posted
Matthew Koso is 22. His wife, Crystal, is 14. He is charged with statutory rape, even though they were wed with their parents' blessing in May, crossing into Kansas because their own state prohibits marriages of people under 17.
posted
All I can say is what a stuffed up situation. A 22 year old and a 14 year old - that's just wrong. From the article it sounds like they were 20 and 12 when they started dating. I don't even know the words for that I guess maybe they should've stayed put in Kansas. I guess if the marriage is legal there they couldn't be prosecuted for it (or am I wrong). I guess they are being prosecuted for the "pre marriage" part of their relationship. Messy any way you look at it.
me
-------------------- Check out my handmade pens Check back often because the page changes often Posts: 831 | From: Brisbane, Australia | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the parents of the 14yo should be charged w/ contributing.
-------------------- "My Very Educated Mother Just Said Uh-oh! No...Pluto..."~ Steven Colbert Posts: 3256 | From: Somewhere in Ohio | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
There has been quite an uproar about this here in Lincoln. Some people point out that throwing him in jail won't do anything, since he seems to want to support his family - he can't do that in jail.
I guess. But I believe she was 13 when she got pregnant. Yeesh.
I wish there was someway to punish him where he would still have to work and support his wife and child - but not be allowed near anyone that young.
And not to be petty, but they named the kid after a character from "The Ring"!
I also wish the parents of everyone involved could be prosecuted.
The article said the govenor of Kansas is embarassed the marriage could take place. Maybe this will open a dialogue on age of consent and such. It does seem odd that a 12 year can get married in Kansas but not Nebraska. (Thank goodness, of course.)
--NewZer0
-------------------- I study medieval literature because that's where the money is. Posts: 1431 | From: Corvallis, OR | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I guess if the marriage is legal there they couldn't be prosecuted for it
Prosecute them? What, and make a mockery of the sanctity of marriage?
- snopes
If we allow, 12 year olds to get married. Then what's next, homosexuals would want to get married too. Can't somebody think of the homosexuals.
IP: Logged |
posted
Every time I read an article about this in the Omaha paper when I see that at work, I can't help but roll my eyes. I believe they said the couple are both on the mentally challenged side, but I don't think that really excuses their behavior either. Their parents only allowed them to get married because it's the "responsible" thing to do. I'm not sure I think either of their sets of parents are really responsible, considering they apparently knew before the girl had her baby that he was the father. They surely knew that condition had to have been caused by.
I don't know what I really think about this. It's so confusing and stupid all at the same time.
-------------------- "I am lost in the familiar streets and created the other side of myself in the darkness" ~ Kawaita Sakebi~ Field of View Posts: 302 | From: Nebraska | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
As a Nebraskan, I was pretty upset about this whole thing. While Kansas does allow marriage with parental consent, and cannot prosecute statutory rape by a spouse, Nebraska (where the couple lives) can and will. It kills me that people are saying that the law should leave them alone and stay out of it because he "did the right thing" by marrying her after she got pregnant. Um, the "right thing" is not having sex with 13 year olds. It's a complicated case, I understand her parents' position. They took out a protection order against Koso, but he and the girl ignored it. The protection order was dropped immediately following the wedding. I can understand them allowing the two to marry, what else are you going to do with a pregnant 13-year-old? But the letters I've read in the paper concerning this case....I just don't understand why some people are having trouble recognizing that she is a victim.
-------------------- Too broke to pay attention Posts: 452 | From: Omaha, NE | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm glad that he want to be able to take care of his family. But I can't wrap my head around the fact that he was 20 and she was 12 when they got together. She wasn't even done with puberty yet, let alone ,IMHO, mentally prepeared to make such a huge decision as to become sexually active. And I'm sorry if people disagree with me, but I serioulsy think that this guy's actions are pretty pedophiliac.
-------------------- I'm as giddy as a Japanese school girl in an octopus tank. Posts: 641 | From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Anyte: I can understand them allowing the two to marry, what else are you going to do with a pregnant 13-year-old?
Not allow her to marry her (statutory) rapist?
-------------------- -Oh, we'd all like to lick the great Superman, Jimmy. Posts: 2298 | From: Eastern Scandinavia (Sverige) | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Technically speaking this dude could be prosecuted and probably should, either that or shove him in a dark whole for a time being.
Posts: 61 | From: Pittsburgh, PA | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A 21yo man had sex with a 13yo girl. That is the bottom line. He should be charged.
