Skip to main content

View Diary: Republican House Underage Sex Scandal: Thread III (335 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Legally, I understand what you are saying. (5+ / 0-)

    Given modern times, however, and sexual harassment in areas such as this, can we really say sixteen will be perceived in this situation as the age of consent? There is still the power divide issue - even if he was a page for a different Representative.

    The law is slacked and judgment doth never go forth: the wicked compass about the righteous and wrong judgment proceedeth - Habakkuk 1:4

    by vox humana on Fri Sep 29, 2006 at 09:19:32 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I think we are talking apples and oranges... (7+ / 0-)

      I asked the question about the legal age of consent on another thread and was called a concern troll.  LOL!

      I think it important to distinguish between criminal, civil and moral liability.  To be sure...this is morally beyond the pale on many different levels.  It should certainly take a prize for rethuglican hypocrisy.  Civilly, there might very well be some sexual harrasment charge should the page wish to proceed.

      My problem is with the criminal aspect.  I can't figure out what criminal liability would be had IF the page is above the age of consent.  Of course, this is based on what we know now...who knows what will come of this story.  If the page is below the age of consent...then I think a whole new chapter can be written about whether Hastert, et.al. are complicit and accessories after the fact somehow.  I hope so.  I just need to know where the age of consent is.

      "We're all working for the Pharoah" - Richard Thompson

      by mayan on Fri Sep 29, 2006 at 09:27:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Maybe we are, (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fabooj, northcountry, litho, bwren, gmb

        but sexual harassment should come into play above the age of consent, should it not? That is precisely the problem I have with those who would entirely dismiss Bill Clinton's behaviour to an intern - it is the same problem I have now. There is a power issue at stake. Consenting or no... a teeanger of 16 cannot consent to a teacher, a psychologist, a doctor - is there a void in there for employers or those working in the same "company?"

        The law is slacked and judgment doth never go forth: the wicked compass about the righteous and wrong judgment proceedeth - Habakkuk 1:4

        by vox humana on Fri Sep 29, 2006 at 09:34:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  bwren, not to embarrass you, (0+ / 0-)

          but I see you are here. How was your [were your] visit(s)?

          The law is slacked and judgment doth never go forth: the wicked compass about the righteous and wrong judgment proceedeth - Habakkuk 1:4

          by vox humana on Fri Sep 29, 2006 at 09:39:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Yes. (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Creosote, gmb, Pam from Calif, vox humana

          Sexual harrasment has NOTHING to do with the age of consent.  In fact, I would think it has nothing to do, legally, with age.  Perhaps the age of the harrassed individual would be taken into account in deciding on tort damages but the claim itself doesn't implicate the age of consent.

          Nope.  The age of consent is all important, however, for statutory rape or maybe sexual predator laws (which I'm not familiar with).  The idea behind statutory rape is that one is, by statute, unable to give consent below a certain age.  In theory, it does not make a difference how "willing" you are...if the individual is below the age and they had intercourse or some sort of penetration, the perp is guilty.

          "We're all working for the Pharoah" - Richard Thompson

          by mayan on Fri Sep 29, 2006 at 09:41:57 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thank you! (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            litho, mayan, Pam from Calif

            The "predator" law I hadn't even thought of. I'm not a lawyer. Some of these posts of his do read as stalking, in my opinion.... Surely the age of majority would come into effect in that case?

            This gap between sixteen and eighteen is disturbing to a parent, knowing how to protect and let go... I hope in my state there is more unity in the law!

            The law is slacked and judgment doth never go forth: the wicked compass about the righteous and wrong judgment proceedeth - Habakkuk 1:4

            by vox humana on Fri Sep 29, 2006 at 09:46:08 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  I'm not sure which state law applies... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            vox humana

            the kid was apparently from Louisiana.  I just looked up the Louisiana age of consent...it's 17.  The age of consent in DC is 16.

            Maybe a criminal attorney would be able to inform us as to whether Louisiana state law or DC law would apply. Would the kid's domicile be the determinant?  Foley's domicile?  The place where the acts (the IMs took place)?  Lots of questions...and that's assuming that the predator laws track the statutory rape laws...which is a while assumption on my part, at present.  I'm getting too tired to research it now, though.

            "We're all working for the Pharoah" - Richard Thompson

            by mayan on Fri Sep 29, 2006 at 09:56:58 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Me, too! (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mayan

              Good night! And thanks for being patient with my non-legal self!

              The law is slacked and judgment doth never go forth: the wicked compass about the righteous and wrong judgment proceedeth - Habakkuk 1:4

              by vox humana on Fri Sep 29, 2006 at 10:00:52 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  BTW...to make it more confounding... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gmb

              in my currently sleep-deprived state, the statutory age of consent in Florida is 18...so,if Foley was writing from Florida or to Floridians, then Florida's rules might apply.  Frankly, I've no clue which criminal jurisdiction, if any, would apply,.  And I have NO clue as to the Federal laws or crossing-state line aspects of the case.

              "We're all working for the Pharoah" - Richard Thompson

              by mayan on Fri Sep 29, 2006 at 10:12:15 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Well, one thing seems clear: (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jonathan, mayan, vcmvo2, vox humana

        the page did not consent, he complained about it.  

        •  so it's sexual harassment then (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Creosote, gmb, Pam from Calif

          And hey this might not be the only page....there might yet be a page in here who's under 16 (or whatever). This is just the only one we know about so far.

          Be ye ever so high, the law is above you

          by nota bene on Fri Sep 29, 2006 at 10:00:06 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Another thing is REAL CLEAR.... (8+ / 0-)

          ANY PARENT of a child can most DEFINITELY feel the RAGE OVER ANY ADULT stalking, sexually exploiting, and HUNTING VULNERABLE CHILDREN, TEEN AGED OR YOUNGER on the internet, in the work environment, and trying to entice them to have sex with him.

          ANY PARENT OF ANY CHILD OF ANY AGE.

          If he had tried that on my son, I would have behaved much differently than this boy's parents.  I think they were probably threatened to remain silent and do nothing by the Republicans, and probably paid off.

          Hastert is an accessory to the conspiracy to abuse a child.  He has a LEGAL DUTY TO REPORT CHILD SUSPECTED CHILD ABUSE TO THE AUTHORITIES. HE DID NOT REPORT THE CRIME.  I believe this is a FELONY.

          Hastert should be removed, as should ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL OFFICIAL WHO HAD KNOWLEDGE OF THIS AND DID NOT IMMEDIATELY REPORT THIS INCIDENT TO THE POLICE.

          A country is not only what it does--it is also what it puts up with, what it tolerates. --Kurt Tucholsky

          by Eyes Wide Open on Fri Sep 29, 2006 at 10:21:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  That was my first thought too... (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Creosote, hhex65, gmb, GN1927

            I mean seriously, my mind fucking boggled over the statement that the parents "didn't want to take any action".

            I've said it before, I'll say it again. If that were any one of my boys, legal troubles would be the least of that man's worries...

            The problem with America Today: There's a difference between The American Dream, and The American Way.

            by Disillusioned on Fri Sep 29, 2006 at 11:20:49 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site