Epstein, Kiddies, And Trump. Oh, My

[Loren Pechtel]

In the US, sex for pay is illegal for anyone under 18.

Actually, in most of the world, the age of consent for prostitution is 18. A very few have a lower age and one or two have an older age.

The situation was not prostitution. I brought it up because it's adjacent to prostitution--sex for lifestyle rather than sex for money.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Utah’s Senate president prompted law change that helped a teen charged with child rape

An 18-year-old high schooler was facing potential prison time and having to register as a sex offender until help came from a powerful ally — Senate President J. Stuart Adams.

www.sltrib.com

Last year, an 18-year-old Utahn was staring at the potential of years in prison, accused of having sex with a 13-year-old.

Plea bargain negotiations were at an impasse. Then the Utah Legislature — based on an initial suggestion from Senate President J. Stuart Adams — changed the law.

Two months later, prosecutors offered the 18-year-old, who is related to Adams, a plea deal. The teen would plead guilty to reduced charges, face no additional jail time beyond a week already served, and would not have to register as a sex offender.

Not sure what to think of this. My first thought is it's pretty skeevy. My second thought is some 18 year olds can still be pretty immature.

I don't think there's anyone on here who thinks 18/13 is acceptable.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Neither are they children. Both boys and girls of that age are often sexually active with people of similar ages. While there are good reasons to discourage them from having sex with people much older than them, or in positions of authority over them, but that is not because they are children incapable of consenting.
'
And btw, age of consent may be 16 in most places, but teachers can still be prosecuted based on their position of authority.

Yeah. The real issue is power and authority, far more than age itself. In any situation where there's a line of authority sex should be prohibited.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The thing is, expecting such young kids to go to the police to report the abuse those kids endured is not reasonable, particularly when one takes into account the fact that they had been groomed and were coerced and in fact physically abused as well as raped by Trump and Epstein and threatened with not only their death but the death of their family members. Statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse do not necessarily apply. It is a further obscenity to lay blame at the feet of abuse victims. Honestly, Derec, you should be ashamed here.

Yeah, it's a quite problematic situation when it comes to enforcement.

Statute of limitations exists for a very good reason, but at the same time there is the problem that the predators are generally pretty careful about selecting victims that won't talk. In the days before forensics it was mostly eyewitnesses and memory fades and people move away and vanish, statute of limitations was unquestionably right. Now, I'm thinking we should have a longer statute of limitations when the evidence of guilt does not involve witnesses. And the defendant's words establish guilt there should be no statute of limitations. Twice now we have had high profile cases where I would not have a problem with convicting the person because of their words.

 

[Toni]

The thing is, expecting such young kids to go to the police to report the abuse those kids endured is not reasonable, particularly when one takes into account the fact that they had been groomed and were coerced and in fact physically abused as well as raped by Trump and Epstein and threatened with not only their death but the death of their family members. Statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse do not necessarily apply. It is a further obscenity to lay blame at the feet of abuse victims. Honestly, Derec, you should be ashamed here.

Yeah, it's a quite problematic situation when it comes to enforcement.

Statute of limitations exists for a very good reason, but at the same time there is the problem that the predators are generally pretty careful about selecting victims that won't talk. In the days before forensics it was mostly eyewitnesses and memory fades and people move away and vanish, statute of limitations was unquestionably right. Now, I'm thinking we should have a longer statute of limitations when the evidence of guilt does not involve witnesses. And the defendant's words establish guilt there should be no statute of limitations. Twice now we have had high profile cases where I would not have a problem with convicting the person because of their words.

There are often different statutes of limitation carved out specifically for those who survived childhood sexual abuse.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The thing is, expecting such young kids to go to the police to report the abuse those kids endured is not reasonable, particularly when one takes into account the fact that they had been groomed and were coerced and in fact physically abused as well as raped by Trump and Epstein and threatened with not only their death but the death of their family members. Statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse do not necessarily apply. It is a further obscenity to lay blame at the feet of abuse victims. Honestly, Derec, you should be ashamed here.

