Jump to content
IGNORED

Caleb Williams


karen77

Recommended Posts

Un.fucking.believable. I honestly feel like I’m going to vomit. I don’t want to just exit this discussion because this shit absolutely needs to be challenged, but I honestly don’t think I can stomach this any longer. I can’t be part of a conversation where people try to justify the sexual abuse of a teenager by an adult man.

Can I remind you that he has been charged with these crimes? She’s not reminiscing about her sexual experiences with an older man and saying ‘yeah I guess it was kind of sketchy, but I did consent and I really don’t regret it!’ He’s been charged with sexual abuse. Aggravated sexual abuse.

I’m furious. And disgusted. And incredibly disappointed. I don’t think I can be involved in this anymore. I hope others keep pushing back. I’m sorry I have to bow out. I think I’m going to log off for a while. I don’t want to take part in a forum with people making excuses for sexual predators. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 593
  • Created
  • Last Reply
33 minutes ago, Mama Mia said:

I’ll defend it. An age gap of 5 or 6 years isn’t remotely unusual in my world. And starting to have sex young, with a guy who is 5 or 6 years older isn’t unusual either. I certainly understood the concept of consent at 14. 

NO YOU DID NOT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RosyDaisy said:


 

 


Yes, really. That's exactly what's going on here. This dude in his 20s sexually assaulted a young teenage girl, and people are trying to explain it away as something much less serious. That is beyond disgusting.

By the way, I have never, ever said anything offensive about the separation of immigrant children from their parents. My opinion on that has always been that it is cruel and evil.

 

Ummm my point was I could not believe there is rape apologists here and that poster was disgusting about that and she has made xenophobic insensitive remarks about the immigrants. I was agreeing with you. Sorry if it wasn't clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SapphireSlytherin said:

I disagree. I know many 14-year-olds who have been fingered by older guys. 

MY unpopular opinion:  this girl was "all in" for the relationship for a couple of years, got dumped, never got over him (may still love him - and Im not putting love in quotes because to a 14/15/16-year-old, it really is love), but due to the #metoo movement may have developed a different perspective. 

Oh my god. Why are you saying this? And if you know 14-year-olds who were fingered by older guys, I hope you reported it to the appropriate authorities.

This post is disgusting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Nikedagain? said:

NO YOU DID NOT. 

Yes. I actually did. Thanks. I also understood where and how to get birth control, how to say no, that saying no (or yes) was 100% my choice. I understood that having sex didn’t make me a slut. Again, the norm in my group was to have very early sex. Sometimes with older guys.Sometimes with guys the same age. I didn’t feel I was somehow squandering my precious flower by being sexual. I understood when I was violated and when I was not. Did I make some crappy choices? Absolutely. Would I undue some? 100%. But there are some crappy choices I made in my 20’s, and 40’s I’d undue as well. 

Thank you for adding the legal definitions Buzzard. That clearly takes it out of the realm of statutory rape. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Pete Pickles said:

I totally understand and respect what you’re saying, @Palimpsest. I want to reiterate I did not for a moment think or imply this was anything other than terrible and abusive. I believe it is exactly that.

On the flip side, I was a victim of foggy rape. What’s that, you ask? He was older (old enough to be having sex). I was younger but not by a whole lot. I gave all the signs that I liked him (and I did). I told him “no” but I didn’t fight him off me. I was not drugged. He was sober too. I knew I didn’t feel right after it happened but I didn’t know it was rape. I spent months questioning whether or not I really told him no. After I accepted that I DID say no, I still wondered if I didn’t really want it deep down or if I didn’t communicate “no” well enough. (Those wondering, “NO” is enough.) My point is that it isn’t always black and white and it isn’t always a distant relative’s friend or something you read about. It happens and it draws out the grieving process quite a lot. Let’s talk about victim blaming when you yourself are both the victim AND the one doing the blaming. It’s a shitty place to be. And then to find out people think it’s so rare it couldn’t have happened to anyone who would know first or second hand.

@Pete Pickles, I'm sorry that happened to you.  I hope you are in a better place today.

But the problem is that you are still victim blaming - the victim is yourself.  So you are still questioning whether you didn't "communicate no" well enough.  Well join the victim. blamers and use your experience to bolster the cause.

Of course NO is enough.  Being pressured into having sex when you don't want it is never consensual. 

The myth that when a woman says "no" she means "yes" is still prevalent.

Let's stop that bullshit here and now.  NO does not mean YES.  Ever.  If you are a woman - stop using it that way.  If you are a human being - stop hearing it that way.

