Talk:Dennis Hastert - Revision history

User4: /* Citation */

2016-04-29T15:24:27Z

Citation

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:24, 29 April 2016
Line 8:		Line 8:
	:: Another boy had been 17 years old, so clearly any sexual activity (the AOC was 17 at the time) was ''not'' illegal with that boy. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 14:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)		:: Another boy had been 17 years old, so clearly any sexual activity (the AOC was 17 at the time) was ''not'' illegal with that boy. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 14:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
	::: Ok, I can accept that but the issue here is not AOC so much as it is that he was in a position of authority over his accusers being their coach. Yes? --[[Etenne]] [[File:BLSmileyface.png\|50 px\|link=Etenne]] 15:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)		::: Ok, I can accept that but the issue here is not AOC so much as it is that he was in a position of authority over his accusers being their coach. Yes? --[[Etenne]] [[File:BLSmileyface.png\|50 px\|link=Etenne]] 15:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
			:
			:::: As far as I know, the <strike>"feminazis"</strike> wonderful, caring, compassionate women dedicated to ''Truth, Justice, and the American Way'' had not yet thought to put the "position of authority" <strike>crap</strike> clause into the law at the time the (so-called) "offenses" occurred. (There is still debate about whether the "position of authority" clauses are actually a good idea.) The "abuse of authority" <strike>crap</strike> argument is one which is now used as part of the "betrayal of trust" narrative, and therefore was highlighted in the news articles. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 15:24, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Etenne: /* Citation */

2016-04-29T15:00:38Z

Citation

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:00, 29 April 2016
Line 7:		Line 7:
	:: NOTE: At least one of the boys involved was 14 at the time, and it seems that 20-or-so years later, the LEO used a, shall we say, "creative" (and quite dubious) definition of "sexual activity" ("his hand brushed my crotch" became "sexual activity").		:: NOTE: At least one of the boys involved was 14 at the time, and it seems that 20-or-so years later, the LEO used a, shall we say, "creative" (and quite dubious) definition of "sexual activity" ("his hand brushed my crotch" became "sexual activity").
	:: Another boy had been 17 years old, so clearly any sexual activity (the AOC was 17 at the time) was ''not'' illegal with that boy. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 14:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)		:: Another boy had been 17 years old, so clearly any sexual activity (the AOC was 17 at the time) was ''not'' illegal with that boy. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 14:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
			::: Ok, I can accept that but the issue here is not AOC so much as it is that he was in a position of authority over his accusers being their coach. Yes? --[[Etenne]] [[File:BLSmileyface.png\|50 px\|link=Etenne]] 15:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

User4: /* Citation */

2016-04-29T14:40:45Z

Citation

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:40, 29 April 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==Citation==		==Citation==
	''"The "age of consent" in Illinois in the 60s and 70s may very well have been such that Hastert actually committed no criminal offenses by having sexually touched the boys as he did."'' This statement appears to be a legal opinion which requires a citation. --[[Etenne]] [[File:BLSmileyface.png\|50 px\|link=Etenne]] 14:07, 29 April 2016 (UTC)		''"The "age of consent" in Illinois in the 60s and 70s may very well have been such that Hastert actually committed no criminal offenses by having sexually touched the boys as he did."'' This statement appears to be a legal opinion which requires a citation. --[[Etenne]] [[File:BLSmileyface.png\|50 px\|link=Etenne]] 14:07, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
			:
			:: The use of "...may very well have been..." makes the sentence a simple ''conjecture,'' rather than a formal legal opinion.
			:: I spent two hours or more trying to find the history of the age of consent laws in Illinois, but without any real success.
			:: All ages-of-consent laws have been modified at different times in all of the states, but finding the history of these changes is ''very very difficult''. Hence the "conjecture" rather than a "legal opinion".
			:: NOTE: At least one of the boys involved was 14 at the time, and it seems that 20-or-so years later, the LEO used a, shall we say, "creative" (and quite dubious) definition of "sexual activity" ("his hand brushed my crotch" became "sexual activity").
			:: Another boy had been 17 years old, so clearly any sexual activity (the AOC was 17 at the time) was ''not'' illegal with that boy. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 14:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Etenne: Created page with "==Citation== ''"The "age of consent" in Illinois in the 60s and 70s may very well have been such that Hastert actually committed no criminal offenses by having sexually touche..."

2016-04-29T14:07:51Z

Created page with "==Citation== ''"The "age of consent" in Illinois in the 60s and 70s may very well have been such that Hastert actually committed no criminal offenses by having sexually touche..."

New page

==Citation==
''"The "age of consent" in Illinois in the 60s and 70s may very well have been such that Hastert actually committed no criminal offenses by having sexually touched the boys as he did."'' This statement appears to be a legal opinion which requires a citation. --[[Etenne]] [[File:BLSmileyface.png|50 px|link=Etenne]] 14:07, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:24, 29 April 2016
Line 8:		Line 8:
	:: Another boy had been 17 years old, so clearly any sexual activity (the AOC was 17 at the time) was ''not'' illegal with that boy. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 14:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)		:: Another boy had been 17 years old, so clearly any sexual activity (the AOC was 17 at the time) was ''not'' illegal with that boy. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 14:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
	::: Ok, I can accept that but the issue here is not AOC so much as it is that he was in a position of authority over his accusers being their coach. Yes? --[[Etenne]] [[File:BLSmileyface.png\|50 px\|link=Etenne]] 15:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)		::: Ok, I can accept that but the issue here is not AOC so much as it is that he was in a position of authority over his accusers being their coach. Yes? --[[Etenne]] [[File:BLSmileyface.png\|50 px\|link=Etenne]] 15:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
			:
			:::: As far as I know, the <strike>"feminazis"</strike> wonderful, caring, compassionate women dedicated to ''Truth, Justice, and the American Way'' had not yet thought to put the "position of authority" <strike>crap</strike> clause into the law at the time the (so-called) "offenses" occurred. (There is still debate about whether the "position of authority" clauses are actually a good idea.) The "abuse of authority" <strike>crap</strike> argument is one which is now used as part of the "betrayal of trust" narrative, and therefore was highlighted in the news articles. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 15:24, 29 April 2016 (UTC)