Thread: Prostitution

Originally Posted by Roamy

basically I am seeing to completely different problems. forced prostitution and giving it up for a little coin. forced prostitution of a minor should be punishable by death. forced prostitution should be severely punished. prostitution one on one should be ignored. We obviously know all the associated problems i.e. drug induced prostitution etc. In our culture none of this is going away. money and drugs = sex. So with prostitution i think you are better off to tax it and manage it from a health standpoint

I don't disagree with any of that, except the death penalty bit, of course.

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I do find it very strange that an arbitrary choice of age should mean that the mere matter of a day is the difference between being a criminal and not.

I don't know how many cases of statutory rape are actually prosecuted in a close age scenario. In today’s environment of do-gooders and political correctness nothing would amaze me. When I was 18 my 17 year old girlfriend and I were playing "hide the Salami" in the back of my parents station wagon on a place called Fiesta Island in Mission Bay. A cop caught us with our pants down (actually she managed to get hers mostly on although they were inside out). We had some alcohol which we were both under the age to have. I was about 15 months older than her. The cop simply told me to pour out the alcohol, informed me that he could have arrested me for as he put it, "Felony Dumb $hit," and told us to be on our way. Things have probably changed in California since 1972. I have not made a study of such matters.

Can you believe the F____king idiots we have in office - Here is the latest quote

[h=Chuck Grassley: Colombian prostitutes or Russian spies?]1[/h]

This guy has probably never be laid in his life. And if so it probably had 4 legs. Do you think we have a problem in Washington or what.

Originally Posted by Roamy

Can you believe the F____king idiots we have in office - Here is the latest quote

[h=Chuck Grassley: Colombian prostitutes or Russian spies?]1[/h]

This guy has probably never be laid in his life. And if so it probably had 4 legs. Do you think we have a problem in Washington or what.

What you do have a problem with is paranoia relating to security issues.

Originally Posted by Dr Giacomo Rappaccini

I don't know how many cases of statutory rape are actually prosecuted in a close age scenario. In today’s environment of do-gooders and political correctness nothing would amaze me.

Oh it happens often enough. a fired had a girlfriend who was late 15, he was late 17, no problems...within a week of turning 18 he was arrested and charged and convicted of rape of a minor since he was (gasp!!!!)"three years older".....5 years in Oregon Prison....Happens when a prosecutor wants to mollify some Bible thumping hypocrites...
This was maybe 8 years ago... Life is rough as a convicted felon and sex offender, nobody will hire him...

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I do find it very strange that an arbitrary choice of age should mean that the mere matter of a day is the difference between being a criminal and not.

This is a classic issue for debate in philosophy. How many grains does it take to have a pile?

What would be your solution, then?

Originally Posted by janvanvurpa

Oh it happens often enough. a fired had a girlfriend who was late 15, he was late 17, no problems...within a week of turning 18 he was arrested and charged and convicted of rape of a minor since he was (gasp!!!!)"three years older".....5 years in Oregon Prison....Happens when a prosecutor wants to mollify some Bible thumping hypocrites...
This was maybe 8 years ago... Life is rough as a convicted felon and sex offender, nobody will hire him...

Originally Posted by Rudy Tamasz

This is a classic issue for debate in philosophy. How many grains does it take to have a pile?

What would be your solution, then?

As described, this does sound a harsh verdict. Appropriate to a 30-year old adult who should know better. But the 17-18 year old presumably knew what the law is - at that age we certainly did even if we only fantasised about it.

Is the answer is to have sentencing guidelines for judges. Not published for public consumption, but available to judges, and possibly to legal counsel (as they'll find out anyway), on a confidential basis.

How to police it is difficult. Prosecutors will appeal against an excessively light sentence and they should (in an ideal world) also appeal against excessively heavy ones but they won't. The private individual often can't afford the legal costs for an appeal. So should the committee setting the guidelines be charged with making an appeal in this sort of case. As part of their scrutiny they should advise/ admonish judges for excessively heavy and excessively light sentences.

A tricky issue.

Originally Posted by D-Type

As described, this does sound a harsh verdict. Appropriate to a 30-year old adult who should know better. But the 17-18 year old presumably knew what the law is - at that age we certainly did even if we only fantasised about it.

Is the answer is to have sentencing guidelines for judges. Not published for public consumption, but available to judges, and possibly to legal counsel (as they'll find out anyway), on a confidential basis.

How to police it is difficult. Prosecutors will appeal against an excessively light sentence and they should (in an ideal world) also appeal against excessively heavy ones but they won't. The private individual often can't afford the legal costs for an appeal. So should the committee setting the guidelines be charged with making an appeal in this sort of case. As part of their scrutiny they should advise/ admonish judges for excessively heavy and excessively light sentences.

A tricky issue.

Two problems:
1. the guy should have not been put in prison
2. Parents should be able to consent for the minor.

prosecutors get a track record by sending people to prison- so they don't give a sh!t about anything but incarceration.
the track record gets them a better job with a legal defense firm.

They publish lists that show where each registered sex offender lives in local papers and are easy to find on the internet. That is very harsh punishment and there is a whole vigilante culture that actually has members try to intimidate these lawbreakers. As far the 18 year old kid is concerned he is the one that get's screwed. It is a very good idea to know the law and consider the consequences, as you say Mr. Rollo.
The poor ******* can't even join The French Foreign Legion where he could renounce his citizenship, put in 5 years and name himself anything he wants as a French Citizen. However they do background checks and don't admit convicted felons.
Nothing that I can think of short of this will allow you to lose the stigma you will carry around for the rest of your miserable life.

