mitch

Sun, Dec 20, 2009 : 9:20 p.m.

Terrin, maybe you didn't read the law so I'll post it again. "Fourth Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct - Section 750.520e (a) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree if he or she engages in sexual contact with another person and if any of the following circumstances, exist: That other person is at least 13 years of age and under 16 years of age, and the actor is 5 or more years older than that other person." The age of consent for Freeman was 13 ---not 16. It's a math thing.

Terrin

Sun, Dec 20, 2009 : 9:06 p.m.

Mitch, there doesn't need to be actual force or coercion to be found liable for 4th Degree Criminal Sexual Assault in Michigan. Read the statute. The prosecution argues that when the alleged victim is a minor, regardless of the age of the accused, the alleged victim lacks the mental capacity to agree to sex. So, a sixteen year old can be found liable for sleeping with a fifteen year old even though the sex is strictly voluntary because the courts will hold that the fifteen year old doesn't have the mental capacity to agree to sex. So, here it sounds like the girl probably said yes to the sex, but if it had went to trial the Court would ultimately rule that she didn't have the mental capacity to do so strictly by virtue of her age. The coercion is strictly imputed to the boy because the girl was under the age of consent. To me this is strange, since women are supposed to reach mental maturity much quicker then boys. Moreover, girls reach sexual and mental maturity quicker then boys. This whole law is tied to medieval attempts based on stereotypes to protect the virtue of innocent girls from evil boys. A person shouldn't be on the list, if the sex was consensual and the two people were in about the same age group. To see how silly the list is just consider the fact that people who urinate outside and run in the Naked Mile can be exposed to the possibility of making the list. Putting the kid on the list likely will ruin his life for a mistake he made when he wasn't old enough to understand the ramifications. Further, if we are going to go after kids like this, we shouldn't have boys and girls in the same school if we are going to treat them differently.

mitch

Sun, Dec 20, 2009 : 10:58 a.m.

You are right Billy. It's all about the money. States have been using these vague statutes to scare men into pleading guilty to make-believe crimes. However, in the Freeman case I don't see how they made any money directly from Freeman himself being 17 and unemployed, but all parties (police, jailers, prosecutors, lawyers, clerks, etc.) do get STATE/GOVERNMENT MONEY for doing their thing. Most states do charge a sex offender registration fee ($150 in SC) which if you don't pay they'll call that a violation of the sex registry law and put you in prison for up to 5 years. From my humble observation Michigan's 3rd degree csc is used to scare defendants into believing the age of consent is 16 then they are tricked to plead guilty to other lesser offenses, i.e., 4th degree csc. I don't know about Michigan, but some states even allow defendants charged with very serious sex offenses to plead guilty to non-sex crimes so they don't have to be put on the sex registry. To fully understand Michigan's csc laws I would have to research the HISTORY and see when the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th degree csc statutes were enacted/amended. Chances are the 4th degree csc came later as it is a so-called Romeo/Juliot law that lowers the age of consent for teens to 13. However, if a teen less than 5 years older than a victim uses force or coercion then they would be punished for that. As to why Freeman pleaded guilty to force or coercion is either that he was lead to believe the age of consent for him was 16 or he actually forced the victim. Another possibility is that he engaged in sex with a victim who was less than 13. There are several ways to find out. 1. Put him on trial for force or coercion and let a jury decide. 2. Check court records and see how many other teens have plead guilty who were in the same situation. 3. Check court records and see how many men who were more than 5 years older than a victim pleaded guilty. I noticed there are several threads to this story and I haven't read nor do I intent to follow all the posts, but anyone who wants to copy and paste my posts to another thread has my permission. I am not a lawyer and not even a certified paralegal, but I do have very good reading skills, and most importantly I know how to apply mathematics and logic when interpreting vague statutes.

billy

Sun, Dec 20, 2009 : 2:33 a.m.

