GUILTY TX - Christina Morris, 23, Plano, 30 August 2014 - #37 *Arrest*

[Momoffourboys]

I do wish we had someone with actual courtroom experience and vast knowledge of the law to help us understand what may be in the works here. #Qualifoot. IMO

 

[Eileen730]

Here's why 16 is below the age of consent in Tx.
http://www.crimevictimsinstitute.org/documents/Adolescent_Behavior_3.1.11.pdf

"Although “statutory rape” is rarely used in the language of the laws, the term is typically recognized as encompassing the intent of several other named laws such as sexual assault, sexual assault of a minor, rape of a child, corruption of a minor, carnal knowledge of a minor, unlawful carnal knowledge, sexual misconduct, or child molestation, to name a few. The predominant rationale of statutory rape laws is to protect minors who are said to be incapable of consenting to sexual intercourse or other sexual activities, due to their lack of experiences to make mature, informed decisions.4 It is believed that youth below the age of consent are less likely to understand and consider the potential consequences of sexual activities, such as sexually transmitted diseases, and pregnancies. These minors are also argued to be unequal to adults, socially, economically, and legally. Because of this, statutory rape laws have been introduced to reduce the power adults may have over minors. These laws do consider that minors will consent to sex. It is the basis for the laws that even if minors consent, adults cannot engage in sexual activities with them because of the power they have over minors. What the laws do not consider is that minors are consenting to have sex with other minors or slightly older peers who do not have power over them.
The wording of these laws encompass teenage relationships making it equally illegal for, say a 17 year old to be sexually intimate with a 16 year old boyfriend or girlfriend. However, because the laws were not originally written to prosecute such cases, the law was rarely enforced among teen couples. In 1995, however, a study was published that caused many states to toughen their statutory rape laws, widening the net to include more teen romances. Landry and Forrest (1995)5, found that half the teenage pregnancies of girls aged 15-17 were the result of teenagers having sexual relationships with men who were 20 years of age or older. "

Just a snippet, lots more explanation in the link.

1995?
Alot has changed since then.

 

[Balor51]

I do wish we had someone with actual courtroom experience and vast knowledge of the law to help us understand what may be in the works here. #Qualifoot. IMO

I thought this was court week. Maybe they will be here later afterwards.

 

[BaeMomma]

1995?
Alot has changed since then.

Read the entire report, it was published in 2011. That one snippet is referencing a study done in 1995. Lots more helpful info in the doc if you really want to understand that part of the law and why it's in place.

 

[BaeMomma]

I can't wait to see what occurs tomorrow. Nothing new happening here.

 

[Mamamerced]

I respect your opinion and I'm not trying to argue either. I don't think the emotional weight or seriousness of the act is actually known to anyone other than the victim.

Not to beat a dead horse, but I'm referring to the emotional weight the legal terminology has on the typical reader, not the victim. Other than that, we're in sync, CP.

 

[Eileen730]

1 You assume that, to him at 22, dating a 16 year old was "an affair of the heart" and some sort of true-ish love, rather than simply a ploy to get in her pants. I find it far more likely to have been perceived as "deep" and "caring" and "heart-felt" to her at 16, than to him at 22.

More important. Because of the disparity in age and potential maturity, the law doesn't allow the older to prey on the younger in making such decisions. Period.

2 The issue isn't what she felt or thought. It's about him and his actions. He lied to her about his age, so that she would let down her guard. He preyed on a much younger girl.

I don't question that perhaps SHE was sincerely swept up in a love affair (or so she thought), just like you were at 16. She may have even thought he was madly in love with her. But that doesn't alter who HE was (a 22 year old man preying on a much younger, impressionable teen) and what HE was doing (committing rape of a child who was too young to legally be considered wise enough to give sexual consent to a much older man).

How do any of us know how he felt?

 

[catpatrol]

Not to beat a dead horse, but I'm referring to the emotional weight the legal terminology has on the typical reader, not the victim. Other than that, we're in sync, CP.

:highfive:

 

[SteveS]

How do any of us know how he felt?

You're right in saying that no one can know who felt what. The trial will be about whether EA raped her or not, and will not be concerned with what anyone FELT, because we can only guess what's in the heart of another. But we can ascertain what he DID. And if he, at 22, had sex with a girl who was 16, he raped her and will be punished accordingly.

 

[daisytrail]

How do any of us know how he felt?

Everyone's experience is different. I have actually met people with things like NPD and watched predatory animals when I lived a long time in the country and interviewed a couple of adult men whose primary sexual interest was teenage girls. We all bring a unique individual perspective to WS. As a victim advocate, my particular area was sexual abuse. I did lots of research because of personal interest in types of predatory and exploitive behavior that involves rape and the sexual abuse of minors. I extrapolate from this experience to imagine what EA's thinking is. I would not really want to be in his head. Just imagining him is scary enough.

 

[Mamamerced]

:highfive:

Cute icon. At first I thought it meant arguing until one was blue in the face!

 

[cluciano63]

A question...if the victim does not feel violated/assaulted...can a trial take place anyway? I know a defendant has the right to face accuser, but in a case where charges may be statuary, how would that work? If victim does not wish to pursue charges, for example?

 

[Eileen730]

You're right in saying that no one can know who felt what. The trial will be about whether EA raped her or not, and will not be concerned with what anyone FELT, because we can only guess what's in the heart of another. But we can ascertain what he DID. And if he, at 22, had sex with a girl who was 16, he raped her and will be punished accordingly.