Yeah, it's a quite problematic situation when it comes to enforcement.

Statute of limitations exists for a very good reason, but at the same time there is the problem that the predators are generally pretty careful about selecting victims that won't talk. In the days before forensics it was mostly eyewitnesses and memory fades and people move away and vanish, statute of limitations was unquestionably right. Now, I'm thinking we should have a longer statute of limitations when the evidence of guilt does not involve witnesses. And the defendant's words establish guilt there should be no statute of limitations. Twice now we have had high profile cases where I would not have a problem with convicting the person because of their words.

There are often different statutes of limitation carved out specifically for those who survived childhood sexual abuse.

Yeah, but the reason for the statute of limitations remains.

I am saying that more generally some types of evidence should be permitted later. You confess (or say things a jury decides amounts to a confession), you can be convicted no matter how long. I used to think that long ago sex offenses could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and thus should not be prosecuted, but now we have seen two people whose defense convinced me of their guilt. I'm sure there are more such things.

 

[Toni]

The thing is, expecting such young kids to go to the police to report the abuse those kids endured is not reasonable, particularly when one takes into account the fact that they had been groomed and were coerced and in fact physically abused as well as raped by Trump and Epstein and threatened with not only their death but the death of their family members. Statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse do not necessarily apply. It is a further obscenity to lay blame at the feet of abuse victims. Honestly, Derec, you should be ashamed here.

Yeah, it's a quite problematic situation when it comes to enforcement.

Statute of limitations exists for a very good reason, but at the same time there is the problem that the predators are generally pretty careful about selecting victims that won't talk. In the days before forensics it was mostly eyewitnesses and memory fades and people move away and vanish, statute of limitations was unquestionably right. Now, I'm thinking we should have a longer statute of limitations when the evidence of guilt does not involve witnesses. And the defendant's words establish guilt there should be no statute of limitations. Twice now we have had high profile cases where I would not have a problem with convicting the person because of their words.

There are often different statutes of limitation carved out specifically for those who survived childhood sexual abuse.

Yeah, but the reason for the statute of limitations remains.

I am saying that more generally some types of evidence should be permitted later. You confess (or say things a jury decides amounts to a confession), you can be convicted no matter how long. I used to think that long ago sex offenses could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and thus should not be prosecuted, but now we have seen two people whose defense convinced me of their guilt. I'm sure there are more such things.

When there are children involved, consent is not an issue: they cannot give consent. And in the case of accusations against Epstein’s client list, none of the victims that we know about were too young to be able to remember and be reliable witnesses. But unfortunately, also very vulnerable to threats of harm to them and their families.

 

[Derec]

What Katie Johnson—yes, a pseudonym, alleges and is corroborated by another victim did not happen in Manhattan.

Afaik it was in Manhattan.
From the text of the lawsuit (since then witthdrawn).

8. The Plaintiff, Katie Johnson, alleges she was enticed by promises of money and a modeling
career to attend a series of underage sex parties held at the New York City residence of Defendant
Jeffrey E. Epstein and attended by Defendant Donald J. Trump.

Epstein's NYC residence was in Manhattan.

Yes, those acts were each felonies. The accusers, assuming they would have been free to report to the police, were unlikely to have been believed in their accusations against wealthy, powerful men.

That does not change the fact that if you are going to allege rape or other sexual misconduct it is better to do it right after it happened, when there is a greater chance of evidence being found.
Otoh, if you are going to make up claims of sexual misconduct, it is better to do it decades later, when lack of corroborating evidence can be dismissed with the passage of time, and there is little chance of exculpatory evidence being found either.
I am not saying KJ is lying, but if she is telling the truth, she should have come forward right away.

It takes a great deal to go to the police with allegations of rape for anyone. In this case, you have young girls, removed from their families, who had been groomed and abused for some time, by wealthy, powerful people who manipulated and controlled them.

Doesn't change the fact that no evidence is no evidence.

 

[laughing dog]

I’ve raised children. Anyone who has knows there are stages of childhood development until adulthood.

