Age of Consent

SC Age of Consent

This is the latest corrected version as of 9-7-2023

TREATISE ON AGE OF CONSENT IN SOUTH CAROLINA by mrcleanisin

When I [or you] find errors in this treatise I will correct them as soon as possible. Sometimes I emphasize words by bold, CAPITALIZATION, and I insert comments using [brackets].

The age of consent in SC at the time of this writing is 14 with a partner who is less than his 18th birthday, and 16 for someone more than their 18th birthday based on "or is older than the victim" language in the statute, and 16 for a person in a position of authority to coerce the victim to submit.

If you are 18 or older as of today's date the age of consent is 16 for sex unless you use the Internet to hookup, then it's 18. If you are, or were, charged with 16-3-655 between 1977 and today, then you will have to read this treatise to determine whether you would be guilty. I was convicted and sentenced to 20 years pursuant to 16-3-655(3)'s "or is older than the victim" clause, offense date September 10-20-1987. I believe my conviction was illegal based on my research presented below. I have for the last 28 years offered a $100 reward for proof of a case like mine where the person was convicted and went to prison for the same offense. The person must not be in a position of authority nor force or coercion used. To collect this reward post the case and/or link in the comments section below. If you can offer proof my research is in error and I was guilty of the offense in 1987, I will pay you $500.

History of Statute 16-3-655 Criminal sexual conduct with a minor.

Changes made to 16-3-655

1977 Act No. 157 Section 5

(1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the 1st degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is less than 11 years of age and the actor is at least 3 years older than the victim.

(2) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the 2nd degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is 14 years of age or less but who is at least 11 years of age and the actor is at least 3 years older than the victim.

(3) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the second degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is more than 14 years of age but who is less than 16 years of age and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit.

1978 Act No. 639 Section 1

1984 Act No. 509

(1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with the victim who is less than eleven years of age.

(2) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the second degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is at least fourteen years of age or less but who is at least eleven years of age.

(3) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the second degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is at least fourteen years of age but who is less than sixteen years of age and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than the victim.

2006 Act No. 346

(1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with the victim who is less than eleven years of age.

(2) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is fourteen years of age or less but who is at least eleven years of age; or

(2) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is at least fourteen years of age but who is less than sixteen years of age and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than the victim. However, a person may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this item if he is eighteen years of age or less when he engages in illicit but consensual sexual conduct with another person who is at least fourteen years of age. In addition, mistake of age may be used as a defense.

2008 Act No. 335

(1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with the victim who is less than eleven years of age.

(2) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is fourteen years of age or less but who is at least eleven years of age; or

HISTORY: 1977 Act No. 157 Section 5; 1978 Act No. 639 Section 1; 1984 Act No. 509; 2005 Act No. 94, Section 1, eff June 1, 2005; 2006 Act No. 342, Section 3, eff July 1, 2006; 2006 Act No. 346, Section 1, eff July 1, 2006; 2008 Act No. 335, Section 18, eff June 16, 2008; 2010 Act No. 289, Section 6, eff June 11, 2010; 2012 Act No. 255, Section 1, eff June 18, 2012.

This whole mess of criminal sexual conduct [csc] started back in 1977 Act No. 157 Section 5 when South Carolina repealed its rape laws and followed the Model Penal Code's recommendations for states to revamp their rape laws and use less offensive language and change the term "rape" to "sexual battery." They enacted three degrees of [rape] csc, 1st 30-year sentence, 2nd 20-year sentence and 3rd 10-year sentence and two degrees of [statutory rape] csc/wm 1st 30 years and csc/wm 2nd 20 years. Accordingly, the repealed Statutory Rape 16-3-650, which meant a person raped the statute because the minor consented but was deemed incapable due to their age, became known as Criminal Sexual Conduct With a Minor [csc/wm] 16-3-655. Looking at the repealed statutory rape statute 16-3-650, it appears the age of consent was 16 for everyone back then, including persons in a position of authority over the victim such as parents, teachers, jailers and such because there were no other statutes making these actors guilty of sexual acts once the minor turns 16 years of age. At that time there was a statute called Committing or attempting lewd act upon child under FOURTEEN 16-15-140 which conflicted with 16-3-650 which set it at SIXTEEN. Also at that time Article 3 Section 33 of the SC Constitution set the age of consent for unmarried women at FOURTEEN years of age, but in State v. Smith, 181 S.C. 485, 487, 188 S.E. 132, 133 (1936) [The victim was 15, don't know how old Smith was or whether he was in a position of authority over the victim, and I need to see how statute 16-3-650 read when Smith committed his crime as it may have read 14 --not 16 for the age of consent.] went before the SC Supreme Court and they ruled that statute [16-3-650] raising the age of consent to 16 did not violate Article 3 Section 33, which was eventually removed by voter referendum in 2008. As to why or how the SC Supremes used this case to say the age of consent is 16 is beyond my speculation. Since the Federal Model Penal Code 213.3 recommended setting a higher age of consent for actors in positions of authority the legislators in 1977 enacted statute 16-3 655(3) which read as follows: "A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the second degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is more than 14 years of age but who is less than 16 years of age and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit." This meant the age of consent would be 16 for persons in a position of authority and 14 for all others and even under 14 for actors not more than 3 years older than the victim because statute 16-3-655(1) and (2) and (3) read as follows:

