SmokingFap
Former Stud
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2022
- Posts
- 7,878
I guess I misspoke. Although it may be considered a "legal term", I've never seen a case of someone being CHARGED with "molestation". I have seen charges, as in the case you cited, of "aggravated sexual assault of a child" or similar wording. Not sure why you're picking nits here. I guess you think you "owned" me on the basis of semantics. Pretty pathetic way to give yourself a "win".https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/molestation
molestation:
Molestation is the crime of engaging in sexual acts with minors, including touching of private parts, exposure of genitalia, taking of pornographic pictures, rape, inducement of sexual acts with the molester or with other children, and variations of these acts. Molestation also applies to incest by a relative with a minor family member and additionally any sexual acts short of rape. For example, in Abshire v. State, a Texas Court of Appeals case, affirmed the lower court conviction of an uncle who sexually contacted and raped his niece from when she was five years old to seventeen, describing his conduct, among other things, as molestation.
But back to the original point, do you believe that victims of impregnation by "molestation" should be forced to carry the product of their "molestation" to term and deliver that product of "molestation"?