Metropolis Reality Forums - Adult-Child Sex Laws on Trial in Kansas

Sponsored by: The Fans!

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Nov 25^th, 2024, 2:39am

Upcoming Premiere Dates:
Survivor 23, Season premiere
Thursday, September 14 (8:00-9:30 PM, ET/PT) on CBS

Metropolis Reality Forums Ť Adult-Child Sex Laws on Trial in Kansas ť

   Metropolis Reality Forums
   Off-Topic Forums
   In the News (Moderators: lakelady, yesteach, MediaScribe, Bumper, Isle_be_back)
   Adult-Child Sex Laws on Trial in Kansas

Previous topic | New Topic | Next topic »

Pages: 1

Add Poll

Notify of replies

Send Topic

Author

Topic: Adult-Child Sex Laws on Trial in Kansas (Read 425 times)

Rhune
ForumsNet Administrator

Gender:

Posts: 292

Adult-Child Sex Laws on Trial in Kansas
« on: Sep 16^th, 2003, 10:59am »

Quote

Modify

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/local/6780405.htm

Posted on Tue, Sep. 16, 2003

Kline says appeals case threatens laws criminalizing adult-child sex
By NICK KOWALCZYK
The Kansas City Star

The institution of marriage and laws banning adult-child sex are at stake in an appeal of a Miami County sodomy case, Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline said Monday.

The case involves the conviction of Matthew Limon, whom gay rights activists say was treated unfairly -- and sentenced more harshly -- because his alleged victim in a consensual sex crime was a boy.

Kline said that Limon's conviction was justified and that his office would represent the state in Limon's second appeal.

One day after the U.S. Supreme Court in June struck down laws that ban same-sex sodomy between consenting adults, it ordered Kansas authorities to re-examine Limon's conviction.

"The breadth of this case is extensive," Kline on Monday told The Kansas City Star's editorial board. "If the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) prevails in its arguments, then the institution of marriage fails and the state cannot restrict adult-child sex."

If Limon wins his appeal, Kline said, the ACLU will use the victory to make sexual orientation a protected class, such as race and gender. Protecting sexual orientation, Kline said, could lead to protecting not just homosexuality but also pedophilia and bestiality.

"They are going to challenge marriage," Kline said. "I think this is the best case to defend marriage."

Kline also criticized a statement in an ACLU brief filed with the Kansas Court of Appeals that, according to Kline, said it is well-established that teenagers "have a due process liberty interest in being free from state compulsion" in personal choices about sexual relations, marriage and procreation.

Kline said Limon's case could unravel all laws criminalizing adult-child sex.

ACLU officials disagreed.

"The attorney general has completely jumped off the track," said Matt Coles, director of the ACLU's Lesbian and Gay Rights Project in New York.

The ACLU is representing Limon, who was convicted in 2000 of having sex at age 18 with a 14-year-old boy in a group home for the developmentally disabled.

Limon was sentenced to 17 years in prison for the crime, for which Limon's lawyers say he would have been less harshly punished if he -- or the boy -- had been a female.

In Kansas, sex is illegal when it involves anyone under 16, but the state's so-called Romeo and Juliet law lessens the penalties if one partner is under 19 and the other is within four years of the other's age. But the law doesn't apply to homosexual couples.

Had Limon been prosecuted under the Romeo and Juliet law, he would have faced a prison sentence of a little more than one year.

"This is not a complicated case," Coles said. "This is about whether you can sentence a kid to prison for 17 years because he's gay when you would have sentenced him to 15 months if he had been straight."

Coles said the ACLU would use the U.S. Supreme Court's same-sex sodomy ruling in Lawrence v. Texas to support Limon's appeal.

Kline said the Lawrence ruling shouldn't apply.

The Texas case involved two men who police found having consensual sex in one of the men's apartments. They were each fined $200 and spent a night in jail. Many saw the Supreme Court's ruling as a broad decision in support of gay rights, privacy and equality.

Limon's case is different, Kline said, because the criminal sex act took place in a state institution, not a private home, and the crime involved a child, which nullifies Limon's right of privacy.

Oral arguments before the Kansas appellate court have not been scheduled.

------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------
To reach Nick Kowalczyk, call (816) 234-7716 or send an e-mail to [email protected].

IP Logged

azure
ForumsNet Member

Gender:

Posts: 4087

Re: Adult-Child Sex Laws on Trial in Kansas
« Reply #1 on: Sep 16^th, 2003, 12:21pm »

Quote

Modify

on Sep 16^th, 2003, 10:59am, Rhune wrote:

The ACLU is representing Limon, who was convicted in 2000 of having sex at age 18 with a 14-year-old boy in a group home for the developmentally disabled.

