Catawampus wrote:Well, 16 is over the legal age of consent in most places. . .including Minnesota, I believe.
In the most states, yes, but that majority of states do not contain the majority of people. For instance, the AoC is 17 in NY, Illinois, Missouri, and Texas, and it is 18 in California and Florida. And of course all those various states have their own individual rules about close-in-age (aka, "Romeo & Juliet") relationships, as well in differences if the parties are married. There also used to be differences in whether the relationship was hetero or homo, but
Loving v Texas wiped that out.
Wikipedia tells us that in Minnesota, it is comparatively simple. If the "actor" is in a position of authority, the age of consent is 18. If the younger party is under the age of 13, the older party must be no more than 36 months older. If the younger party is 13, 14 or 15, the other person must be no more than 48 months older.
This is very different than in many other states, where if either party is under XX years of age, the other party is considered a criminal (and tried as an adult!) even if both parties are the same age.
Try to wrap your head around that one. Two precocious 12yos get caught playing doctor. Both are charged with "rape of a child" or its equivalent, and are tried as adults--which means that the court is assuming that both parties have enough agency to commit a crime, but not to consent to sexual activity--making them adults and children at the same time, but only to better throw them in jail. Schrödinger's cat has nothing on this!
