Jump to content
  • Sky
  • Blueberry
  • Slate
  • Blackcurrant
  • Watermelon
  • Strawberry
  • Orange
  • Banana
  • Apple
  • Emerald
  • Chocolate
  • Charcoal
deborahlynn1979

The Seven Sisters Continue Progressing

Recommended Posts

TheJewAmongUs
Quote

 

* In 12 or 13 states, public urination can be charged as indecent exposure or public lewdness. Public urination is illegal in all 50 states but most write a ticket with a fine or it's a misdemeanor. Indecent exposure and public lewdness will both mean registering as a sex offender. I don't know how common it is, but my friend in college got caught twice in a month in her freshman year peeing behind plants in garden beds while extremely intoxicated, and on her second time she got charged with public lewdness even though you could not see her from the path going by at all (she was at least 10-15 feet off the path and behind tall shrubbery) and the cop had to squeeze past the plants to even see why she was back there. She wanted to be a nurse so had to hire a lawyer to try and get her off the charges. She ended up having to do a good amount of community service and had to attend AA (she wasn't an alcoholic, just an 18 year old who didn't know her drinking limits yet) and classes on reducing her alcohol use, and then the charges were expunged.

She is now a nurse and the whole experience very much turned her off drinking to excess.

 

Off topic, but I'm completely fine with someone who did these things being excluded from certain professions. If you're not aware that actions have consequences by the time you go to college, you're not ready to go away to college or to start training towards these professions. The fact that she got caught and did it again soon after (both the drinking and the peeing in garden beds) shows this. At 18 she had to know that drinking was illegal. It is not ok to break the law if you do it 10-15 feet away from where you think someone can see you. And other people are not required to stay on paths to avoid seeing illegal things. And you have no idea if she was an alcoholic or not. But if she wanted it expunged, she needed to stop drinking. Being required to attend substance abuse counseling is a completely appropriate requirement when you're asking the court to give you a do over that you have in no way shown that you deserve or earned.

  • Upvote 4
  • Bless Your Heart 1
  • WTF 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VVV
2 hours ago, TheJewAmongUs said:

Off topic, but I'm completely fine with someone who did these things being excluded from certain professions. If you're not aware that actions have consequences by the time you go to college, you're not ready to go away to college or to start training towards these professions. The fact that she got caught and did it again soon after (both the drinking and the peeing in garden beds) shows this. At 18 she had to know that drinking was illegal. It is not ok to break the law if you do it 10-15 feet away from where you think someone can see you. And other people are not required to stay on paths to avoid seeing illegal things. And you have no idea if she was an alcoholic or not. But if she wanted it expunged, she needed to stop drinking. Being required to attend substance abuse counseling is a completely appropriate requirement when you're asking the court to give you a do over that you have in no way shown that you deserve or earned.

:::::::::applause:::::::::

22 years ago our then-next-door-loser-neighbor (pretty sure she was dealing drugs from her house for awhile) rented her house to an illegal fraternity associated with the local rich kid university, and we embarked on a months-long nightmare. The frequent parties, the noise, the trash tossed over the fence into our yard, the parking problems, the used condoms in the street by our curb, everything was intolerable but the icing on the cake was the night when I heard rustling outside our bedroom window at 1 AM, walked outside to see what was going on, and discovered two young women PEEING behind our bushes, right in front of our bedroom window. They ran off but left their discarded used tissue behind. I'm still angry just thinking about it.

Thankfully loser neighbor eventually got foreclosed on and a very nice couple bought the house at auction. But wow, that was an awful year.

  • Upvote 5
  • Sad 4
  • Rufus Bless 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nellautumngirl

Wow, that's awful. Thanks to everyone who dug it up. I'm hoping Susannah didn't know about this. She wouldn't be the first fundie to fall for this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paperplate
On 1/28/2020 at 12:28 PM, nellautumngirl said:

Wow, that's awful. Thanks to everyone who dug it up. I'm hoping Susannah didn't know about this. She wouldn't be the first fundie to fall for this. 

She posted a pic with him just three days ago, so apparently they are still together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paperplate
On 1/27/2020 at 5:05 PM, TheJewAmongUs said:

Off topic, but I'm completely fine with someone who did these things being excluded from certain professions. If you're not aware that actions have consequences by the time you go to college, you're not ready to go away to college or to start training towards these professions. The fact that she got caught and did it again soon after (both the drinking and the peeing in garden beds) shows this. At 18 she had to know that drinking was illegal. It is not ok to break the law if you do it 10-15 feet away from where you think someone can see you. And other people are not required to stay on paths to avoid seeing illegal things. And you have no idea if she was an alcoholic or not. But if she wanted it expunged, she needed to stop drinking. Being required to attend substance abuse counseling is a completely appropriate requirement when you're asking the court to give you a do over that you have in no way shown that you deserve or earned.

Not sure what it is like in the US but in my country you can be tried as a youth until you're 22 (and sometimes even above) if you are deemed to lack the maturity of an adult.

