She was 15yo. OK's age of consent is 16yo.

How old did she SAY she was? Not mentioned in the story. If he was told 18, then he might be able to sue for false arrest.

If he was told 18, then he might be able to sue for false arrest.

I am confident he won't be suing her or the PD.

I am confident he won't be suing her or the PD.

Because you know for a fact that she told him she was only 15?

Question. What was his crime? Where's the little girl who was utterly corrupted and had her life forever changed? The laws were written to protect them, right?

Maybe there's a lot missing from the story, these days I've come to expect that, but on the face of it there doesn't seem to be any justification to detain the guy; he could easily claim he was mislead.

Lacking justification, I hope he sues that family and the cops into poverty for false arrest and defamation.

I am confident he won't be suing her or the PD.

I don't see anything in this story to support your confidence.

Because you know for a fact that she told him she was only 15?

It doesn't matter what she told him.

He was soliciting child porn from her, sending nude pictures to a minor.

Why do you care so much about this non-cop kiddie diddler? Don't you have a cop to suck off this morning?

I don't see anything in this story to support your confidence.

Save yourself the keystrokes. Trust me.

He was soliciting child porn from her, sending nude pictures to a minor.

What if she looked 18 and told him she was 18? As far as he's concerned, he's doing nothing illegal. Why is he at fault if she is really 15?

What if she looked 18 and told him she was 18? As far as he's concerned, he's doing nothing illegal. Why is he at fault if she is really 15?

It's clear that you are incapable of making a judgment between right and wrong, so must depend on whether or not it's "legal".

Here's a clue, you and your buddies at the Whiteyberg PD should not send pictures of your uglies nor suggestive notes to any person you don't know personally (and have their explicit permission).

Got it?

It's clear that you are incapable of making a judgment between right and wrong, so must depend on whether or not it's "legal".

I'm only using the same standard as the police. He was arrested for doing something illegal, not doing something wrong.

"Here's a clue, you and your buddies at the Whiteyberg PD should not send pictures of your uglies nor suggestive notes to any person you don't know personally (and have their explicit permission)."

Do you also think people should wait until after they're married to have sex?

I'm only using the same standard as the police.

I knew that, I'm sure others do too.

Your false analogy indicates that you also need to have it explained that you should not marry someone you don't know personally.

Maybe there's a lot missing from the story, these days I've come to expect that, but on the face of it there doesn't seem to be any justification to detain the guy; he could easily claim he was mislead.

Yes -- and because this story is sensationalized WITHOUT much specificity, spinning wheels on this case without facts is futile.

The Media no longer gives a rip about facts. OR truth. Their "FAKE" moniker is deserved. Their role is now about ONLY helping create societal confusion, anarchy, and anger. IOW, they have become satanic. Literally.

What if she looked 18 and told him she was 18?

She's just your average 18yo girl hiding in a tent in Dad's backyard, waiting to be deflowered by an understanding mature gentleman? Is that your story?

Is that your story?

From the information presented in the story above, all we can conclude is that it's a likely case of false arrest at a minimum.

Until we learn more, I'd say that family is in financial if not legal trouble.

From the information presented in the story above, all we can conclude is that it's a likely case of false arrest at a minimum.

Until we learn more, I'd say that family is in financial if not legal trouble.

I say neither.

He's going to jail for a few years and then he'll be on the sex offender registry.

She's just your average 18yo girl hiding in a tent in Dad's backyard, waiting to be deflowered by an understanding mature gentleman? Is that your story?

First, I'm not aware than your "average 18yo girl" sends pictures and videos of sexual acts to strangers. I would call her an "exceptional 18yo girl".

Second, meeting that 18yo girl for sex in a tent, treehouse, or dumpster would all be on my approved list.

Third, what's the worst that can happen? Legally.

That said, if this guy really thought she was 15 and agreed to meet him in a tent in her parent's back yard for sex -- well, I'd be looking for Chris Hansen and his crew.

What, is the kiddie-diddler a cop or some other authority figure? Is that why you're so interested?

Second, meeting that 18yo girl for sex in a tent, treehouse, or dumpster would all be on my approved list.

Meeting a goat for sex in a tent, treehouse, or dumpster would all be on your approved list.

What, is the kiddie-diddler a cop or some other authority figure? Is that why you're so interested?

One of his buddies at the Whiteyberg PD.

What, is the kiddie-diddler a cop or some other authority figure? Is that why you're so interested?

No. You and your ilk already have this guy tried, convicted, and serving 20 to life and you don't even have/need all the details. By positing different scenarios, I see that you don't have a clue.

Here's one for you, hangman. What if she was really 21 but pretending to be 15 on the Internet? The guy arranges a meet. What should happen to him? Better yet, what law has he broken?

You should be happy that your buddy came out of this tent alive.

Ain't my buddy. How old did the girl claim to be in their online chat?

Ain't my buddy.

Must be. Otherwise you would bellow for the harshest punishment.