Actually the presence of a loud and fully consensual "YES" should be the golden rule for having sex.  And that would be after the young (or older) couple have discussed it fully, bought protection, and are both fully on board with ripping their clothes off and doing the deed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, too, was sadly the victim of rape at the age of 14 by a 27-year-old man I met over the internet. Looking back, he very carefully manipulated me into having this encounter. He was going to marry me, save me from my crappy family, he loved me, he'd pay for me to go to college, and he was going to dump his current live-in girlfriend.* He knew what he needed to say to get what he wanted, and he did it. 

I felt like I was a super mature, sophisticated 14-year-old who knew what she was doing. Now, after working with 14-year-olds, I realize how very far I was from being able to make that decision, especially when I had a grown man, with all the experience that entails, carefully grooming me into being what I, too, thought was a willing participant. That's part of the manipulation--that you think you're totally in control, but your inexperience in life is being used against you.

Grown men do not date 14-year-old girls without an agenda. Period. Full stop. And having sex with them, in any form, is rape. And it's wrong. And that person is a criminal.

It took me until I was 31 to realize that what he'd done was rape me. That may sound strange, but when this happened (mid-nineties), there was very little conversation about consent, sexual assault, coerced sex, etc. So it took learning about these concepts to fully realize how much I'd be wronged. I knew what he did was legally considered statutory rape, but I didn't realize how much deeper, and sicker, it went.

*I've looked him up on Facebook. He's still with her, 20 years on.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that if it was a 17 or even a 16 year old with a 19-21 everyone here would agree with the poster that sometimes althought not legal (in the usa) its not morally wrong. But a 14 years old with a 21 years old is too much of an age diference for it to be consensual. And what normal 21 year old is atracted to a preteen?

And we dont even know the real situation here, everyone is asuming it was  an ongoing relationship but what if it was an abuse of power, wasnt he a youth minister??  If he was then no matter if she was 17 and he 20, there is an abuse of power that makes it morally wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, JenniferJuniper said:

Here's the indictment.  Pretty explicit.  It looks like he wasn't actually picked up until late November, assuming this is him.  http://newherald.news/arrest-report-p7901-105.htm

image.png.77dd8683a2e32b9b9931b7f9277d2293.png

Fucking fundies.

Thanks for the screenshot JJ. Thank you for looking up the law @Buzzard. I agree with Buzzard, he is being charged with aggravated, which means force (when you read what Buzzard copied for all of us). Since the charges were brought before the court & grand jury, there has been evidence brought to the prosecutors that aggravated criminal sexual abuse happened. The prosecutor would have never taking it to the grand jury if there wasn't some evidence. 

It doesn't matter what any of us went through, what matters is what is happening with this case and Illinois thinks Caleb did something illegal and that "something" is penetration and sex with a minor.

As others have said, the Duggars hang out with a very sketchy crowd. I have never seen a public family associated with so many sex offenders and people still love the family! It is baffling!

I hope the victim A.C. is getting counseling. I also hope the family is supporting the victim. The family may also need counseling. The parents may have rage (against Caleb) that they need to funnel into something that isn't jail worthy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Lisafer said:

I'm really shocked that people are defending rape on FJ. Shocked and horrified. 

I am surprised at the depth of my disappointment in some posters.  I've been reading posts by some of them for years and was blindsided by their continuing efforts to try to defend this type of criminal perverted behavior.  The FJ ignore function is going to be utilized because I don't even want to see certain names anymore.  That makes me sad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SapphireSlytherin said:

I have a huge problem with people simply 100% believing what a person says (the stats are out there, searchable, that say 2%-10% of these claims are lies), just because she's female and accusing a male of inappropriate actions. While that means 90%-98% of their accusations are true, it also means that for the 2% - 10% of men simply and falsely accused (not yet tried and convicted/exonerated) of this behavior have their lives ruined forever. 

Let's talk about that 2%-10% part.  I posted something about this in the thread about kavadouche, but I'll give a tl;dr here. 

You're assuming that 2%-10% of rape allegations being false means that 2%-10% of men accused of rape are innocent. This is not true. Only about 18% of false rape allegations actually name someone. The majority of false accusations are teenagers trying to get out of trouble and poor people desperate for health care. So in reality only .36% - 1.8% of rape allegations actually involve accusing an innocent person. 

Given what @Buzzard has stated about the charge (that it is unlikely to have been "consensual" even if you think 14 year olds can consent to sex with an adult), and that the state felt confident enough to charge him, the fact that you feel confident giving your opinion that she just "developed a different perspective" based on absolutely no evidence whatsoever tells me a whole lot about your opinion of women. 

????????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CarrotCake said:

 15-year-olds have consensual sex with 23-year-olds and to me that is on a completely different level than a 10-year-old and a 30-year-old

Bold mine.  To you and others that have posted similar sentiments---that is absolutely not possible. Nowhere (in the USA at least) can a 15-year old ever have consensual sex with a 23-year old.  That is the law.  You can paint it any way you want--that the 15 year old "asked for it", wanted it, used birth control, whatever---it is still not legally possible for them to consent.