Then why do you insist on a dichotomous definition that leads to absurdities, like having 18 and 17 having sex be "adult having sex with a child"?

Until one is an adult, one is a child.

Your dichotomous development is s straw man. Your obsession over when it is okay to fuck children rape apologia is psychologically abnormal,

No, it is Jarhyn et al who erect straw men. And if you cannot sustain an argument without insulting your opponents ("rape apologia", "psychologically abnormal") then there is not much to your argument.

If you cannot stand accurate representations of your views, then there is not much to your views.

You are treating child and adult as binary categories. One does not undergo a great transformation at midnight.

I never made that claim. In fact, if you bothered to read the thread, you’d have seen I said that there is transformation at each age.

However, whatever age limit is determined for statutory rape creates a binary category. So what exactly is your point?

 

[Derec]

Violations of campaign finance laws can be misdemeanors or felonies. Penalties for such violations carry prison terms.

The NY state law is a misdemeanor, and Bragg engaged in some questionable legal maneuvering to elevate it to a felony.
Law Professor: The Manhattan District Attorney’s Convoluted Legal Case Against Donald Trump Gets More Convoluted

And that from a soft-on-crime DA who usually downgrades felonies to misdemeanors.

The thing is, expecting such young kids to go to the police to report the abuse those kids endured is not reasonable, particularly when one takes into account the fact that they had been groomed and were coerced and in fact physically abused as well as raped by Trump and Epstein and threatened with not only their death but the death of their family members. Statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse do not necessarily apply. It is a further obscenity to lay blame at the feet of abuse victims. Honestly, Derec, you should be ashamed here.

Why should I be ashamed? Statute of limitations is only one issue with these allegations from a long time ago. Availability of evidence is another.
I agree that with minors, statute of limitations should be longer, but it should still be finite. For example, run it from the accuser's 18th birthday.

But I do not think that anybody should be in fear of prosecution for things alleged to have happened three decades before. Allegations that may be made up from whole cloth. How do you defend yourself from something like that?

 

[Toni]

What Katie Johnson—yes, a pseudonym, alleges and is corroborated by another victim did not happen in Manhattan.

Afaik it was in Manhattan.
From the text of the lawsuit (since then witthdrawn).

8. The Plaintiff, Katie Johnson, alleges she was enticed by promises of money and a modeling
career to attend a series of underage sex parties held at the New York City residence of Defendant
Jeffrey E. Epstein and attended by Defendant Donald J. Trump.

Epstein's NYC residence was in Manhattan.

Yes, those acts were each felonies. The accusers, assuming they would have been free to report to the police, were unlikely to have been believed in their accusations against wealthy, powerful men.

That does not change the fact that if you are going to allege rape or other sexual misconduct it is better to do it right after it happened, when there is a greater chance of evidence being found.
Otoh, if you are going to make up claims of sexual misconduct, it is better to do it decades later, when lack of corroborating evidence can be dismissed with the passage of time, and there is little chance of exculpatory evidence being found either.
I am not saying KJ is lying, but if she is telling the truth, she should have come forward right away.

It takes a great deal to go to the police with allegations of rape for anyone. In this case, you have young girls, removed from their families, who had been groomed and abused for some time, by wealthy, powerful people who manipulated and controlled them.

Doesn't change the fact that no evidence is no evidence.

Well, there are eye witness accounts of abuse and in fact, sworn testimony verifying the abuse.

But rich, powerful men find ways to avoid facing charges.

 

[Derec]

I don’t actually agree that 18 should be the minimum age for sex work.

What do you think that age should be? 21? 30? And would you also apply it to things like porn and stripping?

I’ve raised kids and spent enough timey with adolescents to believe that they are not old enough to make such a willing choice, just as I don’t think 18 year olds should be allowed to consume alcohol.

Drinking age of 21 is fairly unique to US and another instance of infantilization of not just teenage minors, but also of young adults.

FFS, at 18, you cannot rent cars or hotel rooms—for good reason.

Are you sure about that? I think it's mostly 18 for hotels, and mostly 21 for cars, albeit it's 18 in some states.

