IT CAN BE fairly easy to get caught up in the frenzy, ignited by the press and fueled by social media, surrounding a sensational story like the same-sex statutory rape case in Florida. There are salacious details, a sort of Romeo and Juliet storyline (or Ronnea and Juliet), accusations of bigotry, and stirrings of religious objection. It makes for good TV.
If you’re not familiar with the facts of the case, you can read more here; essentially, an 18-year-old high school senior is accused of felony sexual abuse for having sex with a 14-year-old female classmate. The young woman, Kaitlyn Hunt, was given until Friday to accept a plea offer from the Indian River County, Florida District Attorney, that would have given no prison time but would label her a sex offender for life. She decided to take her chances with a jury.
I didn’t know what to think of this at first, and prevailing opinion in the blogosphere seemed to side with Hunt and her supporters’ claims that the law is being applied unfairly because the accused is a lesbian. If this was an 18-year-old boy and a 14-year-old girl, it was said, the law would be more likely to look the other way. Furthermore, the younger girl’s parents were supposedly of the belief that Hunt had “turned” their daughter gay, something they did not want.
What bothered me about this case was not the alleged anti-gay mistreatment of a young woman whose only crime was one of being in love with someone four years younger. It was the fact that, perhaps, the law really was being applied fairly, and that Hunt’s supporters were looking for a convenient excuse for what is potentially dangerous and deviant sexual behavior.
Reserving judgment would serve us all well given the remarks the younger girl’s parents made on Friday. They are finally telling their side of the story which, if true, paints a very different picture than Hunt’s family and friends would have us believe. They claim they repeatedly admonished Hunt to end her relationship with their young daughter because it was inappropriate for a woman who is legally an adult to be having sex with a 14-year-old girl. They say they only chose to press charges after Hunt did not respect their wishes.
It is entirely possible the alleged victim’s parents are not being entirely honest, and that they really did abuse the law to prevent their daughter from engaging in a lesbian relationship over their moral / religious objections. On the other hand, it is also possible Hunt was unwilling to exercise some common sense and better judgment in having a relationship with a minor after she became an adult.
There are almost always at least two sides to a story. Often, the media only presents one, because only one point of view is accessible, whether because of legal restrictions or an unwillingness by other interested parties to share their perspective. (Or, in some more sinister cases, there is a deliberate bias or agenda.) Before deciding how we feel about any such story, we should carefully consider all the alternatives and see how things shake out.
At any rate, it’s tragic, as an Indian River County prosecutor suggested, that this couldn’t be resolved in a private manner to spare both of these young women a scenario that has permanently damaged their futures.
