Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [ruby1] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 11:08

Post #76 of 436 (1384 views)

ruby1 wrote:

So claims are he travelled with her (assume airplane) and paid her way. To get on an airplane requires birthdate in your ticket request. Assume under 18 she didn't have her own credit card. Guilty as charged, he knew her age.

I'm with you. If he is flying some girl around, putting her up in hotels, etc., there is likely ZERO chance that he didn't know she was seventeen. He, and his dick, just didn't care. He's an arrogant, entitled, awful human being and it might catch up with him.

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 11:12

Post #77 of 436 (1377 views)

ThisIsIt wrote:

ike wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

j p o wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

j p o wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

TheRef65 wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

ryans wrote:

Every law enforcement agency in the US would disagree with you. Lack of knowledge of her age is not something that would matter to them charging and finding you guilty.

That just seems crazy.

How could a person know? Their ID even says they are 21+.

I would think it matter for findings of guilt at least, which is done by courts (including juries) not law enforcement agencies.

When I was younger, 21 living in Florida, me and my buddy were at a picnic and there were a couple of girls flirting with us. We asked my friends SIL what their names were and if she knew anything about them. She told us their names and said, "oh, the one on the left is 14 and the one on the right is 15." They looked a lot older than 14 & 15. We left the picnic.

My daughter is 15. Sometimes, she goes to the college gym with me where I work out. I don't think she looks any younger than what I presume are the mostly 18-22 year old girls working out there. She's been mistaken for a college age girl more than once, and it's not like she even has a particularly womanly figure.

The law simply doesn't care. If "I thought she was 18" was a valid defense then age of consent laws could hardly ever be prosecuted. If they are under 18 you are guilty, and I'm not sure how many juries will really be all that sympathetic to someone in their mid to late 30's making that claim. 21 or 22 years old, maybe. 38? Please.

Yeah I get that. My comments prior were specific to someone under 18 hooking up with someone older who they met in a bar, and even having an ID that shows they are 21+.

I find it hard to believe that any jury in those circumstances would convict someone of statutory rape. I know I wouldn't. There's the law and then there's justice.

I'm trying to remember who it was, and it seems like it was a MLB player but not sure ( I found the story and it looks like it was Felipe Vasquez ). He, hooked up with a 13 year old and used the "I thought she was 16" defense. Oof.

Yeah that would be hard one to pull off.

I know we have some lawyers around here. If a person is duped into breaking the law would that really be prosecuted let alone get a conviction?

As for the conviction: you can only introduce evidence in your defense that is relevant to your case. Someone under the age of 18 is legally incapable of consenting to sex. Hence, your (mistaken) state of mind does not give you a defense of consent.

I can see a judge considering such evidence when it comes to sentencing. And, I can see a jury looking at the victim and crediting the defendant with a defense that she looks 18+. But, technically speaking, it’s not a defense to guilt, as far as I know.

ETA: some states’s laws are different. But, FL is like what I described above. Statutory rape in FL is strict liability and ignorance of the victim’s age appears to not be a defense.

I'm not suggesting "she looks 18" is the defense, I'm suggesting "she was in a place and engaging in behavior that only 21+ year olds can legally engage in" is the defense.

I suppose we could even take it further. What if she showed the other person proof that she was 21+ with her ID?

I know what you’re saying and, as a technical matter, it does not make that evidence admissible at the guilt phase. Her age was what it was. The defendant’s reasons don’t matter at the guilt phase. I was merely pointing out that there are other ways in which the full story might still play a role: in the prosecutor’s discretionary decision whether to bring a case, at the sentencing phase, and perhaps even in the jury wrongly crediting the defendant with a defense. I agree with you that one could imagine a situation where this would all seem rather harsh. And, the prosecutor and the judge have ways to take that into account. But, technically, it is not admissible at the guilt phase, based on my quick reading of FL law.

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 11:16

Post #78 of 436 (1371 views)

ThisIsIt wrote:

j p o wrote:

TheRef65 wrote:

ryans wrote:

You know what, go ahead and just believe you can simply assume that a female drinking an alcoholic beverage in a public establishment is more than enough for you to know she is 21. Try that with the judge too when it turns out she was 17. Report back with your results.

