Skip to content

Absence of intercourse won't necessarily save L.T.

In the aftermath of lawyer Arthur Aidala’s appearance with Mike Francesa of WFAN, a sense is emerging during the call-in portion of Francesa’s show that, if Taylor had sexual contact but not sexual intercourse with the 16-year-old girl, Taylor is off the hook for felony charges.

But it’s not quite that simple.

Currently, Taylor is charged with third-degree rape under Section 130.25 of the New York Penal Law.  The statute specifically contemplates intercourse.

So what if Taylor and the alleged victim only had “Clinton sex“?  Taylor apparently would face the same consequence.

Section 130.40 of the New York Penal Law outlaws “criminal sexual act in the third degree,” and it encompasses for persons 21 years of age or older engaging in “oral sexual
conduct or anal sexual conduct with a person less than seventeen years
old.” 

Like third-degree rape, third-degree criminal sexual act is a Class E felony.  So it’s a distinction without a difference. 

And it sounds as if Taylor already has given authorities enough when he gave them a statement — probably before anyone bothered to tell him that he wasn’t simply in trouble for patronizing a prostitute, but for having illegal sexual contact with someone under the age of 17.

Permalink 74 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Legal, New York Giants, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
74 Responses to “Absence of intercourse won't necessarily save L.T.”
  1. RedOokies says: May 7, 2010 2:29 PM

    It’s pretty funny when a guy who has earned millions and millions can only afford a lawyer who can’t read the statute as well as a sportswriter.

  2. SpankyJanky26 says: May 7, 2010 2:30 PM

    Shibacle

  3. Dewey Axewoond says: May 7, 2010 2:31 PM

    If Michael Jackson can get off (pun intended), I think LT can, too.

  4. ethan robert says: May 7, 2010 2:31 PM

    Sure as hell hasn’t saved me.

  5. EverybodyGotAIDS says: May 7, 2010 2:33 PM

    Maybe he just got a happy ending. Of course, knowing New York, they probably have a statute covering everything up to and including a stick job….which is very unpleasant.

  6. Bill In DC says: May 7, 2010 2:40 PM

    What if they were only ‘fooling around’ as Clinton defined it?

  7. Ilovefoolsball says: May 7, 2010 2:42 PM

    If he did have sex with that little white 16 year old runaway girl there would definitely be evidence of it after they examined her.

  8. RedOokies says: May 7, 2010 2:45 PM

    LT doesn’t have MJ money, never did. Michael Jackson had hundreds and hundreds of millions, even if they were borrowed.
    LT is probably worth about a 10th of what Big Ben is worth.

  9. Bech72 says: May 7, 2010 2:45 PM

    Hmmm, Florio might be a better Lawyer than Journalist; which is kind of like saying the Lions are better than the Rams. Or that JaMarcus Russell is better than Ryan Leaf. Or that….you get the point.

  10. Mean D says: May 7, 2010 2:46 PM

    Lock him in a cell with Florio.

  11. ampats says: May 7, 2010 2:47 PM

    When I saw the headline of the article ,
    “Absence of intercourse”
    I thought PFT was going to write the Frank Burns story.

  12. The Curse of Bobby Layne Part 2 says: May 7, 2010 2:51 PM

    Really? Do we need this much detail?
    Really?

  13. nittanylion0 says: May 7, 2010 2:52 PM

    L.T. sure got himself some crappy lawyers

  14. MakingitRain says: May 7, 2010 2:54 PM

    This girl has screwed half of New York and LT is the only one who gets arrested for it? Where is the justice in that.

  15. Frank Burns says: May 7, 2010 2:56 PM

    Was that a joke ampats buddy? Hey wait I thought you told us NO joking about anything that has to do with your hero LT — what gives?

  16. FreeAgentPro says: May 7, 2010 2:57 PM

    Florio is quickly running his own website into the ground. I wonder what league executives think when they read this supposed NFL football forum and find all this other unrelated crap instead. I mean,. MOST of PFT is crap that is not directly related to the curent NFL teams or players. Who the hell cares about a 51 y/o ex player’s personal issues.

