Off Topic Prince Andrew
- Thread starter Libby
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
New York and Epstein Island is part of the US Virgin Islands.
It has that law that you mentioned:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_the_United_States#United_States_Virgin_Islands
I thought you were asking if it was the other way round. i.e. she's 40 and he's 17.
If it was New York, then there is no Romeo and Juliet law in that state.
The New York Age of Consent is 17 years old. In the United States, the age of consent is the minimum age at which an individual is considered legally old enough to consent to participation in sexual activity. Individuals aged 16 or younger in New York are not legally able to consent to sexual activity, and such activity may result in prosecution for statutory rape.
New York statutory rape law is violated when a person has consensual sexual intercourse with an individual under age under age 17, who they are not married to. Punishment varies depending on the age of the offender. There is no defense based around lack of knowledge of the victim's age.
New York does not have a close-in-age exemption. Close in age exemptions, commonly known as "Romeo and Juliet laws", are put in place to prevent the prosecution of individuals who engage in consensual sexual activity when both participants are significantly close in age to each other, and one or both partners are below the age of consent.
Because there is no such "Romeo and Juliet law" in New York, it is possible for two individuals both under the age of 17 who willingly engage in intercourse to both be prosecuted for statutory rape, although this is rare. Similarly, no protections are reserved for sexual relations in which one participant is a 16 year old and the second is a 17 or 18 year old.
The New York Age of Consent is 17 years old. In the United States, the age of consent is the minimum age at which an individual is considered legally old enough to consent to participation in sexual activity. Individuals aged 16 or younger in New York are not legally able to consent to sexual activity, and such activity may result in prosecution for statutory rape.
New York statutory rape law is violated when a person has consensual sexual intercourse with an individual under age under age 17, who they are not married to. Punishment varies depending on the age of the offender. There is no defense based around lack of knowledge of the victim's age.
New York does not have a close-in-age exemption. Close in age exemptions, commonly known as "Romeo and Juliet laws", are put in place to prevent the prosecution of individuals who engage in consensual sexual activity when both participants are significantly close in age to each other, and one or both partners are below the age of consent.
Because there is no such "Romeo and Juliet law" in New York, it is possible for two individuals both under the age of 17 who willingly engage in intercourse to both be prosecuted for statutory rape, although this is rare. Similarly, no protections are reserved for sexual relations in which one participant is a 16 year old and the second is a 17 or 18 year old.
Lucky boy Duggie.
Actually I was in my early twenties and she was around 40 ish
But at 17 I was going steady with a girl of 21
If he had sex with her on the Virgin Islands, then he broke the law, age of consent is 18.
me 19 with 23 yo... and she was my line manager at the time on a summer job. Fck me could she give a blow job. Gives me a tingle just thinking about it.
When I had my accident I was 19 and she was 23
The first time she came to visit me in hospital everyones jaw dropped as she walked in and gave me a kiss
Did you see the Savile documentary last night on ITV. I posted about it on this thread. It had another band's guitarist I think who also witnessed it but much earlier in the 70's and complained at the time but was told to go away. They also interviewed a couple of women who were in their teens on TOTP at the time. One case of a girl committing suicide because he got her pregnant. It was harrowing just watching it tbh.
I was watching that. It was Sparks bassist.
I find it incredible that this could happen and that he was protected by the BBC while he was doing it.
Seeing his state funeral at the start for ****s sake! And then it was a matter of weeks before it all came out.
Weirdly protected by Prince Charles as well, all very strange.
The BBC should be brought to book. They can't just say ah well it was in the past. **** that, they should be implicated and prosecuted.
They knew. As an institution, they ****ing knew.
I find it incredible that this could happen and that he was protected by the BBC while he was doing it.
Seeing his state funeral at the start for ****s sake! And then it was a matter of weeks before it all came out.
Weirdly protected by Prince Charles as well, all very strange.
The BBC should be brought to book. They can't just say ah well it was in the past. **** that, they should be implicated and prosecuted.
They knew. As an institution, they ****ing knew.
Aye they should, but as that programme showed he was protected from all sorts, including hospitals, members of the government, the royals. If they go after the bbc they'll be opening a pandora's box of people being associated with turning a blind eye, brushing aside accusations or even covering up.
They should definitely go after the beeb and individuals though, whether they're still there or retired.
They did like they knew about other cases.........yet nothing is done and the monsters are left to roam free
I remember the **** running past near where I used to live when there was such a thing as the Bolton marathon.
Along Manchester road, in his shiny gold tracksuit with kids running along side him. **** sake, people would have known fine well what he was up to all along.
Along Manchester road, in his shiny gold tracksuit with kids running along side him. **** sake, people would have known fine well what he was up to all along.
Nah I've never watched any of it, it makes me angry. Decades ago I used to look at him on TV and think, something is not right about this guy. I use to just tell myself it was only a persona he puts on for tv, and people say he helps hospitals. When all along my instincts were right about him, in that something wasn't right. I remember when the BBC use to silence John Lydon for his attacks on the establishment, in the main I looked at it as typical reaction, to my generation rebellious behaviour. We now know Johnny Rotten was closer to the truth then any of us realised at the time. Door opens, Abe enters and says 'told you so.'
about 2 mins into the louis theroux documentary and you didn't need any evidence to know he was a wrong un