Come on man, you know what he is saying and why he's saying it. There has to be some responsibility on the part of the minor at this point. A person can't read someone's mind and know their age. He's not saying it's right, he's not saying anything about Gaetz one way or the other, he's making a point that there should be some responsibility if a person has done all of their due diligence.

There really isn't. Have sex with someone who is a minor, get charged, go to jail. All of the burden is on the adult. Hazards of chasing after people on the cusp of adulthood.

Some states have distinctions based on how much older someone is. So if you are less than 5 years older for instance it is a lower offense than if you are Matt Gaetz's age. Of course the vast majority of cases are never prosecuted because the underage person actually wanted it to happen and no one knows or doesn't care. It is when you piss off the parents, or in this case the FBI when they are investigating one of your close allies, that you get sent to the pokey.

I guess it just screws with my sense of justice. You want to go after people who are knowingly doing something wrong or else you're really not protecting society. Going after someone who is duped into a crime they had no idea they were committing makes zero sense to me.

Do you know if your BAC is .07 or .08? Sometimes it is on you to know even if knowing isn't very easy.

I get where you are coming from, but the whole goal of the law is to protect young people, even if it is against themselves, and the responsibility lies on the adult, even if they are as dumb as Matt Gaetz.

Oh, and statutory rape laws are different from the federal sex trafficking law we are talking about. A majority of states have an age of consent for sex under 18. I think the sex trafficking law is about transporting people under 18 for the purposes of having sex with them, which is what the ally of Gaetz, Joel Greenburg, was being investigated for.

Summary of statutory rape laws - https://www.cga.ct.gov/.../rpt/2003-r-0376.htm

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [ike] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 11:16

Post #79 of 436 (1369 views)

ike wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

ike wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

j p o wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

j p o wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

TheRef65 wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

ryans wrote:

Every law enforcement agency in the US would disagree with you. Lack of knowledge of her age is not something that would matter to them charging and finding you guilty.

That just seems crazy.

How could a person know? Their ID even says they are 21+.

I would think it matter for findings of guilt at least, which is done by courts (including juries) not law enforcement agencies.

When I was younger, 21 living in Florida, me and my buddy were at a picnic and there were a couple of girls flirting with us. We asked my friends SIL what their names were and if she knew anything about them. She told us their names and said, "oh, the one on the left is 14 and the one on the right is 15." They looked a lot older than 14 & 15. We left the picnic.

My daughter is 15. Sometimes, she goes to the college gym with me where I work out. I don't think she looks any younger than what I presume are the mostly 18-22 year old girls working out there. She's been mistaken for a college age girl more than once, and it's not like she even has a particularly womanly figure.

The law simply doesn't care. If "I thought she was 18" was a valid defense then age of consent laws could hardly ever be prosecuted. If they are under 18 you are guilty, and I'm not sure how many juries will really be all that sympathetic to someone in their mid to late 30's making that claim. 21 or 22 years old, maybe. 38? Please.

Yeah I get that. My comments prior were specific to someone under 18 hooking up with someone older who they met in a bar, and even having an ID that shows they are 21+.

I find it hard to believe that any jury in those circumstances would convict someone of statutory rape. I know I wouldn't. There's the law and then there's justice.

I'm trying to remember who it was, and it seems like it was a MLB player but not sure ( I found the story and it looks like it was Felipe Vasquez ). He, hooked up with a 13 year old and used the "I thought she was 16" defense. Oof.

Yeah that would be hard one to pull off.

I know we have some lawyers around here. If a person is duped into breaking the law would that really be prosecuted let alone get a conviction?

As for the conviction: you can only introduce evidence in your defense that is relevant to your case. Someone under the age of 18 is legally incapable of consenting to sex. Hence, your (mistaken) state of mind does not give you a defense of consent.

I can see a judge considering such evidence when it comes to sentencing. And, I can see a jury looking at the victim and crediting the defendant with a defense that she looks 18+. But, technically speaking, it’s not a defense to guilt, as far as I know.

ETA: some states’s laws are different. But, FL is like what I described above. Statutory rape in FL is strict liability and ignorance of the victim’s age appears to not be a defense.