The LAW won't change because they make money off the LAW. Kind of like we still keep cannabis illegal. Because law enforcement and their interests keep themselves employed and make money off these laws. They have lobbying organizations that represent themselves to the authorities as well.

mitch

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 1:29 p.m.

I don't know if the law was different 6 years ago, but I can tell you that the age of consent is 13 in Michigan today by the 4th degree csc which is the same as most states Romeo/Juliot additions to statutory rape laws that decriminalizes sex between close in age teens. The legislature just forgot to repeal the 3rd degree csc. Without the 3rd degree csc older men could still be charged but not teens having sex with teens. All states have trumped up laws/charges to pressure defendants to plead guilty. Maybe, just maybe, I'm not sure older men should be punished either if no harm was done and is usually the case an older man is more likely to support the younger partner and to care for any children that may have come from the relationship or that she may have alreay had.

Lee Higgins

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 1:14 p.m.

Freeman said today he is planning to meet with a private attorney next week. Here's the latest story: http://www.annarbor.com/news/young-man-struggling-with-sex-offender-label-to-meet-with-private-attorney/

MjC

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 12:47 p.m.

This is one law on the books that needs serious revising. We have hundreds of people on the sex offender list in similar situations. Teenagers make mistakes.

Steven Billings

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 12:16 p.m.

The reason and logic displayed in many of the comments shows that these really good people do not understand how these really bad laws work. Attorneys don't push for plea bargains because they are bad lawyers; they do it to keep these kids out of mandatory prison sentences if they go to trial. There is no defense - the law is there and he violated it. Not knowing it was a crime, the fact that it is an irrational law, the way it is enforced - none of those common sense arguments can overpower the fact that it IS the law. The law is bad - change can only come from within the legislature. If you really believe this law is wrong, write your legistlators and let them know what you think. And by all means write to your senator and representatives in Congress and tell them to trash the Adam Walsh Act. The lawyer and Mr. Freeman did what they had to do to prevent him from a prison sentence. Also to the guy who said that he would move out of state - That doesn't help. Many of the states have even harsher laws and once you're there, you have to follow their laws. Check out www.txvoices.com and read some more stories. There are many links that will inform you and connect you to resources in your area.

Jim Osborn

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 11:56 a.m.

This happened 6 years ago. I wonder if the law did not have the greater than 5 years age difference in it. A 2 year difference is fine, three years is pushing it, but 4 or 5 years is too much. I remember being 20 and knew that a 16 year old girl was was too young. Same for when I was a senior in high school, all 9th graders were too young.

Dave66

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 11:12 a.m.

Just because he plead guilty doesn't mean he is guilty. Many, many, many times innocent people plea bargain to a lesser charge because they don't want to take the chance of being convicted of the more serious crime. Actual guilt or innocence doesn't really play a part in this little drama. So for all those simple-minded people who gravitate to the line, "pleaded guilty to fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct with force or coercion" and say, "Ah-HA! He's a rapist!" grow up and join us back in the real world when you get a chance, OK? The charge a defendant pleads guilty to has almost nothing to do with the actual crime and very much to do with a risk analysis of putting your faith in a jury to receive accurate information and make a rational judgement based on the same. "There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws." Ayn Rand

KeepingItReal

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 10:55 a.m.

Tom Weider/Mitch: Thanks to both of you for providing this critical information. I am not an attorney but it seems to me that there the 3 key elements of this case is the age of the young lady (according to law, she was clearly underage at the point at which this occurred); whether Mr. Freemen "forced or coerced" the young lady to engage in sexual intercourse, which if my reading of the posting is correct, he did not and the statutes seems to support the fact that he did not); and the age difference (as summarized by Section 750.520e(a). Even if there are statutory requirements guiding conviction, it seems rather harsh that Mr. Freemen would be forced to register as a sex offender. I hope that His Public Defender challenge these facts even if he has to take this to the Supreme Court. It makes no sense for our government and system of laws and justice to be creating criminals unnecessarily. This case has much broader implications for many young men (both black and white) in our community. Mr. Weider, if there any possibility that you could provide legal representation for this young man? I know you and I know your commitment to social justice.

mitch

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 10:46 a.m.

