While I'm working on my blog about repealing alimony laws, here's another political blog that doesn't involve much research on my part.

A lot of people don't know that you can have certain aspects of your CORI sealed - 10 years later for a misdemeanor and 15 years later for a felony. However, there are certain crimes that cannot be sealed, one of which being rape. On the other hand, crimes on your juvenile record are automatically sealed once you come of age.

Those last two facts having been said,the issue of rape by a minor creates a puzzling scenario.
In Massachusetts, the age of consent is 16 years old and the law revolves around the age of the female involved. The concept of the age of consent rests upon the belief that under the age of 16, an individual cannot actually consent to anything because they are not mentally or emotionally mature enough to be able to fully comprehend the ramifications of their decisions. In a similar vein, the establishment of 18 as the legal age of an adult rests upon the presumption that under the age of 18 an individual is not responsible enough to make their own decisions, nor are they mature enough to measure consequences and long term effects.

Taking all of the above into consideration, suppose Johnny, who is 16, has a one night stand with Susie, who is 15 years old. Johnny is convicted of statutory rape for engaging in intercourse with an individual who is not mature enough to truly consent to a sexual act. However, the argument can be made that Johnny committed said act, regardless of whether or not Susie consented, because, as an individual under the age of 18, he is not mentally or emotionally mature enough to properly weigh the consequences of his actions. Under the law he is a minor but under the law he also committed rape. The same legal conundrum is created in more difficult circumstances - say Johnny had sex with Susie while she was drunk and did not, in fact, consent. It was, indeed, rape but he is, indeed, a minor and therefore, arguably, less responsible for his actions. So we have a situation of conflict of law and thus the question is, to seal or not to seal?

I personally do not believe that there is an easy solution to this situation. Ideally, it would be settled on a case by case basis, but the law doesn't work that way because in order for the law to be fair, there must be some level of uniformity. However, what is fair is not always just and what is just is not always fair. Fortunately, there is some level of discretion involved in the review of petitions to seal, which can be a saving grace for some. For others there are those who invariably draw the hard line that rape is rape, regardless of age. Perhaps some guidelines can be applied to cases across the board to make a determination - but who is to determine which type of rape is more serious a crime? Indeed, it runs the risk of understating the severity of someone's traumatic experience and even runs the risk of allowing a dangerous individual to exist unmonitored in society.

It's a multifaceted argument and the potential solutions are numerous. Unfortunately, the way that these conflicts of law are often sorted out is through a series of cases in which many suffer as collateral.