TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead
    • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Justice for Men and Boys
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • Mensactivism
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

Enough is enough. Another 19 year old who has to register as a sex offender when he's NOT ONE!! Get this jerk judge dethroned and save Zachery.

Member12

August 4, 2015
1231 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://www.change.org/p/justice-for-zachery-anderson
Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Enough is enough. Another 19 year old who has to register as a sex offender when he's NOT ONE!! Get this jerk judge dethroned and save Zachery.
Author

Member12

Upvotes 1231
Comments 120
Date August 4, 2015 3:47 PM UTC
(11 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/3frbgy/enough_is_enough_another_19_year_old_who_has_to/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/enough-is-enough-another-19-year-old-who-has-to.974028
https://theredarchive.com/post/974028
Top posts by Member12

BuzzFeedNews stories do not qualify as news in the slightest. I read the entire 223 page court document; their version of the case is not what actually happened to this lady.

155 upvotes
October 5, 2014
/r/MensRights

Zach Anderson, the 19 year old sentenced to 25 years on the sex offender list for sex with a girl who lied about her age was just re-sentenced.

89 upvotes
October 20, 2015
/r/MensRights

An Op-ed finally not done by a feminist or HuffPost: Do men hate women – justifiably?

66 upvotes
August 17, 2015
/r/MensRights

Woman Screams Rape While Being Arrested After Claiming She Doesn’t Have to Follow Laws

52 upvotes
August 25, 2015
/r/MensRights

Texas lawyer :Controversial ad to warn men on child support

44 upvotes
October 9, 2014
/r/MensRights

If anyone was curious about the TIME Magazine Poll of words to ban, including 'feminist' as one of them; here were the results.

37 upvotes
November 19, 2014
/r/MensRights

Alleged DUI driver out on bail after hitting two 12-year-old boys in San Francisco

23 upvotes
November 7, 2015
/r/MensRights

Feminism: Then and Now

17 upvotes
April 14, 2015
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]CommanderZx2 102 points103 points104 points 11 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

You seem to get labelled as a sex offender for the most trivial of reasons over there. I've heard that you can be given such a label for as mundane activity as pissing in public.

Now I wouldn't do such a thing, but it seems bizarre to use the same label for someone who supposedly raped someone and someone who relieved themself against a wall.

[–]Member12[S] 48 points49 points50 points 11 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

The laws in the US today are absurd. They don't even make sense anymore. Explain to me how what you just said makes any logical sense to a rational human being?

It just doesn't work. People are having their lives ruined. It's terrible.

Update: Wow, the support is phenomenal. The petition is 30,000 away from a total of 200k to help this teen get the real justice he deserves. Zach's family never gave up making this petition for their son!

[–]chrispdx 37 points38 points39 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Explain to me how what you just said makes any logical sense to a rational human being?

Because it involved a penis. And a penis is a dirty, sexually disgusting appendage that should be hidden from sight and from mention around children, women, and small animals.

oh, and /s if it wasn't obvious.

[–]Member12[S] 18 points19 points20 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Oh right. Let's switch roles and see what the females punishment would be.

Oh wait, there wouldn't be one.

[–]calicotrinket 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

And the victim will be in prison.

[–]AngryCyberCriminal 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And paying child support

[–]barnun 16 points17 points18 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It always comes back to money. Use the term "sex offender" instead of "rapist" and suddenly you can lump everyone who has committed a crime that has anything to do with sex or nudity into the same pot.

How is this profitable? Sex offender treatment. Now all of those guys need to get "therapy," and the "therapists" who "treat" these people get a steady stream of clients. Not to mention it's sometimes required for SO's to take regular polygraphs and plethysmograph (deviant arousal) tests at a couple to a few hundred bucks a pop, and it justifies creation and expansion of SO monitoring infrastructure such as probation, dedicated police units for registering and tracking.

There is a massive industry built around the Sex Offender Panic that must justify its existence. The drunk wall pissers, college streakers and 19 year old Romeos are far more common than the actual, hard core pedophiles this system was actually designed to control. They help make the problem look bigger than it is while making sure everyone involved is needed and paid.

[–]Member12[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's so terrible. Just terrible.

[–]PM_ME_NICE_THOUGHTS 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It all comes back to a failing economy and job security.

[–]Captaincastle 62 points63 points64 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

My uncle died a sex offender at 60 for pissing in an alley behind a bar when he was in his 20s.

[–]CACKENBOOLS 19 points20 points21 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

How old is the sex offender registry?

[–]Member12[S] 39 points40 points41 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Usually, you get put on for life. There are instance of 10 or 20 years etc., But because of the transparency on the web, once you are on it you are essentially a lifer.

