Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T14:17:08.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Two Truths and a Lie: In re John Z. and Other Stories at the Juncture of Teen Sex and the Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Michelle Oberman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Laws governing adolescent sexuality are incoherent and chaotically enforced, and legal scholarship on the subject neither addresses nor remedies adolescents’ vulnerability in sexual encounters. To posit a meaningful relationship between the criminal law and adolescent sexual encounters, one must examine what we know about adolescent sexuality from both the academic literature and the adults who control the criminal justice response to such interactions. This article presents an in-depth study of In re John Z., a 2003 rape prosecution involving two seventeen-year-olds. Using this case, I explore the implications of the prosecution by interviewing a variety of experts and analyzing the contemporary literature on sexual norms among youth. I also relate a series of interviews conducted with the major players in the prosecution. Examining this case from a variety of perspectives permits a deeper understanding of how the law regulates adolescent sexual encounters and why it fails.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 38 , Issue 2 , Spring 2013 , pp. 364 - 402
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

American Bar Association. 2007. Model Rules of Prof'l Conduct R. 1.9.Google Scholar
American Bar Association. 2011. ABA-Approved Law Schools Web Page. http://www.abanet.org/legaled/approvedlawschools/approved.html (accessed September 15, 2011).Google Scholar
Bachman, Ronet, and Paternoster, Raymond. 1993. A Contemporary Look at the Effects of Rape Law Reform: How Far Have We Really Come? Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 84:554–574.Google Scholar
Baker, Katharine K. 1997. Once a Rapist? Motivational Evidence and Relevancy in Rape Law. Harvard Law Review 110:563–624.Google Scholar
Baker, Katharine K. 1999. Sex, Rape, and Shame. Boston University Law Review 79:663–716.Google Scholar
Brown, Jessica Harkins. n.d. Notes from 2010 Criminal Law I Class, Santa Clara University School of Law. March 17, 2010. In author's possession.Google Scholar
Burke, Alafair S. 2007. Insights from the Field of Psychology: Prosecutorial Passion, Cognitive Bias, and Plea Bargaining. Marquette Law Review 91:183–211.Google Scholar
Bryden, David P., and Lengnick, Sonja. 1997. Rape in the Criminal Justice System. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 87:1194–1294.Google Scholar
Casarino, Corrine. 1996. Note: Civil Remedies in Acquaintance Rape Cases. Boston University Public Interest Law Journal 6:185–201.Google Scholar
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2010a. Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance—United States, 2009; Surveillance Summaries. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 59 (SS-5). http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/ss/ss5905.pdf (accessed February 22, 2011).Google Scholar
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2010b. QuickStats: Never-Married Females and Males Aged 15–19 Years Who Have Ever Had Sexual Intercourse, National Survey of Family Growth, United States, 1988–2008. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5926a8.htm?s_cid=mm5926a8_e (accessed February 22, 2011).Google Scholar
Chein, Jason, Albert, Dustin, O'Brien, Lia, Uckert, Kaitlyn, and Steinberg, Laurence. Forthcoming. Peers Increase Adolescent Risk Taking by Enhancing Activity in the Brain's Reward Circuitry. Developmental Science.Google Scholar
CNN.com. 2005. Roberts: My Job Is to Call Balls and Strikes, and Not to Pitch or Bat. http://articles.cnn.com/2005-09-12/politics/roberts.statement_1_judicial-role-judges-judicial-oath?_s=PM:POLITICS (accessed September 15, 2011).Google Scholar
CNN.com. 2009. Sotomayor Criticizes Wording but Defends Point of “Wise Latina.” http://articles.cnn.com/2009-07-15/politics/sotomayor.hearing_1_hispanic-supreme-court-justice-third-female-justice-sonia-sotomayor?_s=PM:POLITICS (accessed April 8, 2011).Google Scholar
Coughlin, Anne. 2009. Interrogation Stories. Virginia Law Review 95:1599–1661.Google Scholar
Davis, Angela J. 2001. The American Prosecutor: Independence, Power, and the Threat of Tyranny. Iowa Law Review 86:393–465.Google Scholar
Davis, Angela J. 2007. Racial Fairness in the Criminal Justice System: The Role of the Prosecutor. Columbia Human Rights Law Review 39:202–32.Google Scholar
Dressler, Joshua. 2010. Cases and Materials on Criminal Law, 5th ed. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.Google Scholar
Dripps, Donald. 2008. After Rape Law: Will the Turn to Consent Normalize the Prosecution of Sexual Assault? Akron Law Review 41:957–80.Google Scholar
England, Paula, Shafer, Emily Fitzgibbons, and Fogarty, Alison C. K. 2008. Hooking Up and Forming Romantic Relationships on Today's College Campuses. In The Gendered Society Reader, 3d ed., ed. Kimmel, Michael and Aronson, Amy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Estrich, Susan. 1987. Real Rape. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Estrich, Susan. 1993–1994. Rape. Yale Law Journal 95:1087–1184.Google Scholar
Fine, Michelle, and McClelland, Sara I. 2006. Sexuality Education and Desire: Still Missing after All These Years. Harvard Educational Review 76:297–338.Google Scholar
Frye, Marilyn. 1983. The Politics of Reality. Freedom, CA: Crossing Press.Google Scholar
Furby, Lita, Weinrott, Mark R., and Blackshaw, Lyn. 1989. Sex Offender Recidivism: A Review. Psychological Bulletin 105:3–30.Google Scholar
Hemingway, Ernest. 1964. A Moveable Feast. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
Jones, Owen. 1999. Sex, Culture, and the Biology of Rape: Toward Explanation and Prevention. California Law Review 87:830–941.Google Scholar
Kahan, Dan M. 2000. Gentle Nudges versus Hard Shoves: Solving the Sticky Norms Problem. University of Chicago Law Review 67:607–45.Google Scholar
Kahan, Dan M. 2010. Culture, Cognition, and Consent: Who Perceives What, and Why, in Acquaintance-Rape Cases. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 158:729–813.Google Scholar
Kahan, Dan M., and Braman, Donald. 2006. Cultural Cognition and Public Policy. Yale Law & Policy Review 24:149–72.Google Scholar
Kahan, Dan M., and Braman, Donald. 2008. The Self-Defensive Cognition of Self-Defense. American Criminal Law Review 45:1–65.Google Scholar
Kahan, Dan M., Hoffman, David A., and Braman, Donald. 2009. Whose Eyes Are You Going to Believe? Scott v. Harris and the Perils of Cognitive Illiberalism. Harvard Law Review 122:837–906.Google Scholar
