prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,529
|
Post by prhoya on May 19, 2010 13:02:54 GMT -5
What a weird situation!
When's the book/TV movie coming out? Saturday Night Blues?!
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on May 19, 2010 13:17:32 GMT -5
I tink the whole story is made a million times more absurd because of the names involved: Guerdwich Montimere and "Jerry Joseph." Guerdwich Montimere sounds like something out of a Tim Burton movie.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on May 19, 2010 13:29:13 GMT -5
In all honesty, if my name was Guerdwich Montimere, I think Jerry Joseph would be awfully attractive as well.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on May 19, 2010 18:42:18 GMT -5
I see those points. Again, maybe it is just how strongly I view actual rape, and I admittedly do problems the way some statutory laws are set up. Really, I'm more focusing on LT, but I did see some parallels with "joseph." I mean, hey, its cool, that 13 year old girl is DEFINITELY old enough to give consent. I'm sure she's not being taken advantage of in anyway...
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on May 19, 2010 18:59:29 GMT -5
I tink the whole story is made a million times more absurd because of the names involved: Guerdwich Montimere and "Jerry Joseph." Guerdwich Montimere sounds like something out of a Tim Burton movie. Actually, it reminded me of the classic Eddie Izzard "Jerry Dorsey/Englebert Humperdinck" bit:
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Jun 8, 2010 8:48:22 GMT -5
Montimere indicted for sexual assaultExcerpt An Ector County, Texas grand jury indicted Guerdwich Montimere, a 22-year-old man accused of posing as a high school student and basketball star in West Texas, on five felony counts on Monday.
The grand jury returned two indictments against Montimere. The first contained two counts of sexual assault of a child.
Montimere was arrested on May 14 after a 16-year-old girl in Odessa told police and school district officials she had sex with him at a home in August when she thought he was 15-year-old Jerry Joseph. Seems the authorities don't agree with the creative re-interpretation of the State's rape laws that was put forth previously in this thread.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Jun 8, 2010 11:37:44 GMT -5
I'm not surprised Sir. And like I said all along, it's a very tough spot either way. On one hand the law is the law, and when issues of controversy arise, there is a fundamental reason that you have ... and must have the law to begin with. And regardless of anyone's point of view, the unfortunate response in any ultimate confrontation in this regard is "tough!" That doesn't mean that we all agree on all laws, but we must live by the laws. That being said, I'm just uneasy with the general statutory as a blanket law. Yes, I know that there are older people who will prey on "kids." I also know that there are children who aren't old enough/learned enough to make proper decisions. And I also understand that parents are responsible for their kids and their actions up to a certain age -- at least to a degree. And therefore, some kids aren't allowed to make certain decisions. I get it.
My reservation simply comes with the stigma of "rape" when the act was a normal action that both participants voluntarily participated in. That being said, I again reiterate that I understand the need for the laws of the land. I just find it a lot more of a difficult issue than some of you.
Additionally, the laws are different from state to state. As an advocate of states' laws, I think that is a good thing, but not something that makes the issue any easier to deal with.
To try to simplify, rather than get too far off on a tangent, I will give assorted different examples:
1. A 17 year old boy has a 14 year old "girlfriend." They have been friends since they were born and both families know each other. As they mature, they get intimate. There's nothing "unusual" about this. Then he turns 18 a week before she turns 15. Their relationship hasn't "changed," and they continue doing what they were doing when he was 17 and she was 14. For one week, he is 18 while she is "almost" 15. Then she turns 15.
At this point, the story could go in a hundred different directions. But from my limited knowledge of the particular laws in this situation, I think he is guilty of what I consider to be a heinous and reprehensible crime -- rape!
** Now suppose that their birthdays were flip-flopped. She turns 15 a week before he turns 18. So for that week, they aren't "four" years apart, but rather only "two." How much does that change the substance of the situation? Legally -- and again, I respect and defer to the laws of the land -- the situation is drastically different in many states. But common sense would have to tell me that these two situations are identical.
2. Now consider a girl who has been bounced around between parents, relatives and foster homes. She has failed/been held back a couple of grades. But she finally finds a loving home that she can relate with and guardians that she both respects and trusts. She is now an 18 year old junior, on pace to finally graduate next year with her high school diploma. As a junior, she decides to go to the Junior/Senior prom and her date is a "mere" sophomore, but a jock, starring in both football and basketball. As a 15/16 year old sophomore, with his life in front of him, the entire world is his for the taking. Then in a night of passion, beginning on the dance floor and ending who knows where, a life changing felony is committed. In this case, he's not the criminal but rather the victim.
Now for argument's sake, flip the roles around. After a troubled start to life, a boy who's a couple of years old for his grade, apparently rights the ship. He's on the same path as the young woman detailed above. He too falls "victim" to a night of passion, but in this case, ironically, he isn't the victim but rather the criminal.
I could describe numerous situations such as these, and while not encouraging such behavior, I just have a very hard time thinking of people such as these as deserving of a crime such as rape. Again, maybe it's because of my intense animosity towards such a heinous crime. I don't know.
Does anyone else at least see the point I am trying to make, even if he or she doesn't agree with it?
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,438
|
Post by hoyarooter on Jun 8, 2010 20:08:18 GMT -5
I'll ask a slightly different question: Did anyone actually bother to read that last post? I think it exceeded our length guidelines.
|
|
hoyaalf
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
I like what your doing very much. Why squirrel hate me?
Posts: 688
|
Post by hoyaalf on Jun 8, 2010 20:45:05 GMT -5
hifi, old man quit while you're behnd.
