re: BR: 13 year old girl raped by teen, HIV positive

quote:

---

 How did she contract the virus?

---

Probably from the drug needles she uses.

quote:

---

He turned himself in which I would assume is an admission of guilt.

---

What?

So if I see myself on the news accused of something I didn't do, I should run away?

How the hell does going to the police equal an admission of guilt? It can just as easily mean the opposite.

quote:

---

Sounds like you want this to be a classic case of the dindu

---

Not at all, and if you think that you aren't paying close enough attention to my posts in here (much less in simikar threads).

quote:

---

If he statutorily raped this young girl, why no lynch mob?

---

*If*
Lynch mob isn't waiting for the *if*.

Feels better to play the odds, and judge everyone from the start now based on nothing but the prelim findings. Then *if* it turns out to be false...well then we will pretend it never happened.

Cliff notes: It's not that fricking hard; not saying the guy is innocent in the slightest but there are irregularities in the girls story to make treating her report as ironclad gospel right now silly . Doesn't mean it didn't happen that way, but it does mean it's fairly stupid to go full Lemming and get on the bash band wagon as if this story affected you in the slightest.

quote:

---

s specifically says that he does have the disease.

---

No, it says the victim tested positive for HIV. It does not say specifically that the accused has the disease. Although the first sentence is unclear since the subordinate clause could apply to either the victim or the accused. Another case of poor journalism.

quote:

---

What? So if I see myself on the news accused of something I didn't do, I should run away? How the hell does going to the police equal an admission of guilt? It can just as easily mean the opposite.

---

Alright so lets break this down. First, I would never "turn myself in" for a crime I did not commit. Regardless of the repercussions, I would know I am innocent until proven guilty; the burden is not on me to prove my innocence. Nor is it for this kid. So yes, I am assuming by "turning himself in" that it means he is acknowledging the fact he AT THE LEAST had sex (statutorily raped)and possibly gave her HIV.

Second, she got HIV from somewhere, and she is only 13. I would venture to say she has not had many sexual encounters (hopefully). Therefore, the field of guilty candidates should be relatively small. I'm sure she did not randomly choose this guy to blame.


Third, as for the lynch mob. I would assume many people read the article and interpreted it like I did. When it says he turned himself in, they are assuming guilt for the reason I mentioned above.

FWIW, I could be completely wrong. He could be innocent. He may not even know this girl. He may be an outstanding student and upstanding citizen. But if I were a betting man, I would say that he got a little too horny thinking about some 13-year-old poon and decided he was going to smash at all costs. And here we are.

quote:

---

Victims don't come forward for rape all the time, for many reasons...once the blood test came back, it went from rape to rape and murder. The guy gave her a death sentence and could do it to others. She should be congratulated for being brave enough to come forward.

---

Only if he gave it to her; the bad journalism of this article makes it impossible to determine.

quote:

---

Is it possible that the 13 year-old girl has been sexually active, and the positive HIV test disclosed that fact. and she claimed it was non-consensual to avoid disclosing other sexual activities or that she was a willing participant? Couldn't your "scared, embarrassed, don't want to deal with it etc etc" conditions apply to consensual sex by the 13 year-old, and the rape claim is a way of avoiding those issues?

---

And yet again, this is all irrelevant to the case at hand. Right or wrong, a 13-year-old can not, by law, consent to sex. Therefore, any sexual act performed with a 13-year-old is considered statutory rape. What you are suggesting is possible in that she has consented to and had sex with multiple partners. But it doesn't matter, and if that is the case, then she could claim rape against anyone she has had sex with.

quote:

---

So you won't work to straighten it out but rather flee the area. Gotcha. Because any point of dialogue to straighten it out will involve you being in custody, no matter how brief.

---

All I can say is show me where I said I would flee?? WTF are you even saying at this point?

Quit being a simpleton and quit putting words in my mouth.

I would never "turn myself in" for a crime I did not commit because if I did, I would be indicted for a crime I didn't commit.

Very sad story...though not extremely surprising given how BR is #4 in the country for HIV diagnoses. Regardless of what really happened, a 13-year-old should not have HIV...(and if he was the one that gave it to her, he should be put away for a long time)

Luckily, it's not the death sentence it once was.

quote:

---

Not sure what your point is

---

What is the appropriate punishment? Statutory rape when there was consent does not deserve anywhere close to the same punishment as forced non-consensual sex. Given the accused is only 4 years older than the 13 year-old victim, the crime of carnal knowledge of a juvenile is only a misdemeanor. First degree rape is a felony. That is my point.