Katz, Sedelle, and Mazur, Mary Ann. 1979. Understanding the Rape Victim: A Synthesis of Research Findings. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Kleck, Gary, Sever, Brion, Li, Spencer, and Gertz, Marc. 2005. The Missing Link in General Deterrence Research. Criminology 43:623–59.Google Scholar
Koss, Mary P., and Oros, Cheryl J. 1982. Sexual Experiences Survey: A Research Instrument Investigating Sexual Aggression and Victimization. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology 50:455–57.Google Scholar
LaFave, Wayne R. 2010. Criminal Law, Hornbook Series, 5th ed. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.Google Scholar
Levine, Kay L. 2005. The New Prosecution. Wake Forest Law Review 40:1125–1214.Google Scholar
Levine, Kay L. 2006. The Intimacy Discount: Prosecutorial Discretion, Privacy, and Equality in the Statutory Rape Caseload. Emory Law Journal 55:691–748.Google Scholar
Lisak, David, and Miller, Paul M. 2002. Repeat Rape and Multiple Offending Among Undetected Rapists. Violence and Victims 17:73–84.Google Scholar
Lisak, David, and Roth, Susan. 1990. Motives and Psychodynamics of Self-Reported, Unincarcerated Rapists. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 60:268–80.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, Catharine A. 1989. Toward a Feminist Theory of the State. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mahoney, Martha R. 1992. The Import of the Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas Hearings: Exit Power and the Idea of Leaving in Love, Work, and the Confirmation Hearings. Southern California Law Review 65:1283–1319.Google Scholar
Marcus, Paul, and McMahon, Tara L. 1991. Limiting Disclosure of Rape Victims’ Identities. Southern California Law Review 64:1020–55.Google Scholar
Mendes, Silvia M. 2004. Certainty, Severity, and Their Relative Deterrent Effects: Questioning the Implications for the Role of Risk in Criminal Deterrence Policy. Policy Studies Journal 32:59–74.Google Scholar
Moritz College of Law, Ohio State University. Faculty Webpage: Joshua Dressler. http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/faculty/bios.php?ID=19 (accessed September 15, 2011).Google Scholar
Muehlenhard, Charlene L., and Peterson, Zoe D. 2005. Wanting and Not Wanting Sex: The Missing Discourse of Ambivalence. Feminism & Psychology 15:15–20.Google Scholar
Mutcherson, Kimberly M. 2005. Whose Body Is It Anyway? An Updated Model of Healthcare Decision-Making Rights for Adolescents. Cornell Journal of Law & Public Policy 14:251–325.Google Scholar
New York Times. 2006. Free Genarlow Wilson Now. New York Times, December 21. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/21/opinion/21thu4.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all (accessed September 15, 2011).Google Scholar
Nin, Anaïs. 1961. Seduction of the Minotaur. Athens, OH: Swallow Press.Google Scholar
Oberman, Michelle. 1994. Turning Girls into Women: Reevaluating Modern Statutory Rape Law. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 85:15–79.Google Scholar
Oberman, Michelle. 2000. Regulating Consensual Sex with Minors: Defining a Role for Statutory Rape. Buffalo Law Review 48:703–84.Google Scholar
Peterson, James R. 2003. Rape or Regret? A California Case Brings the Issue to a Head. Playboy 50 (5): 50–51.Google Scholar
Pettinato, Tammy R. 2007. Transforming Marriage: The Transformation of Intimacy and the Democratizing Potential of Love. Journal of Law & Family Studies 9:101–27.Google Scholar
Phillis, Nicole. 2011. When Sixteen Ain't So Sweet: Rethinking the Regulation of Adolescent Sexuality. Michigan Journal of Gender & Law 17:271–312.Google Scholar
Pillsbury, Samuel H. 2002. Crimes against the Heart: Recognizing the Wrongs of Forced Sex. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 35:845–959.Google Scholar
Pipher, Mary Bray. 1995. Reviving Ophelia: Saving the Selves of Adolescent Girls. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
Pollack, William S. 2000. Real Boy's Voices. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Rosen, David. 2007. Racism, Justice, and Age of Consent Laws in America. Counterpunch. http://www.counterpunch.org/rosen08142007.html (accessed February 22, 2011).Google Scholar
Schulhofer, Stephen J. 1998. Unwanted Sex: The Culture of Intimidation and the Failure of the Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Secunda, Paul M. 2010. Cultural Cognition at Work. Florida State University Law Review 38:107–48.Google Scholar
Seventeen. 2006. Hookup Survey Results. Seventeen. http://www.seventeen.com/health/tips/hookup-survey-results-hsp-0406 (accessed September 15, 2011).Google Scholar
Sommers, Christina Hoff. 2000. The War Against Boys. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Spohn, Cassia C., and Horney, Julie. 1996. Criminology: The Impact of Rape Law Reform on the Processing of Simple and Aggravated Rape Cases. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 86:861–84.Google Scholar
Steinberg, Laurence. 2008. A Social Neuroscience Perspective on Adolescent Risk-Taking. Developmental Review 28:78–106.Google Scholar
Stuntz, William. 2001. The Pathological Politics of Criminal Law. Michigan Law Review 100:505–600.Google Scholar
Taslitz, Andrew E. 2005. Willfully Blinded: On Date Rape and Self-Deception. Harvard Journal of Law & Gender 28:381–446.Google Scholar
Taslitz, Andrew E. 2007. Forgetting Freud: The Courts’ Fear of the Subconscious in Date Rape (and Other) Cases. Boston University Public Interest Law Journal 16:145–94.Google Scholar
Temkin, Jennifer, and Krahe, Barbara. 2008. Sexual Assault and the Justice Gap: A Question of Attitude. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Teten, Andra, Gordon, C. N. Hall, and Capaldi, Deborah M. 2009. Use of Coercive Sexual Tactics Across 10 Years in At-Risk Young Men: Developmental Patterns and Co-occurring Problematic Dating Behaviors. Archives of Sexual Behavior 30:574–82.Google Scholar
Tolman, Deborah L. 2000. Object Lessons: Romance, Violation, and Female Adolescent Sexual Desire. Journal of Sex Education & Therapy 25:70–79.Google Scholar
Weisberg, Robert J. 2003. Norms and Criminal Law, and the Norms of Criminal Law Scholarship. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 93:467–591.Google Scholar
Wiehe, Vernon R., and Richards, Ann L. 1995. Intimate Betrayal: Understanding and Responding to the Trauma of Acquaintance Rape. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, Tracy. 1990. Violence against Women Pervasive, Panel Told. Los Angeles Times, October 17, B4.Google Scholar