I'm not suggesting "she looks 18" is the defense, I'm suggesting "she was in a place and engaging in behavior that only 21+ year olds can legally engage in" is the defense.

I suppose we could even take it further. What if she showed the other person proof that she was 21+ with her ID?

I know what you’re saying and, as a technical matter, it does not make that evidence admissible at the guilt phase. Her age was what it was. The defendant’s reasons don’t matter at the guilt phase. I was merely pointing out that there are other ways in which the full story might still play a role: in the prosecutor’s discretionary decision whether to bring a case, at the sentencing phase, and perhaps even in the jury wrongly crediting the defendant with a defense. I agree with you that one could imagine a situation where this would all seem rather harsh. And, the prosecutor and the judge have ways to take that into account. But, technically, it is not admissible at the guilt phase, based on my quick reading of FL law.

I guess that's how we get to the statutory rape cases that make the news from time to time because they rile people's sense of justice. At least in some states they've added that age discrepancy bit so you don't get some 18 year old kid convicted of raping his 17 year old partner.

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [kiki] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 11:18

Post #80 of 436 (1378 views)

kiki wrote:

backpfeifengesicht battle of the titans.
Who wins?

I do have two fists.

Remember - It's important to be comfortable in your own skin... because it turns out society frowns on wearing other people's

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [Tri2gohard] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 11:19

Post #81 of 436 (1373 views)

Funny how that one never ended up in the Qanon folks' playbook... Well... even if they missed it, surely they've grabbed on to it and run wild by now, right?... Or maybe, this echoing and conspicuous silence could ALMOST lead you to believe that it was all just a bunch of politically motivated hacks regurgitating these sloppy lies because they knew that the dumbest people in the world would happily latch onto anything that could be used to demonize their political opponents... Of course, that would make everyone "we-should-be-looking-into"ing those lies monstrous humans or absolute dupes... Definitely not the sort of people who should be major influences in a quasi-legitimate political party... So we MUST be missing something here...

I'm really, really hoping that our collective societal memory doesn't allow anyone to pretend all the things that were said and done by people between 2015-2021 were excusable, or things that shouldn't permanently and irreparably harm people credibility.

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [ruby1] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 11:19

Post #82 of 436 (1372 views)

ruby1 wrote:

So claims are he travelled with her (assume airplane) and paid her way. To get on an airplane requires birthdate in your ticket request. Assume under 18 she didn't have her own credit card. Guilty as charged, he knew her age.

They were simply together to discus Russian adoptions

Remember - It's important to be comfortable in your own skin... because it turns out society frowns on wearing other people's

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [j p o] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 11:20

Post #83 of 436 (1370 views)

j p o wrote:

ThisIsIt wrote:

j p o wrote:

TheRef65 wrote:

ryans wrote:

You know what, go ahead and just believe you can simply assume that a female drinking an alcoholic beverage in a public establishment is more than enough for you to know she is 21. Try that with the judge too when it turns out she was 17. Report back with your results.

Come on man, you know what he is saying and why he's saying it. There has to be some responsibility on the part of the minor at this point. A person can't read someone's mind and know their age. He's not saying it's right, he's not saying anything about Gaetz one way or the other, he's making a point that there should be some responsibility if a person has done all of their due diligence.

There really isn't. Have sex with someone who is a minor, get charged, go to jail. All of the burden is on the adult. Hazards of chasing after people on the cusp of adulthood.

Some states have distinctions based on how much older someone is. So if you are less than 5 years older for instance it is a lower offense than if you are Matt Gaetz's age. Of course the vast majority of cases are never prosecuted because the underage person actually wanted it to happen and no one knows or doesn't care. It is when you piss off the parents, or in this case the FBI when they are investigating one of your close allies, that you get sent to the pokey.

I guess it just screws with my sense of justice. You want to go after people who are knowingly doing something wrong or else you're really not protecting society. Going after someone who is duped into a crime they had no idea they were committing makes zero sense to me.

Do you know if your BAC is .07 or .08? Sometimes it is on you to know even if knowing isn't very easy.

