San Angelo Man Indicted For Assaulting Minor

Its strange how 100 years ago we married off our daughters as quickly as possible. 14 wasn't unheard of to be married, especially if the man was in his early 20s. Non consensual? Not a chance. No one gets a hickey nonconsensually. You can get bit, but it doesn't say its a bite. This is ridiculous.

A lot can change in 100 years.

We widely accept and agree as the state of Texas that is is unacceptable no matter how much you disagree, for a minor to permit a grown adult to have sex with them even if the kid wants to have sex ... it's the law and it's the law for a reason.

Better not let me catch some dude trying to justify having sex with a minor regardless of that minors willingness.

There are already a bunch of over sexualized teens running around... just because some perv capitalizes on that without doing any checking on the validity of a youngsters age and blames the child to absolve himself of all responsibility, sorry Bucko but that crap don't fly in this house.

The law recognizes that children are developmentally not able to make decisions about some things, including when to engage in sexual behaviors. Willingness or permission from a child does not imply consent. A child's sexual desire does not permit sexual activity with an adult. If you're under 17, you're a child in Texas.

If you are participating in a sexual relationship with someone under 17 in Texas, you are in violation of the law... Just being real.

Mistake of age is not a defense in Texas, whattyagotta say now people?

Many of us had grandparents/great-grandparents who hooked up and had burgeoning families by 15 or so. Save any instances of disapproving fathers, no mobs of self-appointed vigilantes wanted to lynch the male halves of these unions, nor were there any empty suits with badges, carting away the female halves for a mandatory genophobic brainwashing, and passive aggressive issuances of victimhood badges: "I'm so sorry, dear, and it's not your fault, but you were one half of an illegal,shameful act!"

Within our modern age of championed infantilization, I believe the age of consent in the United States is now 30. After all paperwork and superfluous formalities have been filled out and executed, two people may then engage in intercourse -- in keeping within the guidelines of said contract, and preferably only performed in the prescribed, moral "missionary" position (or other ambiguously interpreted methods, specifically formulated for same-sex prospects.)

I'm not familiar with any guidelines regarding ''approved banter'', overt vocalized expressions of pleasure, or technical bumps in the road in the instance the act in question involves more than two persons, but I'm certain much of this is covered in the fine print, and subject to review and revision, as needed.

For those interested in learning more about this ingenious link in the ever tightening choke-chain around our liberties, or simply wanting to lessen the chance of being pounced on 20 years from now, by a gaggle of emotionally imbalanced, middle aged #metoo'ers, I've provided a link to the contract for your convenience:

https://www.jotform.com/form-templates/sexual-consent-form

Hell yes, times have changed, you can't mess with someone under 17 legally in Texas in 2020 and that's better than Grandad's era.

-- 14 year old who presumably knows right from wrong and has a basic understanding and awareness of the common dangers young women may be subjected to in relationships such as these

-- "non consensual" acts are mentioned, yet she's coming home with a hickey, something which is nearly impossible to acquire in the instance a struggle occurs

If this girl is mentally retarded, her guardians dropped the ball and should be held as accountable as the accused. However, this looks like the quintessential case of the impetuous teenage girl who's going to do what she's going to do, right under the noses of the predictably oblivious parental figures.

JJE made two excellent points:

1) cases like these are clearly enabled: readily available, unsupervised access to phones and the internet, free reign to do whatever, whenever, with WHOMEVER

2) these incidents tend to be lumped in with violent abductions, and are seen as being on par with 2 or 3 year olds who are kidnappeed and assaulted

It'd be nice to receive fewer ''Amber Alerts" for runaway 16 year olds, or narratives about ''sexual assaults" which upon a closer look, reveal absentee parents of alleged ''victims'' with revolving doors of intimate companions of questionable character.

Runaways aren't "missing children", rather delinquents, and "rape" and "sexual assault", involves somebody violently forcing themselves upon someone else, sexually -- not so much a torrid, ongoing affair that's suddenly taken a wrong turn somewhere along the line.

Albeit this man's actions were illegal, more often than not, the narratives of these incidents seem to try and convince the reader that these teenaged female halves had absolutely nothing to do with the activities in question. She's a young woman, not a 3 year old. Had the "victim" robbed a bank or burglarized a building with the suspect, she more than likely would be sitting in Juvi' hall, instead of an interview, being handed tissues to wipe away her crocodile tears.

Fourteen year olds know that affairs with men over 18 are illegal, as much as 18 year old men are aware of the ramifications of screwing 14 year olds. An illegal act was committed by two people. Both should face consequences.

The narrative is not to say that the child has no "INVOLVEMENT", it is to say regardless of your opinion, the truth remains that a child under 17 in Texas CANNOT GIVE CONSENT to sex with an adult, regardless of their involvement! The law is pretty clear, and I'd say it's a good one that doesn't need any revision.