[–]CACKENBOOLS 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah, but it wouldn't mean nearly as much in 1975 and my spider senses are tingling. I'm also just curious if that is part of why it is so fucked today.

[–]Member12[S] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, even if you are on it for what, 7 years say, it's online forever.

If you ever have to register, you are pretty much screwed.

[–]Funcuz 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Very much depends on where you live.

These registries go pretty far back but the part about where they become tools for mob justice was fairly recent. Around 1990 to 2000 is when the fun started for most jurisdictions. Prior to that they were literally reserved for the worst of the worst and it wasn't public knowledge exactly. I mean, it was public the same way that knowing where your sewer outlet is located underground is public knowledge.

[–]Member12[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's when it got changed to drunk college kids peeing outdoors and anyone else who even comes close to that category.

[–]BlundersuitMacGoose 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In 1947, California became the first state in the United States to have a sex offender registration program.

Was that really so hard? Maybe some people don't trust Wikipedia, but that quote has a direct reference.

[–]jcorkern 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This is why I tell people we don't need anymore laws because of the unintended consequences that follow them. There are over 65k pages just in the tax code. Find one lawyer that knows the entire tax code, much less anything else.

There are about 20,000 laws just governing the use and ownership of guns. New laws mean new crimes. From the start of 2000 through 2007, Congress had created at least 452 new crimes, so that at that time the total number of Federal crimes exceeded 4,450.

We haven't talked state, local and county laws and ordinances or international law, which govern some of our laws. Congress just nullified a law on place of origin labels on meats that the World Trade Organization ruled on like they are somebody, or are they? So now we have to contend with this now. A private for profit organization that dictates the laws of sovereign states, but not in the best interest of the people, who own the state.

Sooner or later we are all criminals because you can't get through a day without violating a law with that many on the books. It's virtually impossible to remain an innocent citizen when the bozo's that stupid, (pretty much moronic) citizens allow to be written. In fact, the very laws we are talking about in this post are a prime example of the intent of the law being ignored and using it for profit.

I warned people about this as an early teen, and exactly what I feared would happen has in fact happened.

This is just like the FCC regulating internet, it's not going to work out for we the people, but will work fine for government and corporations.

Suggesting any other outcome is plain out silly, or worse, blind ignorance.

I an not sure ir you are old enough to remember these laws being passed, but i do and within 4 years a friend of mine who was 19 at the time picked up a girl in a bar, that had city police officers checking ID's for entry to the bar. He done 7 years for carnal knowledge of a minor (a blow job) and will remain on the registry for the rest of his life. The girl was 17, but was in a bar with police checking ID's.

I hate to put it this plainly, but anyone who supports ANY new law is a moron since pretty much any crime possible is already covered in some form or fashion with the bludgeon of laws we have now.

I think there should be a massive public push to simplify the laws and eliminate 99% of them and stop making special laws.

[–]CommanderZx2 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They have a massive incentive to create new laws and so find new ways to incarcerate people, as prison are for profit. With prisons being money making corporations, effectively slave labour, they lobby the government to put people away for longer and for more trivial reasons.

[–]jcorkern 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And we have a massive incentive to stop them.

[–]girraween 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I told a story on here about holding in my piss on a trip to Vegas because I didn't want to risk getting put on the sex registry. I'm not from America so I didn't want to chance it. Some people made fun of me for it. But hey, if the risk is being put on a list I want to hold it in.

[–]fozzie1984 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Happens here in the uk as well.one of my friend got put on for 10 years i think for pissing in an alley.he was in the army as well so got retrospectivly punished by the army as well

[–]Member12[S] 40 points41 points42 points 11 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

We are tired of this society and their ridiculous laws which are meant to stop sex offenders from hurting children, not JAILING teenagers for having consensual sex and ruining ones life in the process.

This is the state of the world and the law we live in. It is the first time in the history of mankind this type of ludicrous nonsense and totally appalling and I mean absolutely repugnant sentencing and condemning from our own justice system is occurring on this matter.

We need to protect our children from actual perverts. Not this grey area BS that's destroying young men's lives.

Also, that judge is atrocious and needs to be taken off the stand immediately.

Here is the story: http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/03/us/dating-app-sex-offender-registry/index.html

Top of Reddit front page as well

[–]NaughtierLink 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's good we are getting to the front page. I just hope people that don't know much about Men's Rights will see this and learn about it.

[+]NWVoS -13 points-12 points-11 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

You posted this talking about feeling great for following girls under 18 on instagram. I don't think you fall into the grey area. I screenshotted it, so no taking it back for you.