I get where you are coming from, but the whole goal of the law is to protect young people, even if it is against themselves, and the responsibility lies on the adult, even if they are as dumb as Matt Gaetz.

Oh, and statutory rape laws are different from the federal sex trafficking law we are talking about. A majority of states have an age of consent for sex under 18. I think the sex trafficking law is about transporting people under 18 for the purposes of having sex with them, which is what the ally of Gaetz, Joel Greenburg, was being investigated for.

Summary of statutory rape laws - https://www.cga.ct.gov/.../rpt/2003-r-0376.htm

Just to be clear, nothing I've said refers to Gaetz. I'm not defending that guy, or actually anyone :)

I guess I just don't see how you're protecting young people by prosecuting someone who wasn't interested in having sex with a minor and was in essence tricked into doing so? I would assume the normal route for the guy going after minors isn't to hook up with them in bars.

Last edited by: ThisIsIt: Mar 31, 21 11:26

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [j p o] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 11:23

Post #84 of 436 (1359 views)

This is somewhat similar to mike Vick. He got in real trouble for transporting dogs across state lines to fight. The federal laws would not have applied. (I think the state laws for felonies at the time were that the dogs had to die. Whereas the federal crime was just transporting the dogs to commit a crime).

Last edited by: sosayusall: Mar 31, 21 11:39

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [sosayusall] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 11:43

Post #85 of 436 (1333 views)

Someone REEEEEAAAALLLLYYYY needs to go through this guy's Twitter with a bucket and a mop to scrub it clean.

ETA the link, because the recent replies are pretty good - https://twitter.com/...s/897946853437833217

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Last edited by: j p o: Mar 31, 21 11:46

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [ryans] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 11:49

Post #86 of 436 (1321 views)

ryans wrote:

He is describing ignorance that sex with a minor is a statutory offense and consent of the minor or other factors really do not come into play for a defense. So, ignorant of the law...

He's not describing ignorance of the statute. He's talking about being lied to about the facts such that you don't think you're committing a crime.

I think we all get that if you just didn't know sex with a minor was against the law, that's no defense.

I think we all get that if you thought the minor was able to consent, that's no defense.

Thisisit is talking about a situation in which the defendant reasonably thought he was having sex with an adult, because he was lied to by the minor.

That's not ignorance of the law.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [slowguy] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 13:34

Post #87 of 436 (1223 views)

Lied to about the facts? Really?

How many people do you know that used fake ID’s?

I amend my statement. Straight up ignorance. That is all. Not just of the law, just straight up ignorant.

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [ryans] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 13:47

Post #88 of 436 (1201 views)

Part of the case against his buddy was making fake IDs and stealing out of state IDs that were to be shredded.

___________________________________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/...eoesophageal_fistula
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_palsy
2020 National Masters Champion - M40-44 - 400m IM
Canadian Record Holder 35-39M & 40-44M - 200 m Butterfly (LCM)

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [slowguy] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 13:54

Post #89 of 436 (1189 views)

This situation happened to one of my roommates in college. This was in the late 80s so the laws now could be way different than they were then. We were at a music club which was 18+ to get in. Everyone was carded and it was the local PD working the door. One of my roommates picked up a girl and ended up taking her home and having sex. Turns out she was 15. This girl was at the club with 1 of her friends. They both had fake IDs. Turns out they were legit IDs, but belonged to their older sisters. They even had their sisters' school IDs (from the same college as us). They knew the campus, knew professors names, and a bunch of other details to make their fake IDs believable. They looked and acted like they were college students.

This girl's father somehow figured found out what had happened and went to the police. Local PD arrested my roommate and processed him through to arraignment. Ultimately they chose not to prosecute. They repeatedly reminded him that they could have if they chose to, but due to the circumstances they thought it was just as likely he would be acquitted by a jury.

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [realAB] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 13:54

Post #90 of 436 (1208 views)

Let’s be clear, Matt Gaetz is a POS. Nothing reported on him would really surprise me. Curious to see what the facts end up really showing in the end. It is a bit of extra humor if they were making fake id’s for the underage ladies they were romancing though. Next level ignorance right there...

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [ryans] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 13:56

Post #91 of 436 (1199 views)

My hunch is that they found communication where Gaetz was "ordering" ID for the underage victim.

