Male Dem won't be charged for public oral sex on teen man

Do you think that what happened to Larry Craig should be what happens to this guy?

 

LOL I can't believe you fell for it. Read the law you just quoted.

without evidence that the offense charged has been committed

The cop caught him with his fly open and the 17 year old where the crime was commited. That IS evidence. Seriously, thats the best you've got? I read that law before even responding to you. Obviously you didn't read the situation the police found this freak in.

EPIC FAIL

At the very LEAST he should have been arrested and tried. If you had actually read case law on this you would have known people have been arrested for arson and murder then tried and LOST when trying this pathetic defense.


My God if thats the best you've got I'm disappointed.

Wrong again. The law does not state age of consent means that child is an adult in any way shape or form.

You just lied again.

The Minnesota legal Age of Consent for sexual contact is 16 years old. A total of thirty one states have set their age of consent at 16, the lowest age of consent in any state.

If the actor is in a position of authority, the Minnesota age of consent is raised to 18. If the victim is under the age of 13 the actor must be no more than 36 months older. If the victim is 13, 14 or 15 the actor must be no more than 48 months older.

Show us in the law where it states age of consent translates into catagorizing this child as an adult. So sad. I was really expecting more from you.

People can be tried as an adult and it doesn't make them an adult either. You aren't helping yourself.

An exception to the rule does not state that child is an adult even for that situation. You are once again fabricating a definition that does not exist.

I quoted you directly. Your own posts bury you. Try to explain them away all you like. Your own words speak for themselves not your sad attempt to rewrite history after the fact.

I do love the "pay no attention to those posts behind the curtain" act but it won't work.

You are on record defending Obama. On record accepting his job as president and your obsession with birthers. Nothing you say after the fact will change those facts.

 

LOL Thats right, no response from Bull. Should have read the law little buddy

 

Of course you do! No self respecting leftard will admit to their own perversion, it's always gotta someone else's fault, right? I mean, gee, your own messiah BO can't do anything but blame Bush, so no reason to think his obamabots would be any different.

 

So what? The age of consent is 16. What you quoted (the 120 months rule) only comes into play if the defendant claims the victim lied about their age, causing the defendant to do something with someone under the age of consent. For example, if an 18 year old had sex with a 15 year old, and was charged, the 18 year old could raise a defense that the 15 year old said their age was 17. A 27 year old, however, could not raise the same defense, because he's more than 120 months older than the victim.

Since Gauither did not do anything with anyone under the age of consent (16), he doesn't need to raise that defense.

I didn't say it didn't. What I said was that his confession alone said it wasn't.

Politically or legally? I think the charges against Craig were pretty sketchy, and I'm not sure he should have been charged. Politically, yes, I think the same thing should happen, in terms of Craig being embarrassed, his political career being basically over, etc. Both of them (Craig and Gauither) exposed themselves as liars, frauds, and hypocrites. Neither belongs in elective office or in any position of respect.

Obviously you didn't read what you said, or what I said in response.

I never said there was no other evidence. What I responded to, correctly, was your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) argument that his confession alone was enough to convict. That's what you said, that he could be charged and convicted simply because he confessed. And that's incorrect.

You need to read what I'm actually saying instead of just what you think I'm saying.

By the way, you're obviously lying: Why would you ask me to quote the law if you read it "before" I brought it up?

The District Attorney in this jurisdiction disagrees with you. Sorry, I'll take his authority and opinion over you, a lay person who has proven incompetant to discuss law on multiple occasions.

I did? Ok, then, quote me where I said it makes him an adult. Good luck.

I never said it did. Go ahead, find the quote.

What I said was, he's not (contrary to your statements) "underage", because "underage" means "under the age of consent for the act being undertaken."

LOL... The only one looking foolish here is you, for putting words in my mouth I never said.

I'm not fabricating anything. The search of my prior posts you are about to undertake will conclusively reveal that you are the one fabricating - fabricating that I said this 17 year old is an "adult."

Yes, I defend Obama when he deserves it. One area in which he does are the lies put forth by idiot birthers with regard to his place of birth or circumstances of his upbringing.

Like I said, there's no point in trying to educate you as to what a libertarian thinks or believes, your inability to process anything beyond the stark dichotomy of "liberal-conservative" is well demonstrated here.

I have a career. And was on vacation with my wife in celebration of our tenth anniversary. Pardon me for not instantly making you look foolish, and instead giving you a few days to wallow in your self-aggrandizement. Next time you say something utterly wrong and stupid, I will make sure to instantly suspend my busy law practice so I can point out how utterly wrong and stupid it is in a more timely fashion.

 

If this was a real American and not a leftist loser pervert they would buy a rope and look for a tree. Leftists suck.

 

Weird...

I thought he was American...

At any rate, his own party is calling for him to step down...

 

Or maybe to the street for a good stoning?

In any case the guy needs to step down and waddle off someplace other than public service. Idiocy on parade.

 

Agreed. He's clearly an idiot, liar, bad husband, and undeserving of the public trust.

For better or worse, however, none of those things is a crime, and so the OP is off base. Had the OP called for him to step down, have his wife take him to the cleaners in a divorce, and have him spend the rest of his life embarrassed and ashamed, I would have agreed.

 

I would think so, too. At the same time, though, I do know many average people, myself included, caught by police doing naughty things in the quiet side of the park, and walked home without a charge.

 

I know...

It happens all the time...

*shrug*

 

You perv.., wait were you with a woman of the age of consent, or were you both under age or… was you underage with an adult? Oh never mind. Bailiff, whack his peepee!