Kelly claimed that a close friend, with an inside track on the case, believes that Epstein was ‘not a pedophile’ and that he was instead ‘into the barely legal type’
Surprisingly, Florida is one of the stricter states where the main age of consent is 18, but if the older person is 23 or younger then the younger person can be as young as 16 and still be legal. Which is still creepy imo, and would not apply to Trump, Epstein, or any other alleged Epstein associates that I’m aware of.
Of course trafficking and sexual assault is still illegal and terrible when the victims are adults too.
No, the alternative to that “creepy” range is to just change the numbers. The reason I included “imo” is because it’s subjective, and should likely change over time as society changes. But I think right now a 23 year old and a 16 year old seems like too far of a stretch.
1/2 Age + 7 is a common heuristic, and it’s one I agree with. With that logic, an 18 year old can be with a 16 year old and a 20 year old can be with a 17 year old. You could argue either way on rounding- should the limit for a 17 year old be 15 or 16? Should a 19 year old be 16 or 17? Or do we get more ganular- down to the age in months or even days? Maybe it’s something best left for judges to decide case by case?
I think there’s also room for some difference between what is commonly acceptable and what is legal. An 18 year old with an 80 year old is undoubtedly creepy but perfectly legal, and I’m fine with that. That doesn’t mean it should never exist, but if I were friends with someone on either end of such a pairing I would feel obliged as a friend to have a good talk with them about that.
claim to be judging objectively via “precedent”, but really all your doing is looking for the tinniest shred of past legitimacy to bullshit whatever answer you really want. common law just being a bastardization of roman law, designed by a bunch of inbred english aristocrats to hold onto their waning power
if you want actual objective law you need to switch to civic law
That’s how the US justice system, and most justice systems in the world, have worked for centuries. Judges and juries making judgements.
If you look at criminal codes, the guidelines for fines, jail time, and other sentences have an incredibly wide range of possibilities. It’s not just a black-and-white “either you fall within the legal age range and you’re consequence-free or if you’re one minute off you’re spending life in jail!”.
Beyond that, you need to consider how these cases would even end up in a court. If sex happens between a 20 year old and a 16 year old and they have a successful and happy relationship for years, no one cares. If the 16 year old’s parents complain, you can argue that the 16 year old is not capable of consenting, but… It’s kind of weird if a 16 year old is deemed mature enough to make their own decision to have sex with an 18 year old but not mature enough to have sex with a 20 year old, isn’t it? And if the 16 year old takes the stand in favor of their 20 year old lover, it’s kind of silly to lock that 20 year old up.
The world is a complicated place, and justice systems need the flexibility to account for what is impossible to legislate.
The gross part is that she apparently considers 15 “the barely legal type”. I don’t know what the rules in the US are but 15? Are you for real?
“Barely Legal” is a porn term for girls who just turned 18 (or look young enough to pass as 18)
So no, Megyn Kelly is a gross pedo supporter. 15 is “still illegal” not “barely legal”
It varies by state.
Surprisingly, Florida is one of the stricter states where the main age of consent is 18, but if the older person is 23 or younger then the younger person can be as young as 16 and still be legal. Which is still creepy imo, and would not apply to Trump, Epstein, or any other alleged Epstein associates that I’m aware of.
Of course trafficking and sexual assault is still illegal and terrible when the victims are adults too.
At one time in Florida it was legal to own slaves, and illegal to participate in the Underground Railroad to free them.
Don’t confuse legality with morality. Sometimes the former takes time to catch up with the latter.
I specifically said I still find it creepy even though it’s legal.
And I do agree with the principal of those relative-age laws, I just disagree with the numbers.
deleted by creator
No, the alternative to that “creepy” range is to just change the numbers. The reason I included “imo” is because it’s subjective, and should likely change over time as society changes. But I think right now a 23 year old and a 16 year old seems like too far of a stretch.
1/2 Age + 7 is a common heuristic, and it’s one I agree with. With that logic, an 18 year old can be with a 16 year old and a 20 year old can be with a 17 year old. You could argue either way on rounding- should the limit for a 17 year old be 15 or 16? Should a 19 year old be 16 or 17? Or do we get more ganular- down to the age in months or even days? Maybe it’s something best left for judges to decide case by case?
I think there’s also room for some difference between what is commonly acceptable and what is legal. An 18 year old with an 80 year old is undoubtedly creepy but perfectly legal, and I’m fine with that. That doesn’t mean it should never exist, but if I were friends with someone on either end of such a pairing I would feel obliged as a friend to have a good talk with them about that.
You know what. I agree, let’s allow judges do case-by-case. Why not make all law case-by-case? It always ends well.
I mean it is going so well for our democracy already.
that’s effectively what common law is anyway.
claim to be judging objectively via “precedent”, but really all your doing is looking for the tinniest shred of past legitimacy to bullshit whatever answer you really want. common law just being a bastardization of roman law, designed by a bunch of inbred english aristocrats to hold onto their waning power
if you want actual objective law you need to switch to civic law
That’s how the US justice system, and most justice systems in the world, have worked for centuries. Judges and juries making judgements.
If you look at criminal codes, the guidelines for fines, jail time, and other sentences have an incredibly wide range of possibilities. It’s not just a black-and-white “either you fall within the legal age range and you’re consequence-free or if you’re one minute off you’re spending life in jail!”.
Beyond that, you need to consider how these cases would even end up in a court. If sex happens between a 20 year old and a 16 year old and they have a successful and happy relationship for years, no one cares. If the 16 year old’s parents complain, you can argue that the 16 year old is not capable of consenting, but… It’s kind of weird if a 16 year old is deemed mature enough to make their own decision to have sex with an 18 year old but not mature enough to have sex with a 20 year old, isn’t it? And if the 16 year old takes the stand in favor of their 20 year old lover, it’s kind of silly to lock that 20 year old up.
The world is a complicated place, and justice systems need the flexibility to account for what is impossible to legislate.