  17. gosox2673 says: May 7, 2010 2:58 PM

    If the guy paid $300 for a B.J. he deserves to go to jail.

  18. CleanSlaton says: May 7, 2010 2:59 PM

    LT couldn’t get in where he fit in……even though under cross-examination, the young-star uncrossed & crossed her legs Sharon-Stone style and a bunch of bats flew out.
    Stupid hall-of-famers & Stupid whores get what they deserve.

  19. ClownP3nis says: May 7, 2010 3:00 PM

    Hey foolsball, where did you hear she was a white girl?

  20. grouchomarx1 says: May 7, 2010 3:00 PM

    I believe the crime happened in NJ. Is the pimp being charged with transporting a minor across state lines? Is the pimp being charged with interstate kidnapping, which would result in bringing in the FBI?

  21. Deb says: May 7, 2010 3:05 PM

    What is this “Clinton sex” stuff? BC didn’t invent oral sex. As for LT, thought that was understood. If he had any kind of sex with a minor, he’s done. The only defense to this particular charge is that he didn’t have sex with her at all, of any kind. If he did, it’s an automatic guilty. Consent or whether he knew her age doesn’t matter in the eyes of the law.

  22. I♥Patriots says: May 7, 2010 3:06 PM

    # ampats says: May 7, 2010 2:47 PM
    When I saw the headline of the article ,
    “Absence of intercourse”
    I thought PFT was going to write the Frank Burns story.
    LMFAO!!!!!
    Why wouldn’t LT just go to Nevada, or ask the ex-governor for the number of his pimp? Or better yet….stay faithful to his wife and only have sex with her?

  23. rickah8888 says: May 7, 2010 3:12 PM

    After hearing about potential felony charges, Jerrah “Facelift” Jones is sending out feelers as to LT’s availability.
    He would fit in nicely on America’s most felonious team!

  24. ethan robert says: May 7, 2010 3:19 PM

    I acknowledge there was “contact”, your Honor, but it probably didn’t last more than 40 minutes.

  25. Citizen Strange says: May 7, 2010 3:22 PM

    Absence of intercourse won’t necessarily save L.T.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    God knows it’s never saved me.

  26. joetoronto says: May 7, 2010 3:22 PM

    The law stinks and needs to be changed. Dude calls a for a hooker, the pimp sends a chick who says she’s 19.
    Taylor pays her for her services, and he gets charged with rape?
    I know, the law is what it is and he’ll be found guilty, but Taylor should get off with a fine, and nothing more.

  27. Cubano says: May 7, 2010 3:25 PM

    @ gosox2673
    Quote of the Day! Hands down LMAO

  28. cleanface says: May 7, 2010 3:26 PM

    This just goes to show that pimpin ain’t easy.

  29. Bob Loblaw says: May 7, 2010 3:26 PM

    Send in Tony Dungy to the rescue!

  30. Harold's Beaver says: May 7, 2010 3:26 PM

    Big Ben guilty of Clinton sex ?

  31. Deb says: May 7, 2010 3:32 PM

    @MakingItRain …
    The girl ran away in March when she was still 15. She was delivered to Taylor’s hotel room by a pimp. She’d been beaten in the face. Apparently, the pimp had forced her into prostitution. I doubt since March she’s had sex with half of New York. I can understand what you’re saying, but she’s an exploited kid; don’t take it out on her.
    The evidence shows Roethlisberger didn’t rape anyone. But I still blame him for being the IDIOT who put on a Satan shirt and acted like a moronic, entitled frat boy. Taylor knows prostitution is illegal; he has only himself to blame for his predicament, too.

  32. Dapollock says: May 7, 2010 3:41 PM

    Harold’s Beaver says:
    May 7, 2010 3:26 PM
    Big Ben guilty of Clinton sex ?
    Big Ben isn’t even innocent of George Clinton sex.

  33. ethan robert says: May 7, 2010 3:54 PM

    ‘I submit Your Honor, this is no more than a case of unfortunate contact. You see, Larry Thug contacted his friend Rasheed. Rasheed contacted the young lady. The young lady contacted her uncle. Rasheed contacted her eye with his fist. She contacted her senses. Larry Thug contacted her private spots. Uncle contacted cops. Cops contacted Larry and the media. Larry contacted me, and here we are.

