Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Problem of my own (:

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Problem of my own (:

    Okay, so I have this friend who happens to be 19, turning 20 in September. I am currently 14 years old, turning 15 in July. We have been pretty good friends and just recently, we have been...well, more than friends. He treats me very, very well. He respects me and my family. (he's a family friend) We only talk and see each other at church, where he is a new youth leader. We both like each other...very much so. We already talked about what we can and cannot do due to our ages. We haven't kissed or held hands or done anything physical. It's just an emotional relationship right now. He said after I graduate, we can then pursue an actual relationship. I was just curious, as to what is illegal with our relationship. Is it illegal to have a relationship without any physical attributes until I turn 16 - if it is alright with my parents. I need to know (or want to know) what I can and cannot do at this point in time and what I can do at age 16.

    Thanks!


    Ps.- I live in Ohio, by the way.
    Last edited by 12longb; 05-26-2009, 04:00 PM.

  • #2
    The first thing that comes to mind is that your "friend" has already broken the law by talking about what kind of relationship you can have in future.

    So the wisest thing to do at this point would be to have NO contact whatsoever beyond discussing the algebra homework. Otherwise, your "friend" may find himself facing life as a sexual offender.
    The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

    Comment


    • #3
      a new youth leader
      And has already shown a lack of ethics for his behavior. As a youth leader, he has no business having the conversations he's having with you. If the church found out, he'd be kicked to the curb in no time. Is that what you want for him?
      I am not an attorney, and don't play one on TV. Any information given is a description only and should be verified by your attorney.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by cbg View Post
        The first thing that comes to mind is that your "friend" has already broken the law by talking about what kind of relationship you can have in future.

        So the wisest thing to do at this point would be to have NO contact whatsoever beyond discussing the algebra homework. Otherwise, your "friend" may find himself facing life as a sexual offender.

        So even if we haven't done anything physical at all, we just talk about a relationship, it's considered a crime? He could be charged? We just text, talk on the phone, and see each other at church a lot. We went to the movies a couple times and out to eat but that was only with my youth pastor's family. We weren't alone and it wasn't a date...

        Comment


        • #5
          You are not only a minor, but under the age of consent. He is a legal adult. Yes, if you even just talk about having a relationship in the future, that is a crime.
          The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

          Comment


          • #6
            Hm. I didn't know that.

            And, is there any other alternative to not having any contact with him whatsoever? I really want to keep our friendship alive until a real romantic relationship can actually happen.

            Also, what exactly is allowed when I turn 16? What isn't allowed?

            Comment


            • #7
              There's no law against being friends. You simply do not even so much as mention how nice it will be when you can (fill in the blank). However, keep in mind that it's not what you ARE doing - it's what people THINK you are doing. If someone finds the relationship inappropriate and even THINKS you are doing "something physical" and reports it, will you be able to prove that you're not?

              At 16 you can do exactly what your parents tell you, you can do and nothing more. Why do you think otherwise? The age of majority is 18, dear; you don't get to decide for yourself what you can do until then.
              The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by cbg View Post
                At 16 you can do exactly what your parents tell you, you can do and nothing more. Why do you think otherwise? The age of majority is 18, dear; you don't get to decide for yourself what you can do until then.

                Well, I have read elsewhere that age 16 is the legal age of consent and that people at our ages would be allowed to date as long as we don't kiss, hold hands, hug, etc, etc. But as soon as I turn 18, then there's no limit. I could be wrong but this is what I have read some where else...

                Comment


                • #9
                  You're not understanding. 16 may be the AOC but that means diddly when it's your parents who control your every waking move until you are 18.

                  Also, I may be wrong, but I would think the fact he's a leader of YOUTHs he'd be violating something by talking about a relationship with one of his youths while being an authority figure.

                  I am hoping someone does finds out and removes him from being a youth leader, he has no business near any of those he is already around.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    You're confusing several different concepts.

                    The law does not say who is allowed to date. The law says who is allowed to have sexual contact, which is NOT limited to intercourse. The law also says when your parents can and cannot control who you can see.