Let's rather take up whether being the same size as Albany is a good or bad thing for Odessa.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Jun 8, 2010 21:51:04 GMT -5
hifi, let's say I drink a potion which magically causes me to switch bodies with my son (played in this example by a young Kirk Cameron). Would I be able to hit it with a hot chick in his junior-year biology class? Let's keep in mind, my body is technically of legal age to have intercourse with this young lady. Also I believe all sexual crimes against minors carry a "hijinks" exception. And trust me, the comedy created by this scenario would be necessary and sufficient.
My creepy aging drunk mind says "no" but her youthful figure tells me I can write it off to the old saying "When in Rome, do as many chicks who are the age you aren't really but are pretending to be." What do you think?
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jun 9, 2010 1:00:24 GMT -5
Quality, giga. Quality.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Jun 9, 2010 10:34:03 GMT -5
hifi, let's say I drink a potion which magically causes me to switch bodies with my son (played in this example by a young Kirk Cameron). Would I be able to hit it with a hot chick in his junior-year biology class? Let's keep in mind, my body is technically of legal age to have intercourse with this young lady. Also I believe all sexual crimes against minors carry a "hijinks" exception. And trust me, the comedy created by this scenario would be necessary and sufficient. My creepy aging drunk mind says "no" but her youthful figure tells me I can write it off to the old saying "When in Rome, do as many chicks who are the age you aren't really but are pretending to be." What do you think? OK, I'll play along ... I presume you are reversing the "should" and "could" alternatives. In your example, while you "could" the question is whether you "should." That is an entirely different question. I honestly can't answer your querry. How can you or I say what someone "should" do if he or she is all of a sudden a different person? Getting back to this incident, the only point I am trying to make is that his actions, while "wrong," shouldn't be thought of in the same light as someone who grabs an innocent bystander and throws her into the bushes to have his way with her. Again, I would simply ask your opinions under the circumstances that I described before. Do you really view such acts similarly as you would to the guy hiding in the bushes? I just don't.
|
|
hoyaalf
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
I like what your doing very much. Why squirrel hate me?
Posts: 688
|
Post by hoyaalf on Jun 10, 2010 11:30:06 GMT -5
With all due respect, hifi, your lack of a Hoya education is showing.
We try not to be TOO relative about moral/ethical issues. Some things are objectively wrong. He lied about his age to have sex with a minor. I doubt the statute in question has an exception for this.
Who disagrees?
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Jun 10, 2010 14:02:44 GMT -5
With all due respect, hifi, your lack of a Hoya education is showing. We try not to be TOO relative about moral/ethical issues. Some things are objectively wrong. He lied about his age to have sex with a minor. I doubt the statute in question has an exception for this. Who disagrees? I haven't heard anyone suggest that. Now if that's the case, then I think that sheds an entirely different light on the issue. I had presumed he assumed a new identity because he either wanted to hone his skills to potentially earn a college scholarship or to improve with hopes of turning pro. But if he did assume this identity to nail high school girls then I think that's entirely different. In this case, I would liken that to the difference between first and second or third degree murder. Again, I'm not specifically trying to exonerate Guerdwich, but rather pointing out potential pitfalls of the statutory argument.
|
|
hoyaalf
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
I like what your doing very much. Why squirrel hate me?
Posts: 688
|
Post by hoyaalf on Jun 10, 2010 22:13:07 GMT -5
What pitfalls? The statute is the bloody LAW. It doesn't make any difference why he lied initially. He had sex with a minor. He's not a minor.
A criminal statute should be tightly written, spelling out precisely the proscribed conduct. The more serious the crime, the greater the possible punishiment, the more precision in the staute.
It protects us all.
End of argument.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jun 11, 2010 0:57:01 GMT -5
Does anyone get the feeling that hifi lies about his age in his free time and hits on high school girls?
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Jun 12, 2010 10:35:14 GMT -5
no SF, barking up the wrong tree there. I just have such a utter loathing of the most heinous crimes -- rape, kidnapping, murder, severe life-changing, debilitating battery etc... -- that I really try to distinguish them from other "mere" crimes. As such, while I understand the need for certain laws and respect them, I still have a hard time considering some certain actions to that level of severity. It doesn't make said actions right for sure. Again, I offer up this example that I posed before:
1. A 17 year old boy has a 14 year old "girlfriend." They have been friends since they were born and both families know each other. As they mature, they get intimate. There's nothing "unusual" about this. Then he turns 18 a week before she turns 15. Their relationship hasn't "changed," and they continue doing what they were doing when he was 17 and she was 14. For one week, he is 18 while she is "almost" 15. Then she turns 15.
At this point, the story could go in a hundred different directions. But from my limited knowledge of the particular laws in this situation, I think he is guilty of what I consider to be a heinous and reprehensible crime -- rape!
** Now suppose that their birthdays were flip-flopped. She turns 15 a week before he turns 18. So for that week, they aren't "four" years apart, but rather only "two." How much does that change the substance of the situation? Legally -- and again, I respect and defer to the laws of the land -- the situation is drastically different in many states. But common sense would have to tell me that these two situations are identical.
Do you all really think the actions in this example should be viewed in the same light as someone who grabs a jogger and hauls her off in the bushes to have his way with her, leaving her a battered, crying, embarrassed and ashamed individual -- even though she really shouldn't have those last two emotions? That is all that I'm saying. Maybe it's more that I view "real" rape so despicably, that it isn't that I'm trying to justify actions as being acceptable, but rather that while totally unacceptable, they shouldn't be described in such horrific terms.
|
|