Most pervs are aware of the law that is always ready to serve consequences for those type of actions... and they show up for sex with the children anyway.

Comparing willingness in the two different acts mentioned is exactly what you like to say, "apples and oranges."

Be a responsible adult in our community Lares.

https://ifstudies.org/blog/how-denial-and-victim-blaming-keep-sexual-assault-hidden

"The Biloxi bridge assault illustrates another problem, which is that some victims are blamed because they aren’t innocent enough to deserve victim status. If a person fights back, is not dressing in the right way, is intoxicated, or if the accused is someone they know, their story is more likely to be questioned or doubted. One scholar found that people only give a full pass to those fitting an “ideal victim” profile, which consists of five traits. The one hurt must be: (1) weak/vulnerable, (2) involved in a respectable activity at the time of victimization, (3) blameless in all aspects of the interaction, (4) victimized by an obvious offender, and (5) someone who does not know the offender. This may be why professionals or clergy are more likely to blame victims who are not living according to the standards or recommendations they give, and it also may be why male victims are less likely to be taken seriously. Those who meet the victim profile fully are most likely to be supported in their trauma."

Sexual predators love the wrong kind of victim... people are less likely to care about them leaving the predator feeling secure in doing their misdeeds.

When a child predator is unmasked, they play the victim card and blame the kid... i.e. "Fourteen year olds know that affairs with men over 18 are illegal, as much as 18 year old men are aware of the ramifications of screwing 14 year olds."
It's called victim blaming, they do it because of the undesirable consequences of their actions.

Stop blaming the victims!

There's a huge audience with an insatiable hunger for devouring your sort of spin on this topic...feminazis, #metoo'ers, jaded old spinsters, fans of "The View" etc...

My intention was not to place blame, rather accountability on the part of all involved in a criminal act.

Little Miss Thang knows not to shoplift, she understands elementary concepts like keeping schedules, family obligations, personal hygiene....but is suddenly devoid of all better judgement and discretion when it comes to having sex?

That's a hard sell, Nate, but like I said, you'd have plenty of eager buyers.

So let me get this this straight, the child, who is deemed unable to legally give consent is somehow at fault?

Not sure I'm understanding how this is counted acceptable to you? Common sense would say a grown adult should always say no to engaging in sexaul acts with a child under the age of seventeen.

In this case, a man felt it was ok to engage in sexual intercourse with a child even though HE is an adult and able to make those distinctions. Knowing the weight of his consequences surely, including the possibility of the pedophilia being outted, landing himself on a S.O. roster, he still messed with this kid.

A kid can be willing and want it so much it drives them crazy but ultimately, it is the adults decision to engage in the illegal act.

No matter the physical attributes a child has or the lusts they have or the fact they're physically able to have sex, adults should never diddle a kid under the age of seventeen here in Texas because it is the LAW and obviously it wouldn't be the morally right thing for a grown man / women to do as well.

I do not believe it is the child's fault that she was exploited by a grown man looking to please his pedophilia. Everyone has the desire to be wanted and if a perv knows that, they will willingly give a child what they want.

We dont need to be telling the children, LITTLE GIRL DONT PUT YOURSELF OUT THERE LIKE BAIT BECAUSE GROWN UPS CANT HELP THEMSELVES AND WILL HAVE TO BREAK THE LAW TO DO WHAT YOU WANT...

We should be respecting our children who aren't respecting themselves as they grow into adulthood... in fact we need to teach them the dangers of when a grown man is lusting for them, we need to teach them that pedophile behavior is not ok they have something wrong with with them and they should stay away from people like that. And of course we know children will be children and do things they shouldn't ie. lie or try to manipulate to get what their wanting because after all they're not grown yet and it's a part of learning.

Surely we should be saying things like, HEY ADULT, YOU ARE THE ONE WHO WILL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS BECAUSE A CHILD HAS NO WAY TO CONSENT.

This child was a victim of exploitation regardless of her willingness a grown man took advantage. There really is no grey area in this, either your alright with kiddy diddling or not. Breeding features and tradition hold no weight to the law or the morality of this issue.

Also, their are studies that have proven some children develop physically at a much earlier age than others because they began to be molested at an early age... not saying that is the case for every child either... just saying you can't rule that out while you excuse these pervs actions by saying that a bunch of 14 some odds wanted it.

You hit the heart of the issue LOL, when you said we should be respecting our children who aren't respecting themselves as they grow into adulthood!

I didn't originate a view here buddy, I just align with what I believe God's heart on the matter is and what Texas law has on the books, any other opinion is an anomaly to me.

Just another tidbit...

For those who don't know, these stories will always detail that "non-consensual", sex occurred in the event a minor is involved... Because a minor doesn't have a legal capability or a moral responsibility to give consent to an adult.

Hey, you're the final perv arguing what has already been written into the law okay, counsel me if it makes you feel better, argue with me when these laws are changed, till then, you're gonna look increasingly peddy/petty.