  34. EskinSux says: May 7, 2010 3:57 PM

    @joetoronto
    Brilliant. You should really run for political office. Yes, let’s change the law because LT got caught with an underaged hooker. So, on the basis of your truly brilliant analogy, the lawmakers of NY, should protect those who call for the services of what is an illegal occupation, and not enact laws that are designed to protect children. I mean how could lawmakers be so stupid. Did you ever stop and think, that when most states enacted age of consent laws, it really wasn’t for douchebag ex professional athletes who hire hookers? Are you talking about the age of consent law in general?, or just the hookers that lie about their age?…Which law would you like changed counselor?. Do you really expect lawmakers to differentiate?…Are you really that freakin stupid?

  35. thumper says: May 7, 2010 4:02 PM

    CleanSlaton: It sounds like you have some SERIOUS anger issues. If someone starts killing prostitutes in your area, don’t be surprised when they come looking for you!
    And, let’s see, the girls shows up to his hotel room in obvious need of medical assistance, and LT doesn’t see any problem with that?
    and Joetoronto: the law is what it is for a reason and that reason is that a 16-year old child doesn’t have the capacity to fully understand the long-term ramifications of their actions. There’s a reason you can’t even VOTE until your 18. LT on the other hand is a 51-year old man who is stupid enough to have sex with someone who’s age has to be at the very least questionable and who obviously had been beaten. So yes, let’s blame the child who was beaten and let LT off with just a fine! That’s about as moronic as LT is!

  36. MuskyHunter2542 says: May 7, 2010 4:04 PM

    If the glove didnt fit….

  37. chargerrich says: May 7, 2010 4:07 PM

    This smells funny… (the story pervs)
    Perhaps we will find out this was a setup like Bettis went through. I am betting there is a LOT more to follow.

  38. ray says: May 7, 2010 4:11 PM

    Is OJs Lawers still around

  39. ECS - Brougham Boys 74 says: May 7, 2010 4:11 PM

    Too bad he doesn’t work for the Steelers. No off-duty cops to conceal/destroy evidence. I hear there are some qualified and experienced Pennsylvania State cops that might be available.

  40. AllThat says: May 7, 2010 4:13 PM

    #ampats says:
    May 7, 2010 2:47 PM
    When I saw the headline of the article ,
    “Absence of intercourse”
    I thought PFT was going to write the Frank Burns story.
    Yes ampats!!!

  41. GloRob says: May 7, 2010 4:23 PM

    I must agree that if he paid $300, he should be arrested.
    This is sad, the pimp prostitued her! And they are accusing LT of renting her. I hope he’s innocent, meaning nothing happened, to include oral sex! But if that were the case, why pay?……
    Bottom line, get that child some counseling.
    Yes, we all know that prostitution is illegal, but only if you get caught! I cannot find anyplace that says her beating was physically obvious to others.

  42. I♥Patriots says: May 7, 2010 4:26 PM

    # joetoronto says: May 7, 2010 3:22 PM
    The law stinks and needs to be changed. Dude calls a for a hooker, the pimp sends a chick who says she’s 19.
    Taylor pays her for her services, and he gets charged with rape?
    I know, the law is what it is and he’ll be found guilty, but Taylor should get off with a fine, and nothing more.
    You have a good point, cases like this should be looked at individually, its not all black and white with a statutory rape charge. The pimp should also be held responsible for forcing a 16 year old girl into something like this. The girl is more the pimp’s victim than LT’s.
    Unfortunately the law doesn’t distinguish between an 8 year old and a 16 year old. IMO that’s a big difference. I started having sex with my current boyfriend when I was 16 and he was 21. This was 14 years ago, we are still together, and I was more than willing. Sad thing is that he could have been charged with statutory rape. The law should be changed so that these cases can be looked at on an individual basis.
    LT is not innocent in all of this, either. He should not have been calling a hooker to begin with, but he did not forcibly rape a girl. LT has lived a pretty shady lifestyle, but I don’t think he deserves to be sent up the river for soliciting a prostitute who lied about her age, and went to that hotel room in the first place, out of fear of her pimp.