Mrs. Freeman, You need to contact Oprah or similar talk show with your story. Poorly written laws should not be used to harm selected people. Now using an attorney's logic a 40 year old who had sex with a 13-16 year old could plead guilty under the 4th degree csc and only get a 2 year misdemeanor. So, since they wanted to harm your 17 year old son they had to get him to plead guilty to force or coercion which is rape. The Romeo/Juliot revision of state's statutory rape laws reduces the age of consent for close in age partners. I know a great deal about these laws as I spent 15 years in prison because of thses types of misinterpretations. b) Criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $500, or both.

Lee Higgins

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 10:25 a.m.

Here is a link to the original story: http://www.annarbor.com/news/a-young-man-struggles-with-the-sex-offender-label/

Tom Wieder

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 10:24 a.m.

Mitch- You're getting a bit confused here. The age of consent in Michigan is 16. Sex with anyone under 13 is CSC 2d. Sex with anyone between 13 and 16 is CSC 3rd, even if consensual. Consensual sex with someone between 13 and 16 is CSC 4th, but only if the offender is at least 5 years older. It would make sense if you were only 2 years older, as Freeman was,and had consensual sex with someone 13-16, that the lesser charge of CSC 4th applied, but the law wasn't written that way. The only way to come under CSC 4th, with its lesser penalties, is to "admit" to force or coercion. It simply isn't true that there's no crime unless there's force or coercion. Consensual sex with a person between 13 and 16 is a 15-year felony under CSC 3rd. The law is a logical mess, but that's what Freeman and his attorney had to deal with.

Yolanda Freeman

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 10:16 a.m.

@ mitch you say you believe that there is more to the case why did her mother write the letter to take this off my son. The mother admitted that she wanted to break up there relationship and the only way she knew how was to call the police. So there is your answer to more to the case very simple the mother did not like my son.

mitch

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 10 a.m.

Thank you Tom Wieder for saying in legaleaze what I said mathematically. No crime was committed unless there was force or coercion. You said, "Freeman's attorney had him plead guilty to 4th degree, supposedly involving force or coercion." Now we must decide if his attorney knew that the age of consent in Michigan is actually 13 or was there force or coercion involved.

Tom Wieder

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 9:50 a.m.

As an attorney, I can tell you that, unfortunately, the criminal statutes can be quite confusing, and somewhat illogical, but what happened here actually makes sense. Sex with a person between 13 and 16 years of age is Criminal Sexual Contact (CSC) 3rd Degree, punishable by up to 15 years in prison. It does not require force or coercion, so this section would apply to statutory rape. 4th Degree CSC covers sex with a person 13-16 years old, but only if the offender is more than 5 years older than the "victim", which Mr. Freeman wasn't. It also covers sex with a person 13-16 years old using force or coercion. This sounds worse than what's covered by CSC 3d degree, but the section only provides for a prison sentence up to 2 years, not 15. I am fairly certain that what happened here is that Freeman's attorney had him plead guilty to 4th degree, supposedly involving force or coercion, so that he faced a maximum 2-year sentence, rather than 3d degree, with its 15-year maximum. There wasn't actually any force or coercion, as everyone agrees the sex was consensual.

mitch

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 9:35 a.m.

No normalm 17 year old would plead guilty to having consensual sex with a 15 year old when it is common knowledge no crime has been committed because 15 + 5 = 20. That means if he had been 20 a crime had been committed. If she was 15 and he was 17 that's only 2 or 3 years difference---not 5 or more years difference. It's a math problem --not a lawyer problem. If I'm the first person to discover this then you folks in Michigan need to study math harder in school. I'm from SC by the way where the age of consent is 14 when the older person is less than his 18th birthday.

KMTE

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 9:21 a.m.

I agree that this is a case of poor representation and that this young man should not have to be punished for 25 years. Hopefully this case will get more thoughtful review and better handling this time.

mitch

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 9:19 a.m.

