• layzerjeyt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    22 hours ago

    The committee said it found evidence that Gaetz did not learn the victim’s age until a month after they had sex. But “statutory rape is a strict liability crime,” the report said, referring to crimes that don’t require proof of intent for a conviction.

    • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      21 hours ago

      And this is one of the problems with strict-liability crimes like this. Again, say what you will about being at a drug-fueled party in the first place, but Gaetz had every reason to believe he was engaging in consensual (if abhorrent) sexual activity with a willing adult. Everything else he did is 100% on him, but in this specific case, I can’t help but feel that the guy is getting railroaded. Especially since that is by far the most serious charge he is facing.

      • layzerjeyt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Gaetz had every reason to believe he was engaging in consensual (if abhorrent) sexual activity with a willing adult.

        what reason?

        • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          He was at a drug-fueled party with wealthy, well-connected people. There would be no reason to believe that a 17 year old girl would have the wealth or connections needed to gain access to that party. Most of the women attending the party were regular attendees. Gaetz had absolutely no reason (that we know of) to believe that the one girl that he randomly hooked up with at this party happened to be a minor that nobody had realized was 17. The report says as much. Now if anyone has any evidence that this specific girl was hired for Gaetz with the knowledge she was 17, then that’s a different story. But given everything we know, there was no reason to believe she was anything other than a consenting adult.

          That said, it’s kinda moot anyway. He only has a valid defense for the first time they hooked up. They had apparently met multiple times and while the report gives no indication that he knew of her age for over a month, I don’t think a reasonable person would hook up with someone multiple times and either not say how old she was or never give any indication that something may not be right. Something is going to slip in casual conversation. If they only hooked up the one time, I’d say the case was overblown and actually be on his side. But once he started going back for more, any defense of him not knowing her age becomes less and less believable.

          • layzerjeyt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            17 hours ago

            He was at a drug-fueled party with wealthy, well-connected people. There would be no reason to believe that a 17 year old girl would have the wealth or connections needed to gain access to that party.

            are you new?

            of course a party like that would have underage girls. it is a situation that FAMOUSLY has underage girls.

            can you at least tell me they were IDing at the door?