  43. EskinSux says: May 7, 2010 5:08 PM

    “Unfortunatlely the law doesn’t distinguish between an 8 year old and a 16 year old.IMO thats a big difference…I started having sex with my CURRENT boyfriend when i was 16 and he was 21. That was 14 years ago”
    —————————————-
    Yes, lets put sex with a minor on a grading curve, another genius, the closer they get to puberty,or the said states age of consent the less of an infraction. Now, I know there are plenty of women who read this site and comment, most are articulate, level headed, and i have to ask…….Are they scractching their heads as much as I am over this comment?….LT was caught with an underaged hooker, two violations of the law, but somehow this bozo has related it to her personal relationship….Seriously, after 14 years of being just a GF, perhaps you should not be queationing anything….

  44. ItalianArmyGuy says: May 7, 2010 5:13 PM

    “Absence of Intercourse” to start the headline, and not one of you we-tards has the brains to bash Tebow?
    Do Gruden and I got to do everything for you dumb-a$$es?

  45. lifelongphinfan says: May 7, 2010 5:29 PM

    ESKINSUX-man the only stupid person is you.are you for real?if a hooker admits she lied to her client about her age explain how that makes l.t. or anyone else a rapist what do they need to do have a written contract with 3 witnesses signing her rear end as proof?the law in this country is stupid and the mindless twits like you that follow it blindly with out question are the epitome of stupidity.btw doesn’t it show that he did attempt to follow the law by asking her age to begin with?or am i just stupid as well?if he and or her were to be charged with anything it should have to do with prostitution laws not rape laws as the suspect in this case was lied to and the victim admitted that. if the laws in this nation had any basic common sense applied to them this and all other kinds of crap from civil law to criminal law to tax law ect…ect…wouldn’t be an issue and would not waste countless tax payer dollars as well,but the law makers in this nation with all their degrees hanging on thier office walls wouldn’t have enough good sense to pour piss out of a boot if the instructions were written on the heel and i would throw your dunb-ass right in there with that group.

  46. GirthyOne says: May 7, 2010 5:30 PM

    joetoronto says:
    May 7, 2010 3:22 PM
    The law stinks and needs to be changed. Dude calls a for a hooker, the pimp sends a chick who says she’s 19.
    Taylor pays her for her services, and he gets charged with rape?
    I know, the law is what it is and he’ll be found guilty, but Taylor should get off with a fine, and nothing more.
    ————————————-
    Yup

  47. Deb says: May 7, 2010 5:40 PM

    GloRob says:
    Yes, we all know that prostitution is illegal, but only if you get caught! I cannot find anyplace that says her beating was physically obvious to others.
    ———————————————–
    He got caught.
    In their press conference yesterday, the police spokespeople said that Taylor was cooperative when the police arrived. They said several times that he was particularly anxious for them to know he was not the one who hit her.
    He would not have kept telling the cops he was not the one who hit her unless the facial injuries were physically obvious to him and the cops.
    If you were hiring a hooker and a pimp showed up at your door with a young girl who had bruises on her face, wouldn’t you be concerned about going through with the transaction? Have you seen the photos of Eliot Spitzer’s hooker? It’s New York. Other options were available and LT certainly has the financial resources to afford a more … upscale arrangement.
    I’ve been pulled over for driving 70 in a 35 zone. I didn’t tell the cop: It’s only illegal if you get caught.

