BREAKING: Syracuse investigating report that Asst coach Molested former ball boy

#202
#202
oklavol said:
how is it molesting if you are over 18?
Isn't that the age of consent?
Seems more like sexual harassment, but he's not getting paid.
Maybe he was on scholarship? I doubt it.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be. It would be a charge of Sexual Abuse or Sexual Assault, depending on the state statute.
 
#203
#203
oklavol said:
how is it molesting if you are over 18?
Isn't that the age of consent?
Seems more like sexual harassment, but he's not getting paid.
Maybe he was on scholarship? I doubt it though.
Click to expand...

The abuse allegedly began when the victim was in the 5th grade.
 
#204
#204
GAVol said:
You're either trolling or you're trying so hard to be enlightened that you've fallen face first into the absurd.
Click to expand...

You do not think a psych eval would come in handy if a 19-year-old came forward and said, "this happened when I was 9, but I consented and I still claim that I was able to give my consent".

What if it was a 29-year-old? 50-year-old? You either conduct a psychological evaluation to make the determination that he was so traumatized by the event that he still does not know what he is saying about it today or you declare the adult to be a liar.

I am not in the position of forcing individuals to be victims where they do not want to nor am I in the position to simply state that an individual is not mentally competent (the 19, 29, 50-year-old), without first having a professionally trained individual evaluate his competency.
 
#205
#205
therealUT said:
You do not think a psych eval would come in handy if a 19-year-old came forward and said, "this happened when I was 9, but I consented and I still claim that I was able to give my consent".
.
Click to expand...


I find a picture in your house of you sodomizing a 3rd grader 15 years ago.

I locate said 3rd grader 15 years later.

What steps are taken from here?
 
#206
#206
DrunkJohnny said:
I find a picture in your house of you sodomizing a 3rd grader 15 years ago.

I locate said 3rd grader 15 years later.

What steps are taken from here?
Click to expand...

Have the police investigate. Get statement from "victim". If he says it was not consensual, move forward with charges. If he says it was, have him evaluated by a psychologist. If psychologist determines that the trauma caused damage that impairs his ability to competently think about the event, then move forward with charges. If that determination is not made, then I really think the investigation stalls out.

If the "victim" from the photograph can never be located, I think then you push forward with the charges and let the jury decide whether or not it could have been deemed consensual. I have a feeling there is no jury in America that would see it as consensual.
 
#207
#207
therealUT said:
Have the police investigate. Get statement from "victim". If he says it was not consensual, move forward with charges. If he says it was, have him evaluated by a psychologist. If psychologist determines that the trauma caused damage that impairs his ability to competently think about the event, then move forward with charges. If that determination is not made, then I really think the investigation stalls out.

If the "victim" from the photograph can never be located, I think then you push forward with the charges and let the jury decide whether or not it could have been deemed consensual. I have a feeling there is no jury in America that would see it as consensual.
Click to expand...
If you were on that jury, you would no doubt vote not guilty, correct?
 
#209
#209
therealUT said:
Have the police investigate. Get statement from "victim". If he says it was not consensual, move forward with charges. If he says it was, have him evaluated by a psychologist. If psychologist determines that the trauma caused damage that impairs his ability to competently think about the event, then move forward with charges. If that determination is not made, then I really think the investigation stalls out.

If the "victim" from the photograph can never be located, I think then you push forward with the charges and let the jury decide whether or not it could have been deemed consensual. I have a feeling there is no jury in America that would see it as consensual.
Click to expand...

You're putting scare quotes around the word "victim" in a hypothetical situation involving a man screwing an eight year old? Really?

If you're serious about all this, you're the worst kind of fool that there is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#210
#210
GAVol said:
Both of you need to use the Law of Common Sense.
Click to expand...

Common sense? Good post.

Several here have posted their outrage the allegations of child abuse and possible cover-ups. And I agree with their assessments of this situation. When you sometimes question if our country is morally bankrupt, it is good to hear that there are others who don't subscribe the to the "Its all good" mindset. It's not all good.

Personally, I think there should be harsher penalities for child abusers. Maybe harsher penalities would deter would-be abusers and keep convicted abusers away from potential victims. Far away.

But which ever side of the debate you are on, the resulting discussions in these NCAA/child abuse threads have impressive view counts.

But here's the common sense part of it to me. There's nothing like a good debate/argumentive/name calling/threatening/pushing the limits of the rules, etc. thread to sell tickets - I mean hits - to a message board. If the advertisers here at VN pay by the hit, these topics are helping pay the bills. Therefore, common sense would indicate that there will be few bannings from these threads.
 