[–]zer0t3ch 12 points13 points14 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Following teenagers on instagram while in your mid-20's is not perverted.

The human race (largely men, as far as attraction to females go) has evolved to be attracted to things like symmetry, wide hips, or large breasts, and there are reasons for this, but they are irrelevant. As girls begin to display these features midway and late in puberty, they are, as far as our primal instinct goes, attractive. Yes, there are problems when people are exclusively attracted to younger people, or act on these attractions with someone under the age of consent, but the only thing "wrong" with being attracted to them is the societal barrier. As an 18 y/o in a 17 y/o age of consent state, I am sexually attracted to a lot of 15 and 16 y/o, but I know I can't do anything with them, so I don't pursue it, but masking these attractions (much like any emotions) can cause mental health issues.

[+]NWVoS -14 points-13 points-12 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I posted it because /u/member12 is rather sanctimonious in his post.

I also don't care enough to debate the problems with your argument of evolution programed men and it's just the social barrier that makes it wrong.

[–]Member12[S] 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You don't care enough to debate, yet you still debated anyway.

Hmmmm, interesting.

[+]NWVoS -12 points-11 points-10 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What exactly did I debate? I simply explained why I posted my comment. I explicitly said I wasn't going to debate the problems with /u/zer0t3ch argument. I'm still not going to debate his argument.

[–]zer0t3ch 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I only said attraction is evolution based, and that is an undeniable fact.

[–]Member12[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Lol, this was like the 7th time you repeated the word 'sanctimonious'.

Is it the only five syllable word you know? Lmao.

Mix it up a little

[+]Bubos 11 years ago* [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

Aaah yes the good old illegal act of having consensual sex. That judge is one of those guys still scared by the internet who thinks everyone who uses it is a leet haxx0r and out to harm civilization.

He let his personal reasons and beliefs weigh stronger than anything else:

"That seems to be part of our culture now," he said, according to a transcript. "Meet, have sex, hook up, sayonara. Totally inappropriate behavior. There is no excuse for this whatsoever."

Let the justice flow through you

[–]bosoxdanc 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What a fucking joke. Oh, you're not into casual sex, judge? Cool, but isn't your job to be objective in a situation like this?

[–]scdi 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Aaah yes the good old illegal act of having consensual sex.

This is assuming a 14 year old can consent. What gets me if that most of the people protesting this says a 14 year old cannot consent. There is still plenty of reason to get mad at the judge rejecting the plea deal, but it seems most people who want it to be illegal for a 14/19 year old couple to have sex are mad that the 19 year old in such a couple got punished for having sex.

[+]Bubos 11 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

I am sorry, but I have difficulty understanding what you are trying to say here. Are you mad at people who think that a 14 year old can consent. Or are you mad at people who think that a 14 year old can't consent. Not trying to start some shit here I really just can't figure it out and I might be dumb haha.

Personally I think that in this case it is pretty clear. She used an online dating app on her own, used it to meet someone and pretended to be older than she was, so he wouldn't reject her. Seems pretty consensual to me

[–]scdi 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A little of column A, a little of column B.

In short, I'm not really mad at any one, but instead I'm perplexed because it appears people are getting mad at something either way it works.

There are three things at work here:

  1. A rape victim never deserves it. There is nothing a rape victim could have done that would have meant she deserves to be raped. As such, none of her actions can ever be used as a defense to say it wasn't rape. (Except for her giving consent. What I am trying to say is that if we agree the sex was non-consensual, there is nothing she could have done that should have any impact on if the rapist is punished.)

  2. Statutory rape is rape. Pretty clear and simple.

  3. A 14 year old cannot consent to sex with a 19 year old. Even with general close in age exceptions to age of consent, 5 years is too much.

(Remember, these are the views of the people I'm perplexed about it. These may or may not be my own views.)

So given all this, why are people made the guy got punished? Yes, ignoring the plea deal was wrong and a reason to get mad, but he should still be guilty of a crime, just no have been sentenced so hard. But the people getting mad over this thinks he should be innocent. But for him to be innocent, then one of the three above points must not hold. Yet those who are made still say all three points hold. Thus I'm confused.

Seems pretty consensual to me

So are you saying a 14 year old should be allowed to consent to sex with a 19 year old?

Or are you saying that a 14 year old who lies about her age cannot be the victim of statutory rape?

Or are you saying that in some cases, such as this one, statutory rape isn't rape?

[–]tonyespresso 14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That judge is totally out of control. This is an outrage.

[–]basedbobby 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Shouldn't have pleaded guilty and spent more on a lawyer. They tricked him into a plea deal type situation but fucked him over. This should've been dropped if you had the right person working for you

[–]Member12[S] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

He most likely had an awful lawyer. I agree, but what can you do.