1977 Act No. 157 Section 5

[This was a so-called Romeo exception for minors close in age...mathematically speaking victims ages would be 0 to 11th birthday, or 0 to 132 months]

[Again, this was a so-called Romeo exception for minors close in age...mathematically speaking victims ages would be 11th to 14th birthday, or 132 months to 168 months. An example would be a 13-year 364-day old female could legally consent with her 16-year 363-day old boyfriend that she's been going with since grade school and can continue to date after turning 14 because subsection (3) presented below concerning victims 14 to 16 only applies to persons in a position of authority and her boyfriend is not in a position of authority over her ---just older than her.]

[Romeo exception is not needed here because this subsection was written only for persons in a position of authority over victims 14 to 16 years of age...mathematically speaking victims ages would be 14th to 16th birthday, or 168 months to 192 months]

So regardless of what the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled in 1936, the legislators in 1977 set the age of consent at 14 for everyone except persons in a position of authority over the victim. Also, the legislators left 16-15-140 lewd act upon child under 14 as is keeping the petting/making-out age at 14 even though they should have put the Romeo exception in it to match the 3 years older than the victim exception in 16-3-655(1)(2). The absurdity here is 16-15-140 [presented below] could charge an over the age of 14 Romeo for making out with an under the age of 14 Juliet, but not for intercourse pursuant to 16-3-655(1)(2). It should be noted that subsections (2) and (3) are both 2nd degree because the legislators assumed a person more than 3 years older than a victim 11 to 14 should receive the same punishment as a person in a position of authority with a victim 14 -16. An example would be a 12-year-old with an 18-year-old is as harmful or sinful to some people as a 15-year-old with a 35-year-old teacher, CSC 2nd degree 20 years in prison.

SECTION 16-15-140.

Committing or attempting lewd act upon child under fourteen.

It is unlawful for [Romeo] a person over the age of fourteen years to willfully and lewdly commit or attempt a lewd or lascivious act upon or with the body, or its parts, of [Juliet] a child under the age of fourteen years, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust or passions or sexual desires of the person or of the child.

Note: in 1977 it said child under 14 --not 16. It has since been raised to 16 in 1996, then later repealed and reborn as csc/wm 3rd degree in 2012.

SECTION 16-15-140. Repealed by 2012 Act No. 255, Section 14, eff June 18, 2012.

Former Section 16-15-140 was entitled "Committing or attempting lewd act upon child under sixteen" and was derived from 1962 Code Section 16-413.1; 1953 (48) 346; 1964 (53) 2192; 1993 Act No. 184, Section 33; 1996 Act No. 433, Section 1, eff June 4, 1996.

Also, if Romeo had sex with Juliet WITHOUT HER CONSENT at any age even if Romeo was under the age of 14, he could be charged with RAPE as provided in 16-3-659.

SECTION 16-3-659. Criminal sexual conduct: males under fourteen not presumed incapable of committing crime of rape.

The common law rule that a boy under fourteen years is conclusively presumed to be incapable of committing the crime of rape shall not be enforced in this State. Provided, that any person under the age of 14 shall be tried as a juvenile for any violations of Sections 16-3-651 to 16-3-659.1.

HISTORY: 1977 Act No. 157 Section 5.

To review: Prior to 1977 statute 16-3-650 set the age of consent at 16, then statute 16-3-655 lowered it to 14, but 16 for someone in a position of authority over the victim, and the Romeo exception lowered it to any age as long as the age difference did not exceed 3 years, or 36 months. However, Romeo could be charged under statute 16-15-140 for making out if he was more than 14 and Juliet was less than 14. And if he committed sexual battery on Juliet he could be charged with rape.