Cases Cited

Commonwealth v. Berkowitz, 415 Pa. Super. 505 (1992).Google Scholar
Humphrey v. Wilson, 282 Ga. 520, 652 S.E.2d 501 (2007).Google Scholar
In re John Z., 29 Cal. 4th 756 (2003).Google Scholar
McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, 403 U.S. 528 (1971).Google Scholar
People v. Dominguez, 39 Cal. 4th 1141 (2006).Google Scholar
People v. Roundtree, 77 Cal. App. 4th 846 (2000).Google Scholar
People v. Vela, 172 Cal. App. 3d 237 (1985).Google Scholar
Rusk v. State, 43 Md. App. 476 (1979); 289 Md. 230 (1981.Google Scholar

Statutes Cited

CALJIC (California Jury Instructions—Criminal)10.65 Belief as to Consent—Forcible Rape. 2004.Google Scholar
Cal. Penal Code § 261.5, et seq. (West 2010).Google Scholar
Cal. Penal Code § 1170.12(c)(2)(A) (2010).Google Scholar
Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 5.502 (2010).Google Scholar
Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 827 (Deering 2011).Google Scholar
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, Pub. L. No. 104–193, 110 Stat. 2105 (1996).Google Scholar
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families Act, 42 U.S.C. § 603 (1996).Google Scholar
18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3124.1 (2010).Google Scholar
18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3107 (2010).Google Scholar