Should the age of sexual consent become standardized across all US states?

Yes

1 of 14

by Ross Voorhees

• 

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

As long as there are Statutory Rape laws, it is imperative that a national age of consent be established that encompasses all states. Why is this important? To understand, we have to first look at the concept of statutory rape and its history in the legal system.

Normally, when an individual is charged with a crime, the prosecution MUST prove the two primary elements of a crime: Actus Reus, that the criminal act was indeed committed, and Mens Rea, that the person who committed the crime had the "mental state" necessary at the time the crime was committed. For example, if an individual is to be found guilty of First Degree homicide, the prosecution must prove that the defendant actually committed the crime (Actus Reus), and that they had mentally thought out the act beforehand (Mens Rea).

Statutory Rape, on the other hand, only requires that the ACT be proven, regardless of mental state or previous thought. There is no Mens Rea component in Statutory Rape. Whether the individual charged thought that the person they were having sex with was of legal age or not does not matter. Whether or not their partner consented does not matter. Only the fact that an individual DID engage in sex with a person incapable of consent is enough to prove the crime, brand an individual as a sex offender for the rest of their lives, and in many cases, place individuals who unwittingly engaged in consentual sexual activity in the same category as rapists and real sexual offenders.

While this argument may sound like an advocation for legalizing under-aged sex, it is in fact an argument to impose the same standards of Mens Rea required for virtually every other crime of this severity, and we only have to look at the facts of the Massachusetts case, State v. Garnett, 332 Md. 571, 632 A.2d 797 (1993) that established the concept of Statutory Rape to see why.

In 1976, then State Prosecutor Sandra Day-O'Connor helped rewrite Massachusetts rape laws to make them gender neutral, meaning that women could be equally guilty of rape as men. The second-degree rape section of state law was significantly changed and approved by the state legislature to read as follows:

463. Second degree rape
(a) Elements of offense. - A person is guilty of rape in the second degree if the person engages in vaginal intercourse with another person:

(1) By force or threat of force against the will and without the consent of the other person; or

(2) Who is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless, and the person performing the act knows or should reasonably know the other person is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless; or

(3) Who is under 14 years of age and the person performing the act is at least four years older than the victim.
(b) Penalty. - Any person violating the provisions of this section is guilty of a felony and upon conviction is subject to imprisonment for a period of not more than 20 years. Md. Code Ann., Article 27, 463(a).

In 1996, Raymond Garnett, a 21 year old man, was charged with rape for having sex with Erica Frasier, then aged 13. Raymond, however, was mentally retarded, could not hold a job, often lost his way when going somewhere, and, as was testified, had the social skills of an 11 or 12 year old boy. Erica had invited Raymond to her bedroom when Raymond came to their house to get help finding his way home (Erica's parents were friends with Raymond's parents). Erica convinced Raymond that she was older than she actually was, and actually instigated the sexual contact. These facts are not in dispute in any way, shape or form.

Yet the Supreme Court of the state reached the landmark ruling that because the rewritten law did not specifically state that a person had to KNOW that their partner was underage meant that no Mens Rea was required. The Court did not even apply the Mentally Defective aspect of the law, nor consider the ramifications of their ruling. And thus, from an absurd case and an absurd ruling by a moronic State Supreme Court 4-3 ruling, Statutory Rape was born.

The dissenting opinion even pointed out the fact that under this new ruling, a person who was drunk and completely passed out would be found guilty of second degree rape if an under-aged person took advantage of that individual.

Barring a complete reversal of all Statutory Rape laws to require proof of knowledge of a person's age, the least that the courts could do is establish a national minimum consent age so that individuals who honestly believe that they are engaging in legal activity are not charged and convicted of rape because one state's legal consent age is different from anothers. After all, if a mentally retarded man with a social understanding of an 11 or 12 year old can be convicted and sentenced as a rapist, then anyone can.

Learn more about this author, Ross Voorhees.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.