Kate Hunt and Statutory Rape Laws

[prisonchaplain]

» Suddenly, statutory rape no longer applies » News -- GOPUSA

The sum of this story is that Kate Hunt, an 18-year old senior in high school engaged in sexual activity with a 14-year old freshman girl. The parents of the younger child warned Hunt twice to discontinue the relationship. One night the 14-year old snuck out of the house, late at night, to meet with Kate. The parents called the police. Now Kate is being charged with a form of statutory rape that could land her 15 years in prison and force her to register as a sex offender. The prosecution is offering a plea that would reduce the charge, require two years of ankle-bracelet monitoring, and not require her to register as a sex offender. The judge would make the final call. Hunt's family have refused the plea. They set up a web site: Free Kate Stop the Hate, and insist that the other girls parents are Christian extremist homophobes, and that this is revenge for Kate allegedly turning their daughter gay. The younger girl's parents and the prosecutor say this is about an adult having a sexual relationship with a 14-year old--something illegal under Florida law.

Gay groups, and others, who believe statutory rape laws should not be so strict, are supporting Kate Hunt. Some, though, don't want to lose the right to protect their children from older predators.

[Backroads]

There has to be a middle ground. Incidents like this one make me sick and are unfair.

[selek]

The younger girl's parents and the prosecutor say this is about an adult having a sexual relationship with a 14-year old--something illegal under Florida law.

Amen and amen.

Predatory behavior is predatory behavior- even if the perversion is endorsed by the beautiful people.

Some, though, don't want to lose the right to protect their children from older predators.

Since she and her enablers declined the plea deal, prosecute her to the fullest extent of the law- no matter how politically incorrect it may be.

[Jenamarie]

She should have taken the plea deal. She did something incredibly stupid and, yes, criminal.

However, I somewhat agree with the supporters that the law as written (sex offender *for life*) is a bit heavy-handed. I wish these types of laws could perhaps be written to allow a time-limit, say of 5-10-15 years or so. If the guilty party commits no other sexual offenses within that time frame, then they can be removed from the sex-offender list. (and I'd say the same if it was an 18 year old guy and his 14 year old girlfriend).

[pam]

While the 14 year old appeared to be a willing partner in this, she is still only 14. Even with the 4 year age difference there is in most cases a huge difference in the maturity level.

[jerome1232]

I agree with jenamarie that it was stupid to not take the plea deal. But 14 to 18 is a very large gap, I'd call it differently if the gap were only 2 years, and I'd have to say most people wouldn't blink twice at prosecution if it were an older male and a younger female.

[prisonchaplain]

Florida teen rejects plea deal in controversial same-sex case - CNN.com

This article is longer and more detailed. I was struck that the Hunt supporters are trying to raise the spector of gay rights. My own view is that if the 18-year old were a male, the prosecutor would be blamed for offering such a lenient plea bargain.

Also, the plea bargain recommends that she not be required to register as a sex offender. The judge would have the final say, but I wonder if her defense attorney is looking for some publicity by rejecting the bargain?

[skippy740]

Parents should've been involved in BOTH children's lives enough to say that the relationship is just not a good idea.

Could you imagine an 18 year old legal adult male with a 14 year old female minor child? Heck no! Why should it be any different?

(I know we can't say that she was thinking with 'that part of the body', now can we?)

Personally, the only time a 4-year age gap is acceptable for a serious relationship is when the youngest of the two is at least 18. Until then, just keep your hands off.

This case proves that stupid is as stupid does... no matter what your sexual attraction orientation is.

When I first met my future ex-wife... I was 20 and she was 17. I didn't pursue anything because I knew that the age gap just wasn't a good idea. She didn't tell me she was going to be 18 the next week, but I still told myself that it wasn't going to be a good idea right then. Not because of conduct, but because it just wasn't a good idea.

Edited May 27, 2013 by skippy740

[Soulsearcher]

I think part of the reason she's having issues and not accepting the plea is because Florida is a state with Romeo and Juliet laws. The problem with the way the laws are written is that they only apply to couples of different genders. So while it seems a boy and girl in the same instance could still face statutory rape charges the possible sentence is much much less than what this girl is currently facing. I also think that this might be why some have made it a gay rights issue. I have to do a bit more reading of the laws to see what the possible charges or sentencing could involve, but i know there was a push in Texas not long ago to expand the law to encompass gay couples as well.

[prisonchaplain]

Soul...do share, if you find the details. The Prosecutor was adamant that this was an issue of age, not gender. Also, the Romeo & Juliet law is for those 15 and older. Here, the victim was 14, so that law does not apply--according to one of the two articles I linked here.

In Florida, the legal age of sexual consent is 18. In 2007, the state adopted a "Romeo and Juliet" law that would keep 18 year olds from being registered as sex offenders if they had consensual sex with classmates age 15 or older. Hunt doesn't qualify because her girlfriend was 14 at the time they had sex, Indian River State Attorney Bruce Colton said Monday.

C.S. turned 15 in April, according to Hunt's mother.