  48. Bob S. says: May 7, 2010 5:45 PM

    is the law since having sex with harlots is not imprisonable, does the law stare the john must ask for and record of proof of age? and must check it out first with authorities computer base to make sure the id or proof is valid? is that the law?
    funny how when white guys have sex or are alkledged to they never go to jail for it?
    spitzer, bubba, check this link today of a hypocrite travelling with his own prostitute
    Same-sex rights proponents in the United States were revelling in the news Wednesday that George Rekers, a prominent Christian scholar and “gay cure” crusader, hired a male prostitute for a 10-day European jaunt.
    The Miami New Times, a entertainment publication that publishes twice monthly, confronted Rekers at the Miami airport with the man, who advertised on a sexually explicit gay website — rentboy.com — as a travel companion. …
    http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2010/05/05/13837331.html

  49. joetoronto says: May 7, 2010 5:45 PM

    EskinSux: No need to get your shit in a knot.
    In my opinion, the pimp should be sent up the river without a paddle, without a doubt.
    The girl IS the victim here, i think we all agree with that.
    LT is simply the john though, and while hiring a hooker is against the law, it’s also a service that’s been around since the beginning of time.
    Anything that happened beyond this isn’t known yet, like whether her injuries were clearly visible and where they were on her body.
    Hiring a hooker shouldn’t be against the law, in my opinion, just like smoking weed shouldn’t be either.

  50. Bob S. says: May 7, 2010 5:59 PM

    on the above link
    Rekers said, “Like Jesus Christ, I deliberately spend time with sinners with the loving goal to try to help them,” said Rekers, who has called the New Times article slanderous. ”
    Maybe LT was doing likewise?

  51. funi says: May 7, 2010 6:18 PM

    HE IS A RAPIST! THERE IS NO EVIDENCE SO HE RAPED HER! LAWERENCE TAYRARER!

  52. EskinSux says: May 7, 2010 6:29 PM

    @lifelongphinfan
    Wait, did you just say he tried to follow the law by asking her age?…The law…….HA HA…..For real?..Oh, I’m sure, LT the bastion of legality, after calling some scumbag in the bronx to bring him a ho, was worried about breaking the law, when the entire ordeal is illegal……Do you think before you type this Unibomber type rambling manifesto?
    @joetoronto
    Only LOSERS pay to get laid, and only LOSERS defend them

  53. Deb says: May 7, 2010 6:32 PM

    @lifelongphinfan …
    No, it just shows you don’t understand the law.
    She is a minor in the state of New York. There’s no give in the law on sex with a minor. Ignorance is not a legal excuse. It doesn’t matter if she lied about her age. It doesn’t matter if you’re 22 and she’s your 16-year-old girlfriend and she consented to the sex in front of 50 witnesses. It doesn’t matter if she’s been a prostitute for five years and there were 50 witnesses to the transaction. She is a minor and you are over 21. In the eyes of the law, it is rape.
    The ONLY possible defense to this charge is that he did not have sex of any kind with the girl. That is what his attorney has said. If, however, the police have used condoms with his semen on them, he’s got a big problem. Perhaps he can plead it down. I’m not saying it’s fair. But legally speaking, it is what it is. And he knew when he hired the prostitute that he was committing a crime.
    @Joe in Toronto …
    In their press conference, the police said several times that when officers arrived at the hotel, Taylor was very eager for them to know he was not the one who hit her in the face. That means the facial injuries were visible to him and to the cops.

  54. Bdrunk says: May 7, 2010 6:37 PM

    Lady GaGa is a tremendously talented singer and a gifted performer.
    Discuss…

  55. Rasta says: May 7, 2010 6:52 PM

    LT ordered from his main pimp just what he wanted. I picture in my mind what an over the hill rich African American would want.” A young diminutive white girl” That’s what they always had me send to their room.
    Some of you A** holes try to tell me it’s not so.

  56. Deb says: May 7, 2010 6:56 PM

    @Bob S. …
    Was the gay male prostitute a 15-year-old runaway who’d been forced into prostitution and had visible bruises on his face? (The cops said they could see this girl had been hit in the face and that Taylor wanted them to know he didn’t hit her.) That’s the source of Taylor’s trouble. He’s given interviews before in which he’s openly “confessed” to soliciting prostitutes but he wasn’t arrested. He wouldn’t be in this pickle now if not for the underage girl.
    It is ridiculous that Spitzer confessed to millions that he solicited prostitutes yet he was never arrested for it. On the other hand, have you seen photos of Spitzer’s hooker? She didn’t show up at his door dragged by her pimp with bruises on her face. Taylor could easily afford someone like Spitzer had. When this bruised girl showed at his door, why did he even let her into the room? He couldn’t figure out that trouble had come knocking????