A legal line has to be drawn somewhere.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not interested in trying to guess what gross things this man did to a child. But I have spent quite a bit of time in my life reading and writing legislation. This is the exact statute he's being charged under:

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/fulltext.asp?DocName=072000050K11-1.60

@Buzzard thanks for your work, but just to clarify, the aggravating circumstances in (a)(1)-(7) are only necessary to be charged under 11-1.60(a). Williams was charged under 11-1.60(d):

(d) A person commits aggravated criminal sexual abuse if that person commits an act of sexual penetration or sexual conduct with a victim who is at least 13 years of age but under 17 years of age and the person is at least 5 years older than the victim. 

That is the exact language used in the indictment. No additional aggravating circumstances have to be satisfied under section (d). Further, if there was physical force being used, he probably would have been charged under 11-1.60(c)(2)(ii):

that person is under 17 years of age and: (i) commits an act of sexual conduct with a victim who is under 9 years of age; or (ii) commits an act of sexual conduct with a victim who is at least 9 years of age but under 17 years of age and the person uses force or threat of force to commit the act.

But lack of provable physical force doesn't diminish the crime. And I'm not on his jury or sitting as his judge, so I don't have to presume innocence. I'm glad he has the right to an attorney and a fair and speedy trial. That's as far as I need to go in my sympathy.

6 minutes ago, Satan'sFortress said:

Bold mine.  To you and others that have posted similar sentiments---that is absolutely not possible. Nowhere (in the USA at least) can a 15-year old ever have consensual sex with a 23-year old.  That is the law.  You can paint it any way you want--that the 15 year old "asked for it", wanted it, used birth control, whatever---it is still not legally possible for them to consent.

A legal line has to be drawn somewhere.

Using this space to draw attention to the one terrible circumstance where this kind of thing does happen legally: child marriage. Maranatha and others in these cults have been victims multiple times over by their intendeds and their families. I'm in MO and we just now finally raised our minimum marriage age with parental consent, but we have long been a destination for rapists and their victims to tie the knot before an arrest can occur. There is no statutory rape in marriage. But even in these situations, the parents are the ones consenting, not the young brides. 

https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2018/feb/06/it-put-an-end-to-my-childhood-the-hidden-scandal-of-us-child-marriage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not realize that some women ignore the fact that an adult man having sex with a minor CANNOT be consensual. I have clearly over estimated their intelligence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, theotherelise said:

I'm not interested in trying to guess what gross things this man did to a child. But I have spent quite a bit of time in my life reading and writing legislation. This is the exact statute he's being charged under:

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/fulltext.asp?DocName=072000050K11-1.60

@Buzzard thanks for your work, but just to clarify, the aggravating circumstances in (a)(1)-(7) are only necessary to be charged under 11-1.60(a). Williams was charged under 11-1.60(d):

(d) A person commits aggravated criminal sexual abuse if that person commits an act of sexual penetration or sexual conduct with a victim who is at least 13 years of age but under 17 years of age and the person is at least 5 years older than the victim. 

That is the exact language used in the indictment. No additional aggravating circumstances have to be satisfied under section (d). Further, if there was physical force being used, he probably would have been charged under 11-1.60(c)(2)(ii):

that person is under 17 years of age and: (i) commits an act of sexual conduct with a victim who is under 9 years of age; or (ii) commits an act of sexual conduct with a victim who is at least 9 years of age but under 17 years of age and the person uses force or threat of force to commit the act.

But lack of provable physical force doesn't diminish the crime. And I'm not on his jury or sitting as his judge, so I don't have to presume innocence. I'm glad he has the right to an attorney and a fair and speedy trial. That's as far as I need to go in my sympathy.

Ah, yes.  I see that there is 11-1.20, 30, 50, and 60.  Thanks!  I dont think they could have used 11-1.60(c)(2)(ii), though because he was over 17 at the time of the offense.

Regardless, this is gross and if he's preying on children I'm saddened that he's out on bond.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am so glad that this garbage was moved out of Jana’s thread. Thank you to whoever suggested and did that. 

I doubt Jana ever dated him, but perhaps she counted him as a friend. But even if he was only an acquaintance, that is now three people in her life who have violently sexually abused (ie in an aggravated manner) little girls. Her upbringing has left her and her sisters as women without protection from this - in fact, it is normalised and excused. They can fire gay people, cover their shoulders and ban tv, but they need to look a little closer to home and take the plank out of their own eye before they condemn others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

Ah, yes.  I see that there is 11-1.20, 30, 50, and 60.  Thanks!  I dont think they could have used 11-1.60(c)(2)(ii), though because he was over 17 at the time of the offense.

