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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
While in middle school (I throw curses upon these evil memories) there was a girl by the name of sarah. Who's body matured faster then anyone elses. She was 5'6 and had c cups, and she frequently went out with high schoolers. She was like the neighborhood whore.
She must have been raped like, a dozen times!
There are girls who simply mature faster.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
The law (and some Orgahs) seems to make no distinction between knowingly having sex with a minor, and having sex with someone who you think was legal when you two got frisky. It's a big difference, between accidentally poisoning the dog with chocolate, or feeding it to the dog with full knowledge that chocolate is harmful to dogs. The former is being careless, the latter murder. The former being ingenuous, the latter paedophilia. The former a mistake, the latter a crime.
Uh-huh. And I stick to my opinion that they are nonetheless always recognisable for their age - in looks and behaviour. Believe me, I have known girls of a similar age who pretended to be older than they were, but I have never known anyone falling for it (wheter they went on to ignore the age is another matter...).Quote:
Originally Posted by Quirinus
Uh-huh. And I stick to my opinion that they are nonetheless always recognisable for their age - in looks and behaviour. Believe me, I have known girls of a similar age who pretended to be older than they were, but I have never known anyone falling for it (wheter they went on to ignore the age is another matter...).
I remember being 10-11 and there was this girl in my class at school who was just under 6 feet tall, i remember her talking one day about going to the cinema and getting in for a 15, cinemas aren't too strict on ages but they would have turned down a 10 year old.
When i was getting to the age of about 16 lots of my friends where going out to pubs drinking and i knew a girl who had been going out to pubs and clubs since she was at least 15 (maybe even 14) she could act quite mature at times (other times she would show her age) i would say you have to spend a decent time with most girls before thier actions betrays thier age
The moral of the story is: get to know someone before you sleep with them. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Seconded, and not only because of problems like the above.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
well how long should someone wait to be on the safe side ?
You've got to consider that to alot of young people sex is a recreational activity, most young people go out drinking hoping to have sex, should someone be punished because they sleep with someone the first night they meet them
Yes? If not by the law, they may certainly get punished by getting a nice STD or an unplanned pregnancy. Sex certainly can be recreational- but it is never soley recreational, no matter how much people would like it to be otherwise. There can always be life-altering consequences and it's a mistake to take it lightly.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Yes? If not by the law, they may certainly get punished by getting a nice STD or an unplanned pregnancy.
well an unplanned pregnancy or an std are things the goverment as much as the individuals involved try to avoid and mostly aren't wished on people, whereas a case like this is the goverment making a consequence from an action that previously had no punishment.
Other than asking for I.D there are going to be girls who look and act a few years above thier age, so should people who enjoy sex and go out to get it be punished by the state on top of the risks they already endure.
If they break the law in doing so, yes. Most laws on the matter are quite explicit in stating that ignorance of the age is not an excuse. By the letter of the law, he deserved some punishment. As I've said- taking the story at face value -I don't think he deserves to be listed as a sex offender for life. But, as I've also said, seeing as how it was an aggravated crime and they decided to try him as an adult, I have some serious doubts about the story as presented.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Copulation between non-married people has always been illegal in the US, with punishments varying state-by-state, and (of course) enforcement also varying over time and cultural tolerance.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
The laws against consenting adult copulation have gradually relaxed, and are almost non-existent now. But the laws about "childhood" copulation, as we see in this case, persist, and in some places, are on the rise.
If they break the law in doing so, yes. Most laws on the matter are quite explicit in stating that ignorance of the age is not an excuse. By the letter of the law, he deserved some punishment.
well i think when the ages are so close together it should be looked at independently and if the age a girl said is realistic to the way she looks and acts (hard to judge ill admit but its the fairest way imo) then punishment should be minimal if non-existant
to put it into an example lets pertend gay sex is illegal in the USA, LittleGrizzly goes out to a bar for the night and gets chatting to this lovely lady called miriam (theres something about miriam) we go back to his place and have sex (this is possible without discovering a male sex organ) the next day the police swoop in and arrest grizzly for having sex with a man.
Would this be fair to Grizzly (who obviously has suffered enough! ;)) ?
Miriam is a man who looks like a very attractive lady it was a show on sky one where male contestants competed for her affections and later found out she was a man (or is a transexual im not sure)
Copulation between non-married people has always been illegal in the US, with punishments varying state-by-state, and (of course) enforcement also varying over time and cultural tolerance.
Intresting, I knew there used to be (or are not enforced anymore at least) laws against carrying on with a married woman but i had never heard of this ?
Im assuming its one of those laws that are on the books but never enforced ?
How did this law come about ? was it something that was always there or introduced at some point after the constitution, bill of rights ect. ?
But the laws about "childhood" copulation, as we see in this case, persist, and in some places, are on the rise.
with my last sentence i think i was focusing on "if the girl does seem old enough then people should not have to wait for sex solely based on the fact she could be lying and might be younger than she says..."
If someone's going to have sex with another after only a night, possibly inebriated, then I don't think they're doing their best to avoid the risks. This can be illustrated by illness, pregnancy, and by the subject of this topic. As far as I'm concerned it's always about trust, something you just can't gain in the blink of an eye.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
If the guy HAS to be punished then the girl should too.
Marital infidelity and premarital sex (as well as sodomy and statutory rape) are covered by state and local laws. The federal government doesn't have jurisdiction here. These days, sodomy and infidelity laws are rarely enforced. But it is in the interest of any male high school student (and college-aged for that matter) to know the relevant age restrictions in their state of residence. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Hmmm...Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
I'm a 37 year old dating a 24 year old right now, and all I have to say is:
DAMN, HOT-DIGGITY-DAMN IS IT EVER FUN!
An idiot? Yes. A sex offender? No.
Most states statutory rape laws not only deal with the age of the minor, but the age difference between the two as well. IIRC the usual acceptable age difference is up to 6 years, more than that and it qualifies as statutory. Ricky was in the wrong state.
And I believe it's also illegal for people to harass Ricky and family using the information from the registry. But that bit doesn't seem to be getting enforced so strictly as the part that got Ricky on the registry in the first place.
Ajax
Indeed. This "Reckless Romeo" will have fathered 7 kids at age 21 (starting when he was 13 - obviously a recreational activity)... that UK taxpayers will enjoy paying for, for the next 20 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Maybe she'll buy him that Nintendo now, to divert his recreational/creational urges.Quote:
Mr Macdonald said he did not want to have any more children and that his mother has strong views about the situation.
He said: "My mum's not happy about all these kids.
"She tells me to pack it in and keep it in my trousers."
Anybody else heard about that Argentinian girl who got triplets - for the second time, and who now has a total of 7 kids at the age of 17?
Ma man! ~:smoking:Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
Must be the uniform and the M249, eh?
:yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Beirut
Hehe. Well, they say that "youth is wasted on the young." I'm just trying to see that some of it doesn't go to waste.
It's really an eco-friendly gesture on my part...
Well, I was 35 and went out with a 19 year-old. It was my boss' sister and it got me fired for six months, but it was worth it. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
Eco-friendly indeed.