-------------------- Why is there so much month left at the end of the money? Posts: 76 | From: Brisbane, Australia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just playing devil's advocate here, because I in no way approve of adult men having sex with young girls, but where do you draw the line on what is acceptable and what is not? Suppose her husband had just turned 18, and they'd been together since he was 16 and she was 12? I'm sure people defending them wouldn't if he were in his 30's or 40's. What age difference makes statutory rape "acceptable"? What if she were 15 and he 23? (or whatever that would make him given their age difference?)
I wonder if their feelings on this will change when their daughter is the same age she is now. For the record, I do think that some 12yo's are old enough to decide who they want to be in a long term/permanent relationship with. My uncle married his gf of 12 years when she turned 24. He is 2 years older than she is.
quote:Originally posted by Auntie Witch: ...I do think that some 12yo's are old enough to decide who they want to be in a long term/permanent relationship with. My uncle married his gf of 12 years when she turned 24. He is 2 years older than she is.
Just because a 12 year old can have sex and think they are in love does not mean that they should be getting married at that age. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a bit off their rocker.
-------------------- "My Very Educated Mother Just Said Uh-oh! No...Pluto..."~ Steven Colbert Posts: 3256 | From: Somewhere in Ohio | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I guess if the marriage is legal there they couldn't be prosecuted for it
Prosecute them? What, and make a mockery of the sanctity of marriage?
- snopes
This marriage is an affront to Christians everywhere. I am just thankful that the Anglican Church's founder, Henry VIII, and his wife Catherine of Aragon, and his wife Anne Boleyn, and his wife Jane Seymour, and his wife Anne of Cleves, and his wife Katherine Howard, and his wife Catherine Parr are no longer here to suffer through this assault on traditional Christian marriages.
(With thanks to Sam George)
-------------------- Ad astra per asparagus. Posts: 4806 | From: Groton, CT | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:A 21yo man had sex with a 13yo girl. That is the bottom line. He should be charged.
Actually, the bottom line is what purpose charging him would serve. Is taking a husband away from a barely teenage mother and a father away from an infant child, almost certainly relegating mother and daughter to becoming welfare dependents, really worth whatever illusory, symbolic effect jailing a teenage boy would bring about?
posted
Why almost certainly would they be welfare dependents though? I mean god forbid that my daughter had fallen pregnant at such a young age, but should it have happened and she had decided to keep the baby, she and the baby would have had a home with us. Why just because she falls pregnant does a 13 yr old suddenly stop being a dependent on her own parents? The last thing she should have needed to do at 13 was to marry.
-------------------- If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, it's just possible you haven't grasped the situation. - Jean Kerr Posts: 18428 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why almost certainly would they be welfare dependents though? Why just because she falls pregnant does a 13 yr old suddenly stop being a dependent on her own parents?
Let's see . . . Crystal, the teenaged mother, is a non-working high school student, Crystal's own mother is a single (divorced) parent with another child at home to care for, and both Crystal's mother and Crystal's husband's mother receive Supplemental Security Income for disabilities. Whaddya think the odds are that Crystal is going to be receiving financial assistance from the state to help take care of her child if her husband ends up in jail?
posted
Honestly, one of the smartest things my mother ever told me was "If you're dumb enough to let him get you pregnant, you don't have to be dumb enough to marry him" He got her pregnant - he owes her child support NOT a wedding. He's a statuatory rapist - He deserves jail NOT.. well whatever not jail is. It's not the age difference that's the problem, it's that they were having sex when she was way too young to know all of the possible consequences of that action. I started when I was 15 and I still see his face all the time. 12 is way too young to get that first face branded into your brain. Somewhere between 16 and 20 (depending on the person) is old enough to start making major decisions. No way is 12 or 14 anywhere close.
-------------------- Conforming meant that everyone liked you except yourself Rebecca Posts: 682 | From: Jacksonville, FL | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:A 21yo man had sex with a 13yo girl. That is the bottom line. He should be charged.
Actually, the bottom line is what purpose charging him would serve. Is taking a husband away from a barely teenage mother and a father away from an infant child, almost certainly relegating mother and daughter to becoming welfare dependents, really worth whatever illusory, symbolic effect jailing a teenage boy would bring about?
- snopes
Should prosecutors choose who gets charged based on their familial status- or the crimes they've committed?
He's facing other charges stemming from possible relationships with other young girls, he violated a restraining order filed by the girl's mother, and his mother warned him of the possibility of prison- yet he shouldn't have to face charges?