Edited May 27, 2013 by prisonchaplain

[Soulsearcher]

Soul...do share, if you find the details. The Prosecutor was adamant that this was an issue of age, not gender. Also, the Romeo & Juliet law is for those 15 and older. Here, the victim was 14, so that law does not apply--according to one of the two articles I linked here.

Romeo and Juliet Laws Enacted by Legislature

Yet, until 2007, there was little relief for teenagers who were caught having consensual sex. The overly harsh sex offender laws evolved again, and the so-called Romeo and Juliet laws were passed.

Florida Statute 943.04354, titled, Removal of the Requirement to Register as a Sex Offender Under Certain Circumstances relieves many teens of the requirement to register as sex offenders.

The statute states that a sex offender may be relieved from registration requirements if, among other requirements:

c) Is not more than 4 years older than the victim of this violation who was 14 years of age or older but not more than 17 years of age at the time the person committed this violation.

Modified Age of Consent

So, a 14 year old and an 18 year old; up to a 17 year old and a 21 year old; are allowed to have consensual intimate relationships, without fear of the life time stigma of sex offender status.

This Romeo and Juliet law was passed quietly without fanfare. Changing the age of consent was passed without the media frenzy that accompanies stories of sex offenders stealing children in the night.

Many young registered sex offenders may not be aware that they can now request they be relieved of the obligation to register as sex offenders.

The mechanism for requesting relief from the obligation to register is within the statute.

Florida Age of Consent Law - Romeo and Juliet Laws in Florida

This is what i came up with so it seems that the law should apply.

[Backroads]

Even with the youthful age of 14 (which isn't mature enough for these things) I still find it unfair the older girl is the one prosecuted. Perhaps I didn't fully understand what happened, but I can't help but imagine people purposefully sending a minor off in order to get an older person in trouble. "I, the minor, showed up at your house without your consent and now you have to pay for it." In this case here, did Kate suggest she and the other girl meet?

Cases like this have been on my mind. I recently read an article about a family that is now fatherless after a vigilante looked up the husband/father on the sex offender list for something he did as a teenager and went out and murdered the man. Granted, that's a completely different situation than the one at hand, but I am of the belief that the sex offender system as it currently stands is seriously flawed and does a lot of damage.

On that note, she should have taken the plea bargain to avoid getting on the list.

EDIT: Just noticed Soul's research. If I'm reading it right, it seems she may be protected by law.

Edited May 27, 2013 by Backroads

[Suzie]

Kate knew the other girl was 14 so she knew what she was doing was illegal. She was obviously not thinking straight and made quite a few poor choices such as allegedly have sex in the school bathroom?

She broke the law and needs to pay for it, however not sure if 15 years in prison and being registered as a sex offender for the rest of her life fits the crime she committed but yet again, she didn't accept the great deal they offered. I don't know who is counseling her but obviously they don't seem to know what they are doing.

[selek]

I don't know who is counseling her but obviously they don't seem to know what they are doing.

On the contrary: as with those harassing the BSA, this is being done deliberately to advance a political agenda: the complete decriminalization and societal endorsement of homosexuality.

The actual welfare of the principals (and principles) involved, are expendable so long as the agenda is advanced.

Edited May 27, 2013 by selek

[Backroads]

On the contrary: as with those harassing the BSA, this is being done deliberately to advance a political agenda, regardless of the welfare of the principals (and principles) involved.

Do you think a greater punishment should be given than if Kate were an 18-year-old male?

[selek]

Even with the youthful age of 14 (which isn't mature enough for these things) I still find it unfair the older girl is the one prosecuted. Perhaps I didn't fully understand what happened, but I can't help but imagine people purposefully sending a minor off in order to get an older person in trouble.

Would you make the same argument if the adult in this case were a fifty-year-old man?

Tempted or not, the 18 year-old chose to enage in sexual relations with a minor. And according to every account, she knew that what she was doing was wrong.

What you have just offered us is a variation of the "she was asking for it" defense.

It's bogus when a male rapist offers it.

It's bogus when a female rapist offers it.

[selek]

Do you think a greater punishment should be given than if Kate were an 18-year-old male?

No- but I've yet to see any evidence that that's even a possibility.

This woman made an adult decision to commit a crime against a child.

She did so after having been warned off repeatedly.

She needs to pay the penalty for that, not get a free pass because her of her gender or because her particular fetish is currently celebrated by those who consider themselves "cosmopolitan".

[Dravin]

This is what i came up with so it seems that the law should apply.

It should be noted Soul that the statute you are quoting pertains to the requirement to register as a sex offender. It does not abrogate criminal penalties for violation of s. 794.011, s. 800.04, s. 827.071, or s. 847.0135(5).

Edited May 27, 2013 by Dravin

[Backroads]

Would you make the same argument if the adult in this case were a fifty-year-old man?

Tempted or not, the 18 year-old chose to enage in sexual relations with a minor. And according to every account, she knew that what she was doing was wrong.

