Milwaukee Nun, 79, Charged With Having Sexual Contact With Two Boys

 

MILWAUKEE

Edited September 25, 200718 yr by Walsingham

Having seen the title of this thread, then reading this 79 year old nun story, all I have to say is, keep your kids away from this Eddo36 guy.

 

Edit: Even though the title has now been changed, the point still stands.

Edited September 25, 200718 yr by The Architect

Isn't there like a statute of limitations or something? After a certain amount of time you can't be charged with the crime you committed way back when. Either way I doubt she'd be charged. If the judge puts her in jail it's pretty much a death sentence and she's a nun and really old so she doesn't exactly have the money to pay anything. Whoever wasted their money hiring lawyers to for this case probably isn't too bright. Where is enoch when you need him?

The title for this thread is in complete bad taste, Eddo. It sounds like you condone sexual abuse of children. Whether or not that is your intent, I strongly urge the moderators to change the thread title or lock the thread. Sexual abuse should never be considered "fun."

I hope Eddo will not be offended that I have pre-empted his own decision to alter the title to better suit the boundaries of good taste. I am sure I am merely speeding the process rather than going against his wishes.

Good on you, Walsh.

Back on the subject, I think it is interesting that we find it difficult to know how to react in abuse cases involving women. There was another case in the UK recently of a gang of abusers that included a woman. The judge was far more forgiving of her than the others. In a way that was unjustifiable in my opinion.

 

This links to another observation in criminology that I'm awre of (and thus may be very outdated) which is that juries tend to view women as "mad rather than bad". This tends to land them softer sentences.

I happen to agree with that, Walsh. A crime should be punished in the full extent of the law, regardless of gender, orientation, and race. I am also in favor treating children who commit serious crimes as an adult if they are at least 16 years or older. By the time one reaches mid to late teens one should have a very strong sense what is right and wrong.

Isn't there like a statute of limitations or something? After a certain amount of time you can't be charged with the crime you committed way back when. Either way I doubt she'd be charged. If the judge puts her in jail it's pretty much a death sentence and she's a nun and really old so she doesn't exactly have the money to pay anything. Whoever wasted their money hiring lawyers to for this case probably isn't too bright. Where is enoch when you need him?

 

Oh contraire. There is HUGE money in going after the church. The individual nun/priest monetary worth is irrelevant.

Isn't there like a statute of limitations or something? After a certain amount of time you can't be charged with the crime you committed way back when.

 

Yes, but it specific limits for specific crimes in specific jurisdictions. Obviously 47 years is not outside the statute for this crime in that location.

some particularly heinous crimes have no statute of limitations. i'm guessing sexual abuse of a minor qualifies, as does (for sure) murder/manslaughter and probably rape, too.

 

taks

sorry, was only using sarcasm to prove a point.

There is a time and place for sarcasm, Eddo. When children are being hurt for another's pleasure is not one of them.

The courts are as bad as the media. Not too long ago a female teacher was caught having sex with a student. They aired it once on the news and haven't about it since then. A few months ago a male teacher was caught having sex with a student and the news jumped all over him. They kept bring up this case until it went to court and he was convicted. The courts and media have double standards.

Like this?

 

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/25/teach...x.ap/index.html

 

This just in

Edited September 26, 200718 yr by Eddo36

Well, when I was 15 there were a couple of my teachers I wouldn't have minded having sex with.

 

Anyway, this isn't a problem of the court's or the media's double standard but rather a question of general sexual mores. Meaning, if a father discovered his 15 year old son was having sex with a hot teacher he'd probably feel proud of the kid, while if it was a 15 year old daughter the dad would've have wanted to take the teacher down for taking away his daughter's "innocence".

sorry, was only using sarcasm to prove a point.

 

That was perfectly clear. No personal censure was implied.

Well, when I was 15 there were a couple of my teachers I wouldn't have minded having sex with.

 

Yeah, there were a couple of hottie teachers at my high school that I certainly wouldn't have minded having sex with. Wouldn't have minded is an understatement, actually. Ah, the imagination. What a wonderful thing.

 

Anyway, this isn't a problem of the court's or the media's double standard but rather a question of general sexual mores. Meaning, if a father discovered his 15 year old son was having sex with a hot teacher he'd probably feel proud of the kid, while if it was a 15 year old daughter the dad would've have wanted to take the teacher down for taking away his daughter's "innocence".

 

Correctamundo.

 

I think either way, teacher/student relationships, sexual encounters and stuff are just wrong. Some people say age isn't a big deal. I'm not one of those people. To me, if you don't stick to around your own age group, you're a desperate, ****ed in the head person. Well, I'm being biased, though. I mean, I wouldn't want my 23 year old brother flirting with girls around my age group. Why? Because they're for me damn it, not him!

Heck, I'm weirded out by girls under 21 to be honest. Unless they're psych students in college. I make all kinds of exceptions for psych students.

Don't you mean they're weirded out by you?

I was about to weigh in with some statement or other, then I realised it probably wasn't that special. This is one hell of a complex issue.

I don't think it's that complex. Sex isn't so necessary that it's worth going to jail for just to have it with someone under the age of 18 (17 in some states). But then again, some people get so obsessed with relationships and the people in them that the concept of not being involved with someone (particular someones or general someones) and consumating it is beyond comprehension to them.

 

Hence why I just shake my head at people in general.

Teachers should know better, even if the student wants it and stuff. I mean, if a hot teacher wanted to have sex with me, I wouldn't decline the offer, no way. Even though I know it could have serious consequences for the teacher, that's their problem, not mine. If a teacher wants to sexually fantasize over a student, good for them. I still think they're being a dirty bastard, or dirty cow, but yeah. When it goes beyond fantasy, then it becomes a problem. None of us want to die a virgin, but as Tale said, sex isn't worth going to jail for.

Edited September 26, 200718 yr by The Architect

Meaning, if a father discovered his 15 year old son was having sex with a hot teacher he'd probably feel proud of the kid, while if it was a 15 year old daughter the dad would've have wanted to take the teacher down for taking away his daughter's "innocence".

i disagree with this. i think any reasonable father would have an issue with his child, son or daughter, engaging in sexual activity with a teacher, particularly the child's own teacher. teachers are in a position of authority and no matter how much a child may "enjoy" such acts, they are being used. a reasonable father would know this and, rather than condone, scorn such acts.

 

also, some states allow parental consent down to 15, no consent down to 16.

 

taks

I don't think the problem is a question of unequal footing between teacher and student. For me the issue is that most girls are brought up to be wary of sex while boys are brought up to be more open and more aggressive about sex. This makes the situation completely different when it's a male student rather than a female one. While for a male teen, consensual sex with someone older might healthy, and even a major self confidence boost, for a female teen, it brings with it a much bigger and more dangerous load of emotional baggage. Of course, these issues will likely be exacerbated by the teacher's position but, again, those issues are a direct consequence of the child's mores.

 

 

I hope this doesn't make me sound like I support child molesting, or something.