I agree that the harshest of sentences might not be the best option, but to leave him uncharged would be ridiculous IMO.
Posts: 687 | From: Grand Rapids, Michigan | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why almost certainly would they be welfare dependents though? Why just because she falls pregnant does a 13 yr old suddenly stop being a dependent on her own parents?
Let's see . . . Crystal, the teenaged mother, is a non-working high school student, Crystal's own mother is a single (divorced) parent with another child at home to care for, and both Crystal's mother and Crystal's husband's mother receive Supplemental Security Income for disabilities. Whaddya think the odds are that Crystal is going to be receiving financial assistance from the state to help take care of her child if her husband ends up in jail?
- snopes
But again that still does not mean that at 13 the appropriate response to a pregnancy is marriage. I mean you could just as easily make the argument that at 13, even if she were not pregnant, she may as well get married if her husband can support her and her parents cannot.
Whether the husband actually goes to jail or not isn't the issue for me, the issue is whether, at 13, she should be married. I don't believe it should even be a choice. At 13 she is still a child.
-------------------- If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, it's just possible you haven't grasped the situation. - Jean Kerr Posts: 18428 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Christie: Why just because she falls pregnant does a 13 yr old suddenly stop being a dependent on her own parents?
Legally, her parents are still required to provide for her. But the 13-year-old girl is required to provide for her child. The grandparents are not legally responsible.
Pogue
-------------------- Let's drink to the causes in your life: Your family, your friends, the union, your wife. Posts: 11325 | From: Kentucky | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Auntie Witch: ...I do think that some 12yo's are old enough to decide who they want to be in a long term/permanent relationship with. My uncle married his gf of 12 years when she turned 24. He is 2 years older than she is.
Just because a 12 year old can have sex and think they are in love does not mean that they should be getting married at that age. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a bit off their rocker.
I didn't say all, or even most, I said some. Granted, they're a very small minority. By no means is 12 an appropriate age to marry at, but some girls can and do know at 12 who they will marry eventually, and for some, it's not an inappropriate choice.
quote:Should prosecutors choose who gets charged based on their familial status- or the crimes they've committed?
Prosecutors should (and sometimes actually do) consider all the factors involved in a case before deciding whether to bring charges, and what charges to bring.
quote:But again that still does not mean that at 13 the appropriate response to a pregnancy is marriage.
But whether her response to pregnancy was "appropriate" is irrelevant to the issue of whether society is best served by incarcerating her husband for having sex with her.
quote:Originally posted by TuFurg: Should prosecutors choose who gets charged based on their familial status- or the crimes they've committed?
In some states -- Kentucky is one -- marriage trumps a statutory rape charge.
Pogue
-------------------- Let's drink to the causes in your life: Your family, your friends, the union, your wife. Posts: 11325 | From: Kentucky | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pogue Mahoring Has Broken:
quote:Originally posted by Christie: Why just because she falls pregnant does a 13 yr old suddenly stop being a dependent on her own parents?
Legally, her parents are still required to provide for her. But the 13-year-old girl is required to provide for her child. The grandparents are not legally responsible.
Pogue
Which still means very little when you consider that there are very few places AFAIK where it is legal for a 13 yr old girl to marry for any reason, including pregnancy. So where does that leave the grandparents? They can do the old "never darken my doorway again" routine and cast her out into a snowbank or they can do what most caring parents do, support their daughter and their grandchild.
My point is not who should or should not be supporting the baby - my point is that 13 yr olds should not be getting married.
-------------------- If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, it's just possible you haven't grasped the situation. - Jean Kerr Posts: 18428 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:A 21yo man had sex with a 13yo girl. That is the bottom line. He should be charged.
Actually, the bottom line is what purpose charging him would serve. Is taking a husband away from a barely teenage mother and a father away from an infant child, almost certainly relegating mother and daughter to becoming welfare dependents, really worth whatever illusory, symbolic effect jailing a teenage boy would bring about?
- snopes
He should still be charged. In this case, a non-custodial sentence should be imposed.
It is not about a symbolic effect of jailing, but about sending a clear message that society will not tolerate grown men having sex with young girls.
-------------------- Why is there so much month left at the end of the money? Posts: 76 | From: Brisbane, Australia | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Christie: My point is not who should or should not be supporting the baby - my point is that 13 yr olds should not be getting married.