Frankly I care much more about the potential damage to 18 year old sex workers than I do about a trashed hotel room.

They are still adults and should be allowed to make their own choices with their bodies.

As I’ve said before, the part about sex work that concerns me is the potential for coercion.

And that potential is higher when the business is driven underground through prohibitionist policies you keep advocating.

Most of the stats I’ve read have stated that most sex workers begin this line of work when they are 14 or 15—way too young to be able to advocate for themselves. And vulnerable enough to believe that is all that they are good for.

Frankly, most stuff you read on that topic comes from prohibitionist sources that have an agenda.
That said, I think that is what law enforcement should be doing - focus on underage and involuntary sex work, and leave consenting adults alone. Instead, a lot of law enforcement resources are wasted on persecuting adult, consensual sex work because that's an easier target.

 

[Toni]

Violations of campaign finance laws can be misdemeanors or felonies. Penalties for such violations carry prison terms.

The NY state law is a misdemeanor, and Bragg engaged in some questionable legal maneuvering to elevate it to a felony.
Law Professor: The Manhattan District Attorney’s Convoluted Legal Case Against Donald Trump Gets More Convoluted

And that from a soft-on-crime DA who usually downgrades felonies to misdemeanors.

The thing is, expecting such young kids to go to the police to report the abuse those kids endured is not reasonable, particularly when one takes into account the fact that they had been groomed and were coerced and in fact physically abused as well as raped by Trump and Epstein and threatened with not only their death but the death of their family members. Statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse do not necessarily apply. It is a further obscenity to lay blame at the feet of abuse victims. Honestly, Derec, you should be ashamed here.

Why should I be ashamed? Statute of limitations is only one issue with these allegations from a long time ago. Availability of evidence is another.
I agree that with minors, statute of limitations should be longer, but it should still be finite. For example, run it from the accuser's 18th birthday.

But I do not think that anybody should be in fear of prosecution for things alleged to have happened three decades before. Allegations that may be made up from whole cloth. How do you defend yourself from something like that?

Some crimes have no statute of limitations. Murder is an example. Raping children should also have no statute of limitations, imo. Otherwise, wealthy and powerful people simply need to ride out the time frame .

 

[Derec]

However, whatever age limit is determined for statutory rape creates a binary category. So what exactly is point?

Not necessarily. Setting an age of consent with close-age exceptions is not binary. Why California does not have that is strange, as it is a common-sense way to avoid criminalizing 18 and 17 year olds having sex with each other, even if you want 18 as a general aoc.

 

[laughing dog]

However, whatever age limit is determined for statutory rape creates a binary category. So what exactly is point?

Not necessarily. Setting an age of consent with close-age exceptions is not binary. Why California does not have that is strange, as it is a common-sense way to avoid criminalizing 18 and 17 year olds having sex with each other, even if you want 18 as a general aoc.

Pedantic point made - trinary instead of binary.

 

[Derec]

Some crimes have no statute of limitations. Murder is an example.

Murder is I think the only crime that should not have a statute of limitations, because of what kind of evidence may be found for murder. I.e. a dead body.

Raping children should also have no statute of limitations, imo. Otherwise, wealthy and powerful people simply need to ride out the time frame .

Decades later, there is no chance to find corroborating evidence. So I disagree that there should not be a statute of limitations. But to account for the younger ages, the sol clock should start running at 18.
And just because somebody is "wealthy and powerful" does not mean that they cannot be a target of false accusations by malicious actors.

 

[Toni]

I don’t actually agree that 18 should be the minimum age for sex work.

What do you think that age should be? 21? 30? And would you also apply it to things like porn and stripping?

I’ve raised kids and spent enough timey with adolescents to believe that they are not old enough to make such a willing choice, just as I don’t think 18 year olds should be allowed to consume alcohol.

Drinking age of 21 is fairly uniquZe to US and another instance of infantilization of not just teenage minors, but also of young adults.

FFS, at 18, you cannot rent cars or hotel rooms—for good reason.

