As for the pardon, he already served his jail time and the victim and her mother both requested the pardon if that matters for folks.
But as for DJT, his dad wished Ghislaine Maxwell well before her trial and Matt Gaetz just had his girlfriend testify to the grand jury in his sex trafficking case, so pretending this only occurs in one party is silly.
VA's laws on the topic are quite interesting and somewhat confusing and contradictory.
For instance, it definitely states that sexual intercourse with any person under age 13 is rape. There is no "consensual" provision. It's black and white. Why? 13 and under are children. That's not up for debate. There is no gray area.
As for age of consent, well that's complicated...
*§ 18.2-370. Taking indecent liberties with children; penalties.
A. Any person 18 years of age or over, who, with lascivious intent, knowingly and intentionally commits any of the following acts with any child under the age of 15 years is guilty of a Class 5 felony
[list of various sexual acts]*
So it would appear that for sexual intercourse, the age of 15 is the age of consent. Under 15, it's a felony.
18.2-370 appears to be dealing with other circumstances, for example the creation of "delinquency" and the factor of whether it's between a spouse not. One reading would be that if a 45 year old is married to a 16 year old, they can legally have consentual sex, BUT if they aren't married then they can't. Interesting practical way of attempting to permit "gray" areas of age, yet age still being arbitrary... why is age an issue when not married, but not an issue when married? Also begs the question, if the guy does end up marrying the 17 year old, does that not achieve what the law aims to accomplish, i.e. protect the sanctity of marriage and sexual consent?
Another interesting VA statue, seemingly rarely enforced:
§ 18.2-365. Adultery defined; penalty.
Any person, being married, who voluntarily shall have sexual intercourse with any person not his or her spouse shall be guilty of adultery, punishable as a Class 4 misdemeanor.
And Xiden better watch himself with the kissing... if that tongue of his penetrates... 😳
§ 18.2-370.6. Penetration of mouth of child with lascivious intent; penalty.
Any person 18 years of age or older who, with lascivious intent, kisses a child under the age of 13 on the mouth while knowingly and intentionally penetrating the mouth of such child with his tongue is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
You have a problem sir. You really do. Makingb17 the age of consent is arbitrary and doesn't mean the girl is capable of the adjustments for a relationship with an old man.
You might not like it, but nothing in man's law or God's Law forbids said acts. You may disregard the entirety of human history and biological, psychological facts of science, and submit the only argument that it's "icky" but that's childlike thinking, yet you present yourself to be an adult. Your comments here seem to indicate otherwise, at least in terms of your mental state. I have one account on these boards. Why would I need more? If there are multiple thumbs down on your bot like comments, that just means other posters have also recognized your failure at persuasive argumentation or that you're an ad.
How is a consensual relationship between two people of age, sick?
they were not of age. Sex with a 17 year old in Virginia is the crime of contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor. https://www.virginiacriminallawfirm.com/practice-areas/juvenile-criminal-cases/contributing-to-the-delinquency-of-a-minor-18-2-371
As for the pardon, he already served his jail time and the victim and her mother both requested the pardon if that matters for folks.
But as for DJT, his dad wished Ghislaine Maxwell well before her trial and Matt Gaetz just had his girlfriend testify to the grand jury in his sex trafficking case, so pretending this only occurs in one party is silly.
VA's laws on the topic are quite interesting and somewhat confusing and contradictory.
For instance, it definitely states that sexual intercourse with any person under age 13 is rape. There is no "consensual" provision. It's black and white. Why? 13 and under are children. That's not up for debate. There is no gray area.
As for age of consent, well that's complicated...
*§ 18.2-370. Taking indecent liberties with children; penalties. A. Any person 18 years of age or over, who, with lascivious intent, knowingly and intentionally commits any of the following acts with any child under the age of 15 years is guilty of a Class 5 felony
[list of various sexual acts]*
So it would appear that for sexual intercourse, the age of 15 is the age of consent. Under 15, it's a felony.
18.2-370 appears to be dealing with other circumstances, for example the creation of "delinquency" and the factor of whether it's between a spouse not. One reading would be that if a 45 year old is married to a 16 year old, they can legally have consentual sex, BUT if they aren't married then they can't. Interesting practical way of attempting to permit "gray" areas of age, yet age still being arbitrary... why is age an issue when not married, but not an issue when married? Also begs the question, if the guy does end up marrying the 17 year old, does that not achieve what the law aims to accomplish, i.e. protect the sanctity of marriage and sexual consent?
Another interesting VA statue, seemingly rarely enforced:
§ 18.2-365. Adultery defined; penalty. Any person, being married, who voluntarily shall have sexual intercourse with any person not his or her spouse shall be guilty of adultery, punishable as a Class 4 misdemeanor.
And Xiden better watch himself with the kissing... if that tongue of his penetrates... 😳
§ 18.2-370.6. Penetration of mouth of child with lascivious intent; penalty. Any person 18 years of age or older who, with lascivious intent, kisses a child under the age of 13 on the mouth while knowingly and intentionally penetrating the mouth of such child with his tongue is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
You have a problem sir. You really do. Makingb17 the age of consent is arbitrary and doesn't mean the girl is capable of the adjustments for a relationship with an old man.
Bearing false witness against others is sin. Repent.
What posts? Defend your accusation.
You might not like it, but nothing in man's law or God's Law forbids said acts. You may disregard the entirety of human history and biological, psychological facts of science, and submit the only argument that it's "icky" but that's childlike thinking, yet you present yourself to be an adult. Your comments here seem to indicate otherwise, at least in terms of your mental state. I have one account on these boards. Why would I need more? If there are multiple thumbs down on your bot like comments, that just means other posters have also recognized your failure at persuasive argumentation or that you're an ad.