Regardless, this is gross and if he's preying on children I'm saddened that he's out on bond.

out on bond - I wonder if he has provisions such as stay away from schools, minors, youth groups, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe it is common in some places for people of this age difference to have sex. But this isn't a girl talking about her personal experiences, this isn't A. C. talking about her relationship with Caleb, this isn't a context in which this was presented as consensual. Literally the only evidence we have is that he is being charged with sexual assault. This is clearly a context where consent has gone out the fucking window.

Just a question to those saying it's normal for 14 year olds to have sex with men in their early 20s:

How many of them brought charges against those men? How many of them brought false charges against the man just to ruin his life? A few? One? None? How many of their parents brought up charges? How many of the girls disagreed with those charges? How many men do you know of, specifically, in your life, whose lives were ruined by false charges brought up by a teenager they were in a relationship with?

Now, think of all the 14 year olds in the world who have been sexually assaulted by men in their early 20s. How many brought charges against the men? How many more are there? How many more do you know that never brought up charges, merely suffering in silence, because they were ashamed? Because they thought no one would believe them? Hundreds? Thousands? I know of at least 4, personally.

My point is, again, option 1 is possible, but option 2 is, statistically, a hell of a lot more likely. Why would anyone believe option 1 when it's much more reasonable to believe option 2?

Addressing, once again, those who believe she is lying:

You are the reason why, if I was assaulted at 14, I would never have told anyone.

Because I would have been ashamed.

Because I would have been afraid.

Because the adults in my life would have said things like you just said. And after enduring trauma, that would have just made it hurt more. Because I knew I would be questioned at every turn, did I lead him on, what did I say to hem, how was it my fault, etc, etc. Do you really want to make the young women in your lives feel unsafe coming to you if they were assaulted? Do you really think they don't hear your opinions of other women, and ascribe it to themselves? Do you think they'll actually come to you for help after you disparage other women, who have gone through the same thing.

You need to be better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gross.

It reminds me of when the Josh scandal broke, and we all rolled our eyes when Jill went on TV to say that something like 2/3 of all families deal with it. I certainly found that statement to be shocking but frankly with the company they keep maybe she really does think that this is normal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, quiversR4hunting said:

out on bond - I wonder if he has provisions such as stay away from schools, minors, youth groups, etc. 

One of the articles said that he does have a no contact with minors provision.

2 minutes ago, AtlanticTug said:

Gross.

It reminds me of when the Josh scandal broke, and we all rolled our eyes when Jill went on TV to say that something like 2/3 of all families deal with it. I certainly found that statement to be shocking but frankly with the company they keep maybe she really does think that this is normal.

Funny you should say that, because the allegations fall in time right about when the Josh thing went down.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AtlanticTug said:

Gross.

It reminds me of when the Josh scandal broke, and we all rolled our eyes when Jill went on TV to say that something like 2/3 of all families deal with it. I certainly found that statement to be shocking but frankly with the company they keep maybe she really does think that this is normal.

I've always believed the figure she quoted was unfortunately fairly accurate.  And I don't think it's just in fundy circles either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, adidas said:

I am so glad that this garbage was moved out of Jana’s thread. Thank you to whoever suggested and did that.

Any time.  I'm sorry things took such a turn while I was sleeping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, AtlanticTug said:

It reminds me of when the Josh scandal broke, and we all rolled our eyes when Jill went on TV to say that something like 2/3 of all families deal with it. I certainly found that statement to be shocking but frankly with the company they keep maybe she really does think that this is normal.

I thought it was Jim Bob who said that.  But that is irrelevant.

9 minutes ago, SamiKatz said:

I've always believed the figure she quoted was unfortunately fairly accurate.  And I don't think it's just in fundy circles either.

Unfortunately I think that could be true.  It is so under-reported.

The thing is with Gothardism (and other Biblical Patriarchal movements) the teachings are a virtual incubator for abuse.  Men get to rule.  It's all the woman's fault if the man is tempted. Men can be forgiven for abuse (with "repentance") but women are shamed and shunned.  

The boys are taught that it is OK to be tempted - all men are.  The girls are not taught to defend themselves and have no recourse.

And predators not brought up in the cult seeing those attitudes probably chose to join.

Reminder of Bill Gothard's teachings here: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/26/duggars-homeschooling-sex-abuse_n_7445238.html

IBLP is a hotbed of sexual abuse - an institution founded by a sexual predator who groomed his victims - under the very noses of their parents.

8 minutes ago, Coconut Flan said:

Any time.  I'm sorry things took such a turn while I was sleeping.

I was wondering what took you so long. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jellybean locked this topic

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.