I don't disagree. I was just pointing out that the grandparents have no legal obligation to the infant, although they still do to their own child.
Pogue
-------------------- Let's drink to the causes in your life: Your family, your friends, the union, your wife. Posts: 11325 | From: Kentucky | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Devil's advocate: Shouldn't the people in the situation be looked at, not the situation itself? Although it's probably the exception rather than the rule, Loretta Lynn got married at 14, and look how well she turned out.
Posts: 2711 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was really surprised to read in Christie's link that if you are under age 21 and want to get married in Mississippi, you need parental consent. At age 18, you're a legal adult, not a minor, so that seems very strange.
Edit: MisterGrey pointed out something I was going to mention; marriage views have certain changed over the last few generations. When Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13-year-old cousin in 1957, the scandal nearly destroyed his career, but I don't recall him being accused of statutory rape or prosecuted for such. Loretta Lynn married at age 14 and started having kids shortly after, and while she admits she was too young to know anything about sex or marriage, her husband was not accused of or prosecuted for statutory rape. (He wasn't exactly Mr. Nice Guy though.) Those are the only examples I'm familiar with involving young brides. However, they both happened 50-60 years ago, when teenage brides were unusual but their husbands were not automatically considered pedophiles or rapists.
-------------------- "There is no constitutional right to sleep with endangered reptiles." -- Carl Hiaasen Won't somebody please think of the adults! Posts: 8254 | From: Florida | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
If her parents went so far as to get a restraining order against this man, why the hell didn't they enforce it? Had it been my child, I would have gone to whatever lengths it took to keep her away from him, and I damn sure wouldn't have consented to the marriage.
You can bet I would have had statutory rape charges against him the second I found out she was pregnant, rather than running off to a chapel and allowing a marriage to someone with obvious problems.
IMHO, the parents did not take the right action.
-------------------- Some people are like slinkies...They don't really have a purpose, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs. Posts: 907 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cervus: I was really surprised to read in Christie's link that if you are under age 21 and want to get married in Mississippi, you need parental consent. At age 18, you're a legal adult, not a minor, so that seems very strange.
Edit: MisterGrey pointed out something I was going to mention; marriage views have certain changed over the last few generations. When Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13-year-old cousin in 1957, the scandal nearly destroyed his career, but I don't recall him being accused of statutory rape or prosecuted for such. Loretta Lynn married at age 14 and started having kids shortly after, and while she admits she was too young to know anything about sex or marriage, her husband was not accused of or prosecuted for statutory rape. (He wasn't exactly Mr. Nice Guy though.) Those are the only examples I'm familiar with involving young brides. However, they both happened 50-60 years ago, when teenage brides were unusual but their husbands were not automatically considered pedophiles or rapists.
From what can see, the difference between those two cases and the case in the OP is that they guy in the OP was having sex with the underage girl before they were married. AFAIK, neither of the guys in your cases was known to have had sex until after they were married. So basically, he is/could be prosecuted for the sex before the marriage. Since the full faith and credit clause of the US Constitution means their wedding is valid in all 46 states, he can't be prosecuted for any sex they had after they got married.
-------------------- IIRC, it wasn't the shoe bomber's loud prayers that sparked the takedown by the other passengers; it was that he was trying to light his shoe on fire. Very, very different. Canuckistan Posts: 3694 | From: Arizona | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
IIRC, there was a couple at the high school I attended who I who got married a couple of years after I graduated. He was 18 and she was 14. There was no pregnancy or mitigating issues, they just wanted to get married. She obtained parental consent and he didn't have to. I don't know either of them, so I have no idea if it actually worked out or not.
I do believe that people should be mature enough to get married by the time they enter high school and should absolutely give marriage some real consideration by the time they both graduate if they've been in a long-term relationship and seem to know what they want.
The idea that people aren't really ready to get married until they're well into their twenties just strikes me as odd and almost unnatural.
Elwood, who will back away from his straw man and get back to work now. 11:26 pm and I'm in my office! What am I thinking?!
-------------------- "If I didn't see it and didn't know it was a real news report, I wouldn't believe it. I mean, how nutty can you get?"-Pat Robertson Oct 26, 2006. Posts: 2936 | From: Mean Streets of West Virginia | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
I guess maybe they should've stayed put in Kansas. I guess if the marriage is legal there they couldn't be prosecuted for it (or am I wrong). I guess they are being prosecuted for the "pre marriage" part of their relationship. Messy any way you look at it.