  57. jsbeck says: May 7, 2010 7:17 PM

    hes lucky it was only the butt or mouth!!
    looks like the vajayjay means SERIOUS business!!

  58. Mike D says: May 7, 2010 7:26 PM

    Florio, are we 100% certain that anal is outlawed?

  59. Mr Krinkle says: May 7, 2010 7:49 PM

    What if he just got (umm how can I get this comment approved) a hand on penis satisfaction?

  60. GloRob says: May 7, 2010 8:15 PM

    Ok, as a reminder: Innocent until proven guilty in America, or does that apply here?

  61. fastfred21 says: May 7, 2010 8:28 PM

    yeah–this girl is a victim and the FBI was watching, seems to me that they must have known what was up before LT pulled out his wad to pay her. He gets arrested by some supercop that didn’t have the brains to arrest this girl (I mean victim) and save her from being beat up and prostituted. Either I haven’t seen enuff details or something stinks here.

  62. GloRob says: May 7, 2010 8:30 PM

    Mr Krinkle wrote:
    What if he just got (umm how can I get this comment approved) a hand on penis satisfaction?
    Hey, that is MOST certainly illegal! especially if he paid $300 for it!

  63. Zaggs says: May 7, 2010 9:24 PM

    Floor-boy, buy a dictionary. Here is Webster’s definition of intercourse:
    3 : physical sexual contact between individuals that involves the genitalia of at least one person .
    Hence if LT’s lawyer says no intercourse, he means no oral sex either.

  64. JimmyLions says: May 7, 2010 10:30 PM

    To be more accurate — this should be called the Gingrich defense.
    When Newt divorced his first wife (he went to her hospital bed with a yellow legal pad after her breast cancer surgery), he argued in court that he hadn’t been unfaithful. The intern he was screwing was only blowing him, and therefore it wasn’t really sex — blowjobs don’t count as cheating.
    Newt married that intern, and was cheating on her with another intern, during the time that he was making speeches on the House floor attacking Clinton’s morality.
    But regardless of Florio giving the GOP a free pass (like the rest of the media), LT is totally gonna do some time for this one.

  65. billyray22 says: May 8, 2010 12:45 AM

    Ignorance of the law is no defense…However, in most states there is a defense called “mistake of fact.” So if LT REASONABLY believed the girl was 17 plus, then he should get off (pun intended). But I do not know if NY or was it NJ recognizes this defense.

  66. joetoronto says: May 8, 2010 6:57 AM

    Deb says:
    May 7, 2010 6:56 PM
    @Joe in Toronto …
    In their press conference, the police said several times that when officers arrived at the hotel, Taylor was very eager for them to know he was not the one who hit her in the face. That means the facial injuries were visible to him and to the cops.
    ========================================
    If that’s the case then it’s inexcusable for LT to go ahead with the service, in my opinion, Deb.
    I think I can speak for the vast majority of middle aged men when I say that upon seeing young women in trouble, our fatherly instincts kick in.
    I have to ask you though, this young woman had turned several tricks before LT, how come she didn’t simply text her uncle BEFORE hooking up with LT, Deb?

  67. Route36West says: May 8, 2010 9:42 AM

    Statature Rape is a Joke. I have friend who started dating this girl when he was 19 and she was 14. They were together when he was 21 and she was 16. Well she got pregnant and here parents who always got along with my friend pressed charges. He was convicted of Statuture Rape and did a year and a day. They stayed together while he was in jail. A few months after he was released she turned 18 and moved in with him. That was 5 years ago and there still together.
    Now I know LT’s case is totally different. She’s a 16 year old prostitute and hes like 50. I think I would take it more seriously if they called it something else. Calling it rape really doesnt fit my defention. I dunno I just dont think what he did even if he did have sex with her is that wrong. What the pimp did in my opinion is alot worse.