#211
#211
Vercingetorix said:
Do you have children? Have you ever been around them much? It's flat-out impossible for a child, no matter how much of a "prodigy," to consent meaningfully to sex. Can you explain how the penis goes in and out? Sure. Can they understand all the emotional baggage that goes along with it? No way.

Studying philosophy is important. On some level, it's the only serious human undertaking; everything else is just fluff around the sides. But once it's led you to a precipice where you hear yourself refusing to declare that a man screwing a child in the ass is wrong, it's time to figure out that you've bought into a system of "morality" which is totally divorced from the universe that human beings live and act in.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
#212
#212
therealUT said:
Have the police investigate. Get statement from "victim". If he says it was not consensual, move forward with charges. If he says it was, have him evaluated by a psychologist. If psychologist determines that the trauma caused damage that impairs his ability to competently think about the event, then move forward with charges. If that determination is not made, then I really think the investigation stalls out.

If the "victim" from the photograph can never be located, I think then you push forward with the charges and let the jury decide whether or not it could have been deemed consensual. I have a feeling there is no jury in America that would see it as consensual.
Click to expand...

This is beyond stupid. You're actually suggesting that we give a psych eval to a 9 year old to see if he/she could consent to sex. Unbelievable.
 
#214
#214
LawVol13 said:
This is beyond stupid. You're actually suggesting that we give a psych eval to a 9 year old to see if he/she could consent to sex. Unbelievable.
Click to expand...

It gets even better if you follow the implications down a little farther. If sex with kids isn't flat-out wrong and instead becomes a situational thing based on the kid's maturity level.....well, there isn't anything magical about a so-called psychologist doing the evaluation, is there? Why can't a guy who loves kids and empathizes with them like Jerry Sandusky do the evaluating himself? Hell, he knows more about kids than any pointy-headed Poindexter who took a couple of college classes. Right, Jerry?

Now Jerry can't even be guilty of rape anymore, at least in his own mind. The worst thing he might have done is just been mistaken when he judged the kid's maturity level. Child rape has been demoted to an error similar to letting a teenager stay out too late on the weekends.

This is why no human community since we came out of the trees has let its members make up their own morality as they go along, which once you break it down is what therealUT is advocating. If nothing is right or wrong except that thinking makes it so, why then, that gets to be true for Jerry Sandusky too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#215
#215
Vercingetorix said:
It gets even better if you follow the implications down a little farther. If sex with kids isn't flat-out wrong and instead becomes a situational thing based on the kid's maturity level.....well, there isn't anything magical about a so-called psychologist doing the evaluation, is there? Why can't a guy who loves kids and empathizes with them like Jerry Sandusky do the evaluating himself? Hell, he knows more about kids than any pointy-headed Poindexter who took a couple of college classes. Right, Jerry?

Now Jerry can't even be guilty of rape anymore, at least in his own mind. The worst thing he might have done is just been mistaken when he judged the kid's maturity level. Child rape has been demoted to an error similar to letting a teenager stay out too late on the weekends.

This is why no human community since we came out of the trees has let its members make up their own morality as they go along, which once you break it down is what therealUT is advocating. If nothing is right or wrong except that thinking makes it so, why then, that gets to be true for Jerry Sandusky too.
Click to expand...

It's about the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard, man. You would think that a guy that pretends he's intelectually above us commoners could read the words that types on his keyboard and common sense would kick in. Unfortunately, that doesn't appear to be happening with the guy. Whether he wants to admit it or not, his stance is absolutely pro-pedophilia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#217
#217
Vercingetorix said:
It gets even better if you follow the implications down a little farther. If sex with kids isn't flat-out wrong and instead becomes a situational thing based on the kid's maturity level.....well, there isn't anything magical about a so-called psychologist doing the evaluation, is there? Why can't a guy who loves kids and empathizes with them like Jerry Sandusky do the evaluating himself? Hell, he knows more about kids than any pointy-headed Poindexter who took a couple of college classes. Right, Jerry?

Now Jerry can't even be guilty of rape anymore, at least in his own mind. The worst thing he might have done is just been mistaken when he judged the kid's maturity level. Child rape has been demoted to an error similar to letting a teenager stay out too late on the weekends.

This is why no human community since we came out of the trees has let its members make up their own morality as they go along, which once you break it down is what therealUT is advocating. If nothing is right or wrong except that thinking makes it so, why then, that gets to be true for Jerry Sandusky too.
Click to expand...
You've just laid out the enormous problem with the philosophical approach to the practical world. The over the top avoidance of any and all absolutes eventually gets to the point of senseless and is worthless in a world in need of black and white.
 
