Girl, 13, charged as sex offender and victim
By Pamela Manson
The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated:12/06/2006 01:12:35 AM MST
Salt Lake City - Utah Supreme Court justices acknowledged Tuesday that they were struggling to wrap their minds around the concept that a 13-year-old girl could be both an offender and a victim for the same act - in this case, having consensual sex with her 12-year-old boyfriend.
The Ogden, Utah, girl was put in this odd position because she was found guilty of violating a state law that prohibits sex with someone under age 14. She also was the victim in the case against her boyfriend, who was found guilty of the same violation by engaging in sexual activity with her.
"The only thing that comes close to this is dueling," said Associate Chief Justice Michael Wilkins, noting that two people who take 20 paces and then shoot could each be considered both victim and offender.
And Chief Justice Christine Durham wondered if the state Legislature had intended the "peculiar consequence" that a child would have the simultaneous status of a protected person and an alleged perpetrator under the law.
The comments came in oral arguments on a motion asking the high court to overturn the finding of delinquency - the legal term in juvenile court for a conviction - against Z.C., who became pregnant after she and her boyfriend engaged in sex in October 2003.
State authorities filed delinquency petitions in July 2004, alleging that each had committed sexual abuse of a child, a second-degree felony if committed by an adult.
The girl appealed the petition, saying her constitutional right to be treated equally under the law had been violated.
Her motion noted that for juveniles who are 16 and 17, having sex with others in their own age group does not qualify as a crime.
Juveniles who are 14 or 15 and have sex with peers can be charged with unlawful conduct with a minor, but the law provides for mitigation when the age difference is less than four years, making the offense a misdemeanor.
For adolescents under 14, though, there are no exceptions or mitigation and they are never considered capable of consenting to sex.
A juvenile court judge denied the motion by Z.C., who then admitted to the offense while preserving her right to appeal to a higher court. The boy did not appeal.
The Utah Court of Appeals last December upheld the judge's refusal to dismiss the allegation, saying the law's "rigorous protections" for younger minors include protecting them for each other. Z.C. then appealed to the state Supreme Court.
At Tuesday's arguments, Matthew Bates, an assistant Utah attorney general, argued the prosecution of the girl was not unreasonable. He said the statute in question is designed to prevent sex with children who are 13 and younger, even if the other person is in the same age group.
By passing that law, legislators were sending a message, Bates said: Sex with or among children is unacceptable.
Randall Richards, the girl's attorney, argued that prosecuting children under a law meant to protect them is illogical.
"A child (victim) cannot also be a perpetrator in the exact same act," Richards said.
The Utah Supreme Court will issue a ruling later.
What the hell? Can't they just throw out the case, considering they're both under 14?
I know that the Mormons are weird, but I didn't think they were this stupid.
I don't see what's so stupid about this. If you want to go the legal way, there is a law against it and obviously someone is suing so it should be followed up. If you want to go the moral way, they both need therapy for this lol.
This the problem with the rigidity of the legal system...
Of course, juries are actually allowed to ignore laws they don't agree with, but it's mostly unknown as they generally aren't informed of such.
North Korea thinks that I sell a nuclear weapon to Islam radical group from lack of funds at last
This looks another job for Silmido man.
Faster than an inter-continental missile.
Can leap exploding nuclear warheads in a single bound.
It's Silmido man.
this is just one of the wtf moments and should be blamed on the parents of both sides because they did not catch them!!
this is just one of the wtf moments and should be blamed on the parents of both sides because they did not catch them!!
this is just one of the wtf moments and should be blamed on the parents of both sides because they did not catch them!!
sorry bout that