Florida woman granted asylum in Canada

cybercoma · May 20, 2014

It is a crime here, the age of consent is just different. So we do accept anyone who has broken a law that isn't exactly the same as ours.

The specific activities she was charged and convicted for are not a crime here. Since the crime is explicitly about age, saying "age of consent is just different" is silly.

cybercoma · May 20, 2014

people my age in the U.S. are damn well aware of why Chuck Berry disappeared for a spell, and that "15 will get you 20".

Yet here we are discussing how "16 will get you 30".

bush_cheney2004 · May 20, 2014

Do CBSA guards routinely review the sentences for convicted American sex offenders to see if they meet "international standards" before permitting entry into Canada ? Or did she enter Canada under false pretenses ?

guyser · May 20, 2014

Routinely?

Who knows

But they do check the conviction against our convictiosn to see if it is a CCC violation (your felony) or just a misdemeanor.

If that latter, come on in for the most part

bush_cheney2004 · May 20, 2014

Yet here we are discussing how "16 will get you 30".

Sixteen will still get you 20 in some jurisdictions. The "excessive penalties" were well known and understood by all, at least for adult males. I must have missed the memo that sex with an underage person is now similar to jaywalking.

On Guard for Thee · May 20, 2014

Sixteen will still get you 20 in some jurisdictions. The "excessive penalties" were well known and understood by all, at least for adult males. I must have missed the memo that sex with an underage person is now similar to jaywalking.

Yeah how many years DO you get for jaywalking down there? Gotta be at least 25 I'd bet.

Bob Macadoo · May 20, 2014

The specific activities she was charged and convicted for are not a crime here. Since the crime is explicitly about age, saying "age of consent is just different" is silly.

Its not silly, its the whole point of the argument. If he was 5 yrs old, was 30 yrs cruel and unusual.....how about 12 yrs old? I'm willing to bet you'd lose half your supporters. So age of consent is the distinction.

cybercoma · May 20, 2014

You're supporting what I said.

Bob Macadoo · May 20, 2014

So 30 yrs is OK if he was 12? So the sentence isn't cruel and unusual. Now it is statutory rape. Hmmmm. So then laws must be identical to Canada to be respected. Understood.

What happens when we lower our age of consent? Still on board?

Edited May 20, 2014 by Bob Macadoo

jbg · May 20, 2014

Of course they do. You don't seem to get one fairly important point here, in Canada she is not a sex offender, and since the penalty has been deemed "cruel and unusual" I doubt she will be extradited.

One thing that everyone seems to be overlooking is difference in State matters between sentenced time and time actually served. The latter is usually much lower. In Federal prosecutions the time served is very close to time sentenced.

jbg · May 20, 2014

And the reason she has been granted asylum is because in Canada, she did not commit a crime.

What does Canada call sex with someone below the "age of consent?"

bush_cheney2004 · May 20, 2014

In all the excitement, I don't recall anyone articulating what the actual penalties are in Canada for "sexual interference" and such. Looks like the criminal code does have a stiff penalty for sex with someone below the consent age of 16 and lower depending on the age of the older partner. In any event, the age of consent for anal sex is set in stone at 18...go figure !

151. Every person who, for a sexual purpose, touches, directly or indirectly, with a part of the body or with an object, any part of the body of a person under the age of sixteen years

(i) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of forty-five days; or

(ii) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding eighteen months and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of fourteen days.

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/pubs/ncecc-cncee/guide/index-eng.htm#c

Edited May 20, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

Wilber · May 21, 2014

The specific activities she was charged and convicted for are not a crime here. Since the crime is explicitly about age, saying "age of consent is just different" is silly.

Actually they could be considered a crime here under some circumstances.

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/other-autre/clp/faq.html

However, the age of consent is 18 years where the sexual activity "exploits" the young person -- when it involves prostitution, pornography or occurs in a relationship of authority, trust or dependency (e.g., with a teacher, coach or babysitter). Sexual activity can also be considered exploitative based on the nature and circumstances of the relationship, e.g., the young person's age, the age difference between the young person and their partner, how the relationship developed (quickly, secretly, or over the Internet) and how the partner may have controlled or influenced the young person.

Does CBSA not check to see if a person is a wanted fellon when allowing someone into our country? Do we allow entrance to any US citizen who has been convicted of something that is not technically a crime in this country, then offer them asylum with the option of permanent residency? Kind of spits on the poor shmuck who has been waiting for years to get in and hasn't had so much as a parking ticket. Want to get a fast track into Canada? Get convicted of something that isn't technically a crime in Canada and request asylum.

This woman is not a hero. She is someone who acted selfishly, irresponsibly and knowingly broke the law. She is not someone we would normally want as an immigrant, unless we have some need for horny middle age women with the hots for young boys. The US should be happy to be rid of her. Now she's our problem.