#218
#218
While I understand the point that some are more emotionally advanced than others, and the "18 year old" rule may seem arbitrary, practical application demands a clear line drawn in the sand. Otherwise, you made an already obtuse legal system even more foggy. Child molesters with top notch lawyers would be getting out left and right, committing the same crime that already has the highest recidivism rate.
 
#219
#219
BigPapaVol said:
You've just laid out the enormous problem with the philosophical approach to the practical world. The over the top avoidance of any and all absolutes eventually gets to the point of senseless and is worthless in a world in need of black and white.
Click to expand...

Exactly right. Couldn't have said it any better.
 
#221
#221
therealUT said:
When did I say that I think they are capable of legitimate, rational consent? I said that if they are, then they can give consent. I also said it is not out of the realm of possibilities that some child prodigy could come along who was advanced enough to understand all that was involved in said act, decision, and therefore, said prodigy would have the ability to consent.
Click to expand...

The fact that you think it's possible that a child is capable of consenting to intercourse says a lot about you. I thought philosophers were supposed to be intelligent? You are either an exception or just plain ignorant.
 
#222
#222
Vercingetorix said:
It gets even better if you follow the implications down a little farther. If sex with kids isn't flat-out wrong and instead becomes a situational thing based on the kid's maturity level.....well, there isn't anything magical about a so-called psychologist doing the evaluation, is there? Why can't a guy who loves kids and empathizes with them like Jerry Sandusky do the evaluating himself? Hell, he knows more about kids than any pointy-headed Poindexter who took a couple of college classes. Right, Jerry?

Now Jerry can't even be guilty of rape anymore, at least in his own mind. The worst thing he might have done is just been mistaken when he judged the kid's maturity level. Child rape has been demoted to an error similar to letting a teenager stay out too late on the weekends.

This is why no human community since we came out of the trees has let its members make up their own morality as they go along, which once you break it down is what therealUT is advocating. If nothing is right or wrong except that thinking makes it so, why then, that gets to be true for Jerry Sandusky too.
Click to expand...

What if the boy is 15 and the molester is 27 and looks like Pamela Turner Rogers. Playing devil's advocate here. Some people thought that kid was lucky instead of feeling sorry for him. There does appear to be a double standard when it's a man.
 
#223
#223
oklavol said:
What if the boy is 15 and the molester is 27 and looks like Pamela Turner Rogers. Playing devil's advocate here. Some people thought that kid was lucky instead of feeling sorry for him. There does appear to be a double standard when it's a man.
Click to expand...

Fifteen's an entirely different animal. That's enough past puberty that you really are starting to edge into societal norms and arbitrary distinctions. Obviously for most of human existence 15 year olds have been working in the fields and dying in wars and fathering & bearing children and marrying men decades older than them. However, the fact that adolescence is a recent luxury afforded by modern civilization doesn't meant that it's not very real, especially concerning the emotional crap surrounding sex that makes abuse so damaging.

I would probably argue that a grownup screwing a 15 year old is typically wrong as an abuse of power, as using another person as a means to one's own selfish end, that sort of thing, rather than the visceral crime against humanity that raping a 10 year old is. It's possible to imagine a 15 year old being able to rationally consent to sex [1]; after all, it happened for most of human history. It's impossible to imagine a 9 or 10 year old being able to rationally consent.


[1] (Although certainly not with a 60 year old coach who's been plying him with gifts and promising him a slot on the Penn State football team)
 
#224
#224
Vercingetorix said:
Fifteen's an entirely different animal. That's enough past puberty that you really are starting to edge into societal norms and arbitrary distinctions. Obviously for most of human existence 15 year olds have been working in the fields and dying in wars and fathering & bearing children and marrying men decades older than them. However, the fact that adolescence is a recent luxury afforded by modern civilization doesn't meant that it's not very real, especially concerning the emotional crap surrounding sex that makes abuse so damaging.

I would probably argue that a grownup screwing a 15 year old is typically wrong as an abuse of power, as using another person as a means to one's own selfish end, that sort of thing, rather than the visceral crime against humanity that raping a 10 year old is. It's possible to imagine a 15 year old being able to rationally consent to sex [1]; after all, it happened for most of human history. It's impossible to imagine a 9 or 10 year old being able to rationally consent.


[1] (Although certainly not with a 60 year old coach who's been plying him with gifts and promising him a slot on the Penn State football team)
Click to expand...

He was actually 13, went back and checked the record, she was 28 or 29.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top