[–]basedbobby 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's unfortunate man considering what she said about lying and her parents also stating he should be free. Judges should be more in tune with the situation at hand. How the fuck do you justify not letting him walk after this testimonies? Christ

[–]Member12[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This judge is just terrible. His concluding statement didn't even have anything to do with the charge.

He simply said the equivalent of, 'Don't go meeting girls on that internet, son!'

Luckily this is trending now. I just want the petition to hit 200k so the parents and his family can hopefully get some real legal assistance on this abhorrent abuse of power.

[–]PlaneHijacker 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Can we petition and rally up enough votes for Congress to see and get this judge atleast tried for impeachment?

[–]pnw_diver 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

One petition, signed. Hopefully this Jerk Judge will get backed up to the wall and have to overturn his own decision.

[–]Member12[S] 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

His concluding statement was disgusting. Didn't even have anything to do with the charge.

"Don't use the internet to talk to girls. Case closed."

[–]pnw_diver 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Texas is infamous for its looney criminal justice system, and this life-wrecking Jerk Judge seems a fine example of that.

[–]SaviorCastiel 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I can't even describe how much this pisses me off. It seems like the judge's decision was solely based on his own opinion.

[–]chrispdx 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Isn't this the same kid we've been reading about on Reddit for like the last month?

[–]Member12[S] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, but CNN just released a new story on it today with an exclusive interview. So it came back up, and they are only 30,000 votes short of 200,000 which is huge.

We can do this guys. Maybe justice for one will be justice for all. So much support for such an obviously unjust case. It's so good.

[+]Ransom_Stoddard 11 years ago* [recovered] (7 children) | Copy Link

I believe they should appeal and keep appealing any negative judgements, because they have a "good faith" defense, in which the young man had no idea he was committing a crime, because the horny little worthless cunt lied about her age.

Legal Precedent: United States v. Kantor

In US v. Kantor, which concerned underage pornographic actress Traci Lords, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals introduced a "good faith" defense against strict liability crimes in which the victim intentionally tricked the defendants into a factual mistake believing that no crime was being committed, which since has been adopted as precedent throughout the United States. A "good faith" defense requires showing that the defendant affirmatively had reason to believe that they were not committing a crime, not simply a lack of knowledge that they were.

More Info: Good Faith Defenses: Reshaping Strict Liability Crimes, by Laurie L. Levinson (PDF)

If they have a legal fund donation, this would be a good one to donate to.

EDIT: Apparently, the young man plead guilty, so there are no appeals possible.

[–]Karissa36 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

He already plead guilty so the conviction can't be appealed. Their only hope is that the judge will voluntarily reduce his sentence.

[–]Ransom_Stoddard2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Unfortunate.

[–]scdi 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

He already plead guilty so the conviction can't be appealed.

Since appeals can be coerced, this is bullshit.

[–]Karissa36 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think that you meant that guilty pleas can be coerced. However, there is no evidence that happened here. He had a private attorney. What happened here is an unexpected case of judicial discretion. A prosecutor and a defense attorney can agree to recommend X punishment for a guilty plea, (or at least that the prosecutor won't oppose the defense attorney's recommendation), and most of the time a judge will just rubber stamp that. However, a judge does not have to agree and rarely a judge will impose a different sentence. That's what happened here.

[–]hfxRos 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I thought i read somewhere that because the terms of his plea deal were broken through some dirty trick by the prosecutor he may have a way out of it.

[–]Karissa36 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The terms were not broken. A prosecutor can agree to recommend a certain sentence, or to not oppose it when a defense attorney recommends a certain sentence, but the judge has sole discretion in what sentence is given. Most of the time a judge will follow the agreement, but not always. So the prosecutor can never absolutely promise a certain sentence.

The parents seem very legally unsophisticated here. Their petition asks the prosecutor to drop all charges. This is impossible because Zachery has already plead guilty and been found guilty as a result. (Their best option to over turn this now is through a pardon, which is not easy to obtain.) Their petition should focus solely on asking the judge to reduce the sentence so that he is not on the sex offender list.

I think this problem occurred because Zachary both plead guilty and then presented a defense through witnesses that he didn't do anything wrong. To most judges it is a real slap in the face to say basically, "Yes, I broke the law but the law is stupid." "I'm sorry and I will never do it again" is the appropriate thing to say at a sentencing hearing for your plea bargain. Bringing in a 14 year old statutory rape victim to say it was all her fault that a man 5 years older fucked her at a playground within 2 hours of meeting her and he shouldn't be punished at all was a very bad strategy. At best, Zachary was pretty reckless about being sure of her real age. This was one of those times where he should have sucked it up, not pissed off the judge.

