Brandon Henderson accused of sexual assualt of a child

[sail420s]

He was 17, and his girlfriend was 15 at the time, the father just found out about it this past summer.

Doesn't Texas have a 3 or 4 year rule that covers these problems? It is ridiculous that one high school kid could have his life ruined on the sex offender list for sex with someone two grades lower in high school.

Something seems fishy here. I believe the law in Texas is one has to be 16 or younger and the other has to be 21 or older...or something like that.

[Cadillac]

Here's the section of the code that I think everyone is talking about:

(e) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(2):

(1) that the actor was the spouse of the child at the time of the offense; or

(2) that:

(A) the actor was not more than three years older than the victim and at the time of the offense:

(i) was not required under Chapter 62, Code of Criminal Procedure, to register for life as a sex offender; or

(ii) was not a person who under Chapter 62, Code of Criminal Procedure, had a reportable conviction or adjudication for an offense under this section; and

(B) the victim:

(i) was a child of 14 years of age or older; and

(ii) was not a person whom the actor was prohibited from marrying or purporting to marry or with whom the actor was prohibited from living under the appearance of being married under Section 25.01.

From first glance it looks like, IF the facts are as previously stated (17 and 15 consensual), AND the girl isn't his sister, he should be OK. I wonder if she's denying consent?

-CoS

[Horseshoe]

Here's hoping this works out as well as possible for all parties concerned.

[mr. pony]

Isn't anyone going to make the obligatory UT criminal comparison?

I never felt the need to point out the criminal transgressions of any team's players so I won't. And I would counsel those that do like to post something every time some UT or A&M kid gets a DUI to not do so in the future.

I say post 'em all. The stuff is definitely newsworthy. Mack Brown gets abuse because he indeed owns a lengthy burnt orange rap sheet.

[SMU 86]

Sometimes I just wish this stuff would not be made public until the person has been tried and found guilty or innocent.

[Stallion]

yeah that's one of the real problems with a free society-an complaintant is required to testify in open court against an accused and an accused has to be found guilty by a jury of his peers before we take away his life or liberty. We really need to look into changing that

[NickSMU17]

Can't believe they taught that at TECH Law...

[SMU 86]

The accusers name is not made public until the trial in these cases and the defendants name should be withheld as well. At least until the trial IMO.

[Stallion]

that's ridiculous

[Dooby]

yeah that's one of the real problems with a free society-an complaintant is required to testify in open court against an accused and an accused has to be found guilty by a jury of his peers before we take away his life or liberty. We really need to look into changing that

I know. Damn liberal hippies.

[SMU 86]

Reason being if the person is found innocent his or her life could still be destroyed by the accusations. Liberal feminists hippies would want the opposite.

[couch 'em]

Reason being if the person is found innocent his or her life could still be destroyed by the accusations.

The problem is the idiots who hear the charges and assume the person is guilty. (another example of how stupid and worthless most people are) That isn't going away. Unless you are advocating secret trials, which surely you are not, it's just the cost of having criminal trials.

It also doesn't help that the accusation gets a big story and a picture in the paper, while if the charges are dismissed or he is found not guilty, it MIGHT be a one line blurb on the back page.

On a side note, if the average person can't handle the concept of "innocent until proven guilty", how can they be trusted with voting? I lose more faith in representative democracy every day.

[SMU 86]

Yup.

[ponyboy]

I think you'd be surprised by how many people get the innocent until proven guilty concept. Like Stallion said, price of a liberal society.

[RGV Pony]

Reason being if the person is found innocent his or her life could still be destroyed by the accusations.

The problem is the idiots who hear the charges and assume the person is guilty. (another example of how stupid and worthless most people are) That isn't going away. Unless you are advocating secret trials, which surely you are not, it's just the cost of having criminal trials.

It also doesn't help that the accusation gets a big story and a picture in the paper, while if the charges are dismissed or he is found not guilty, it MIGHT be a one line blurb on the back page.

On a side note, if the average person can't handle the concept of "innocent until proven guilty", how can they be trusted with voting? I lose more faith in representative democracy every day.

not only the average person in criminal settings but large corporations and the populace in general in civil settings. Companies love to exploit this weakness in society...how many times do you hear "they won the case when the suit was filed" Anyone can sue anyone for anything, and in the days leading up type a press release, send it out to prweb and whomever else will run it, plaster the news everywhere. Then, same thing...trial comes and goes...and not the same amount of pub on the back end.