking the word RAPE. I agree it has some weight to it, but, what word would you like to use?

This specific girl consented 2 sex with this guy at the time they had sex.

That is a separate issue from the fact that he lied about is age. (a fact that she did not know at the time)

Graycap23 said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Oh, I think I see were the mix up was. I was saying that Force is not necessary for rape. Like I said she could be passed out or be a seemingly willing child. But in both cases there is no force but there is not consent. Sex without consent is Rape. AND YOU said you did not agree with that as a matter of law. But I think that may have more to do with not liking the word rape.

I do not know what you mean by "Consent is NOT rape." Consent is the thing that makes sex not rape.

As far as not liking the word RAPE. I agree it has some weight to it, but, what word would you like to use?

This specific girl consented 2 sex with this guy at the time they had sex.

That is a separate issue from the fact that he lied about is age. (a fact that she did not know at the time)

she did not consent. A 15 year old can not consent to have sex with a 22 year old. His lie is not material to the case. It may or may not even be admissible in court. It makes no difference to the legal case.

It is not my opinion, it is the legal fact. I see you have some issues with the law and this case. I see your point. But the law is what we go by. It is not up to you or me. It is up to the courts.

How can she consent to have sex with a 15 year old but not a 22 year old? This makes no sense. What if she lied to him and told him she was 17 and not 16? She's 16 I thought and he supposedly told her he was 15. Wait....did he actually tell her he was 15 or did he omit his age all together? Did she tell him she was 16? What if neither of them told their ages to one another?

i still think this rape charge is just to stick it to him for fooling everybody at the school. I'm not saying what he did with the girl was right...sure he's a perv but a rape charge shouldn't be thrown in just cuz the guy got over on the school officials.

I dunno. Send him to jail for 6 months then deport him. And while he's gone...this teen trick will bugger other star athletes.

Regardless, she is still a child and that man knew what he was getting himself into. I just think it's bullshit that people are putting the blame on this girl.

It turns out this genius has a brother who did the same thing.

Jabari A. Caldwell, 21, who enrolled Montimere at a junior high school two years ago using a fake birth certificate from Haiti and claimed to be Montimere's half brother, faces four felonies. Caldwell was a high school teammate of Montimer's in Florida.

http://www.usatoday.com/s...cted_N.htm

NastradumasKid said:

Regardless, she is still a child and that man knew what he was getting himself into. I just think it's bullshit that people are putting the blame on this girl.

Nobody is putting the blame on the girl for having sex with him. Some of us just think that in this particular circumstance the rape charge is suspect.

Don't you remember that Florida case of the teen boy (black) who had sex with his white girlfriend (they were separated by 2 or 3 years in age I think) and they had consentual sex. His dumb ass videotaped it. Her pops found out and next think you know the dude was charged with and sentenced to lord knows how many decades in prison for rape. His case went to the state supreme court too. I'm not even sure there was penetration..I think it was just oral. She was 15 I think and he was either 17 or 18. Now of course 22 is not 17 or 18 but it just goes to show that even among teens or alleged teens this law needs to be adjusted somewhat. Maybe it should just be called "unlawful sex with a minor" and carry a different degree of punishment than actual "rape" where there is sex being forced upon someone or peformed on them without their knowledge (cases where someone is drugged/drunk/unconscious/paralyzed). Even sex with a person who is mentally disabled should probably have its own criminal category.

DesireeNevermind said:

How can she consent to have sex with a 15 year old but not a 22 year old? This makes no sense. What if she lied to him and told him she was 17 and not 16? She's 16 I thought and he supposedly told her he was 15. Wait....did he actually tell her he was 15 or did he omit his age all together? Did she tell him she was 16? What if neither of them told their ages to one another?

I do not know if she can or not. Many states have some leeway when they are within a few years of each other. What he told or did not tell her is not important. And even if she lied to him and had a fake ID that said she was 17 or older that would not help him much. Like I said 3 questions Her age, his age, did they have sex. (and his age may not be an issue)

i still think this rape charge is just to stick it to him for fooling everybody at the school. I'm not saying what he did with the girl was right...sure he's a perv but a rape charge shouldn't be thrown in just cuz the guy got over on the school officials.

maybe. But once again not a legal defense at all.

I dunno. Send him to jail for 6 months then deport him. And while he's gone...this teen trick will bugger other star athletes.

I might be willing to admit that 20 years is high, 6 months it way too low. I am going to guess he will get 7 to 10.

Oh! I read something the other day. It was about a guy that got convicted for this same thing. He was 18 she was 14. But the state has a "within 4 years" clause that as long as there is no more than 4 years difference then it is not stat rape. But opps he was 4 years and 4 months older. So the stat rape charge stands!

DesireeNevermind said:

NastradumasKid said:

Regardless, she is still a child and that man knew what he was getting himself into. I just think it's bullshit that people are putting the blame on this girl.

Nobody is putting the blame on the girl for having sex with him. Some of us just think that in this particular circumstance the rape charge is suspect.

Don't you remember that Florida case of the teen boy (black) who had sex with his white girlfriend (they were separated by 2 or 3 years in age I think) and they had consentual sex. His dumb ass videotaped it. Her pops found out and next think you know the dude was charged with and sentenced to lord knows how many decades in prison for rape. His case went to the state supreme court too. I'm not even sure there was penetration..I think it was just oral. She was 15 I think and he was either 17 or 18. Now of course 22 is not 17 or 18 but it just goes to show that even among teens or alleged teens this law needs to be adjusted somewhat. Maybe it should just be called "unlawful sex with a minor" and carry a different degree of punishment than actual "rape" where there is sex being forced upon someone or peformed on them without their knowledge (cases where someone is drugged/drunk/unconscious/paralyzed). Even sex with a person who is mentally disabled should probably have its own criminal category.

if nothing else they could get him on child porn. But I think some states do (and all should) have a 3 to 4 year buffer for this kind of case.

But it is something we need to tell the young men we know. Be careful she might decide to change her mind after. And even if you win the case it is not going to be worth the hassle.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DesireeNevermind said:

Nobody is putting the blame on the girl for having sex with him. Some of us just think that in this particular circumstance the rape charge is suspect.

Don't you remember that Florida case of the teen boy (black) who had sex with his white girlfriend (they were separated by 2 or 3 years in age I think) and they had consentual sex. His dumb ass videotaped it. Her pops found out and next think you know the dude was charged with and sentenced to lord knows how many decades in prison for rape. His case went to the state supreme court too. I'm not even sure there was penetration..I think it was just oral. She was 15 I think and he was either 17 or 18. Now of course 22 is not 17 or 18 but it just goes to show that even among teens or alleged teens this law needs to be adjusted somewhat. Maybe it should just be called "unlawful sex with a minor" and carry a different degree of punishment than actual "rape" where there is sex being forced upon someone or peformed on them without their knowledge (cases where someone is drugged/drunk/unconscious/paralyzed). Even sex with a person who is mentally disabled should probably have its own criminal category.

if nothing else they could get him on child porn. But I think some states do (and all should) have a 3 to 4 year buffer for this kind of case.

But it is something we need to tell the young men we know. Be careful she might decide to change her mind after. And even if you win the case it is not going to be worth the hassle.

co-sign on that!

I change my mind. He needs to at least do 2 years in the pen.

It's a shame so many males will risk throwing their lives away on some teen pussy.

And these days....females throwing their lives away on teen dick.

This world is going to hell in a knock off Coach bag.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

DesireeNevermind said:

Nobody is putting the blame on the girl for having sex with him. Some of us just think that in this particular circumstance the rape charge is suspect.

Don't you remember that Florida case of the teen boy (black) who had sex with his white girlfriend (they were separated by 2 or 3 years in age I think) and they had consentual sex. His dumb ass videotaped it. Her pops found out and next think you know the dude was charged with and sentenced to lord knows how many decades in prison for rape. His case went to the state supreme court too. I'm not even sure there was penetration..I think it was just oral. She was 15 I think and he was either 17 or 18. Now of course 22 is not 17 or 18 but it just goes to show that even among teens or alleged teens this law needs to be adjusted somewhat. Maybe it should just be called "unlawful sex with a minor" and carry a different degree of punishment than actual "rape" where there is sex being forced upon someone or peformed on them without their knowledge (cases where someone is drugged/drunk/unconscious/paralyzed). Even sex with a person who is mentally disabled should probably have its own criminal category.

if nothing else they could get him on child porn. But I think some states do (and all should) have a 3 to 4 year buffer for this kind of case.

But it is something we need to tell the young men we know. Be careful she might decide to change her mind after. And even if you win the case it is not going to be worth the hassle.

They should nail this fool on something....i just have a problem calling this situation "rape".

DesireeNevermind said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

if nothing else they could get him on child porn. But I think some states do (and all should) have a 3 to 4 year buffer for this kind of case.

But it is something we need to tell the young men we know. Be careful she might decide to change her mind after. And even if you win the case it is not going to be worth the hassle.

co-sign on that!

I change my mind. He needs to at least do 2 years in the pen.

It's a shame so many males will risk throwing their lives away on some teen pussy.

And these days....females throwing their lives away on teen dick.

This world is going to hell in a knock off Coach bag.

This guy is a pedophile anyway. The fact that he wants to pose as a teenager, be surrounded by teens, and have sex, is a dead give away.

Graycap23 said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

if nothing else they could get him on child porn. But I think some states do (and all should) have a 3 to 4 year buffer for this kind of case.

But it is something we need to tell the young men we know. Be careful she might decide to change her mind after. And even if you win the case it is not going to be worth the hassle.

They should nail this fool on something....i just have a problem calling this situation "rape".

Graycap23 said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I'm not repsonding 2 the "force" portion. Force of any kind related 2 this subject is rape. PERIOD.

My response is related 2 consent. A 15/16 year old knows what they are doing when they consent 2 sex. Consent is NOT rape. That fact that this fool lied about being 22 should land his dumb behind in jail but I have a problem with labelling him a "rapist".

He knew he was an adult when he had sex with the little fucking girl. That makes him a fucking rapist. Girls under the age of 18 cannot legally consent to sex with an adult. Even if they say "YES, FUCK THE SHIT OUT OF ME", it's still fucking rape.