That being said, I hope the judge reduces the sentence. He doesn't belong on the sex offender list.

[–]enzikio3 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't think much will change. Even with United States v. Kantor, I have ready plenty of cases since then where a "good faith" defense should have been employed but wasn't even mentioned.

But strict liability has been extremely warped to the point of breaking. If you haven't read/seen this comic it is well worth the time:

http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=1008

[–]MarinTaranu 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why didn't he go for a jury trial and hope for jury nullification? Or just a Not Guilty verdict? Bad move. I think the lawyer pushed him to accept a guilty plea.

[–]HeyZuesHChrist 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The sex offenders registry becomes useless when it's littered with people who aren't actual sex offenders. If we keep this up there will come a day when nobody cares about it anymore because it won't be a reliable tool to determine if you're living close to somebody who might be a threat. When everyone is a sex offender, nobody is.

[–]myunholysins 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

How did the case even go to court, if the parents of the girl were on zachs side?

[–]watercolourstain 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I'd like to know the answer to this as well. From my understanding it is usually the parents of the victim that press charges and then a case can go to court if it gets that far.

[–]Cyrano89 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

There are several instances where crimes can be considered against the whole community, even if there was only one direct victim. Murder and pedophilia are fine examples of limited victims but having a larger impact. Therefore most cases like this, the prosecution represents the community as a whole, regardless of what the individual victim wants.

That said, this judge is freaking nuts, and should immediately be recalled or impeached and disbarred for such a gross abuse of power. The sentence doesn't fit the crime. Hopefully they could appeal under "cruel and unusual punishment" and at least try to get a higher court involved.

[–]actofgod22 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

just to clear something up, hooking up with a 14 year old that can pass as a 17 year old would not fit into the pedophilia category. Pedophiles aren't attracted to secondary sex characteristics.

[–]scdi 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Murder and pedophilia

Murder and sexual orientation are not alike.

[–]hwells6643 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Doesn't matter, I was in the system a while ago and well, the laws are getting worse. I knew a guy who was 18 and had a 17 year old girlfriend, she sent him pics and they were both in trouble he had receipt of cbild pornography and she got distribution and manufacturing. Literally his co-defendant was his "victim" on the flip side she was the perpetrator and the victim in the same crime.
But it doesn't stop there. Here is a list of things that'll get you a child porn charge: Looking at legal porn where the woman pretends to be underage ("pretends" is a vague term, so if the woman is wearing a schoolgirl uniform, you could be arrested) posting images of yourself as a child in the bathtub online, posting images of your clothed child at the beach, if you open the spam mail in your email, your spam probably has a bit, one image = 5 years. Or lets say an FBI agent decides to send you an image, if you cannot prove that they were with the FBI you will be charged with receipt even if you didn't look at it. If you even accidentally download it, you're more than likely to be charged and convicted.
Whats bullshit about the last one is that there is four things that need to be proven to actually be convicted. Except, how do you prove that? You can't even if you never looked at it or had it on your computer and they say you did, you can't prove that you didn't, there is no way.
There is a 0% acquittal rate for child pornography in our country, and a roughly 3% case dismissal rate. With the amount of people falsely imprisoned in the U.S. they're not all guilty, but also, they are, in the sense of how the law will screw you over once you're in the Fed system. As my lawyer exained to me (on a seperate type of charge mind you, fraud) "Laws were not made for defendants"
TL;DR: They can arrest you for whatever they want, they will force you into a plea or take years, hell DECADES, fighting your case, just to lose. The child pornography laws are so flimsy, watching regular porn can result into you being branded a pedophile. And there is hardly a way to prove you did not commit the crime.
Just a side story, there was a guy in Federal holding who asserted that he was innocent, he was there for two years. His mandatory minimum sentence for his level of child pornography offense was 25 years, they dropped it down to 20 years, then 15, then 10, then 5, then tbey went to 10 years probation, 5 years probation, then full time served, he denies all of the pleas so he can go free. Sadly, he won't, once the Feds get you, they have you.

[–]MaestroLogical 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Because the DA's win rate needed padding and they knew the judge would lend an assist.

[–]ixfd64 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The girl's mother called police after thinking her daughter was missing. He dropped her off just minutes later, and that should have been the end of the case. However, the nosy deputy wanted to look at the girl's computer, and saw Zach's name on it. Another good reason to not let police search your computer without a warrant.

[–]myunholysins 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wow that's really messed up! I can't believe they can even do stuff like this.

[–]Torpedo_Borec 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wait, he can't use a computer? What? Is that a sentence a judge can give? If I was in that situation I would just get a fake passport and got to mexico.

