(LeModernCaveman) wrote in message
...
Nick Bourbaki wrote:
Perhaps Alabama's legislators believe that sexual relations within a
marriage are less potentially harmful than sexual relations outside
marriage.

LeModernCaveman wrote:
Then they should criminalize premarital sex.
Oh wait, that's what this trial tried to do.

Nick wrote:
I doubt that Alex Sherzer's criminal trial was an attempt to criminalize
every act of premarital sexual intercourse in Alabama.

If he were married to the girl, what he did would have been legal.

"If something else had been true, then what I have been accused of doing would
have been legal."
--many criminal defendants

LeModernCaveman wrote:
The equal protection clause of the constitution would indicate that the
age of consent in Alabama is *already* fourteen.

Nick wrote:
For some reason, Alex Sherzer's lawyer failed to appreciate LeModernCaveman's
legal advice to argue about "the equal protection clause" of the United
States Constitution, instead preferring to rely on an entrapment defence on
behalf of Sherzer. I doubt that Alex Sherzer today would regret his
lawyer's strategy.

If that strategy hadn't worked, this one could easily have followed it on
appeal.

"If my lawyer had done something else at my trial, then I would not have to
appeal my conviction."
--many criminal defendants

LeModernCaveman wrote:
The state of Alabama says that 14 year-olds are mature enough to have
sex.

Nick wrote:
I thought that the laws of Alabama stated that it was acceptable for a
married fourteen-year-old female (married only with the permission of her
parents?) to have sexual intercourse with her husband. Would it be
illegal for another man to have consensual sexual intercourse with her
at that age?

LeModernCaveman wrote:
Not the point (equal protection under the law).
Alabama sanctions sexual activity for 14 year-olds.

Nick wrote:
As far as I know, the laws of Alabama permit a fourteen-year-old female to
have sexual intercourse under some circumstances, such as with her husband,
but not all circumstances.

And the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution doesn't like "selective"
laws, like those that ban unsolicited calls from telemarketers but not from
politicians or charities.

How would one make a clear distinction between solicitations from telemarketers
and those from "politicians or charities"?

The theory is that if sex is harmful to 14 year-olds, it should be illegal
all the time for that.

Have you ever read or watched 'Romeo and Juliet' by William Shakespeare? :-)

Nick wrote:
The jury has heard all the evidence and given its verdict,
and I respect that verdict.

The verdict made these arguments moot, although someone could still file
suit to have the law declared unconstitutional.

'If' is the title of a poem by Rudyard Kipling. :-)

'Seduction opens the door to a dismal train of innumerable miseries.'
--William Hill Brown (The Power of Sympathy)

--Nick