Printable View
http://www.lacitybeat.com/cms/story/...pagewanted=all
Must really, really suck to be him. Iv seen some 13 year olds that can easily pass as 16 (im 16 myself) and I can easily see this happening to any of my friends.
Does Ricky deserve this?
I think no, the article said the girl lied. And Ricky was tried as a adult, which makes no sense.
If he is a sex offender so am I.
While it illustrates the benefits of abstaining from sex until *ahem* you're married, the things that happen to him are utterly ridiculous. I say a lot more people should try to become registered as sex offenders until they all lost their jobs and are such a drain on the economy that the government and some other people will think about such rediculous policies again. Although I guess noone would want to loose their job for such a cause...
C'mmon who can you turn an clearly consensual act of teeny love into an offense which has destroyed this boys live. This happens when you take a tragic case and try to appear responsible to the public by making harsh and stupid laws. Typical.
That's why I always sticked to older girls! :laugh4:
I would say no, he is not a sex offender.
Isn't he under-age as well ??
So 2 under-age kids had sex, it happens all the time.
It's a common thing to do mistakes while you are a teen, that's how you learn, no need to destroy his life.
It's like branding a baby who accidentally touches a hot plate as suicidal.
These types of laws need to be from case to case, not just one swooping law.
A 16 year old and a 13 year old is a little bit wrong IMO, the fact that she said she was 16 (and im going to assume she looked it as girls usually do look older) means ricky didn't wrong and should not have to deal with everything thats being thrown at him now...
Ricky was sentenced to two years probation and 10 years on the Iowa online sex offender registry. Ricky and his family have since moved to Oklahoma, where he will remain on the state’s public registry for life.
That seems like a bit of a stupid idea, couldn't they have waited until Ricky turned 26 then he could have lived a fairly normal life...
Im guessing they moved to avoid vigilantes and the like though...
Pretty crazy, no just plain crazy.
Two under age kids have consensual sex, but one of them is a sex offender all ofa sudden. Great one.
Just to clarify: each of the 50 states has different sex-offender and statutory rape laws. In Ricky's case, it was the 3-years difference in age that did him in. If she were 14 at the time of the act, in Iowa, no action taken.
I am very against a culture that accepts children at that age having sex, but I'm also against ruining this kid's life because a girl lied to him.
What is really needed is different levels of 'sex offenders'. Rape and child abuse would be at the top, flashing somebody and consensual sex with someone too young (note, only if the offender was also young, as in this case) would be at the bottom. The lesser cases would not be put on a sex offender list for life.
CR
Right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
Crazed Rabbit has it completely right. A legal system that cannot differentiate between a fifty-year-old man who molests a toddler, and two teens getting frisky is a system that should be changed.
These sex offender laws get passed by considering the worst-case scenarios. Who wants to argue that a man who rapes a baby shouldn't be tracked for life? Nobody. But then the same laws get applied to much murkier cases, and the inherent unfairness becomes obvious.
If they're happy about it, I don't really see the problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
Me too.
As is often the case, I suspect we're not being told the whole story by the author. Taking it at face value, you're of course right. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
So... after googling Oklahoma Sex Offender Registry, and wildcarding their search, I found the kid. Total elapsed time: under 2 minutes.
His registry entry shows his pic, his personal particulars, his address, and the part of the OK crim code he was convicted of having violated (aggravated).
Bad stuff that moving to OK from Iowa increased his time on a registry. No other crimes were committed; just moving south 600 miles.
This system needs tweaking, badly, IMO.
Perfectly fine with me, most start to be at least interested at that age. Nothing bad about it sex is a good thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
I believe teenagers should be much more careful with sex than they are in the modern world, namely abstaining until they're at least over eighteen (I would prefer married, but you can't have everything in life), but ruining the life of this boy is insane. It also shows that laws like this need to be changed. I would see two acceptable scenarios here:
1) His name is thrown off the list and his conviction is overturned. She lied to him - honestly, what're you going to do, ask for ID?
2) They're both equally punished and registered as sex offenders. She ruined his life, so ruin hers.
I see 1) as much more acceptable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
Meh, I couldnt find him. I searched for "ricky" and it gave me 40 names. Need his last name I think.
Want to put a linky to him up here? Im just kind of curious.
You have mail.
Anyone else who "finds" him: please don't publish any details here; the State of Oklahoma may not support in his privacy, but I do. I may be over-ruled by Org management (I don't think so), but until then: no details, please.
-edit-
I only went looking for the guy to get his name, so I could try to find news stories about the case (as Xiahou suggests, we don't know many details about the rest of the story), or police blotter reports. So far = negative results.
It is better that way. Actually I already opened the aforementioned site before thinking twice. It is already so sad enough.
OA
Utterly ridiculous. I guess I'm just going to echo what others have said, specifically CR, in that this kind of law needs more specific interpretations, so that we don't end up painting such broad varieties of crimes with the same punishment.
then moving to oklahoma was a bad idea...Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
generally, anything that even smells like statutory rape gets all the books thrown at it. the laws are almost always read very strictly according to the letter, and the 'spirit' of the law is never given much consideration.
so kids, familiarize yourself with your states statutory rape laws and get her ID or ask the girl's friends before you start any monkey business.
The "aggravated" part is interesting. Was it only due to the age of the victim or was it something uglier. Also, why was he tried as an adult if it was simply consensual sex between a 16yr old and a 13yr old? This only makes me more suspicious....Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
On the "aggravated" bit, first IANAL. My understanding of aggravated v simple (assault, rape, robbery, murder) is that "simple" = 'the occasion of', or threat to, or laying the conditions to _____. Aggravated = the threatened or planned act was actually committed or consumated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
So, being discovering by a policeman in a car at lover's lane with your date half-undressed would be simple rape, if said date was under the age of legal consent for that State.
Physical evidence, or persuasive testimony, or confession, of actual vaginal insertion of such an underage (and 3 years younger than the perp) child would constitute aggravated rape.
Rickey confessed. Much to his chagrin nowadays, I'm sure.
But, as you pointed out earlier, court records, news stories, etc are hard to find. Probably because of the age of the actors. We may never know, unless Rickey consents to FOIA releases.
Somebody, somewhere has the trial transcripts.
That doesn't sound right to me. That would mean you've committed rape without actually having sex. My understand was that "aggravated" crimes were the original crime but with the addition of the use of force/violence or the threat thereof. But, I'm thinking some states also classify sexual assault as "aggravated" if the victim is below a certain age. I'd be curious as to why his crime was aggravated. But, since neither of us are lawyers, we'll probably need a real one before we know for sure. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
Regardless, it seems evident that by trying his as an adult, the prosecution really wanted to throw the book at him. Why? Were they jerks or was the crime less "innocent" than the author of the article leads us to believe? I always try to maintain a healthy skepticism when reading an emotional appeal like the story in question.
Second the If he is a sex offender so am i thing...
Why would anyone go for younger girls anyway? Older women are way better in the things that matter...
"Pessmus", as we say. Bah. Experienced horse girls on the other hand....they know how to ride :eyebrows:
Well she claimed to be of the same age.... :whip:Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Can't say I've ever met a thirteen year-old who could pass for sixteen in looks and behaviour, and unless drunk (which is also illegal) I find it hard to imagine making that kind of mistake - either Ricky's dumb, or playing it.