[–]xCAPTAINxTEXASx 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Signed. The judge is an asshole.

[–]Tarnsman4Life 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Statutory rape laws need to have some element of good faith. If a store makes a reasonable effort to card an underaged teen and they present a believable fake ID, the store is not typically held at fault.

If I ask to see a womans ID to prove she is 18 before I fuck her, its a good fake, and I fuck her, turns out she is only 16, I am the criminally liable one?

This is one fucked up area of law plain and simple. It needs to be written to distinguish between people who prey on minors, knowing they are minors, targeting minors and people who act in good faith to establish someone is an adult only to be deceived by fraud.

[–]ursnoni 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

sex offender registery?? what is that?

[+]thehumungus -60 points-59 points-58 points 11 years ago* (48 children) | Copy Link

He IS a sex offender. He had sex with a minor. That's not in dispute. Just because you think he's being over-punished doesn't mean he didn't do something wrong.

The "her parents are cool with it" argument is pretty invalid. If her parents hated the kid's guts and wanted him punished, would you accept that, too? If a 15 year old's parents are cool with a 45 year old man having sex with her, is that acceptable?

Having statutory rape be a strict liability crime (meaning you don't have to prove any criminal intent, that just doing the action is enough) makes sense. If an older person convinces a younger person to have a sexual relationship with them, it wouldn't also be hard for them to convince that person to say they lied about their age, get them a fake id, etc.

The level of punishment doesn't make sense, but 19 year olds, men or women, SHOULD be punished for having sex with 15 year olds.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+]thehumungus -30 points-29 points-28 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

I think it should probably be a misdemeanor if you can't prove intent/knowledge, but I think there should still be some punishment.

It's not that hard to not fuck people that are a lot younger than you, and sexual predators are out there actively trying to find ways to fuck children. They shouldn't be able to maintain a willful ignorance of the age of the people they're fucking as a defense.

[–]Gnomish8 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

The fact that she lied and claimed to be 17 ruins this case for me... Had he known she was 15 and still gone for it, then sure, convict. She lied, claimed to be 17 (2 year age difference), and was using an app with the intent to have sex with other people. IMO, he's not a sex offender. I realize strict liability crimes are a thing, but I still feel mens rea should have to be met...

[+]thehumungus -26 points-25 points-24 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I mean, he knows she's a minor, and is hoping to fall within the romeo+juliet exceptions. I think in that situation he should be maintaining a pretty high level of care. It's known that women, especially young women, lie about their age. He knew she was below the age of consent.

Now, I'm not saying he should be on the sex offender registry, but he deserves some punishment, in my opinion.

[–]Gnomish8 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Unless age of consent in that state is 16. Not entirely sure, haven't looked it up. Anyways, a 2 year age difference (what he believed it was) I don't feel justifies the punishment. Maybe community service for both of them (him for the act, her for lying) I could get behind, but not this...

[–]Member12[S] 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

The more and more you speak, the less and less educated you seem.

Check age of consent laws by state including the year gaps for allowance.

Also wow, you are a stupid person. Read one book, ever.

[+]thehumungus -15 points-14 points-13 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Thank you for the high-quality response. I've come to expect only the best here, and you've lived up to that expectation.

[–]Member12[S] 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

As a liberal feminist, I am sure your expectations weren't very high to begin with. Yawn

[+]thehumungus -11 points-10 points-9 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

As a liberal feminist, I am sure your expectations weren't very high to begin with. Yawn

Grammatically you're implying you're a liberal feminist, which I find amusing.

Why are you using liberal like a slur in this subreddit? Are liberals not allowed to be involved in men's rights?

[–]Member12[S] 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Actually, I wasn't.

If I had said, "As a liberal feminist, my expectations weren't very high to begin with." That would be a different story.

So grammatically, you are also incompetent as well. Fantastic.

Also, I was using liberal just as it seems in the context of the sentence, meaning an ample, open feminist. I don't think anyone has mentioned politics at all for you to even infer that. So silly.

[–]Member12[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh, I am so sorry. You might not have known some words have more than one meaning.

My apologies, ha.

Again, you should really try reading sometime, you might like it!

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+]thehumungus -11 points-10 points-9 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Just spitballing:

Allow some age gap (if you're within 3 years, it's fine)

Minimum age (not allowed to mount "mistake of age" defense at all if the young person is younger than 15, or if you're more than 10 years older than the younger person)

the "mistake of age" must be demonstrated to a high standard ("they said they were 19" not allowed, has to be that you met the person in an area where minors weren't allowed, or that you can demonstrate that the person made a concerted effort to falsify their age)

[+]Endless_Summer 11 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

So you want her charged with fraud, right?

