Neutral party, checking in.
To Jeff, I don't see any victim-blaming from Al. Or any blaming at all, of either party.
I don't know what happened between the people involved. As best as I can see it, there are 3 possibilities:
1. Parker coerced the girl into an inappropriate sexual relationship.
2. Parker and the girl were in a mutually "agreed" upon sexual relationship, with "agreed" in quotes because a 14/15 year old can't legally consent to that, but it's possible she could have told him "I want to do this."
3. Parker never laid a hand on the girl, but his friendship with her was cause for concern for his work supervisors/her family given the age difference and legal status as a minor.
In any of those cases, the girl is absolutely not to blame. Even if #2 is what transpired, it would be Parker's responsibility to tell her "No" because it's not exactly an archaic law that you do not touch a minor, and he needs to recognize & follow that law even if she felt she was a willing participant.
I don't know what actually happened. I don't know if it was #1 (I really, really hope not, for her sake). I'm not sure if #3 is likely given what he's admitted to, such as violating the stalking order. But I think the difference between this case and the 15 year old from the motel room is that that girl refused to press charges and since she was a runaway, I'm assuming there weren't parents or guardians who could do anything about it. In this case, at least according to the news, the girl's father took out the stalking protective order, so presumably he's pressing charges and is not willing to drop them. Family members have the right to file a stalking protective order, so even if what Al posted that the girl wants the case dropped is true, it's not her decision to make if her family wants to press charges. They have the right to do that just as much as Parker has the right to defend himself in court. Since this hasn't gone to court yet, there isn't justification to rule out possibility #1 any more (or less) than there is to rule out possibility #2 or #3, even though #1 would be the worst of them.
May 8, 2011 5:55 PM
Al M said...
Interesting that in the case of the criminal pimp, the 15 year old gets to decide the outcome, but in the case of Chris Parker, the 15 year old does not get to make the decision.
The real threat to the public runs free while Parker, who was no threat to the public, stays locked up on $750,000 bail.
Great system of (in)justice we have in the land of the free huh?
May 8, 2011 7:35 PM
What does the 'victim' in the Chris Parker case think? See for yourself....