                    So, okay, I'll give you that list you wanted:

                    1.) Until you are 18, you are under the age of majority, which means that your parents have complete control of who you see and where you go and anything else that you do. If your parents say you may date, you may date. If your parents say you may not date, you may not date. If your parents say you may see A and B but not C or D, then you may see A and B but not C or D. If your parents say you may go to X but not Y, then you may go to X but not Y. It is completely up to them. EVEN IF IT IS LEGAL your parents still get to say whether you can date or not and if so, who you may date until you are 18 and not one minute younger. If you are 17 years and 364 days old, it is STILL up to your parents.

                    2.) At 16, if you have sex with your boyfriend the law will not throw him in jail BECAUSE he had sex with you. But if your parents said he couldn't see you and you got together anyway, there are still a whole host of things he can be charged with and legal trouble he can get into because you are still under the age of majority even if you are over the age of consent.

                    3.) At 14, you cannot even TALK about when you can have a physical relationship with your boyfriend unless you are willing to risk him going to jail. And that's even if your parents approve and pay for the hotel room and give you the condoms.
                    Last edited by cbg; 05-31-2009, 02:30 PM.
                    The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      And friend Hawk is correct... if he is found to be in a position of authority over you, he will be going to jail for a very long time.
                      Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

                      I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

                      Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by cbg View Post
                        The first thing that comes to mind is that your "friend" has already broken the law by talking about what kind of relationship you can have in future.

                        So the wisest thing to do at this point would be to have NO contact whatsoever beyond discussing the algebra homework. Otherwise, your "friend" may find himself facing life as a sexual offender.
                        Originally posted by cbg View Post
                        You are not only a minor, but under the age of consent. He is a legal adult. Yes, if you even just talk about having a relationship in the future, that is a crime.
                        Originally posted by cbg View Post
                        You're confusing several different concepts.

                        The law does not say who is allowed to date. The law says who is allowed to have sexual contact, which is NOT limited to intercourse. The law also says when your parents can and cannot control who you can see.

                        ...

                        3.) At 14, you cannot even TALK about when you can have a physical relationship with your boyfriend unless you are willing to risk him going to jail. And that's even if your parents approve and pay for the hotel room and give you the condoms.
                        cbg, what kind of statements are you talking about here? If the 19 year old says to the 14 year old "on your 18th bday, we will [insert x-rated activities here]", I can see how that could be construed as Importuning, in violation of:

                        (B)No person shall solicit another, not the spouse of the offender, to engage in sexual conduct with the offender, when the offender is eighteen years of age or older and four or more years older than the other person, and the other person is thirteen years of age or older but less than sixteen years of age, whether or not the offender knows the age of the other person. (source: http://moraloutrage.net/staticpages/index.php?page=Ohio)

                        However, if the 19 year old says something like "You're a great girl, but it's unethical and wrong for us to have a romantic relationship at this time because of our ages and my position in the church, and that will be the case until you graduate from school (and are no longer in my youth group) and are old enough to be your own legal arbiter. Let's be friends until then and re-evaluate our options at that point in time."

                        How would the above statement be illegal? I cannot find the law it would violate.

                        Originally posted by cbg View Post
                        There's no law against being friends. You simply do not even so much as mention how nice it will be when you can (fill in the blank). However, keep in mind that it's not what you ARE doing - it's what people THINK you are doing. If someone finds the relationship inappropriate and even THINKS you are doing "something physical" and reports it, will you be able to prove that you're not?
                        Wouldn't the state have the burden of proof here, not the people accused? If private citizens or the state suspect illegal sex, don't they have to prove it occurred beyond a reasonable doubt, not the individuals accuse disprove it (how could you even do that, anyway, unless you had your life video documented 24/7?) ?

                        I see your point - it's not wise to put yourself in a position where your legality can be questioned, but still, I don't see how that shifts the burden of proof to the accused.

                        Originally posted by Alice Dodd View Post
                        And has already shown a lack of ethics for his behavior. As a youth leader, he has no business having the conversations he's having with you. If the church found out, he'd be kicked to the curb in no time. Is that what you want for him?
                        I'm sorry, but didn't the youth leader and the young lady here purposefully NOT do anything illicit because of the concerns addressed in this topic? Unless they're planning future sex, it appears that they're making the best of an awkward situation.