Question. What was his crime?

Attempt.

What if she was really 21 but pretending to be 15 on the Internet? The guy arranges a meet. What should happen to him? Better yet, what law has he broken?

Attempt.

Better yet, what law has he broken?

My law.

Attempt.

The law is meant to protect minors from predators. Where the minor in that scenario? There isn't one.

But you say "attempt". Fine. Reverse it. What if she was really 15 but pretending to be 21 on the Internet? In this case, he "attempted" to have sex with a 21-year-old. So it's legal by your standards?

The law is meant to protect minors from predators. Where the minor in that scenario? There isn't one.

But you say "attempt". Fine. Reverse it. What if she was really 15 but pretending to be 21 on the Internet? In this case, he "attempted" to have sex with a 21-year-old. So it's legal by your standards?

Not MY standards. It is statute law and varies by jurisdiction.

Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed.

Attempt. In statutes and in cases other than criminal prosecutions an "attempt” ordinarily means an intent combined with an act falling short of the thing intended. It may be described as an endeavor to do an act, carried beyond mere preparation, but short of execution.

Criminal law. An intent to commit a crime coupled with an act taken toward committing the offense. An effort or endeavor to accomplish a crime, amounting to more than mere preparation or planning for it, which, if not prevented, would have resulted in the full consummation of the act attempted, but which, in fact, does not bring to pass the party’s ultimate design. The requisite elements of an "attempt" to commit a crime are: (1) an intent to commit it, (2) an overt act toward its commission, (3) failure of consummation, and (4) the apparent possibility of commission. State v. Stewart, Mo.App., 537 S.W.2d 579, 581.

A person is guilty of an attempt to commit a crime if, acting with the kind of culpability otherwise required for commission of the crime, he: (a) purposely engages in conduct which would constitute the crime if the attendant circumstances were as he believes them to be; or (b) when causing a particular result is an element of the crime, does or omits to do anything with the purpose of causing or with the belief that it will cause such result without further conduct on his part; or (c) purposely does or omits to do anything which, under the circumstances as he believes them to be, is an act or omission constituting a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in his commission of the crime. Model Penal Code, § 5.01.

Oklahoma Statutes

http://law.justia.com/codes/oklahoma/2006/os21.html

§2142. Attempts to commit crimes Punishment.

Every person who attempts to commit any crime, and in such attempt does any act toward the commission of such crime, but fails, or is prevented or intercepted in the perpetration thereof, is punishable, where no provision is made by law for the punishment of such attempt, as follows:

1. If the offense so attempted be punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary for four (4) years or more, or by imprisonment in a county jail, the person guilty of such attempt is punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary, or in a county jail, as the case may be, for a term not exceeding one-half (1/2) the longest term of imprisonment prescribed upon a conviction for the offense so attempted.

2. If the offense so attempted be punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary for any time less than four (4) years, the person guilty of such attempt is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one (1) year.

3. If the offense so attempted be punishable by a fine, the offender convicted of such attempt is punishable by a fine not exceeding one-half (1/2) the largest fine which may be imposed upon a conviction of the offense so attempted.

4. If the offense so attempted be punishable by imprisonment and by a fine, the offender convicted of such attempt may be punished by both imprisonment and fine, not exceeding one-half (1/2) the longest term of imprisonment and the fine not exceeding one-half (1/2) the largest fine which may be imposed upon a conviction for the offense so attempted.

R.L. 1910, § 2803. Amended by Laws 1997, c. 133, § 21, eff. July 1, 1999; Laws 1999, 1st Ex.Sess., c. 5, § 10, eff. July 1, 1999.

NOTE: Laws 1998, 1st Ex.Sess., c. 2, § 23 amended the effective date of Laws 1997, c. 133, § 21 from July 1, 1998, to July 1, 1999.

§2143. Unsuccessful attempt Another crime committed.

The last two sections do not protect a person who in attempting unsuccessfully to commit a crime, accomplishes the commission of another and different crime, whether greater or less in guilt, from suffering the punishment prescribed by law for the crime committed.

R.L.1910, § 2804.

§21-44. Attempt defined.

A person is guilty of an attempt to commit a crime if, acting with the kind of culpability otherwise required for commission of the crime, he:

(a) purposely engages in conduct which would constitute the crime if the attendant circumstances were as he believes them to be; or,

(b) when causing a particular result in an element of the crime, does anything with the purpose of causing or with the belief that it will cause such result, without further conduct on his part.

Added by Laws 1965, c. 220, § 1.

From the Model Penal Code. Specifics of adoption vary by jurisdiction.

http://individual.utoronto.ca/dubber/web/website/inchoate/Model_Penal_Code.htm

Section 5.01. Criminal Attempt.