Fact is that the brains of most 18 year-olds are not fully developed yet. Oftentimes they are simply not able to make good choices all the time. They act on impulse and can't grasp the consequences of their actions.

Yet, they are legal adults and even if, for example, their parents would tell them not to go to college yet, and to stay home and take some time to mature, there is no stopping them on account of their legal status. They themselves might not be able to tell what their maturity level is and they cannot make rational choices based on that info. And there you have it: legal adults with teen brains out there by themselves, making stupid teen choices.

Based on this I think it makes sense to have some (!) leniency with people in this age category. It's partly just biology. 

Not saying they should get a free pass though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
singsingsing

I feel like this whole ‘brains aren’t fully developed until age 25!’ is going to be this decade’s equivalent of the ‘you only use 10% of your brain’ myth. 

  • Upvote 7
  • Haha 2
  • I Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NachosFlandersStyle
3 hours ago, Paperplate said:

Not sure what it is like in the US but in my country you can be tried as a youth until you're 22

The US tends to go in the opposite direction, trying young teenagers as adults and sometimes even handing out life sentences in adult prisons.

Edited by NachosFlandersStyle
  • Upvote 4
  • Sad 2
  • I Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quiversR4hunting
3 hours ago, Paperplate said:

Not sure what it is like in the US but in my country you can be tried as a youth until you're 22 (and sometimes even above) if you are deemed to lack the maturity of an adult.

Fact is that the brains of most 18 year-olds are not fully developed yet. Oftentimes they are simply not able to make good choices all the time. They act on impulse and can't grasp the consequences of their actions.

Yet, they are legal adults and even if, for example, their parents would tell them not to go to college yet, and to stay home and take some time to mature, there is no stopping them on account of their legal status. They themselves might not be able to tell what their maturity level is and they cannot make rational choices based on that info. And there you have it: legal adults with teen brains out there by themselves, making stupid teen choices.

Based on this I think it makes sense to have some (!) leniency with people in this age category. It's partly just biology. 

Not saying they should get a free pass though.

at 17 you can be charged as an adult or a juvenile. At 18, charged as an adult. 

1 hour ago, singsingsing said:

I feel like this whole ‘brains aren’t fully developed until age 25!’ is going to be this decade’s equivalent of the ‘you only use 10% of your brain’ myth. 

Brain development in the 20s is not a myth. When I was in Ed250 - intro to education (probably changed since I took it back in the mid '90s) gave the timeline of brain development and the brain is not fully developed until the mid 20s. There is still a lot of research out about it- for example:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0963721413480170 

The article here says in heated situations the behavior is less rational but in cool calm it is more rational. 

In this article - that you have to pay for, which I didn't - in the abstract it states we know that some brain areas continue to develop well beyond childhood. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1751-228X.2008.00045.x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
singsingsing
1 hour ago, quiversR4hunting said:

Brain development in the 20s is not a myth. When I was in Ed250 - intro to education (probably changed since I took it back in the mid '90s) gave the timeline of brain development and the brain is not fully developed until the mid 20s. There is still a lot of research out about it- for example:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0963721413480170 

The article here says in heated situations the behavior is less rational but in cool calm it is more rational. 

In this article - that you have to pay for, which I didn't - in the abstract it states we know that some brain areas continue to develop well beyond childhood. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1751-228X.2008.00045.x

Of course it’s not myth that the brain continues to develop into a person’s 20s. It’s the way it’s used in popular culture that’s the issue. People throw it around to ‘explain’, excuse or accuse, without understanding what they’re talking about. It’s taken on a very pseudosciencey overtone In popular culture over the past few years. Note that I am not saying that everyone who brings it up does not understand it. Bolding and underlining to try to avoid to inevitable fifty replies from everyone insisting they have a PhD in neurodevelopment and are gravely offended by my accusations. 🙃

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quiversR4hunting
16 minutes ago, singsingsing said:

Of course it’s not myth that the brain continues to develop into a person’s 20s. It’s the way it’s used in popular culture that’s the issue. People throw it around to ‘explain’, excuse or accuse, without understanding what they’re talking about. It’s taken on a very pseudosciencey overtone In popular culture over the past few years. Note that I am not saying that everyone who brings it up does not understand it. Bolding and underlining to try to avoid to inevitable fifty replies from everyone insisting they have a PhD in neurodevelopment and are gravely offended by my accusations. 🙃

AH! Thanks for explaining, now I see what you were trying to say. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Palimpsest

@singsingsing, I promise to slap with a constipated five figure fish the first person to claim to have a PhD in neurodevelopment from an "elite European university" for you.

1 hour ago, quiversR4hunting said:

at 17 you can be charged as an adult or a juvenile. At 18, charged as an adult. 

In the US, it depends on the state.  The last time I looked 5 states had no minimum age for a child to be charged as an adult.  Most states have raised the minimum age to 17.  Some are considering 18, and some are actually considering raising the minimum age to 21.   I approve of that, because I don't think the brain is fully developed until the mid-20s.