___________________________________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/...eoesophageal_fistula
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_palsy
2020 National Masters Champion - M40-44 - 400m IM
Canadian Record Holder 35-39M & 40-44M - 200 m Butterfly (LCM)

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [j p o] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 14:08

Post #92 of 436 (1177 views)

Twitter never disappoints! The best:

When they arrest you, do you think your entire head will fit inside the mugshot? Or do they have to put the camera in panoramic mode?

I'm still surprised that it was an under aged female and not an under aged male.

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [realAB] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 14:13

Post #93 of 436 (1170 views)

realAB wrote:

My hunch is that they found communication where Gaetz was "ordering" ID for the underage victim.

I wonder if his sex trafficker buddy flipped on him.

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [bm] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 14:14

Post #94 of 436 (1163 views)

I’ll swap stories with you. There was a 47 year old high school teacher who ended up having a “sexual relationship” (emotionally manipulating & raping) a 14 year old female student who came from a tough home life. The case was prosecuted as statutory rape. The teacher was found guilty, but at sentencing Billings, Montana Judge Baugh ordered a 30 day sentence because the girl “appeared older” than she was. Not long after that, the girl committed suicide. Judge Baugh was censured and retired in shame.

For many crimes, there is the actus reas and mens rea elements that must be proven for conviction. Actus reas is conduct which is a constituent element of a crime. Mens rea is the intention or knowledge element of a crime.

Strict liability crimes don’t have a mens rea element. These crimes don't require any intent or knowledge on the part of the offender. Statutory rape is a strict liability crime.

Last edited by: CallMeMaybe: Mar 31, 21 16:56

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [CallMeMaybe] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 14:19

Post #95 of 436 (1154 views)

And this is why they repeatedly told him they could prosecute if they were so inclined. This was a bit over 30 years ago. I suspect if this happened today this would have gone much differently for him.

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [ironclm] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 16:05

Post #96 of 436 (1073 views)

Anyone wonder if his motives in supporting Trump was because he was hoping for a pardon? They seem to have a lot in common, so maybe he just saw Trump as a father figure. LOL

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [rick_pcfl] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 17:46

Post #97 of 436 (1027 views)

So I think the story is as follows

Gaetz paid underage hookers for an orgy

Pictures were taken

In exchange for a pardon (what about the state crime?) Gaetz pays 25MM

The 25MM is used to fund a mission (or payoff) to rescue Robert Levinson who was/is being held in Iran

This deal was being brokered by a former DoJ employee

This makes my head hurt and if true would make a great movie.

He's still going to jail for banging underage prostitutes

Last edited by: windywave: Mar 31, 21 17:48

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [Nutella] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 17:58

Post #98 of 436 (1015 views)

Tonight, Joel Greenberg - former Republican elected official and Matt Gaetz's child-sex-trafficking wingman - was arrested yet again and hit with yet another superseding indictment with an additional 21 charges.

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/...eydlhaiie-story.html

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [Nutella] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 18:59

Post #99 of 436 (974 views)

Nutella wrote:

Tonight, Joel Greenberg - former Republican elected official and Matt Gaetz's child-sex-trafficking wingman - was arrested yet again and hit with yet another superseding indictment with an additional 21 charges.

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/...eydlhaiie-story.html

It always shocks me when public servants boldly commit so many visible crimes expecting to get away with them

Re: Matt Gaetz-Come on down!!!! [rick_pcfl] [ In reply to ]

Mar 31, 21 22:51

Post #100 of 436 (1560 views)

rick_pcfl wrote:

Nutella wrote:

Tonight, Joel Greenberg - former Republican elected official and Matt Gaetz's child-sex-trafficking wingman - was arrested yet again and hit with yet another superseding indictment with an additional 21 charges.

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/...eydlhaiie-story.html

It always shocks me when public servants boldly commit so many visible crimes expecting to get away with them

Now I'm curious if this "friend" is actually the person behind the extortion plot (assuming that plot actually exists).

It had to be someone who knew about the investigation - and who would know more than the guy who was already indicted? And much easier to extort someone if you already have the receipts in your pocket.

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.