Clarifying Some Things About "Saura"

[ShakeZula06]

FWIW, a friend of mine is 17 (I'm only 19, don't get creaped out) and half the places she goes to pick up alcohol she isn't even carded. She just genuinely acts more mature then and other 17 year old I've ever met, (and looks older obviously). Seriously when i met her and had a few conversations with her I was very suprised when she told me she was 17.

[kniper]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just a few things, some of which I've said before.

1. I didn't know she was a runaway.

2. If I had known she was a runaway or that she was 16 I would have sent her on her way. At least at first.

[/ QUOTE ]

David, I do not doubt this at all. However, as others have pointed out in Saura's thread, statutory rape laws do not require that the elder of the two know that the minor is below the age of consent. I understand the age of consent in Nevada is 16; however that may not end matters particularly for an industrious prosecutor in the state from where she is originally. As I understand it from her thread, you met by way of phone conversations through a dating service of some sort. If the prosecutor could show that you intended for her to cross state lines in order to
engage in unlawful sexual activity (unlawful in the state she was from), or as the original statute stated, debauchery or some other immoral purpose, you may be guilty of a felony.

Pertinent section of the original Mann Act of 1910 also known as the White-Slave TRaffic Act:

SEC. 4. That any person who shall knowingly persuade, induce, entice or coerce any woman or girl under the age of eighteen years from any State or Territory or the District of Columbia to any other State or Territory or the District of Columbia, with the purpose and intent to induce or coerce her, or that she shall be induced or coerced to engage in prostitution or debauchery, or any other immoral practice, and shall in furtherance of such purpose knowingly induce or cause her to go and to be carried or transported as a passenger in interstate commerce upon the line or route of any common carrier or carriers, shall be deemed guilty of a felony.

However, the statute has been amended pursuant to 18 USC Sec. 2421, 2422 and 2423, and the pertinent section now reads:

2422(b): "Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce (i.e. telephone) ... knowingly persuades, induces, entices or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 30 years.

Just thought you might like to know.

[/ QUOTE ]

you are not highlighting the word "knowingly." David did not knowingly do the persuasion and the like leading up to banging a 16y/o.

Now, you can make the argument that "knowingly" doesn't extend far enough down the sentence to cover "knowingly" doing those things to a 16; that is, the "knowing" only covers the verbs in that sentence. But I think the Supreme Court has construed the Wire Act statute to covering the entire sentence. Courts will likely make an analogous ruling here.

Bottom line is that unless a statute specifically says so, the courts typically incorporate a mens rea requirement into analyzing that a crime was committed. That is they require a "guilty state of mind."

[Knockwurst]

[ QUOTE ]
However, the statute has been amended pursuant to 18 USC Sec. 2421, 2422 and 2423, and the pertinent section now reads:

2422(b): "Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce (i.e. telephone) ... knowingly persuades, induces, entices or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 30 years.

Just thought you might like to know.

[/ QUOTE ]

you are not highlighting the word "knowingly." David did not knowingly do the persuasion and the like leading up to banging a 16y/o.

Now, you can make the argument that "knowingly" doesn't extend far enough down the sentence to cover "knowingly" doing those things to a 16; that is, the "knowing" only covers the verbs in that sentence. But I think the Supreme Court has construed the Wire Act statute to covering the entire sentence. Courts will likely make an analogous ruling here.

Bottom line is that unless a statute specifically says so, the courts typically incorporate a mens rea requirement into analyzing that a crime was committed. That is they require a "guilty state of mind."

[/ QUOTE ]

Your interpretation of the statute is certainly a valid one, and while I haven't done any research on the issue beyond looking up the statute, I can say that Sec. 2423 which deals with transportation of minors for criminal sexual activity of both a commercial and non-commercial nature has as an affirmative defense, meaning the burden is on the defendant, that the defendant reasonably believed that the person with whom the defendant engaged in a commercial sex act had attained the age of 18.

This leads me to two conclusions: 1) The affirmative defense is not available for illicit sexual conduct of a "non-commercial" nature and 2) the affirmative defense is not available for a prosecution under Sec. 2422.

However, this is not meant to be legal advice nor is it meant to substitute for the advice of legal counsel.

[The Yugoslavian]

DS,

Play on playa.

Yugoslav

[ill rich]

ewww

that's nasty

[bozzer]

Great thread.

highlights for me:

self-contradiction is hip in the SSF
"Now, I am as big a Sklansky critic as there is, also admittedly one of his biggest fans." --Leapondis

when is a "book" not a book?
"Anyone reading Sklansky's "books" should realize that he has a tendency to be misunderstood." --Leapondis

Is the big man a 2p2er?
"it is Sklansky not Hemmingway" --Leapondis

A noble end...
"I am banning myself - again." --Leapondis

...prompts an outpouring of grief
"THERE IS A GOD." --tshort

alpha centuri is very far away isn't it? oh it's not?
"What's the problem with her being 16? It's all relative." --Shandrax

that's a nice way of putting it
"The girls I like have to have an odd combination of traits, smart feisty, but the opposite of feminist and somewhat maleable." --Slansky

"malleable: having a capacity for adaptive change" --Leapondis

this one? not so much
"get a life." --Leapondis

no namecalling please... well ok then.
"Just a ....dick head. Hell, I've been called that before. On this forum, no less. And justifiably so, I might add." --Leapondis

[leaponthis]

Bozzer's contributions to this thread:

[ QUOTE ]
Great thread.


[/ QUOTE ]

leaponthis

[leaponthis]

[ QUOTE ]
THERE IS A GOD.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hope you mind. I am unbanning myself. What do you think about God now?

leaponthis

[Divad Yksnal]

[ QUOTE ]
What do you think about God now?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he's Italian, myself.

D.Y.

[leaponthis]

[ QUOTE ]
What do you think about God now?

I think he's Italian

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, there are just two kinds of people, Italians and wannabe Itailians. Since we people are supposedly made in his image, I guess the same is true for God(s). Unless he's Jewish in which case all bets are off.

leaponthis