Are you sure about that? I think it's mostly 18 for hotels, and mostly 21 for cars, albeit it's 18 in some states.

Frankly I care much more about the potential damage to 18 year old sex workers than I do about a trashed hotel room.

They are still adults and should be allowed to make their own choices with their bodies.

As I’ve said before, the part about sex work that concerns me is the potential for coercion.

And that potential is higher when the business is driven underground through prohibitionist policies you keep advocating.

Most of the stats I’ve read have stated that most sex workers begin this line of work when they are 14 or 15—way too young to be able to advocate for themselves. And vulnerable enough to believe that is all that they are good for.

Frankly, most stuff you read on that topic comes from prohibitionist sources that have an agenda.
That said, I think that is what law enforcement should be doing - focus on underage and involuntary sex work, and leave consenting adults alone. Instead, a lot of law enforcement resources are wasted on persecuting adult, consensual sex work because that's an easier target.

Violence is committed against prostitutes working in legalized settings, here and abroad. Coercion is alleged in the cases of sex workers in places such as Nevada, as is wage theft. In places where prostitution is legalized, there is an increase in sex trafficking, particularly of minors.

I think that 21 is a reasonable age for legalization of sex work:

21 Things You Can Do at 21 Years Old (& Not Just Drinking)

Drinking alcohol, gambling at casinos, renting a car, and more!In the United States, a 21st birthday is considered a major milestone since it marks the age that you're legally allowed to drink alcohol. But did you know that there are a ton...

www.wikihow.com

I think that it is pertinent that one cannot e gage in some activities which can/do have an adverse affect in your health until you are 21, namely legally consume alcohol or tobacco or cannabis.

Here is a link to things you cannot do until you are 21. Personally, I would raise the age to join the military or any branch of law enforcement until 21.

 

[Toni]

Some crimes have no statute of limitations. Murder is an example.

Murder is I think the only crime that should not have a statute of limitations, because of what kind of evidence may be found for murder. I.e. a dead body.

Raping children should also have no statute of limitations, imo. Otherwise, wealthy and powerful people simply need to ride out the time frame .

Decades later, there is no chance to find corroborating evidence. So I disagree that there should not be a statute of limitations. But to account for the younger ages, the sol clock should start running at 18.
And just because somebody is "wealthy and powerful" does not mean that they cannot be a target of false accusations by malicious actors.

Lots of people film such acts. And there are often witnesses.

Of course anyone can be accused, regardless of their wealth and status. Being convicted is a different matter.

 

[Derec]

Pedantic point made - trinary instead of binary.

That's not pedantic. It shows that even though the law relies on age cutoffs when making definitions, things can be designed with more than two divisions. There is also no reason not to make more divisions than three to make it more aligned with reality, for example make it a higher level of crime if the younger person is under 13 rather than 14-15 (or 14-17 depending on the general aoc).

 

[Bronzeage]

In the US, sex for pay is illegal for anyone under 18.
Actually, in most of the world, the age of consent for prostitution is 18. A very few have a lower age and one or two have an older age.

I think 18 is the right age for sex work, so we agree there. I was talking about general age of consent in the post you were replying to. Those are different things.

Where we disagree is that you advocate keeping sex work illegal, regardless of age.

I don’t actually agree that 18 should be the minimum age for sex work. I’ve raised kids and spent enough time with adolescents to believe that they are not old enough to make such a willing choice, just as I don’t think 18 year olds should be allowed to consume alcohol. FFS, at 18, you cannot rent cars or hotel rooms—for good reason. Frankly I care much more about the potential damage to 18 year old sex workers than I do about a trashed hotel room.

As I’ve said before, the part about sex work that concerns me is the potential for coercion. Most of the stats I’ve read have stated that most sex workers begin this line of work when they are 14 or 15—way too young to be able to advocate for themselves. And vulnerable enough to believe that is all that they are good for.

Sex trafficers want 18 year olds(and younger) for the same reason the Army wants 18 year olds. It's easy to get them to do things that are inherently contrary to their self interest.