WWWTT · May 21, 2014

There are million upon millions of people in jails worldwide who are in prisons for reasons that are not crimes in Canada. Anybody convicted under Sharia law for example. Would you support them as refugees too? I'm not trying to be provocative, just gauging the extent of your outrage..

And you are wrong wrong wrong in your reasoning. Statutory rape is a crime in Canada, It is a crime in Florida too. She is guilty of committing that crime. Them's the facts.

Yes if someone whom has been harshly convicted or faces the death penalty and can make it to within Canada's borders can apply for refugee status.

Cybercoma made it clear that the crime was sex with someone underage and not rape. The link provided clearly indicates this.

WWWTT

On Guard for Thee · May 21, 2014

Actually they could be considered a crime here under some circumstances.

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/other-autre/clp/faq.html

Does CBSA not check to see if a person is a wanted fellon when allowing someone into our country? Do we allow entrance to any US citizen who has been convicted of something that is not technically a crime in this country, then offer them asylum with the option of permanent residency? Kind of spits on the poor shmuck who has been waiting for years to get in and hasn't had so much as a parking ticket. Want to get a fast track into Canada? Get convicted of something that isn't technically a crime in Canada and request asylum.

This woman is not a hero. She is someone who acted selfishly, irresponsibly and knowingly broke the law. She is not someone we would normally want as an immigrant, unless we have some need for horny middle age women with the hots for young boys. The US should be happy to be rid of her. Now she's our problem.

Nobody said she was a hero, they just said she's not a criminal. Last I heard not having a parking ticket didn't stop anyone at the border.

Edited May 21, 2014 by On Guard for Thee

On Guard for Thee · May 21, 2014

In all the excitement, I don't recall anyone articulating what the actual penalties are in Canada for "sexual interference" and such. Looks like the criminal code does have a stiff penalty for sex with someone below the consent age of 16 and lower depending on the age of the older partner. In any event, the age of consent for anal sex is set in stone at 18...go figure !

151. Every person who, for a sexual purpose, touches, directly or indirectly, with a part of the body or with an object, any part of the body of a person under the age of sixteen years

(i) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of forty-five days; or

(ii) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding eighteen months and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of fourteen days.

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/pubs/ncecc-cncee/guide/index-eng.htm#c

In any event, it doesn't surprise me you'd bring that up.

jbg · May 21, 2014

This woman is not a hero. She is someone who acted selfishly, irresponsibly and knowingly broke the law. She is not someone we would normally want as an immigrant, unless we have some need for horny middle age women with the hots for young boys. The US should be happy to be rid of her. Now she's our problem.

You put the nail on the head as far as the drivers of immigration decisions. The decisions are driven nowadays by political correctness, not pragmatic or social considerations.

On Guard for Thee · May 21, 2014

What does Canada call sex with someone below the "age of consent?"

They call it a crime.

bush_cheney2004 · May 21, 2014

In any event, it doesn't surprise me you'd bring that up.

It doesn't make any sense to claim that Canada has a "rational" approach to these laws if the age of consent remains 18 years for anal sex and the punishment is a max of ten years (per count ?). Hell, you may as well do it Florida and enjoy much better weather !

On Guard for Thee · May 21, 2014

You put the nail on the head as far as the drivers of immigration decisions. The decisions are driven nowadays by political correctness, not pragmatic or social considerations.

And you can prove any of this? According to the one we are discussing at the moment, those decisions are based on the law.

bush_cheney2004 · May 21, 2014

You put the nail on the head as far as the drivers of immigration decisions. The decisions are driven nowadays by political correctness, not pragmatic or social considerations.

Gee....imagine how Bernie Madoff feels right now...he coulda been an asylum contender !

On Guard for Thee · May 21, 2014

It doesn't make any sense to claim that Canada has a "rational" approach to these laws if the age of consent remains 18 years for anal sex and the punishment is a max of ten years (per count ?). Hell, you may as well do it Florida and enjoy much better weather !

I take it you speak from experience?

bush_cheney2004 · May 21, 2014

I take it you speak from experience?

Reported and ignored.

On Guard for Thee · May 21, 2014

Reported and ignored.

Whoo scary. I think I was replying to your direct reply where you say "you may as well do it, blah, blah blah" Perhaps I should report you. I believe I'm more mature than to bother.

Bob Macadoo · May 21, 2014

Whoo scary. I think I was replying to your direct reply where you say "you may as well do it, blah, blah blah" Perhaps I should report you. I believe I'm more mature than to bother.

Again I can't believe I am debating on BC's side but he made justified observation. The argument has been how much a yardstick our system is (RE; Argus) and how much FLA is a rube state. He has shown how absurd we can be. Bravo. You went immature, and he defaulted to his natural state unfortunately.