Making statutory rape laws sensible
Another bill I highlighted earlier was the proposal to change the age difference between teens having sex which would constitute statutory rape. Also called “Romeo and Juliet” laws (who comes up with these names?) the law in CT currently creates a presumption of rape if the “offender” is more than two years older than the “victim”. Consent is not a defense.
However, under SB 1457, the age difference would be increased to 4 years. This bill would not affect those circumstances where the “victim” is under 13 or obviously, where there is no consent.
Highlighting the need for this bill is this story from the Courant, which tells the story of an 18 year old who was convicted of having consensual sex with his 15 year old girlfriend. He now has to register has a sex offender and have his picture plastered on the web.
Sex offender laws were designed to protect people from predators – pedophiles, rapists and the like. But Davis doesn’t fall into that category. At 18, he was convicted of having sex with his 15-year-old former girlfriend, who told investigators she was a willing partner.
“We would sit out in my truck at her apartment complex and just talk. Thinking we were deeply, madly in love, we talked about getting married, buying a house,” [Davis the "offender"] said.
But when the girl started slacking off at school and mouthing off, her father blamed Davis and wanted to get rid of him, Davis said.
“As far as he was concerned, I was the root of all his problems,” Davis said.
According to court records, the girl’s mother knew her daughter was having sex with Davis, but her ex-husband only suspected it. He went to Newington police, who arrested Davis. His jail sentence was suspended, and now he is serving 10 years of probation.
That’s why these laws are stupid.
It is absolutely a step in the right direction to change the gap to 3 years. I am totally in favor of the change, but it certainly doesn’t solve the problem. Do kids in high school really understand that it’s okay for a senior to have sex with a sophomore but not a freshman? (I suppose the response is that we don’t want freshmen having sex at all, but good luck with that one). I have an autumn birthday, so I was always younger than the rest of my class. In my case, I could have been a sophomore, dating a senior and still have been more than 3 years younger. Bottom line – we’re still going to have these kids having to register as sex offenders, albeit fewer of them.
This problem would also be alleviated with my “Reverse Truth in Sentencing” proposal, in which I proposed that a conviction shouldn’t count as a felony on your record unless they actually make you do a full year.
It seems reasonable that sex offenders shouldn’t have to register if they don’t serve felony time. How can the state claim that this guy has to register as a danger to the community when they don’t even lock him up?
(I know it’ll never happen, but I still think it’s a good idea.)