                        Originally posted by cyjeff View Post
                        And friend Hawk is correct... if he is found to be in a position of authority over you, he will be going to jail for a very long time.
                        I assume you're talking about laws that add extra punishment for sexual exploitation of minors by authority figures. I have looked up the Ohio laws about this (http://moraloutrage.net/staticpages/index.php?page=Ohio admittedly a biased site, but it's just reproducing the text of the law here) and I'm not seeing where his position constitutes a specifically listed position under §2907.03. The only two that might qualify are the cleric listed in bullet 12, but since '“Cleric” has the same meaning as in section 2317.02 of the Revised Code' and 2317.02 lists cleric as '(a) “Cleric” means a member of the clergy, rabbi, priest, Christian Science practitioner, or regularly ordained, accredited, or licensed minister of an established and legally cognizable church, denomination, or sect.', I don't think the youth leader would qualify, as they typically aren't ordained/official in any sense.

                        Possibly bullet 9 "the offender is the other person’s athletic or other type of coach, is the other person’s instructor, is the leader of a scouting troop of which the other person is a member, or is a person with temporary or occasional disciplinary control over the other person" might qualify for the youth leader, but I doubt it unless the Youth Leader position in her church is more of a disciplinarian or personal instruction kind of Youth Group.

                        Maybe a case could be made for that, but it's not clear and obvious, so do you really think the state would pursue it, especially if they had a clear and convincing case on "§ 2907.04. Unlawful sexual conduct with minor."?

                        Or maybe I'm missing part of the relevant statute. Please fill me in if that's the case!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by glassell View Post
                          However, if the 19 year old says something like "You're a great girl, but it's unethical and wrong for us to have a romantic relationship at this time because of our ages and my position in the church, and that will be the case until you graduate from school (and are no longer in my youth group) and are old enough to be your own legal arbiter. Let's be friends until then and re-evaluate our options at that point in time."

                          How would the above statement be illegal? I cannot find the law it would violate.
                          It becomes illegal when the adult acknowledges that a relationship will be possible when the minor comes of age. "We can't have a relationship because you're too young" becomes a different discussion when "but we can when you're older" is added, and they have clearly had the latter discussion.

                          The OP's question was not what the state would be likely to pursue, but what was legal. She asked how far they could go and the answer was that they've already gone beyond where the line is legally drawn.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by CarynG View Post
                            It becomes illegal when the adult acknowledges that a relationship will be possible when the minor comes of age. "We can't have a relationship because you're too young" becomes a different discussion when "but we can when you're older" is added, and they have clearly had the latter discussion.
                            Could you cite a statue or a judicial precedent for that please? I have searched and cannot find one.

                            Not trying to be rude or accuse you of being wrong, but unless saying "we can only have a relationship when it's legal" is equivalent to soliciting sex from a minor, I cannot find where the law would prohibit this.

                            Originally posted by CarynG View Post
                            The OP's question was not what the state would be likely to pursue, but what was legal. She asked how far they could go and the answer was that they've already gone beyond where the line is legally drawn.
                            I realize that, but answering just one of the two questions ignores the realities of the enforcement of the law and would be akin to telling everyone who goes 1mph over the speed limit that they're guilty of speeding and will be punished.

                            Regardless, that was made in response to cyjeff's comment about his being in a position of authority, which I couldn't find explicitly listed in the state code.
                            Last edited by glassell; 06-09-2009, 12:54 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              It's the same statute you posted. "(B) No person shall solicit another, not the spouse of the offender, to engage in sexual conduct with the offender, when the offender is eighteen years of age or older and four or more years older than the other person, and the other person is thirteen years of age or older but less than sixteen years of age, whether or not the offender knows the age of the other person."

                              I'm arguing that "we can take this relationship to a romantic level...when it's legal" IS equivalent to soliciting a minor for sexual activity when an emotional connection is allowed to continue, and when the discussion about the relationship has included points on what kinds of physical contact have to wait for later. Paying lip service to the fact that the act isn't legal NOW doesn't make it any less of a solicitation.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X