Government-emitted ID proves she is 20. Men could not know she is 15, but will go to prison for underage sex, child porn | Due to strict liability laws, there is no safe way for men to have sex or watch porn.

tomek77 · 2011-07-26T19:45:34+00:00

I don't understand how this application of the law can possibly be constitutional; isn't it "cruel and unusual" punishment?

How can someone be punished for a crime he didn't know he was committing, especially if all reasonable and available precautions were taken to abide the law? What was he supposed to do.. remove one of her teeth and carbon-date it??

On a somewhat related note: if you ever sit on a jury where a man is being railroaded, please don't forget that you have the right to "nullify the jury"; it is your right as a citizen to find the defendant not guilty and ignore the judge's instructions, if you believe that the application of the law is unconstitutional. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

curious67 · 2011-07-26T19:23:26+00:00

Strict liability and mens rea: go to prison even if you did all possible precautions to avoid a crime

Strict liability makes sense in minor crimes, if it does not need to be proven a defendant knew that there was a non-parking sign. But would anyone be convicted of a parking violation if he could prove that government had put a "Parking" sign there? No! Such insanity only is valid in criminal sex persecutions, 95% of which are against men. If you read legal literature [1] [2] [3] [4] about lack of "mens rea" and "strict liability", it was never meant as means to imprison men that can prove they did everything to assure they only do legal acts. Even if the man can prove that there was no "No Parking" sign, that is enough to prove his innocence, an explicit sign that parking is allowed would not be needed.

The lawsuit against RK Netmedia, which Sherrita Smalley filed in Miami-Dade court this past December, is still developing. Attorney Grossman says Imber's LLL Advertising will soon be added as a defendant. Florida criminal law decrees that "a minor's misrepresentation of his or her age... may not be raised as a defense" in statutory rape prosecution.

This is called "strict liability crime" [1] [2] [3] [4]

The liability is said to be strict because defendants will be convicted even though they were genuinely ignorant of one or more factors that made their acts or omissions criminal. The defendants may therefore not be culpable in any real way, i.e. there is not even criminal negligence, the least blameworthy level of mens rea.

prodevel · 2011-07-27T00:44:21+00:00

By emitted, I think you meant issued.

TrueButSad · 2011-07-27T11:55:51+00:00

I wonder what would happen if this was a 15 year old boy.

kragshot · 2011-07-27T02:08:00+00:00

Just remember Rob Lowe....

thedevilsdictionary · 2011-07-26T19:33:57+00:00

But but.. I didn't mean to fuck no kid.. damnit, now I'm going to jail as a kid fucker! Woah.

Comments