(1) Definition of Attempt. A person is guilty of an attempt to commit a crime if, acting with the kind of culpability otherwise required for commission of the crime, he:

(a) purposely engages in conduct which would constitute the crime if the attendant circumstances were as he believes them to be;

or

(b) when causing a particular result is an element of the crime, does or omits to do anything with the purpose of causing or with the belief that it will cause such result without further conduct on his part; or

(c) purposely does or omits to do anything which, under the circumstances as he believes them to be, is an act or omission constituting a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in his commission of the crime.

(2) Conduct Which May Be Held Substantial Step Under Subsection (1)(c). Conduct shall not be held to constitute a substantial step under Subsection (1)(c) of this Section unless it is strongly corroborative of the actor's criminal purpose. Without negativing the sufficiency of other conduct, the following, if strongly corroborative of the actor's criminal purpose, shall not be held insufficient as a matter of law:

(a) lying in wait, searching for or following the contemplated victim of the crime;

(b) enticing or seeking to entice the contemplated victim of the crime to go to the place contemplated for its commission;

(c) reconnoitering the place contemplated for the commission of the crime;

(d) unlawful entry of a structure, vehicle or enclosure in which it is contemplated that the crime will be committed;

(e) possession of materials to be employed in the commission of the crime, which are specially designed for such unlawful use or which can serve no lawful purpose of the actor under the circumstances;

(f) possession, collection or fabrication of materials to be employed in the commission of the crime, at or near the place contemplated for its commission, where such possession, collection or fabrication serves no lawful purpose of the actor under the circumstances;

(g) soliciting an innocent agent to engage in conduct constituting an element of the crime.

(3) Conduct Designed to Aid Another in Commission of a Crime. A person who engages in conduct designed to aid another to commit a crime which would establish his complicity under Section 2.06 if the crime were committed by such other person, is guilty of an attempt to commit the crime, although the crime is not committed or attempted by such other person.

(4) Renunciation of Criminal Purpose. When the actor's conduct would otherwise constitute an attempt under Subsection (1)(b) or (1)(c) of this Section, it is an affirmative defense that he abandoned his effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevented its commission, under circumstances manifesting a complete and voluntary renunciation of his criminal purpose. The establishment of such defense does not, however, affect the liability of an accomplice who did not join in such abandonment or prevention.

Within the meaning of this Article, renunciation of criminal purpose is not voluntary if it is motivated, in whole or in part, by circumstances, not present or apparent at the inception of the actor's course of conduct, which increase the probability of detection or apprehension or which make more difficult the accomplishment of the criminal purpose. Renunciation is not complete if it is motivated by a decision to postpone the criminal conduct until a more advantageous time or to transfer the criminal effort to another but similar objective or victim.

For the U.S. military, 10 United States Code § 880, (UCMJ Art. 80) is the applicable Federal law.

http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2015/title-10/subtitle-a/part-ii/chapter-47/subchapter-x/sec.-880/

2015 US Code
Title 10 - Armed Forces (Sections 101 - 18506)
Subtitle A - General Military Law (Sections 101 - 2926)
Part II - Personnel (Sections 501 - 1805)
Chapter 47 - Uniform Code of Military Justice (Sections 801 - 946)
Subchapter X - Punitive Articles (Sections 877 - 934)
Sec. 880 - Art. 80. Attempts

10 U.S.C. § 880 (2015)

§880. Art. 80. Attempts

(a) An act, done with specific intent to commit an offense under this chapter, amounting to more than mere preparation and tending, even though failing, to effect its commission, is an attempt to commit that offense.

(b) Any person subject to this chapter who attempts to commit any offense punishable by this chapter shall be punished as a court-martial may direct, unless otherwise specifically prescribed.

(c) Any person subject to this chapter may be convicted of an attempt to commit an offense although it appears on the trial that the offense was consummated.

(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 65.)

A classic example is Artie Assassin contracts to kill Vinnie Victim. He enters the bedroom where observes Vinnie Victim in bed and fires multiple shots, each directly hitting Vinnie Victim's heart. Artie Assassin is apprehended. The autopsy shows that Vinnie Victim had suffered a heart attack and had died in his sleep an hour before Artie Assassin shot him. Of what crime is Artie Assassin guilty?

The answer is attempted murder. Artie Assassin believed Vinnie Victim was alive and engaged in the conduct which would have been murder had such belief been correct.

My law.

He violated Oklahoma criminal law. See my #34.

So it appears that if she was 15 and claimed to be 21, any attempt to have sex with her would be legal.

The law of attempts would still snag him if he did not reasonably believe her claim to be of legal age. Depending on the appearance of the girl, a jury might find there is no reasonable possibility that he believed she was of legal age. Or a jury could find cause to believe that he knew her claim to be false.

The law of attempts would still snag him if he did not reasonably believe her claim to be of legal age. Depending on the appearance of the girl, a jury might find there is no reasonable possibility that he believed she was of legal age. Or a jury could find cause to believe that he knew her claim to be false.

Looking at the video, he was attacked before he saw the girl. If he saved her text messages where she claimed she was older, he's a free man.