Mormon Bishop pleads guilty to having sex with teenager.

[_EAllusion]

He is charged with rape. Rape is a heinous crime.

The article only refers to his sexual relationship with the woman. I know state laws are sometimes written in such a way that standard rape charges can be piled on statutory cases due to the presumption of lack of consent. It varies from state to state. Based on the article that only refers to a consensual, but underage relationship, that's what it looked like was going on here. If that's the case, the penalty is far too harsh. I don't think a 17 year old's capacity for consent is impaired in the same way a 7 year old's is. Without more information, it's hard to make a judgement.

[_LDSToronto]

He is charged with rape. Rape is a heinous crime.

The article only refers to his sexual relationship with the woman. I know state laws are sometimes written in such a way that standard rape charges can be piled on statutory cases due to the presumption of lack of consent. It varies from state to state. Based on the article that only refers to a consensual, but underage relationship, that's what it looked like was going on here. If that's the case, the penalty is far too harsh. I don't think a 17 year old's capacity for consent is impaired in the same way a 7 year old's is. Without more information, it's hard to make a judgement.

As the girl's teacher, he may be subject to laws that govern relationships between students and teachers. Reading the article, it sounds as though he coerced the continuation of the relationship by stating that she'd be kicked out of the athletic program.

H.

[_sock puppet]

Life in prison seems like a way over the top penalty for carrying on a sexual relationship with a 17 year old. The way in which he abused his authority, while contemptible, isn't criminal.

Maybe, but the article implies there was more to it than just a statutory rape charge: forcible sodomy and forcible rape, as well as obstruction of justice and witness tampering. Doesn't look like we are getting the whole story here.

Unfortunately, it sounds like the 17 year old girl got the full 'story', against her will.

[_sock puppet]

He has that crazy look, for sure.

http://archive.sltrib.com/images/2014/0515/bills_051614~0.jpg

That picture explains why he was in a sexless marriage, and had to force himself on a female, in order to have sex with another person.

[_sock puppet]

He is charged with rape. Rape is a heinous crime.

The article only refers to his sexual relationship with the woman. I know state laws are sometimes written in such a way that standard rape charges can be piled on statutory cases due to the presumption of lack of consent. It varies from state to state. Based on the article that only refers to a consensual, but underage relationship, that's what it looked like was going on here. If that's the case, the penalty is far too harsh. I don't think a 17 year old's capacity for consent is impaired in the same way a 7 year old's is. Without more information, it's hard to make a judgement.

Statutory rape obviates the element of rape that the sex not be consensual. A person under a specified age is said not to be legally capable of giving consent to sex. A perp is often charged with both, where the person is both below the age of consenting to the sex act (statutory) and was not a willing participant in the sex act (standard). I've not heard of forcible rape, forcible sodomy, or any other 'forcible' act dispensing with the element that the victim was an unwilling participant.

[_sock puppet]

He is charged with rape. Rape is a heinous crime.

The article only refers to his sexual relationship with the woman. I know state laws are sometimes written in such a way that standard rape charges can be piled on statutory cases due to the presumption of lack of consent. It varies from state to state. Based on the article that only refers to a consensual, but underage relationship, that's what it looked like was going on here. If that's the case, the penalty is far too harsh. I don't think a 17 year old's capacity for consent is impaired in the same way a 7 year old's is. Without more information, it's hard to make a judgement.

As the girl's teacher, he may be subject to laws that govern relationships between students and teachers. Reading the article, it sounds as though he coerced the continuation of the relationship by stating that she'd be kicked out of the athletic program.

H.

Donny Bills sounds like a classless piece of crap, don't you agree?

[_EAllusion]

Statutory rape obviates the element of rape that the sex not be consensual. A person under a specified age is said not to be legally capable of giving consent to sex. A perp is often charged with both, where the person is both below the age of consenting to the sex act (statutory) and was not a willing participant in the sex act (standard). I've not heard of forcible rape, forcible sodomy, or any other 'forcible' act dispensing with the element that the victim was an unwilling participant.

A 17 year old, on average, has significantly greater capacity for consent to sex than a 12 year old. I'm not even sure if it makes sense to draw the age of consent above 17 (many states/countries do not), but assuming we do, the law should have enough gradient in it to recognize that this type of sexual relationship is not as harmful as other forms of sexual assault. The penalties should be proportional to that fact. The witness tampering and obstruction charges derive from him pressuring her to have a false story for investigators. The type of coercion he engaged in, threatening her athletic position, is also not the same in degree as threatening bodily harm with a weapon. The law should have the capacity to take these differences into account. The multiple charges related to the sexual relationship itself seem to be piled on from the different sex acts engaged in. If that's all there is to the case, then life in prison is a stunningly draconian response. If there's more to the case, then it's not being adequately reported.

[_LDSToronto]

As the girl's teacher, he may be subject to laws that govern relationships between students and teachers. Reading the article, it sounds as though he coerced the continuation of the relationship by stating that she'd be kicked out of the athletic program.

H.

Donny Bills sounds like a classless piece of s***, don't you agree?

I'd know one to see one ;)

H.

[_LDSToronto]

Wikipedia says:

Utah
The age of consent in Utah is 18. However, it is legal for minors aged 16 and 17 to engage in sexual activity with partners less than 7 years older, and between 7 and 10 years older if the partner reasonably didn't know the minor's age.[111]

76-5-401.2. Unlawful sexual conduct with a 16- or 17-year-old.

(1) As used in this section, "minor" means a person who is 16 years of age or older, but younger than 18 years of age, at the time the sexual conduct described in Subsection (2) occurred.

(2)

(a) A person commits unlawful sexual conduct with a minor if, under circumstances not amounting to an offense listed under Subsection (3), a person who is:
(i) seven or more years older but less than 10 years older than the minor at the time of the sexual conduct engages in any conduct listed in Subsection (2)(b), and the person knew or reasonably should have known the age of the minor; or
(ii) 10 or more years older than the minor at the time of the sexual conduct and engages in any conduct listed in Subsection (2)(b).
(b) As used in Subsection (2)(a), "sexual conduct" refers to when the person:
(i) has sexual intercourse with the minor;
(ii) engages in any sexual act with the minor involving the genitals of one person and the mouth or anus of another person, regardless of the sex of either participant;
(iii) causes the penetration, however slight, of the genital or anal opening of the minor by any foreign object, substance, instrument, or device, including a part of the human body, with the intent to cause substantial emotional or bodily pain to any person or with the intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person, regardless of the sex of any participant; or
(iv) touches the anus, buttocks, or any part of the genitals of the minor, or touches the breast of a female minor, or otherwise takes indecent liberties with the minor, or causes a minor to take indecent liberties with the actor or another person, with the intent to cause substantial emotional or bodily pain to any person or with the intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person regardless of the sex of any participant.

[_LDSToronto]

I also found this story: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/0 ... 40288.html

Which states:

"[ex-teacher Brianne Altice] was in a position of special trust which makes it impossible for victims to consent," [Deputy Davis County Attorney Susan] Hunt said.

Which seems to imply some law for those in positions of authority.

H.