” It is not what it means in popular parlance and everyone else understands that.”

My bad for going by, you know, the definition. Silly, I will try and just make up my own next time, so we can be on equal footing,

“Your claims to 18 as a standard have similarly already been refuted elsewhere in the thread, so I see no reason to revisit it. ”

18 means you are an adult, that is recognized in more states than not. As such, regardless of any regional differences, it is the standard, and regardless of what you may think, in both cases, 18 is the benchmark making it pointless to even discuss the laws in another state. We live in a republic, that means every state can define their own standards. But you are right, there is no point in debating this as it is irrelevant.

“re you claiming that in the boy’s case he was prosecuted and the girl wasn’t because he should have known better?”

I am claiming he was prosecuted because the complaint was filed by the girls parents. In both cases the younger participants parents made the initial complaint. The older individuals are being held responsible because in any legal complaint, there has to be a plaintiff and a defendant. Their parents are free to have done the same, they didn’t. That is why the two older children are being held responsible. AND the fact that they are either adults(by most standards) or on the verge of being an adult, thus making them more responsible for their actions according to the law.

“Also, if I’m understanding you correctly (and i really may not be) you’re completely refuting your final point (the last paragraph) by arguing so. ”

I am not arguing anything. If two people commit a crime and no one knows about it or cares to report it, it is not actually a crime, not because they are right to do so, but rather because of the whole, tree, woods, no sound thing. A crime has to have a victim, and in this case, the parents were making the claim on behalf of their daughters, as is their right. If they didn’t feel the girls were being victimized there would not be a crime, regardless of technicalities with the law.

What I think personally about the behavior of minors is irrelevant, if neither set of parents had complained, then this would not have been an issue. But they did, and the older kids were told to stop, they didn’t, thus it was pursued. The fact that the cops caved to media pressure has no impact on the facts of the case.

You act like the cops went after these people on a whim, they didn’t. There was a complaint, they investigated, that is their job. You thinking it was unfair, or silly is, irrelevant. Was it silly to try and match cock pictures, um, yeah. So what? If the intent was to prove this kid broke the law, then that is within their purview, silly or not.

In the end, we are debating this for the same core reason we debate anything. You prefer anarchy to order. Social liberties are all about the ends justifying the means. I disagree. Doesn’t get simpler than that.