Submit to a preliminary background check. Although the Legion has a reputation for taking all who enlist, felons will not be permitted to join and will be turned away at this point

How to Join the French Foreign Legion | eHow.com

Originally Posted by D-Type

As described, this does sound a harsh verdict. Appropriate to a 30-year old adult who should know better. But the 17-18 year old presumably knew what the law is - at that age we certainly did even if we only fantasised about it.

Is the answer is to have sentencing guidelines for judges. Not published for public consumption, but available to judges, and possibly to legal counsel (as they'll find out anyway), on a confidential basis.

How to police it is difficult. Prosecutors will appeal against an excessively light sentence and they should (in an ideal world) also appeal against excessively heavy ones but they won't. The private individual often can't afford the legal costs for an appeal. So should the committee setting the guidelines be charged with making an appeal in this sort of case. As part of their scrutiny they should advise/ admonish judges for excessively heavy and excessively light sentences.

A tricky issue.

This is the Anglo-Saxon legal approach based on common law where each case is treated individually. The rest of the world and Louisiana, too has a legal system based on the Roman law where each case is treated on the same grounds with all others. I.e. a criminal code would stipulate that such and such crime punishable by 5 to 7 years of imprisonment. This is as wide a room for manoever as any judge has. I.e. an 18 year old guy who had romantic sex with his 15 year old girlfriend gets about the same treatment as a 60 year old pedophile who screwed a 10 year old girl. I'm mot saying it's good or bad, but that's the way it is. Of course, a lot depends on whether the injured side wants to press the charges.

Originally Posted by janvanvurpa

Oh it happens often enough. a fired had a girlfriend who was late 15, he was late 17, no problems...within a week of turning 18 he was arrested and charged and convicted of rape of a minor since he was (gasp!!!!)"three years older".....5 years in Oregon Prison....Happens when a prosecutor wants to mollify some Bible thumping hypocrites...
This was maybe 8 years ago... Life is rough as a convicted felon and sex offender, nobody will hire him...

I got the lowdown from a family member that was a deputy DA for the County of San Diego, and is now a capitol felony defense attorney. She told me that currently in California; statutory rape charges are only brought, and prosecuted if the adult is at least 36 months older than the minor.

Originally Posted by Rudy Tamasz

I'm mot saying it's good or bad, but that's the way it is. Of course, a lot depends on whether the injured side wants to press the charges.

You have a great command of the English Language, and you speak like someone who has some legal background. I find your contributions for the most part very enlightening. I'm not sure if you mentioned the desire of the victim to "press charges" as a nuance of the case, because the victim doesn't want to see her adult partner get in deep sh!t, but all she can do is try to convolute the case, and testify for the defense with a denial of the events. Statutory rape just like any assault in California does not require the victim to press charges. If the State has enough evidence to prosecute they will. That is the meaning of statutory rape. The State will prosecute because they believe they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the adult broke this law, or statute. In most cases it is a parent that reports the adult, and then the burden of proof is in the hands of the prosecution. If they feel they have enough evidence to prosecute they will.

The world is in total disarray - our country is in total disarray. Corruption with government officials is rampant and out of control worldwide. People seem to be content to do nothing about it. Oh but wait look at what our country is doing !!

New Secret Service scandal centers on strippers, prostitutes in El Salvador... Yes here we are again - attacking another country over a piece of ass

Originally Posted by Rudy Tamasz

This is a classic issue for debate in philosophy. How many grains does it take to have a pile?

4

Originally Posted by Dr Giacomo Rappaccini

You have a great command of the English Language, and you speak like someone who has some legal background. I find your contributions for the most part very enlightening. I'm not sure if you mentioned the desire of the victim to "press charges" as a nuance of the case, because the victim doesn't want to see her adult partner get in deep sh!t, but all she can do is try to convolute the case, and testify for the defense with a denial of the events. Statutory rape just like any assault in California does not require the victim to press charges. If the State has enough evidence to prosecute they will. That is the meaning of statutory rape. The State will prosecute because they believe they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the adult broke this law, or statute. In most cases it is a parent that reports the adult, and then the burden of proof is in the hands of the prosecution. If they feel they have enough evidence to prosecute they will.

I appreciate your high opinion of my language ability but my knowledge of legal matters is pretty superficial. That's why my wording was confusing. Statutory rape is statutory rape and state will proceed with prosecution if they believe they have a solid case. What I meant was that without cooperation from the injured side, chances of the prosecution winning the case are slim. Forensics don't mean much if the alleged victim doesn't want to testify. Therefore, the prosecution might opt to drop the case or not start it at all.

Originally Posted by ioan

4

This morning I had four candies on my desk. I can't believe I made such a quick work of a pile of candies.

There are one or two streets in Barcelona that I will simply avoid at all times. Like market day. It's impossible for a man to walk on those streets, day or night, because of the number of prostitutes, and they're not just slinking in the shadows making come here gestures. You get mobbed, and it's not at all pleasant. First thing is hold onto your wallet, then keep everything else to yourself and get the hell out of there. Sad, really...

Originally Posted by Rudy Tamasz

This morning I had four candies on my desk. I can't believe I made such a quick work of a pile of candies.

Watch you waist. Better go back to grains instead of candies.

dp.

Originally Posted by Rudy Tamasz

I appreciate your high opinion of my language ability but my knowledge of legal matters is pretty superficial. That's why my wording was confusing. Statutory rape is statutory rape and state will proceed with prosecution if they believe they have a solid case. What I meant was that without cooperation from the injured side, chances of the prosecution winning the case are slim. Forensics don't mean much if the alleged victim doesn't want to testify. Therefore, the prosecution might opt to drop the case or not start it at all.

I guite agree and it is not a comon leagle practice anywhere only a very well to do pererson would persue something like this. Aslo proof probably is in
the woman That has the baby, and dude is .999999099 sure he in a heap'o'$h*t