I still say that it's all those trials in which everybody agrees that a 20-year-old boy believed a 15-year-old girl when she lied about her age that are unjust. A recent news story about a convicted rapist, who murdered some of his other victims, mentioned that there are thousands of convicted "sexual predators" in that state, from violent rapists to teenage boys who were fooled, which is part of the reason why his parole officers were too easy on him. Maybe the solution to that problem isn't the one that the news story offered, to hire lots more "sexual predator" parole officers, and to get tough on "sexual predators," but to shorten the list of "convicted sexual predators" by taking all the adolescent boys who were fooled by another adolescent off that list.

Maybe the solution to that problem isn't the one that the news story offered, to hire lots more "sexual predator" parole officers, and to get tough on "sexual predators," but to shorten the list of "convicted sexual predators" by taking all the adolescent boys who were fooled by another adolescent off that list.

Isn't it the american way to get tough, put 'em all away and lose the key?

i'll one step further, it's not always even a case of "she said/he believed", how about 16 y.o. male having sex with a younger girl and added (for life!) to the convicted sexual predators list?