There are other statutes on the books back then {and today} that could send Romeo and even Juliet to jail for various sexual acts, pornography and sexting but unraveling the age of consent for sex is difficult enough.

One year later the legislators revisited 16-3-655 and made a mind-blowing change that to this day [2023] has not been resolved. It is possible that the change made may have been a scrivener's error. Without researching the legislative minutes back then I can only speculate what happened. Regardless, my main purpose through legal research and this treatise is to show errors in the age of consent laws and to give guidance and clarification so the legislators can correct these statutes. The below amendment ruined my life!

1978 Act No. 639 Section 1

“Approved the 2nd day of August 1978: Section 1. Section 5 (3) of Act 157 of 1977 is amended by striking the period at the end and adding: 'or is older than the victim' so that when amended the item shall read: '(3) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the second degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is more than fourteen years of age but who is less than sixteen years of age and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit OR IS OLDER THAN THE VICTIM.'”

[Note: In the year 2023 I have searched the state archives, Attorney General's Opinions and newspapers during those years and have not found any information about raising the age of consent. It is unconscionable that the people were not made aware of changes made by the legislature to the state's age of consent laws. Hopefully there is a hidden journal, or a still alive legislator who can help solve this mystery.]

Either this was a blatant mistake or a scrivener's error! Surely this was not deliberately added to the end of this subsection by a sane, rational, intelligent person. Maybe the conjunction "and" instead of "or" was meant to be there; that is, the person in a position of authority would coerce the victim to submit AND be older than the victim. Rarely if ever, would a person in a position of authority be younger than a victim between the ages of 14 and 16. If we interpret this addition to now mean a person who is NOT in a position of authority over the victim but just simply OLDER than the victim it would cause many absurdities in interpretation. The most obvious absurdity is Romeo could legally have sex with 13-year-old Juliet but once she turns 14, he would be "older than the victim" and subject to 20 years in prison. If this was an attempt to raise the age of consent to 16, they should have removed all the language about persons in a position of authority and wrote subsection (3) just like subsections (1) and (2). And the 2nd degree for victims 14-16 should have changed to 3rd degree as the victims in subsection (3) are older than the victims in subsections (1) and (2). There should have been a separate statute for persons in a position of authority and as to what degree would depend of various factors of age of victim, coercion and authority. As of today 2016, they have done exactly that and is presented below. However, if the person in a position of authority was familial [i.e. stepfather], he would be charged with 16-3-655's "in a position of FAMILIAL, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit."

SECTION 16-3-755. Sexual battery with a student.

(A) For purposes of this section:

(1) "Aggravated coercion" means that the person affiliated with a public or private secondary school in an official capacity threatens to use force or violence of a high and aggravated nature to overcome the student, if the student reasonably believes that the person has the present ability to carry out the threat, or threatens to retaliate in the future by the infliction of physical harm, kidnapping, or extortion, under circumstances of aggravation, against the student.

(2) "Aggravated force" means that the person affiliated with a public or private secondary school in an official capacity uses physical force or physical violence of a high and aggravated nature to overcome the student or includes the threat of the use of a deadly weapon.

(3) "Person affiliated with a public or private secondary school in an official capacity" means an administrator, teacher, substitute teacher, teacher's assistant, student teacher, law enforcement officer, school bus driver, guidance counselor, or coach who is affiliated with a public or private secondary school but is not a student enrolled in the school.

(4) "Secondary school" means either a junior high school or a high school.

(5) "Sexual battery" means sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, or any intrusion, however slight, of any part of a person's body or of any object into the genital or anal openings of another person's body, except when such intrusion is accomplished for medically recognized treatment or diagnostic purposes.

(6) "Student" means a person who is enrolled in a school.

(B) If a person affiliated with a public or private secondary school in an official capacity engages in sexual battery with a student enrolled in the school who is SIXTEEN or SEVENTEEN [16-18] years of age, and aggravated coercion or aggravated force is not used to accomplish the sexual battery, the person affiliated with the public or private secondary school in an official capacity is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned for not more than FIVE years.

(C) If a person affiliated with a public or private secondary school in an official capacity engages in sexual battery with a student enrolled in the school who is EIGHTEEN years of age or older, and aggravated coercion or aggravated force is not used to accomplish the sexual battery, the person affiliated with the public or private secondary school in an official capacity is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than five hundred dollars or imprisoned for THIRTY DAYS, or both.