Oh Im sure he will be!
Im just not having a party about it!

 

[Mamamerced]

A question...if the victim does not feel violated/assaulted...can a trial take place anyway? I know a defendant has the right to face accuser, but in a case where charges may be statuary, how would that work? If victim does not wish to pursue charges, for example?

I would think yes because a law has been broken. Will wait for Steve's interpretation, though.

 

[Eileen730]

Everyone's experience is different. I have actually met people with things like NPD and watched predatory animals when I lived a long time in the country and interviewed a couple of adult men whose primary sexual interest was teenage girls. We all bring a unique individual perspective to WS. As a victim advocate, my particular area was sexual abuse. I did lots of research because of personal interest in types of predatory and exploitive behavior that involves rape and the sexual abuse of minors. I extrapolate from this experience to imagine what EA's thinking is. I would not really want to be in his head. Just imagining him is scary enough.

Its funny!
When I was younger and met someone I liked I wasn't concerned with their age. I really cant say I knew there was a LAW against it way back then. If you like someone and u work together and spend time together im not so sure your going to even think something like this could happen.



They saw each other for 6 months so there was something there.

Im not so sure she was the one to go to the cops.

Hopefully we will find out more.

 

[SteveS]

A question...if the victim does not feel violated/assaulted...can a trial take place anyway? I know a defendant has the right to face accuser, but in a case where charges may be statuary, how would that work? If victim does not wish to pursue charges, for example?

Technically under the law it's not up to the victim's wishes, since they may have given consent that was "above their pay grade" to give, so to speak.

But as a practical matter, if the victim didn't want to pursue charges, it would be up to LE but in many instances it would get dropped. It can depend on the case, the DA, the wishes of the family as well as the victim, and on lots of other factors, but most importantly cooperation by the victim is usually (but not always) a necessity in proving sex happened.

 

[hockeymom4]

A question...if the victim does not feel violated/assaulted...can a trial take place anyway? I know a defendant has the right to face accuser, but in a case where charges may be statuary, how would that work? If victim does not wish to pursue charges, for example?

Great question. Example, a spouse physical abuses the other spouse, but the spouse refuses to press charges after police are called to the scene. The police are aware the law is broken but do they arrest and pursue charges? I know this doesn't happen all the time. Often the spouse gets arrested and the charges are dropped because the other spouse will not pursue it.

Questions that I have that remain unanswered,
1. why sexual assault versus statutory rape?
2. Does the family agree with pursuing these charges?
3. Why did they not pursue them in 2012, 2013, 2014? Not faulting them for not, just curious. I know firsthand why many people don't.
4. Who started and end the relationship and details surrounding it? Including where her mom thought she was when she slept over.
5. I believe I read in the warrant her mom found out at the end of 2012 that she was sleeping over, but the relationship continued. Did she still sleepover? Or did they just still date?

Just so everyone is clear, I am not blaming "Jennifer" or her mom. I am trying to understand how they cam to this charge of sexual assault and why LE came to the charges and not the family.

What's important to me, may not be important to you, just like what's important to you, may not be important to me.

 

[daisytrail]

Technically under the law it's not up to the victim's wishes, since they may have given consent that was "above their pay grade" to give, so to speak.

But as a practical matter, if the victim didn't want to pursue charges, it would be up to LE but in many instances it would get dropped. It can depend on the case, the DA, the wishes of the family as well as the victim, and on lots of other factors, but most importantly cooperation by the victim is usually (but not always) a necessity in proving sex happened.

If the victim and her family willingly go forward with this, I think that they are showing extraordinary courage because of the publicity that is likely to result given EA's AK charge and the fact that Christina is still missing. (Yes, I know she is technically entitled to privacy) but the media, and especially the social media, has its ways of turning people's most pain most painful personal circumstances into a circus or often a hate-mongering festival. I can imagine what it must be like for that young woman to realize that the man she had trusted might be capable of a murder and a brutal disregard for the welfare of two families.

 

[Doj1234]

If the victim and her family willingly go forward with this, I think that they are showing extraordinary courage because of the publicity that is likely to result given EA's AK charge and the fact that Christina is still missing. (Yes, I know she is technically entitled to privacy) but the media, and especially the social media, has its ways of turning people's most pain most painful personal circumstances into a circus or often a hate-mongering festival. I can imagine what it must be like for that young woman to realize that the man she had trusted might be capable of a murder and a brutal disregard for the welfare of two families.

I doubt that the family of 'Jennifer' have much choice in the matter at this point. If the DA wants to pursue it for the reasons of law, strategy in getting EA to talk, voter hot issues, legacy or political affiliation, I feel like he will pursue it.

 

[SteveS]

Questions that I have that remain unanswered,
1. why sexual assault versus statutory rape?

I thought I answered this somewhere in the posts on this arrest, but maybe not.

"Sexual assault" is the term used in Texas law statutes (Sec 22.011 is where the specifics can be found). Rape is the more commonly known term for sexual assault. "Statutory rape" (also not a term used in the statutes) is the vernacular for a specific type of sexual assault in which one of the parties is below the age of consent, and is referred to in the Texas statutes as a sexual assault on a child.

IOW when someone refers to statutory rape, they would be speaking of a specific type of sexual assault.

(I can't respond to the rest of your questions, as they ask about actions that may or may not have occurred. I only know what facts are outlined in the arrest warrant.)