Couple found guilty of having sex on a Florida beach, faces up to 15 years in prison

It's a good thing I was friends with local PD as a young one.

They would just roll up to the car spotlight it and ask, "You get any new guns this week? How much you want for it? Alright I'll swing by later"

Rule #1, be a decent human being to the police and more often than not they'll be a decent human being back. (Excluding Fayette County Ohio, they've killed 13 people with TBI's in 3 years, but do you know how hard it is to sue a sheriffs department?.)

 

There is a great possibility that the authorities are gay, and by such they feel offended when heterosexuals have sex.

I can bet whatever you want, that if the ones having sex in the beach were gays, it won't be even in the news and they probably will be out without bail the very next morning.

 

I am ok with it being a crime, even jail time, not more then 30 days, but not 15 years and definitely not the sex offender list

the list is totally useless if were adding non-sexual predators to the list

.

 

from the story -

"they had sex on Bradenton Beach in broad daylight"

"The caller said she “was very upset because her 4-year-old daughter witnessed the couple having sex on the beach.”

They claim their genitals weren't exposed, but there were 6 witnesses and a video and it took the jury just 15 min. to convict. So having sex in front of a 4 year old makes you a perv and a sex offender.

They were also offered a plea deal that they refused - so cry us a river.

 

So he was making woopie with his woman, at least he wasn't hitting the pipe. Crap like this should be a slap in the wrist and no way should this land you on the sex offenders list. Two consenting adults having sex in public is not going to damage anyone. Yes it is rude and people need to understand kids may find you, but in more ways than not it is harmless.

Should be simply a fine followed by a finger wag from the judge and be done with it. Nothing more.

 

Yea, I don't get the logic of putting her on the "sex offender registry". That's nuts! Years ago I lived on the coast & couples having sex on the beach was pretty common. I mean, come on! It's a great spot, & sure beats the hell out of some hotel room of the backseat.

 

The guy is a repeat offender having served time jn jail just three years ago. The woman faces 60 days. They were offered a plea bargain and they refused. People around them pleaded with them to stop their very public sex act on a very public beach where young children were playing. The 15 years is the MAX sentence under the lewd and lachivious behavior law.

So what exactly is your problem here?

 

UP TO 15 years is just how the law is written. He is also a repeat offender so that will apply to any sentence. And yes you have public sex in front of children you become a sex offender and we don't want you around our children anymore.

 

this really isnt about prison, it is more about not letting him reproduce.

 

Fine them. Get them on a sex offender list. But Jail?

 

I never went to jail after a bar full of people watched me down 6 sex on the beach's

 

the problem with sex offender lists.... is when you're on it, no matter the level, it's the scarlet A of society today. Whether you drew stick figures, got caught peeing in public in front of a kid, or raped a child, served your time and are released.... you will never find a good job again.

 

YES, they refused to plea bargain it, HE is a repeat offender.

 

Not if the crime is equivalent to a parking ticket.

What a nonsensical comment... next you are going to be trying to deny that the sky is blue.

 

The courts apparently don't agree with you.

So you don't believe you can petition for a law change? Why not? Lots of people have in the past.

 

Blame the legislature for maximum and minimum sentencing guidelines, not the prosecutor. They are the ones who provided the 'up to' language in the statute. He's just applying a set of facts to the elements in criminal statute. We don't really know what he will recommend, because that will be subject to negociations. So what you are really saying is that judicial discretion and the DA's negociating power should be limited so something far less draconian for that offense or that the definition of the crime should be tightened so as to exclude public sex acts.

 

I am going to add to your argument.

The way the left gets around "individual rights and freedoms" is through a philosophy of law called "Utilitarianism".

This is a justification for law that looks only at what will increase happiness of the collective and completely ignores individual rights and freedoms.
Utilitarianism is horribly flawed in of itself. What we are seeing today is a plague of "fallacious Utilitarianism" .. justifications for law that are not even valid utilitarian arguments.

For example: "If it saves one life" / "Harm reduction"

These arguments are very insidious as they sound good on the surface. Who does not want to save one life ?

Dig deeper and such arguments, as justification for law, are absolutely retarded. The prove this we only need assume "if it saves one life" is a valid justification.

If indeed this is valid then we should ban skiing as ... would we not save one life ? What about boating - very dangerous, one could drown.
Driving a Car ? Banned tomorrow. In fact, one should probably not rise from bed in the morning as one might fall and break neck.

While the left pioneered this form constitutional demonization .. the Right has also jumped on the bandwagon. They trample on the constitution not only through Utilitarian means but also by trying to force their religious beliefs on others... usurping We the people by trying to claim that authority of Government comes from God.

 

You are clueless in relation justification for Law. 15 years for having sex in public is abject insanity by any secular legal standard.

 

TBH it is a ridiculous law in the first place, it makes florida look like its running some sort of religious sharia type law like a tin pot nation in the middle east.

Honestly, what a joke.

 

a 40 year old man should know better than to be having sex in broad daylight on the beach. Put his butt back in prison so he can learn to use the showers for such things.

 

It is a complete affront to any sense of legitimacy. There is a difference between crimes that threaten direct harm to a human and crimes that do not.

This distinction in law is as clear as it gets. It is not like the Government gets to make up laws willy nilly ... although you would never know it these days.

This boundary, between actions which threaten or cause direct harm to others and those that do not, is clearly crossed by putting these people in some sex offender registry ... a registry that is clearly intended for folks on the "causers of direct harm" side of the fence.

 

You need to find yourself a "Prudes Anonymous" and beg them for help.

 

Depends on the circumstances ... There is a huge difference between at night on a secluded beach and during the day on a beach crowded with people.

Conviction for a criminal offense requires 2 things "mens rea" and "actus rea"

actus rea means you a have to have committed the crime
mens rea means you have to have intended it.

Having sex in a semi private public place is different than indecent exposure.

At night on the beach there was no intent to offend ... during the day the prosecution has a case.

Either way ... 15 years is freaken way out of line as is putting them on the sex offenders registry which is supposed to be restricted to folks that post a threat of harm.

We are not supposed to be able to just make law up as we go along. The authority is supposed to be have valid justification .. justification that follows certain guidelines.

 

Not if the couple did not know the 4 year old was watching.

Even then ... the sexual offender registry is supposed to require that the offender caused direct harm (sexual violence) to another.

You making unsupported claims based on your personal prudism is not an argument for much.

 

Thank you... Utilitarianism is a consequence of Relativism... wherein the subjective need to set one's own agenda as a function of the collective need.

Those who would appear to be among 'the Right', but consistently found pushing Relativist notions are known as Progressives today, 10 years ago, they were Neo-Cons... prior to that they were "Blue-Dog Democrats". But Clinton caused them to flee the Democrat Party by the gross, not by his Leftist policy, but by his losing the Congress... .

And they're a real problem... providing aid and comfort to the enemy by pushing the enemies agenda within the GOP... precisely the same as obama is doing for Islam, from inside the White House.