Limon was sentenced to 17 years in prison for the crime, for which Limon's lawyers say he would have been less harshly punished if he -- or the boy -- had been a female.

Umm, why should this man not pay an extreme price for his crime. Either way it was a child, male or female. And to make it even more perverse his target was a developmentally disable boy. This does not seem to be mentioned too much in this article.

I know here in PA, if one is accused of abusing someone who is deemed mentally disabled, it is classified as if that person was still a child, deviant assauly against a minor. I went through this with one of my clients who was molested by another client.

Just found it interesting that this man thinks his rights were wronged, what about the rights of that por young man he assaulted??

ok.............off of my :soapbox:

« Last Edit: Sep 16^th, 2003, 12:22pm by azure »

IP Logged

HELLO EVERYBODY!!

Rhune
ForumsNet Administrator

Gender:

Posts: 292

Re: Adult-Child Sex Laws on Trial in Kansas
« Reply #2 on: Sep 16^th, 2003, 9:28pm »

Quote

Modify

I agree the law should be harsher than it is, but I think it's wrong that he was punished 17 times more severely specifically because he committed it on a boy instead of a girl. The whole thing is outta whack.

IP Logged

Tsutroi
ForumsNet Member

Gender:

Posts: 249

Re: Adult-Child Sex Laws on Trial in Kansas
« Reply #3 on: Sep 16^th, 2003, 11:12pm »

Quote

Modify

I know it says it took place in the development disabled home but it didn't say either the offender and/or the victime was mentally disabled.

I agree that the offender should be punished because the law of that State suggests you cannot have sexual relationship with minors of 16 years old and younger but it makes no sense to give him a sentence harsher than the law prescribes which is 15 months because under the same State laws, because the offender was under 19 and he was within 4 years of the victim, as the law states, the R&J rule should prevail. Therefore, it is illogical to treat him any otherwise. Sex is sex is sex, it makes no difference whether it's hetero or homo.

IP Logged

Tsutroi
ForumsNet Member

Gender:

Posts: 249

Re: Adult-Child Sex Laws on Trial in Kansas
« Reply #4 on: Sep 16^th, 2003, 11:32pm »

Quote

Modify

And this: "The breadth of this case is extensive," Kline on Monday told The Kansas City Star's editorial board. "If the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) prevails in its arguments, then the institution of marriage fails and the state cannot restrict adult-child sex."

If Limon wins his appeal, Kline said, the ACLU will use the victory to make sexual orientation a protected class, such as race and gender. Protecting sexual orientation, Kline said, could lead to protecting not just homosexuality but also pedophilia and bestiality.

is what I call trying to make the issue larger than it is. Where does the instituion of marriage come into this? Frankly, it's absurd to suggest this issue has any connection with marriage at all, so typical of an attorney in panic mode, talking without knowing what he is talking about. Institution of marriage fails? As to the protected class comment, more like out of a discriminated/criminal class. What ACLU is arguing is that every person should be treated in the same fashion, not asking for special privileges such as exemptions. Fro example, diplomatic immunity protects you from prosecution in a foreign country for crimes you have committed, that's a privilege or in a way, a protected class. No one is saying the offender shouldnt' be punished but merely the same like any other cases of same class involving a male and a female.

This case is a non-issue really. As it goes to appeals, I don't even expect it to make it the U.S. Supreme Court (the ACLU will go that far is necessary, I know it) before the higher Courts overturned the lower Court's decision by reajusting the sentencing to conform the prescribed limit as set by the State laws. As to his worry about the traditional institution of marriage, let's just say there are more 'serious threats' from the view of a religious fundamentalists than this case which is not even related at all. If he thinks this is a threat, then maybe the cases pending in MA and NJ would qualify as the End of the World.

As to whether sentencing should be harsher for young offenders, my view is that if the victim is not mentally handicapped (which is not clear from the info we have), then a 18 year old is really, practically a big child. While 14 year old is technically illegal in this State, it isnt' in many others. And clearly, this wasn't a rape but to what degree can a 14 year consent is questionable. So from a more factual sense, the sentencing should be serious enough to serve as an important lesson but it shouldn't be too long to the point of jeapordizing the person's future. 18 years old is about time to go to College and etc. 17 years of sentecning will practically ruin his life which is out of question, I'll buy you a meal if this decision is upheld by the Appeals. I say no more than 4 years, with the possbility of early exit pending on his progress. And before any release, I would make sure that an independent group of psychiatrists to test/monitor him for a while just prior to his release to make sure the probability he repeats the same offense is negligeable enough to warrant an early exit.

IP Logged

Pages: 1

Add Poll

Notify of replies

Send Topic


Previous topic \| New Topic \| Next topic »