Sex with a Minor

They will have to register as sex offenders even with statutory rape. It does not matter if it is a misd. The law still states they must register and will not be able to carry a gun. That came from pros. Attorney. But who knows. We have been lied to manytimes already.

According to the statute Carl refers to, that is incorrect.

That aside, sex crimes are notoriously difficult to successfully prosecute - I'm truly sorry OP, but I do think you should prepare for the possibility that nothing at all will happen to these young men.

Quote:

---

Quoting angry mom

---

They will have to register as sex offenders even with statutory rape. It does not matter if it is a misd. The law still states they must register and will not be able to carry a gun. That came from pros. Attorney. But who knows. We have been lied to manytimes already.

---

No, they would only have to register if they (the offender) were 21 or older.

http://www.georgia.gov/00/article/0,...553821,00.html

The prosecutor may have misunderstood. Or, he may know of a loophole that allows for the state to mandate or request registration. I am not from Georgia, but few states require mandatory registration for consensual relations between minors.

It sounds like the state might have a decent case for statutory rape, but not for forcible rape. But, this is a sword that might cut both ways ... if the acts were consensual then your daughter might be able to charged as well. This is not an easy situation. And, as Dogmatique indicated, you might want to be prepared that this might not turn out the way you hope.

How can she be chargd she was under the influance(sorry my spelling is bad) of alchol and that is one of the.chrgs that the 17 year old.is facing contriputing to. A minor.

Quote:

---

Quoting angry mom

---

How can she be chargd she was under the influance(sorry my spelling is bad) of alchol and that is one of the.chrgs that the 17 year old.is facing contriputing to. A minor.

---

The contributing charge would be for providing the alcohol to someone underage. But, while she may have consumed alcohol that does not automatically imply that she was unable to make a conscious decision regarding sex.

I note from the original post that the boys were 16 and 17, that would effectively clear her from any potential stat. rape charge (though there are others she could be charged with in extreme circumstances that are not likely to be charged).

Let me try to explain why, had one of the boys been 15 or younger that she could have been charged ...

Here is the problem, and I have seen it before out here ... if she was so impaired on alcohol as to be unable to give consent to sexual relations, then the boys are potentially guilty of rape. If she was not so impaired, and the issue is only one of statutory rape (unlawful intercourse - that is, consent was given but the parties were underage), then the implication is that she was not impaired. if she was not impaired, then she arguably freely consented to the unlawful sexual act.

The pertinent section is 16-63:

§ 16-6-3. Statutory rape

(a) A person commits the offense of statutory rape when he or she engages in sexual intercourse with any person under the age of 16 years and not his or her spouse, provided that no conviction shall be had for this offense on the unsupported testimony of the victim.

(b) Except as provided in subsection (c) of this Code section, a person convicted of the offense of statutory rape shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than 20 years; provided, however, that if the person so convicted is 21 years of age or older, such person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than ten nor more than 20 years. Any person convicted under this subsection of the offense of statutory rape shall, in addition, be subject to the sentencing and punishment provisions of Code Section 17-10-6.2.

(c) If the victim is at least 14 but less than 16 years of age and the person convicted of statutory rape is 18 years of age or younger and is no more than four years older than the victim, such person shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Note that the statute does not indicate that only the boy can be charged, it says that "any person" who engages in sexual intercourse with a person under the age of 16 can be guilty of the offense.

In your daughter's case, she should be safe from this charge as the boys are 16 or older.

But, you need to steel yourself for the real possibility that the boys might only face lesser charges for this whole affair and not be brought up on the more serious sex offenses. Unless the state can make the case beyond a reasonable doubt, they are likely to pursue only that case that they are relatively certain they can make. These cases can be very difficult to pursue.

Thank you for clearing that up for me. We do know this is going to be a hard battle. I just hope that all parties understand what they have done to eachpthers lives and their families. I know only they and God know the truth. If it. Is a true.rape case not just statutory these boys will oneday have to answer to their maker.

Why is the underage drinking not being addressed?

Quote:

---

Quoting skbunting

---

Why is the underage drinking not being addressed?

---

By whom? Mom?

For the state, that would be a far lesser allegation than the potential sex crimes alleged. Perhaps there is no objective proof that the boys brought the alcohol, though there would seem to be objective proof of her having consumed it.