  68. realityonetwo says: May 8, 2010 10:03 AM

    Of all the shenanigans committed by these NFL-related morons (and I do mean MORONS), this has to be the worst…

  69. Deb says: May 8, 2010 12:36 PM

    @joetoronto …
    I’m not making a judgment … my feelings about due process apply as much to Taylor as Roethlisberger. As far as I’m concerned he’s innocent until proved guilty–meaning until they present evidence that he actually had some sort of sex with her. And I do have some questions about how all this played out. But my feelings about stupidity apply as much to Taylor as to Roethlisberger, too. Ben was an absolute idiot for putting himself in that situation in the first place. And so was LT.
    It’s New York. All kinds of escort services are available that don’t involve personal delivery by a pimp or a woman who’s clearly been knocked around. Even if he didn’t have the Good Samaritan instinct to question the bruises or want to help the girl, he should have had the self-preservation instinct to keep that kind of obvious trouble out of his life.

  70. GloRob says: May 8, 2010 1:04 PM

    @Deb, you wrote: “I’m not making a judgment…”, and you continued:
    “It’s New York. All kinds of escort services are available that don’t involve personal delivery by a pimp or a woman who’s clearly been knocked around. Even if he didn’t have the Good Samaritan instinct to question the bruises or want to help the girl, he should have had the self-preservation instinct to keep that kind of obvious trouble out of his life”.
    Are you sure you meant it when you said innocent until proven guilty? Your statements are not those of a non-judgmental person. It seems to me that you’ve formed the opinion of guilt! If you don’t believe me, read what you’ve been writing!

  71. joetoronto says: May 8, 2010 1:11 PM

    I understand where your coming from, Deb, LT doesn’t have anywhere near the cash most people think he has though.
    But he is his own worst enemy as to why he doesn’t.

  72. Deb says: May 8, 2010 1:48 PM

    @GloRob …
    Probably should have clarified that I’m not making a judgment on the rape charge. I am assuming he did solicit a prostitute. He’s said in past interviews that he’s solicited prostitutes and the police did find her in his room. That’s … kind of conclusive :-)
    The only defense to what’s commonly called statutory rape is that they didn’t engage in any kind of sex. His attorney said he did not have sex with her. Until there’s evidence that he did, I’ll presume he did not–presumption of innocence. That’s what I meant about withholding judgment.
    And I have other questions about this case. What a mad coincidence that her rescue happened to coincide with the arrest of a famous john? That seems unusually … convenient.

  73. RG Earl says: May 9, 2010 4:55 AM

    I don’t see much of a defense against the charge for soliciting a prostitute.
    He told the police that he paid 300 bucks for her.
    Regarding the “mistake of fact” defense, statutory rape is specifically excluded from that being an acceptable defense.
    Soooo… basically LT is toast
    “In some criminal and civil cases, no mens rea is required for liability. Such cases involve Strict Liability crimes. Statutory Rape is an example of a strict liability crime. It does not matter whether the defendant knew that the victim was too young to have sexual relations or whether the defendant intended to have sex with a minor. In such a case, a mistake of fact is no defense. Strict liability crimes are generally those that endanger the public Welfare, such as toxic waste dumping and the sale of alcohol to minors.”
    http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Mistake+of+Fact

  74. John Lankford says: May 10, 2010 1:56 AM

    That maybe so about Strict liability but these sex laws differ in some states involving age. I heard California’s Supreme Court also allowed Intent as a defense when the defendant proved the victim lied about her age in a recent case.
    I wouldn’t call this particular case similar to toxic waste dumping or the sale of alcohol to minors either. Within another year, this girl would be of the leagal age limit. I don’t give too much weght in the maturation between 16 or 17. This has more to do with politics. In murder, you have to need intent. You are telling me this is more important than murder? Give me a break!
    Furthermore, no one knows anything about the participants except LT. There was nothing keeping this young lady from notifying the authorities once she was in the hotel. She also made the decision to run away and stay with her pimp. It is the way these Legislators manipulate the laws when all is said and done. Criminal Laws should be the same across the Board. The Bottomline is Lawrence Taylor did not intend to rape anybody and if a 16 year old can commit murder than she has the capacity to make a decision to have sex. There is still a debate.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!