Remember, it wasn't until 2005 that the death penalty was abolished for crimes committed as juveniles in the United State.  Some states are still lagging behind on the not pseudosciency stuff.

The above roster of states is just from memory and I may be quite out-of-date.  Please feel free to google the correct stats.  

Now I have to back up in this thread and catch up with the Seven Sisters. :)

 

  • Upvote 1
  • I Agree 1
  • Thank You 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VVV

While it is true that brains continue to develop into a person's 20s, I don't think that should automatically give young people a pass on all types of stupidity. I mean, I expected my neurotypical children to know by elementary school age that they shouldn't pee in other people's yards. And I would expect any neurotypical 21-year-old to know enough to keep his hands off a 13-year-old girl.

Edited by VVV
rewording for clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
browngrl

For what its worth I do think that "your brain isn't fully developed ..." will end up as being this generation's "you only use 10% of your brain". I think there are important (and perhaps critical) structural changes that occur throughout life eg pregnancy can cause measurable changes in brain structure and there is an emerging science of facilitating brain repair following injury. I think we are going to see more and more evidence that important brain changes occur throughout most of life. What this will translate to IMO is that cases will have to be treated on a more individual basis to decide if the person was competent and to what degree the brain change can be said to affect behaviour. I think it is going to mean lots of work for the legal community to hash this all out in an equitable way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PlentyOfJesusFishInTheSea

So, which Richardson is engaged? There seems to be some confusion over on the Unsullied Singles page. People seem to be assuming it's Susannah + Predator Guy but I don't think that's right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NachosFlandersStyle
27 minutes ago, PlentyOfJesusFishInTheSea said:

So, which Richardson is engaged? There seems to be some confusion over on the Unsullied Singles page. People seem to be assuming it's Susannah + Predator Guy but I don't think that's right.

It's Anna.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheJewAmongUs

Does anyone else cringe at all of the photos (and video) that Jessica takes in cockpits. Put your fucking phone away and pay attention. She has something of a social media addiction and I worry it won't stop when she's actually at the controls and not just in the jump seat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheJewAmongUs
On 2/4/2020 at 5:49 AM, PlentyOfJesusFishInTheSea said:

So, which Richardson is engaged? There seems to be some confusion over on the Unsullied Singles page. People seem to be assuming it's Susannah + Predator Guy but I don't think that's right.

I just re-read it. It's not confusing. Anna is engaged. Susannah's pedophile boyfriend took Charissa's (the youngest) phone and changed Charissa's status to engaged. He also changed her profile photo to a photo of him and Susannah.

  • Upvote 1
  • Sad 2
  • WTF 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aine
On 1/25/2020 at 7:46 PM, NachosFlandersStyle said:

But the common perception that thousands of people are being accidentally charged with sex crimes isn't really helpful.

I didn't realize it was a common perception, and I don't think I made it out as though it was common. You can usually see what they've been charged with, hence why I said that essentially, no way can that charge be talked out of nor could there be any decent 'innocent' reasoning for it.

I added the caveat because I was aware of an incident where I could see that being a case of context mattering with the registry but just one. I think statutory sometimes has context that makes it not quite the equivalent of most other sex crimes. But I do think the crime of statutory rape has it's place and I by no means think it's anything that should be passed over on first glance as innocent.

The sex offender registry was something new to me when I moved to the US from Australia. I'd heard about it on TV shows or the news but didn't know the ins and outs of it until I was here. I think it's a wonderful public safety law. I was just shocked to have my first real life 'exposure' to it be a case where a cop really took the law past what it was intended to do. I don't think there is any way a judge would have give a path to expunging my friend's charges if it was anything serious or there was a victim involved. I have no clue how common it is- I only added the anecdote because it's my only experience of someone I know well facing being put on the registry. 🤷‍♀️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NachosFlandersStyle
1 hour ago, Aine said:

I didn't realize it was a common perception, and I don't think I made it out as though it was common.

I promise I wasn't trying to scold you! I just saw the conversation moving in that direction, which I've seen happen often before in other settings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aine
2 hours ago, NachosFlandersStyle said:

I promise I wasn't trying to scold you! I just saw the conversation moving in that direction, which I've seen happen often before in other settings.

I didn't feel scolded, I just read it and thought, 'But that's not what I meant!' 😅 I agree it wasn't a good direction to head in! I didn't mind the redirection back again (and appreciated learning it isn't common!), but I wanted to make sure it was clear I wasn't purposely distracting from the very real reason this man is on the sex offender registry :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ElizaB
On 2/4/2020 at 12:15 PM, TheJewAmongUs said:

Does anyone else cringe at all of the photos (and video) that Jessica takes in cockpits. Put your fucking phone away and pay attention. She has something of a social media addiction and I worry it won't stop when she's actually at the controls and not just in the jump seat.

I think for the most part she is in a simulator- not a jump seat. She may be in that room for a lot of hours waiting for other people to have their turn. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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