In case you have been hiding from the news, Florida House Representative Mark Foley resigned Friday after it came to light that, despite being the Co-Chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children and sponsoring multiple bills to protect children from online predators, had sent multiple sexually explicit emails and instant messages to House pages, all under the age of eighteen. Articles available here, here. and here.
Bookmark to:
jake | 02-Oct-06 at 6:05 pm | Permalink
Teenagers are not children. The law says as much in almost all countries where age of consent is typically 14-16. The indidividual states as well have lower ages of consent than the federal govt uses to define a “minor” for internet/telephone contact. Even in DC, age of consent is 16.
In fact Foley did not commit a crime, because the age of consent in the jurisdiction is 16. Federal solicitation charges depend on the laws of the jurisdiction. There’s no indication that he offered to pay for sex. Sexual harassment is also an unlikely charge because the page in question was not in his emply.
Amanda | 03-Oct-06 at 12:08 am | Permalink
You’re right about the age of consent, DC is 16, and even if it’s based on the kid’s home state the age is 17 — not too far off the mark.
But I think that Foley could still get in trouble for sexual harrassment, even tho the page did not work for him. In most other employment locations (factories or offices), employees can still get into trouble for making unwanted advances toward non-employees, if it occurs within the work environment.
For example, an office worker could get sued for sexual harrassment if she made advances on the UPS man, even tho the UPS man is not an employee of the office. It still would create a hostile work environment.
I think where the page might run into trouble is if there is no documented evidence of him asking Foley directly to stop with the emails. It’s usually only considered harrassment if the victim asked the perpetrator to stop, and the perpetrator ignored the request.
jeff | 03-Oct-06 at 8:52 am | Permalink
It was pointed out to me that he probably violated Congressional Email and Internet policy, if nothing else.