Curly,
I think we have to distinguish between statutory rape, in which the victim is under the age capable of consenting, and regular rape in which consent can be given, or not. In California the age of consent is 18, so a 16 year old who is sexually touched is raped by statute. These articles do not get into those distinctions. Connecticut has a statute very similar to the one mentioned in the article which extends the statute of limitations from age 18 to age 35 for those abused under the age of 18. The reasoning behind the statute is that a minor is incapable of understanding the statute of limitations and other studies showing that sexual abuse can become a repressed memory. I actually defended such a civil claim many years ago. In Connecticut the age of consent is 16, but the victim in that case was abused from ages 12 to 18. You have to also understand that the extension of the statute of limitations runs from 18 and not 16 because a 16 year old is incapable of filing suit on his or her own under the law and may not do so until emancipation at age 18.
The first thing you learn in first year criminal law in law school is that ignorance of the law is not a defense to any crime and consent is not a defense to a statutory rape charge.
There is a further murky area of law not discussed in terms of the age of consent vs. age of emancipation which is usually 18. But before age 18 and after the age of consent, if under age 18, there are a whole host of activities for which parental consents are needed, and they either get obtained or not.
www.yahoo.com
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(560x0:562x2)/pamela-smart-02c48f4673e6446dafbd944729477df1.jpg)
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(1199x0:1201x2)/601-crime-2-bf01679ae3ab48eaa66695c19b216cec.png)
www.sbsun.com
has deliberately facilitated this kind of scheme.
www.dailymail.co.uk
www.nbcconnecticut.com
nypost.com
nationworldnews.com
