My question involves criminal law for the state of: CA
Man, 30, in hotel with teenage girl--she is even carrying a teddy bear! (I know, ick.) It's obvious they are a couple, not father-daughter. Hotel manager calls man to front desk and says, "We don't want this here, we'll refund you, just take your money and go." They didn't even ask, first, to see the girl's ID. That's how young she looked.
SO, HERE'S MY QUESTION:
Shouldn't the hotel have reported that if they were certain enough to kick the man out? I am disturbed by the fact that they were CONVINCED she was a minor child, without even carding her (which, of course, they should have done before telling them to leave, as hotel could possibly get in trouble for that, right?). YET, they were simply going to give the assumed rapist a heads-up that they were onto him, and send him on his merry way? "Hey, we don't want that here, go molest a child at Motel 6, down the street" ? "Go exploit a kid someone else" ? WTH? 17 and 18 don't look any different, and even 16 may look the same. So, I'm thinking, "If you think someone is 16 or 17, you card them, because they might easily be 18." If a girl looks DEFINITELY ILLEGAL, you probably figure she's well under 18. So--especially with a freaking teddy bear!--it could have gone from statutory rape to child molestation. BUT, THEY DIDN'T REPORT IT?
Can someone explain this mentality to me? Is it not their responsibility to report this? Perhaps they were going to report after the couple left? Maybe to avoid a scene on their premises making them look bad--which I feel is immoral because the girl's safety comes first. How is that keeping the girl safe, meantime? Would they have had sufficient info (such as credit card or DL) for police to find this man in time?
Thanks in advance!
LS
Man, 30, in hotel with teenage girl--she is even carrying a teddy bear! (I know, ick.) It's obvious they are a couple, not father-daughter. Hotel manager calls man to front desk and says, "We don't want this here, we'll refund you, just take your money and go." They didn't even ask, first, to see the girl's ID. That's how young she looked.
SO, HERE'S MY QUESTION:
Shouldn't the hotel have reported that if they were certain enough to kick the man out? I am disturbed by the fact that they were CONVINCED she was a minor child, without even carding her (which, of course, they should have done before telling them to leave, as hotel could possibly get in trouble for that, right?). YET, they were simply going to give the assumed rapist a heads-up that they were onto him, and send him on his merry way? "Hey, we don't want that here, go molest a child at Motel 6, down the street" ? "Go exploit a kid someone else" ? WTH? 17 and 18 don't look any different, and even 16 may look the same. So, I'm thinking, "If you think someone is 16 or 17, you card them, because they might easily be 18." If a girl looks DEFINITELY ILLEGAL, you probably figure she's well under 18. So--especially with a freaking teddy bear!--it could have gone from statutory rape to child molestation. BUT, THEY DIDN'T REPORT IT?
Can someone explain this mentality to me? Is it not their responsibility to report this? Perhaps they were going to report after the couple left? Maybe to avoid a scene on their premises making them look bad--which I feel is immoral because the girl's safety comes first. How is that keeping the girl safe, meantime? Would they have had sufficient info (such as credit card or DL) for police to find this man in time?
Thanks in advance!
LS
Sex Offenses: Does Hotel Staff Have to Report an Adult Trying to Check In With a Minor
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire