• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Stupid question about laws and intent.

Leros

Leros

Lifer
If you think you are committing a crime but it turns out you aren't, are you breaking any laws?

For instance, say you are an adult. Some girl presents herself as 15 years old and you have sex. But say the girl lied and is actually an adult. In your mind, you had sex with a minor, but in reality you had sex with another consenting adult.

I'm guessing there isn't anything legally wrong with that?
 
Originally posted by: Leros
If you think you are committing a crime but it turns out you aren't, are you breaking any laws?

For instance, say you are an adult. Some girl presents herself as 15 years old and you have sex. But say the girl lied and is actually an adult. In your mind, you had sex with a minor, but in reality you had sex with another consenting adult.

I'm guessing there isn't anything legally wrong with that?
Click to expand...

I swear I didn't know she was 3!!!!!!

Pretty sure you still broke the law bud.
 
My head hurts.
To think that you did something bad, but really not, or you did something bad but it really isn't...yea, my head hurts!
 
ignorance of the law is no excuse.

just because she is an adult and not 15 does not matter. that is why those old guys are in jail for sex with the guy who claimed he was 12.

they thought they were having sex with a minor. they intended to have sex with a minor. so it really does not matter.


(yes i screwed it up the first time heh)
 
reminds me of a multistate bar question.

rule is: mistake of fact is a defense, while mistake of law is not. if you're trying to kill someone and shoot them while they're lying in their bed, but they had already died of a heart attack an hour ago, you're not guilty of murder.


here is the texas penal code statutory rape provision:
§ 21.11. INDECENCY WITH A CHILD. (a) A person commits an
offense if, with a child younger than 17 years and not the person's
spouse, whether the child is of the same or opposite sex, the
person:
(1) engages in sexual contact with the child or causes
the child to engage in sexual contact; or
(2) with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire
of any person:
(A) exposes the person's anus or any part of the
person's genitals, knowing the child is present; or
(B) causes the child to expose the child's anus
or any part of the child's genitals.

the code says 'with a child younger than 17 years.' if she is 18 then that negates one of the elements of the crime.


now, you might be prosecuted under the attempt law (though i'm not sure, criminal law was not my specialty):
§ 15.01. CRIMINAL ATTEMPT. (a) A person commits an
offense if, with specific intent to commit an offense, he does an
act amounting to more than mere preparation that tends but fails to
effect the commission of the offense intended.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by: ElFenix
reminds me of a multistate bar question.

rule is: mistake of fact is a defense, while mistake of law is not. if you're trying to kill someone and shoot them while they're lying in their bed, but they had already died of a heart attack an hour ago, you're not guilty of murder.
Click to expand...

because shooting a corpse isn't murder

nice example
 
I think some folks are misunderstanding the OP.....

I'd find it hard to believe there could be any way that such a scenario would be illegal in any way. The law defines what is (or is not) a crime. If something is not a crime, then you thinking it is a crime when you do it does not change the fact that it's not a crime.
 
Originally posted by: tagej
I think some folks are misunderstanding the OP.....

I'd find it hard to believe there could be any way that such a scenario would be illegal in any way. The law defines what is (or is not) a crime. If something is not a crime, then you thinking it is a crime when you do it does not change the fact that it's not a crime.
Click to expand...

but people have been arrested over it.

as i said there is 2 old guys who though they had a 12 yr old boy (ended up being 29). they were arrested over it.

also some guy got busted for writing in a journel about how he wanted to have sex with the girl next door (11-12yr old girl).


 
Originally posted by: Leros
If you think you are committing a crime but it turns out you aren't, are you breaking any laws?

For instance, say you are an adult. Some girl presents herself as 15 years old and you have sex. But say the girl lied and is actually an adult. In your mind, you had sex with a minor, but in reality you had sex with another consenting adult.

I'm guessing there isn't anything legally wrong with that?
Click to expand...

While they are busy trying to change this so far thoughtcrime has not been codified except for so called "hate crime".
 
Well, its more about intent? no?

For example, if I intend to kill the op and am stoped, because lightning strikes, its still attempted murder no?

I still don't think its an actual crime though. Attempted Statitory Rape?
 
also all those guys on datellin getting nailed for "to catch a predator". should they all be let go? they planned on aniling a kid but they were adults who were talking to them.
 
Originally posted by: FoBoT
Originally posted by: ElFenix
reminds me of a multistate bar question.

rule is: mistake of fact is a defense, while mistake of law is not. if you're trying to kill someone and shoot them while they're lying in their bed, but they had already died of a heart attack an hour ago, you're not guilty of murder.
Click to expand...

because shooting a corpse isn't murder

nice example
Click to expand...

That question was on the Bar exam when I took the NY Bar. I nearly broke out laughing when I read through it. It was definitely a "oh snap" moment.

 
Originally posted by: ElFenix
reminds me of a multistate bar question.

rule is: mistake of fact is a defense, while mistake of law is not. if you're trying to kill someone and shoot them while they're lying in their bed, but they had already died of a heart attack an hour ago, you're not guilty of murder.


here is the texas penal code statutory rape provision:
§ 21.11. INDECENCY WITH A CHILD. (a) A person commits an
offense if, with a child younger than 17 years and not the person's
spouse, whether the child is of the same or opposite sex, the
person:
(1) engages in sexual contact with the child or causes
the child to engage in sexual contact; or
(2) with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire
of any person:
(A) exposes the person's anus or any part of the
person's genitals, knowing the child is present; or
(B) causes the child to expose the child's anus
or any part of the child's genitals.

the code says 'with a child younger than 17 years.' if she is 18 then that negates one of the elements of the crime.


now, you might be prosecuted under the attempt law (though i'm not sure, criminal law was not my specialty):
§ 15.01. CRIMINAL ATTEMPT. (a) A person commits an
offense if, with specific intent to commit an offense, he does an
act amounting to more than mere preparation that tends but fails to
effect the commission of the offense intended.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

look more specifically at 15.031 - Criminal Solicitation of a Minor

(b) A person commits an offense if, with intent that an
offense under Section 21.11, 22.011, 22.021, or 43.25 be committed,
the person by any means requests, commands, or attempts to induce a
minor or another whom the person believes to be a minor to engage in
specific conduct that, under the circumstances surrounding the
actor's conduct as the actor believes them to be, would constitute
an offense under one of those sections or would make the minor or
other believed by the person to be a minor a party to the commission
of an offense under one of those sections.
Click to expand...
 
Kind of reminds me of a situation about a guy that called into a talk radio show to explain his situation with being labeled as a sex offender for the rest of his life.

According to him, he met this girl at a bar and she bought him a drink and they got real friendly with one another. They end up having a wild weekend of consensual sex. Later that week he ends up with the police at his doorstep because that girl was actually underage and he didn't know it. He ended up accepting a plea bargain where he spent a couple of years in jail and ended up with the sex offender status. He accepted the plea bargain because the prosecution was going for the maximum amount of punishment with the jail time which basically equated to the rest of his life.
 
Originally posted by: Jeeebus
Originally posted by: ElFenix
reminds me of a multistate bar question.

rule is: mistake of fact is a defense, while mistake of law is not. if you're trying to kill someone and shoot them while they're lying in their bed, but they had already died of a heart attack an hour ago, you're not guilty of murder.


here is the texas penal code statutory rape provision:
§ 21.11. INDECENCY WITH A CHILD. (a) A person commits an
offense if, with a child younger than 17 years and not the person's
spouse, whether the child is of the same or opposite sex, the
person:
(1) engages in sexual contact with the child or causes
the child to engage in sexual contact; or
(2) with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire
of any person:
(A) exposes the person's anus or any part of the
person's genitals, knowing the child is present; or
(B) causes the child to expose the child's anus
or any part of the child's genitals.

the code says 'with a child younger than 17 years.' if she is 18 then that negates one of the elements of the crime.


now, you might be prosecuted under the attempt law (though i'm not sure, criminal law was not my specialty):
§ 15.01. CRIMINAL ATTEMPT. (a) A person commits an
offense if, with specific intent to commit an offense, he does an
act amounting to more than mere preparation that tends but fails to
effect the commission of the offense intended.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

look more specifically at 15.031 - Criminal Solicitation of a Minor

(b) A person commits an offense if, with intent that an
offense under Section 21.11, 22.011, 22.021, or 43.25 be committed,
the person by any means requests, commands, or attempts to induce a
minor or another whom the person believes to be a minor to engage in
specific conduct that, under the circumstances surrounding the
actor's conduct as the actor believes them to be, would constitute
an offense under one of those sections or would make the minor or
other believed by the person to be a minor a party to the commission
of an offense under one of those sections.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Well since it is codified Actus Reus is fulfilled and you can go to jail.
 
quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ 15.01. CRIMINAL ATTEMPT. (a) A person commits an
offense if, with specific intent to commit an offense, he does an
act amounting to more than mere preparation that tends but fails to
effect the commission of the offense intended.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) A person commits an offense if, with intent that an
offense under Section 21.11, 22.011, 22.021, or 43.25 be committed,
the person by any means requests, commands, or attempts to induce a
minor or another whom the person believes to be a minor to engage in
specific conduct that, under the circumstances surrounding the
actor's conduct as the actor believes them to be, would constitute
an offense under one of those sections or would make the minor or
other believed by the person to be a minor a party to the commission
of an offense under one of those sections

Looks like at least in this state that action would be illegal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top