[–]thehumungus 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

sure, why not.

[–]Endless_Summer6 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Wow, that's the first thing you've said that was rational.

[–]Member12[S] 22 points23 points24 points 11 years ago* (27 children) | Copy Link

The "her parents are cool with it" argument?

Apparently the "lied about her age" part is a little confusing to you, isn't it? You are so polluted with social constructs and narrow-mindedness, you couldn't even read the whole story, put it in perspective, or give a valid opinion. You are the definition of having a 1 dimensional mind.

Go back to Buzzfeed/feminism, I am sure they need their village idiot back. Thanks.

[+]thehumungus -24 points-23 points-22 points 11 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

I specifically addressed the fact that statutory rape is a strict liability crime, and the basic reason why it is that way.

Do you think it's okay for 19 year olds to have sex with 15 year olds?

[–]CACKENBOOLS 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you think it's okay for 19 year olds to have sex with 15 year olds?

The reasons why it is wrong don't always apply to the same degree and sometimes not at all. At that age, a big reason might be his ability to decieve her. Note how the opposite happened.

I think your problem might be that you are pointing out the letter of the law when you in fact either agree with it or at least place value on it in a sense that, yes, that is how laws work for some pretty sound reasons. Those things are easily conflated. The details of the case make you sound like a dope though.

You aren't here to argue about it being fair and neither are we. Nobody is reversing genders because you probably couldn't even find a legal precedent. It's just an observation that maybe a law like this shouldn't be able to be so subjectively enforced.

[–]KingMong 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Actually yes I do, because it's legal where I was raised

[+]thehumungus -9 points-8 points-7 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Huh. Where is that?

Pretty much feels obviously wrong to me.

[–]KingMong 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Europe ranges from, 14-16 depending on country, and nobody is honestly that bothered about it, 19 is maybe pushing it a little but sexuality isn't a big deal here, teens are gonna do it, this case wouldn't even be an issue anywhere here, because she lied and even places where the age is, 16 he would probably be protected because the age range is pretty close

[–]PunxTatto 19 points20 points21 points 11 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

What part of lying about her age do you not get? Are you suck on stupid or intentionally ignoring that fact for convenience of your opinion?

[+]thehumungus -21 points-20 points-19 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

What part should I get?

Do you know what a strict liability crime is? I mean, thanks for the name calling etc, but I don't even understand what you're trying to communicate here.

[–]Member12[S] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

This is what happens when you have people who look at the law in a literal manner and lack any common sense behind their notion supporting it.

Laws says lots of things, does that mean they function? No, and this case is the perfect example of just that occurring.

A 19 year old kid, thinking he's having consensual sex with a girl his age that he met off a dating app, has his life ruined and is now a registered sex offender until 2040.

You and your 'strict liability' defense, can legitimately fuck off. The law is the reason he's in this garbage predicament, you don't need to go on with your continued redundancy trying to make your defense stand. It has no merit.

Strict liability works to give appropriate punishment with most cases, did it work here? Nope, obviously not you inept fuck.

[–]NWVoS -5 points-4 points-3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This is what happens when you have people who look at the law in a literal manner

That is exactly what judges and lawyers are suppose to do. It is also how jurors should convict.

This case is a prime example of that application. The law says don't have sex with 14yo and nothing else matters. It doesn't matter to the law if she lied. Only the written letter matter to the law. What matters is he had sex with her.

Hell, he could be in jail for 1-6 years since it is a level 5 felony. He was in for 90 days. I would take 25 years of being on the sex offender list over 6 years of jail any day.

[–]Member12[S] 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

The ignorance is so strong. I was responding to the user above me, not the lawyers and the judge you idiot. If you already knew that and still continued, I have no idea why. Obviously, that is what happens and how people are convicted in the court of law, it's not even up for debate? Lmao

That aside don't quote a single sentence and make 4 paragraph response. Why don't you read my whole post and digest that you one dimensional plebeian.

[+]NWVoS -6 points-5 points-4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Strict liability works to give appropriate punishment with most cases, did it work here? Nope, obviously not you inept fuck.

Yes it did work here, because this dumb kid realized she lied, but said fuck it and fucked her. She's 14 they are obvious as day.

You and your 'strict liability' defense, can legitimately fuck off. The law is the reason he's in this garbage predicament, you don't need to go on with your continued redundancy trying to make your defense stand. It has no merit.

Strict liability is the only thing that matters because that is what the law says. The law says there is no defense for fucking a 14yo. What is so wrong with that? It protects children, which is far more important than a kid who fucked a 14yo knowingly.

