What a Flaky Mom!!

[johnnymk]

WILLOW GROVE, Pa. - A teenager accused of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl during an underage drinking party has agreed to testify against his mother, who allegedly provided the alcohol, a prosecutor said.

In exchange for his testimony, James Smith, 18, who has been charged with statutory sexual assault and related counts, will avoid a mandatory prison sentence if convicted, Montgomery County prosecutor Todd Stephens said.

"What we've offered James is the opportunity to avoid the five- to 10-year mandatory prison sentence that he would face, in exchange for his truthful testimony against his mother," Stephens said. "We expect that he'll testify to some of the details of the occurrences that night in the house."

Prosecutors allege that Megan Smith, 36, allowed about 25 ninth-graders to drink alcohol during a December party at her home, where the 14-year-old girl told police she was raped by Smith's son, police said.

Megan Smith has been charged with corruption of minors, furnishing alcohol to minors and child endangerment. Prosecutors also say Megan Smith provided alcohol to a 14-year-old boy and ****left him and her daughter at a hotel overnight******.


She actually paid for the motel room!!

[rtse313]

haha what a mom !!

[nickel]

that woman is an a$$hole. looks like she is trying to fit in with teenagers. also, she had her 18 yr old when she was only 18 and is wrongly trying to make up for lost time. :shrug:

[Cubsfan]

If I was the 14 year old girl, I'd be very upset. Why should the kid get an easier sentence for testifying against his mom?

[Speedfreak]

Looks like that mom is getting a flaming bag of dog **** next May.

[attgig]

if the kid is 18......he should be charged as an adult....
put him in jail...
he can't go on thinking that he can go around college and rape any girl he wants to and blame it on whoever provided the alcohol.

[bachviet]

Originally posted by attgig
if the kid is 18......he should be charged as an adult....
put him in jail...
he can't go on thinking that he can go around college and rape any girl he wants to and blame it on whoever provided the alcohol.
Second to that idea but the mom should be punished as well.

[ufcrusher]

I am sure you are all aware that statutory rape isnt necessarily forceable rape. The girl could have consented but due to her age she is considered to be unable to give consent. Additionally, depending on the state if there are any intoxicants around, consent (even by a legal adult) can be negated. (In Florida for example if she is drinking and she takes you home to rock your world with her initiating everything but you are sober..and she decides that she would never have slept with the likes of you and goes to the cops, you are guilty of rape, even though there was no rape. I happen to think its the stupidest rule)

[gwilks98]

Originally posted by ufcrusher
I am sure you are all aware that statutory rape isnt necessarily forceable rape. The girl could have consented but due to her age she is considered to be unable to give consent. Additionally, depending on the state if there are any intoxicants around, consent (even by a legal adult) can be negated. (In Florida for example if she is drinking and she takes you home to rock your world with her initiating everything but you are sober..and she decides that she would never have slept with the likes of you and goes to the cops, you are guilty of rape, even though there was no rape. I happen to think its the stupidest rule)

Just a point of order: The original quote said "statutory sexual assualt" not rape. There's a HUGE difference.

[ufcrusher]

Originally posted by gwilks98


Just a point of order: The original quote said "statutory sexual assualt" not rape. There's a HUGE difference.

If you read what I wrote you would understand that I was pointing out the fact that any sex between the two would have qualified for this. It does not matter if there was consent or not


From the PA code
§ 3122.1. Statutory sexual assault.
Except as provided in section 3121 (relating to rape), a person commits a felony of the second degree when that person engages in sexual intercourse with a complainant under the age of 16 years and that person is four or more years older than the complainant and the complainant and the person are not married to each other.

[welfareloser]

unfortuneately, many parents would rather buy alcohol for their teenagers, with the stipulation that they consume it at home, rather than let them go out to parties and risk that they will decide to drive drunk.

18 year olds just don't get to have sex with 14 year olds. period. that guy - an adult! - is an idiot. prison time is appropriate. being able to get out of it is not.

here's what i wonder... why does the prosecutor need him to testify against his mom?! she bought them the damned alcohol... anyone else at the party could testify to that.

so she had a kid at 18... we don't know what the surrounding circumstances were... but the daughter in the hotel room with alcohol and a functional penis is a pretty good indication of what kind of a person the mom is :eek: "flaky" isn't quite the word i would use :disa:

[Memo]

Maybe the mom and kid and prosecutor came under an agreement so she wouldn't have to have her kid goto jail. I don't mind it when parents buy alcohol and let their kids have partys so they can supervise. However this mom obviously wasn't supervising ****, she was promoting bad behaviour. I'm not sure if the kid should get a full prison sentence he's obviously been raised by a ****ed up "Family"

[molecularfire]

I'm not going to defend the mom because what she did was just plain stupid and criminal. However, kinda sad (unless UT's suggestion is correct) that the kid is testifying against his own mom to get his rear out of the fire. Man... there's an case 18 years ago where I might've supported an abortion...

[ufcrusher]

Originally posted by welfareloser
18 year olds just don't get to have sex with 14 year olds. period. that guy - an adult! - is an idiot. prison time is appropriate. being able to get out of it is not.



Not to sound callous or anything, but there is the same age difference between a 14 and an 18 year old as there is with a 21 and 25 year old. Most people, at that age, dont have a problem with it as they use the same logic that I just mentioned. Would it make any differnce to you if the two had been together for a year before they decided to have sex? What about if he just turned 18..it was his birthday booty present and they had been having sex for months prior to his turning 18? It wouldnt make a differnce under the law.

I know a guy who was arrested for Statutory rape when he was a freshman in college (he was 18)because he had sex with his girlfriend (she was about to turn 17) and her father found out. The father called the police and the guy was arrested. Personally, I dislike the guy and thought it was funny, but it really screwed up his life. Its the same crime as the 18 yo and 14yo.

Now dont take me wrong, I am not condoning having sex with underage people. I am just pointing out what I perceive as a flaw in your logic.

[Joshua]

Hey, the way I look at it, she's just trying to get her kids laid.. Is that so wrong?

LMFAO! :D

[thatonefilipinoguy]

I guess mom won't do that again for awhile especially if her son spills the beans.

[welfareloser]

Originally posted by ufcrusher


Not to sound callous or anything, but there is the same age difference between a 14 and an 18 year old as there is with a 21 and 25 year old.

yes, but there is a big difference between a 14 year old and a 21 year old... that's the point of these laws. if two kids the same age, or two adults, decide to do something, then no crime has occured. but when a child and an adult "decide" to do something, 99% of the time the adult has coerced the child at least to some degree, often to a large degree, and that's what these laws are intended to prevent. children want to please adults that they like, and will do what they think the adult wants them to do. not cool when it comes to sex, which is only healthy if it is an interaction between peers.


Originally posted by ufcrusher

I know a guy who was arrested for Statutory rape when he was a freshman in college (he was 18)because he had sex with his girlfriend (she was about to turn 17) and her father found out.

i think in most states there has to be a certain age difference, often 4 years, before the older participant is considered a coercing adult and is thus subject to prosecution under statutory rape laws. consensual 18-on-17, in and of itself, is hardly a crime, anyone can see that. i agree that it's messed up when ppl get prosecuted for this.


Originally posted by ufcrusher

I am just pointing out what I perceive as a flaw in your logic.

i understand your point, but in this case i don't think the logic is flawed... it's not okay. an 18-year-old doesn't get to have sex with a 14-year-old, period, whether she says it's okay or not.

[ShawnLee]

Wrong... Very, very wrong.