What you have just offered us is a variation of the "she was asking for it" defense.

It's bogus when a male rapist offers it.

It's bogus when a female rapist offers it.

Yes, I would make the same argument, though I don't intend for it to be anything akin to "she was asking for it".

The way I understood the article, the 14-year-old went off to the 18-year-old.

If I'm reading you correctly, you are arguing that the 18-year-old (or anyone) could completely break things off... and still be punishable if a minor shows up at the door even if the adult makes like Joseph and flees. I find that grossly unfair. If you aren't going to prosecute for the past, don't set things up in hopes it will happen again.

Edited May 27, 2013 by Backroads

[Dravin]

If I'm reading you correctly, you are arguing that the 18-year-old (or anyone) could completely break things off... and still be punishable if a minor shows up at the door even if the adult makes like Joseph and flees.

According to the CNN article Hunt picked up the daughter:

Then one weekend morning the Smiths went to their daughter's bedroom and discovered she was missing.

They panicked, thinking someone took their daughter or that she was hurt. "Her running away was the furthest thing from our mind," said Jim Smith. "We thought ... you hear about kids getting abducted from their homes."

But they later learned that Hunt had picked their daughter up, they told WPEC.

Also, to my knowledge, that Hunt had sexual relations is not under dispute, making comparisons to fleeing like Joseph in those circumstances a bit of a stretch. If the story was that Hunt didn't engage in sexual relations, was trying to maintain her distance, and was being charged because the 14 year old disappeared one night and showed up at Hunt's doorstep then a comparison to fleeing like Joseph would be apropos.

Edited May 27, 2013 by Dravin

[Soulsearcher]

It should be noted Soul that the statute you are quoting pertains to the requirement to register as a sex offender. It does not abrogate criminal penalties for violation of s. 794.011, s. 800.04, s. 827.071, or s. 847.0135(5).

Nope i was aware of that, but just commenting that the law that's in place should be applied equally and i think that's part of the fight. I agree she should have taken the plea but i do think this has now become a case of highlighting the fact that while the ages apply to the statute, the genders involved are seeming to make it inapplicable. As said if it was an 18 year old male the same charges should be pressed with the same sentence but it's unclear if it would be or they would apply the Romeo and Juliet statues towards sex offender registry.

here is a break down about the concerns in Texas, i'm unsure exactly how the Florida version works but am looking for it.

Bills would add gays to Texas' 'Romeo and Juliet' law | State | News from Fort Worth, Da...

Though it does say texas is a rarity for their gender requirements, I'm not sure if that means florida doesn't have it or if it can pick and choose.

Edited May 27, 2013 by Soulsearcher

[Backroads]

Also, to my knowledge, that Hunt had sexual relations is not under dispute, making comparisons to fleeing like Joseph in those circumstances a bit of a stretch. If the story was that Hunt didn't engage in sexual relations, was trying to maintain her distance, and was being charged because the 14 year old disappeared one night and showed up at Hunt's doorstep then a comparison to fleeing like Joseph would be apropos.

For the record, I was speaking in general terms but thanks for the clarification of what happened in this incident.

Edited May 27, 2013 by Backroads

[MorningStar]

It's so manipulative to pull the "homophobe" card here. She was warned and if homosexuals want to be equal to heterosexuals, then they better get used to being thrown in jail for predatory behavior.

[Dravin]

Nope i was aware of that, but just commenting that the law that's in place should be applied equally and i think that's part of the fight.

The law makes provision for a petition to be made during sentencing or disposition of sentencing to prevent the requirement for registration. That is to say it is an active step the defense needs to make and the legal proceedings aren't at the point where that step would be made (unless I'm really confused about where the legal proceedings are at this point). I'm reading a report from the Florida Senate and it talks about petitions not granted. I'm not sure if is just for removal from the list, or it includes preventing from going on the list in the first place but it looks like it isn't automatic:

Petitions Not Granted

There is no way to determine exactly how many motions or petitions for relief have not been granted by the

courts. Survey responses from state attorneys indicate that one reason a judge would deny a petition would be if

the offender did not meet the criteria of the statute. Another reason would be if the state attorney objected. When

asked why a prosecutor might object, even if the offender appeared to meet the criteria of the statute, some of the

reasons provided are:

• defendant’s criminal history,
• evidence of similar uncharged/non-arrested behavior,
• situation appeared more coercive than consensual,
• offender provided drugs or alcohol to the victim,
• prior warning by parents or others to stay away from the victim,
• defendant had multiple charged and uncharged relationships with minors,
• offender “targeted” the under-age victim on web or chat room, or
• the offender was in a position of authority over the victim.

Source: http://www.flsenate.gov/PublishedContent/Session/2012/InterimReports/2012-214cj.pdf

Edited May 27, 2013 by Dravin

[Backroads]

It's so manipulative to pull the "homophobe" card here. She was warned and if homosexuals want to be equal to heterosexuals, then they better get used to being thrown in jail for predatory behavior.

Indeed. As selek pointed out earlier, the crime is the same.