A 19 year old kid, thinking he's having consensual sex with a girl his age that he met off a dating app, has his life ruined and is now a registered sex offender until 2040.

Anyone can tell a 14yo apart from a 18/19yo. It doesn't take a genius. This kid thought he could get away with it and is now suffering the consequences of his choice.

Laws says lots of things, does that mean they function? No, and this case is the perfect example of just that occurring.

Well petition to have the law changed. In this instances, if you remove strict liability from the law it opens children up to sexual exploitation the law could not prosecute.

This is what happens when you have people who look at the law in a literal manner and lack any common sense behind their notion supporting it.

I agree with how the law is written and feel no sympathy for this kid. I very much understand the reasoning behind the as written, and I think it meshes well with common sense.

tl/dr Happy?

[–]tabphab 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Do you demand to see ID before having sex with someone?

[+]thehumungus -22 points-21 points-20 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

I'm too old to get involved with women anywhere close to the age of consent.

[–]agiganticpanda 12 points13 points14 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

So you're basing your argument based on your own age vs the age of the person involved?

You don't see the problem in that?

[+]thehumungus -19 points-18 points-17 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I'm not basing my argument on that. I'm answering the question I was asked.

[–]Member12[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Also, you should add common sense to that ever expanding list of things for you to try. You're running hot today.

[–]agiganticpanda 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Then at least answer the question in the context of the issue.

While you may not be currently be looking for barely legal 18 year olds, what about the context of the issue at hand.

[–]thehumungus-7 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If I were trying to engage in any "barely legal" activity, I would be careful to make sure I'm within the boundaries of the law.

[–]Urnotgonnalikeme2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Lol you're going to die alone.

[–]thehumungus-2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Lol you're going to die alone.

Thank you for the high-quality response. I've come to expect only the best here, and you've lived up to that expectation.

[–]Urnotgonnalikeme2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well, it's the truth.

[–]thick_knees2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

you're truely an idiot. you can't even see it. you actually believe your own stupidity. unreal

[–]Member12[S] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

You're not old, shut up. Pretentious, but not old.

[–]Endless_Summer3 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes.

[–]randomthought9 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I don't think it's worth ruining someone's life over. He's not some hardcore child abuser. I don't think it's right for 19 year olds to sleep with 15 year olds, but it's not THAT big a difference. 19 year olds aren't the most mature people either.

If the girl's parents think he doesn't deserve the punishment, then the matter should be settled. I highly doubt this guy is a predator because he slept with a girl he thought was 17, as a 19 year old. At worst, he should do community service.

The problem is the judge, who felt the need to moralize, and get on his high horse. If this was a judge criticizing female sexuality, you'd call it slut shaming, and call for his head.

[–]thehumungus 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

When you say "should be settled" do you mean in the legal sense? Because that can't be done. The victim cannot settle out a criminal case, or prosecute it, or drop charges. The government prosecutor prosecutes criminal cases.

As I discuss above, there is good reason not to rely on the determination of the parents.

I do agree that this punishment seems harsh, but that's not really what I'm talking about here.

[–]randomthought9 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What's legal isn't always right. The prisons are filled with innocent people who couldn't afford to have proper legal representation, or play the game. That's another topic though.

This isn't right, this guy is obviously not a predator. He's a 19 year old who thought he was meeting a 17 year old. There's nothing wrong with that.

The parents isn't the only factor, but it should partially apply. This guy thought he was meeting a 17 year old, she lied, and was really 15. Is there really a big difference between 15 and 17?

19 year olds and 15 year olds together should be discouraged, but also not punished that harshly. It's not that big a difference. In other places, such as Europe, the age of consent is lower.

I'm not saying grown adults should be with teenagers, but 19 is hardly a grown adult. Legally, yes. But 19 year olds are still pretty immature. You've got to look at intent. Is this guy a predator, preying on young girls who don't know better? Not knowingly. I think a 19 year old meeting a 15 year old girl should be judged less harsh than, say a 25 year old guy.

When I was 19, I ended up meeting a girl who lied about her age. She said she was 18, but was really 15 or 16, I found out later. We met at school in the summer, I was going to community college. What are the odds she was a HS student? I thought she was my age.

She added me on social media years later, and I saw her real age. We didn't have sex or anything, just kiss. But I could have easily been this guy, and had my life ruined over it. I would have never hung out with her if I knew her real age. I'm sure this guy feels the same way.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]thehumungus -5 points-4 points-3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Thank you for the high-quality response. I've come to expect only the best here, and you've lived up to that expectation.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Dramahwhore 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh look, he's wrong and you're a cunt making the men's rights movement look bad

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter