If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
yikes. well, while i may not agree with current ideas behind age of consent laws, i would have to say eight is probably too young to have the faculties to decide you want to get boned by someone twice your age who is also your brother...in the ass
that's just me though, and i'm a prude
i say good for the dad though. a lot of people talk a big game, but he actually did it.
where did it say she was 8? i didnt see an age on there at all? did you get that from a second source?
8 is too young for consensual sex IMHO, but i think about the age of 15-16 maybe is right? highschool seams like the age its really prevalent at. if the laws are moving in any direction, its up. i was able to make decisions in highschool, though they were not always the best choices, i was able to make them with reasonable success. i guess its a parental stigma that will keep things the way they are. hard to say which side is right in that arguement.
Thank you Ωbright for the sig fix!
Card Three is released! You can find it here!
both should be charged. the law must prevail, but its up to the father to decide for himself if his actions where worth it. two wrongs have never made a right, no mater how heinous the crime, the law must decide the punishment. i saw a very interesting show about vigilante justice on "American Justice."
it played several cases where the law was taken into the hands of the people. one was a case where crack dealers had taken over a house and turned the neighborhood into a nightmare. so two citizens from the neighborhood went in and burned the place down. though this was against the law, (arson) they got off without a sentence as it was ruled "self defense." that they where doing what was reasonable to defend their neighborhood. it was illegal, but no one was hurt, the probability of them recommitting this crime was next to zero, and the community felt that the actions where justified.
in this case its hard to say what the outcome will be. the jury could sympathize with the defendant, however due to the brutality of the attack, i think he will be found guilty. if he had just beaten up the boy then i could see him getting off, but to act in such a malicious way is very hard to justify and let go.
where did it say she was 8? i didnt see an age on there at all? did you get that from a second source?
You know the words that are in bold, before they get into the story? The ones that say: FORT WORTH, Texas — A father sodomized his 18-year-old stepson to avenge the teenager's alleged rape of the man's 8-year-old daughter, police said. That is where they came up with the age.
I dont think I would have done it if he was blood related, for the simple fact that I'm more bonded with him then someone who was a stipulation of the relationship I was in at the time.
We dont know what kind of relationship the father/stepson had, all of the ones Ive ever seen was fight fight fight all the time.
Here I come Pav, like the Kool-Aid man barging into a funeral! Oh yeah!
Yeah, I don't care much for my step-father.
Two of my kids are step-kids. I don't feel much of a difference between them and my son.
I didn't see the ages though. He's 18, she's 8. It's a hard call. If he was just some guy, it would be an easy choice for sure.
I don't have any step-children, but I think it all comes down to how long they've known each other, if they just moved in, then I see where the father hadn't had time to bond with him.
Here I come Pav, like the Kool-Aid man barging into a funeral! Oh yeah!
You know the words that are in bold, before they get into the story? The ones that say: FORT WORTH, Texas — A father sodomized his 18-year-old stepson to avenge the teenager's alleged rape of the man's 8-year-old daughter, police said. That is where they came up with the age.
haha i somehow missed that line. i even read the article twice. i read the heading then started at the small font, no idea how i missed the bold.
i dont think consensual is an issue for me anymore, its clearly wrong. the age gap is a big factor, but i wonder if mental issues played any role in this? the case seams a bit bizzar.
i still hold to my words as far as vigilante justice. remember that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. its up to due process to decide the boys guilt. on a personal level i would of probably beat the crap out of the boy if he did that to my daughter, but i would expect reprisal from the law, and hence i would accept all consequences.
edit: just a personal note on stepfathers. i had one that i didnt get along with until later on in the relationship. its like a conflict of wills and change. you dont know this person and suddenly they are your father, dividing your mothers attention away from you. the stepfather also comes with new rules which makes friction, plus in a lot of cases like mine he tries to be a father which is difficult to accept for someone who has been without one or known a different one. most people ive spoken to have a caustic relationship with their stepfather. this doesnt appear to be a factor in this case.
where did it say she was 8? i didnt see an age on there at all? did you get that from a second source?
yeah, it's the first sentence in the article
i think it's interesting that the dad is the one who caught him, and apparently had him arrested at the time. my guess would be he either couldn't handle seeing the boy released so quickly, or he talked to his daughter and found out what happened/how long it had been going on
The article said he told his wife not to bail him out but she did anyway so when stepdad picked him up instead of bringing him home he did this. Sounds like he was willing to let the law run its course but was probably sure the boy would make a run for it as soon as he got the chance. Or afraid he'd try to hurt/threaten the little girl.
I guess I'd go for probation for the stepdad for the simple fact he doesn't pose a threat to general society. It wasn't some random act of violence he's likely to repeat. For the son whatever is the maximum penalty for his charges which obviously isn't life without parole considering how many registered sex offenders are out and about. And the strictest order of protection possible to keep him from ever being around the stepsister.
the dad needs to be punished harshly to show that vigilantism, especially of this extreme nature wont go unpunished. i dont care who the kid happened to have banged, im sure that the sex wasnt good enough to deserve to have some metal thing stuck up his bum.
Comment