I don't know when the offense happened and what law was in effect at that time, but I just read Michigan law and it appears to me no crime was commited if he was not more than 5 years older than the 15 year old girl. Why hasn't someone brought this up rather than piss in the wind with sex registry crap. I believe there's more to this case than Romeo/Juliot age of consent. Fourth Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct - Section 750.520e (a) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree if he or she engages in sexual contact with another person and if any of the following circumstances, exist: That other person is at least 13 years of age and under 16 years of age, and the actor is 5 or more years older than that other person Force or coercion is used to accomplish the sexual contact. Force or coercion includes but is not limited to any of the following circumstances: When the actor overcomes the victim through the actual application of physical force or physical violence When the actor coerces the victim to submit by threatening to use force or violence on the victim, and the victim believes that the actor has the present ability to execute these threats When the actor coerces the victim to submit by threatening to retaliate in the future against the victim, or any other person, and the victim believes that the actor has the ability to execute this threat. As used in this subdivision, "to retaliate" includes threats of physical punishments, kidnappings or extortion When the actor engages in the medical treatment or examination of the victim in a manner or purposes which are medically recognized as unethical or unacceptable When the actor achieves the sexual contact through concealment or by the element of surprise The actor knows or has reason to know that the victim is, mentally incapable, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless That other person is under the jurisdiction of the department of corrections, and the actor is an employee or a contractual employee of, or a volunteer with, the department of corrections who has knowledge that the other person is under the jurisdiction of the department of corrections That other person is a prisoner or probationer under the jurisdiction of a county for purposes of imprisonment or a work program or other probationary program and the actor is an employee or a contractual employee of or a volunteer with the county who knows that the other person is under the course jurisdiction The actor knows or has reason to know that the juvenile division of the probate court, the circuit court, or the recorders court of the city of Detroit has detained the victim in a facility while the victim is awaiting a trial or hearing or committed the victim to a facility as a result of the victim having been found responsible for committing an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult, and the actor is an employee or contractual employee of, or a volunteer with, the facility in which the victim is detained or to which the victim was committed (b) Criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $500, or both.

KeepingItReal

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 8:33 a.m.

Mitch: He pleaded guilty on the advice of his attorney.

mitch

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 8:19 a.m.

Doesn't matter about who his attorney is when a man pleads guilty to a rape charge rather than a statutory rape charge then he must have raped rather than consensual sex. Look at the article above. All I did was copied and pasted it in this post. It says "He pleaded guilty to fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct with force or coercion." Statutory rape laws don't have force and coercion in their language.

KeepingItReal

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 7:02 a.m.

Mitch: According to the official police report as pointed out in the original post, the young lady admitted that she was neither forced or coerced into having sexual relations with Matthew. Her mother admitted the same albeit too late. I think the young man is as much a victim as the young lady having what appears to be extremely poor legal representation as most low income individuals when they have to depend upon the public defender for legal defense. I think it is high time to scrutinize how the PD office handles the provision of legal defense for its client. I know of a number of individuals who refused the help of the PD office for this very same reason. This is a classic example of what can happen to an individual when they enter the legal system and receive poor legal representation.

mitch

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 6:26 a.m.

"force or coercion" Freeman was sentenced to probation in 2003 after being convicted of having sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend when he was 17. He pleaded guilty to fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct with force or coercion. In Michigan, the legal age of consent is 16. Doesn't matter about the age of consent if he used force or coercion. Most states have a Romeo/Juliot defense that allows consent when partners are close in age but not when there is force or coercion.

billy

Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 12:53 a.m.

He should get out of Michigan and start a new life while he still can.

geej86

Fri, Dec 18, 2009 : 6:45 p.m.

"As a result of Freemans conviction, he was required to register as a sex offender for 25 years." Absolutely ridiculous considering the charge, even the kid's mom knows he doesn't belong on that list. These sorts of cases are so frustrating..