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’
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.
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.