Quote Originally Posted by Taernath View Post
You must not have read the article describing what happened. She lied about her age, saying she was 17. At his sentencing both she and her mom spoke out against making him a sex offender, which the judge ignored because of some kind of apparent moral crusade.
I did read the article but that's why consent laws such as this exist, to protect people that society has deemed to be vulnerable. In this case no and yes both mean no, and for good reason. I think it would be a dangerous precedent to set that people could avoid being charged with a crime as long as the victim speaks on the defendant's behalf.

I also think the person who wrote that article misunderstood this quote of the judge:

"You went online…trolling for women to meet and have sex with. That seems to be part of our culture now: meet, hook up, have sex, sayonara. Totally inappropriate behavior. There is no excuse for this, whatsoever."

The author took it to mean "You wanted to meet women for sex. You're scum."

To me the judge is saying people are so concerned with having "the sex" these days that they don't even bother to get to know the person first anymore. Which is fine. If that's the way you want to do things who am I to stop you? But then you should be prepared to pay the consequences if it turns out that 19 year old woman you had sex with last night was really a 14 year old girl. You didn't want to bother to get to know them first to make sure they are at least 18 then you pay the price afterwards. I think that's what the judge meant by "There is no excuse for this." The man was looking to place the blame on the girl for lying about her age.

I have more sympathy for these men if they meet these underage girls in a club where you have to be at least 18 to enter or meet them at a bar. At least there is a reasonable belief that they might actually be of age. But anyone can create an online profile and claim they are 18. If you don't take the time to gauge their real age then that should be on you.