(D) If a person affiliated with a public or private secondary school in an official capacity has DIRECT SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY over a student enrolled in the school who is EIGHTEEN years of age or older, and the person affiliated with the public or private secondary school in an official capacity engages in sexual battery with the student, and aggravated coercion or aggravated force is not used to accomplish the sexual battery, the person affiliated with the public or private secondary school in an official capacity is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned for not more than FIVE years.

(E) This section does not apply if the person affiliated with a public or private secondary school in an official capacity is lawfully married to the student at the time of the act.

HISTORY: 2010 Act No. 265, Section 1, eff June 24, 2010

I could not resist commenting on the terms aggravated coercion and aggravated force used in the above statute. The elements of the crime require NO aggravated coercion or aggravated force but due to the person's position of authority COERCION is implicit. If a regular person uses force or coercion that would be a 3rd degree csc charge presented below.

SECTION 16-3-654. Criminal sexual conduct in the third degree.

(1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the third degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with the victim and if any one or more of the following circumstances are proven:

(a) The actor uses force or coercion to accomplish the sexual battery in the absence of aggravating circumstances.

(b) The actor knows or has reason to know that the victim is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless and aggravated force or aggravated coercion was not used to accomplish sexual battery.

(2) Criminal sexual conduct in the third degree is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than ten years, according to the discretion of the court. [It should be noted that csc 3rd degree carries 10 years and csc/wm 3rd degree carries 15 years.]

But wait there's more! The legislators realized statute 16-3-655 was still screwed up so again they revisited it 6 years later presented below:

The next amendment removed the 3 years older Romeo exception.

1984 Act No. 509

Section 5 of Act 157 of 1977, as amended by Act 639 of 1978, is further amended to read: Approved the 29th day of June 1984

(1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with the victim who is less than eleven years of age.

To simplify this statute, here's MY proposal:

1. Sex with victims 0-11, 1st degree, 30 years

2. Sex with victims 11-14, 2nd degree, 20 years

3. Sex with victims 14-16, 3rd degree, 10 years [they set it at 2nd degree, 20 years]

They removed the Romeo exception from the statute so now Romeo and Juliet can't have sex until she turns 16 years of age, period. Unless, however, the OR IS OLDER THAN THE VICTIM was not supposed to be in the statute and subsection (3) only applies to persons in a position of authority over the victim? Nonetheless, they can still make-out when Juliet turns 14 pursuant to 16-15-140's petting age set at 14, or they could get married unless one of them is a negro because at that time blacks and whites could not marry each other, see Art 3 Section 33. I know of no-one but myself [and I am not Romeo] ever getting convicted for being "or is older than the victim," and I have been searching for a case like mine since 1988 when I received a 20-year sentence for 2nd degree csc/wm as presented in statute 16-3-655(3). This is 2016, and I have yet to find even one case. So, by my conviction, then yes, they have used the "or is older than the victim" clause at least once. I have found cases where men were charged, but not convicted, either their cases were dismissed or allowed to plead guilty to other statutes, but no one pursuant to 16-3-655's "or is older than the victim" language.

The statute was again revised in 2005 to change the punishment for 1st degree csc/wm. The subsections’ coding has been changed also.

2005 Act No. 94, Section 1, eff June 1, 2005

Section 16-3-655. (A) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree if:

(1) the actor engages in sexual battery with the victim who is less than eleven years of age; or

(2) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is less than sixteen years of age and the actor has previously been convicted of, or pled guilty or nolo contendere to, or adjudicated delinquent for an offense listed in Section 23-3-430(C) or has been ordered to be included in the sex offender registry pursuant to Section 23-3-430(D).

Upon conviction, the actor must be punished by imprisonment for not less than ten years nor more than thirty years, no part of which may be suspended, or probation granted.

There are many offenses that can land a person on the sex registry, from teens sexting to 1st degree rape, and a violation of 16-3-655 [having sex with someone under 16] requires 10 to 30 years in prison. For example, if 18-year-old Romeo and 17-year-old Juliet made a cell phone video of themselves legally having sex and the police discovered it, Romeo could be prosecuted because the age for pornography is 18 and Juliet is only 17 and would land Romeo on the sex registry for life. Sadly, while Romeo was in prison for porn, Juliet found another boyfriend. Romeo, released from prison now in his mid-20s, falls for 15-year 364-day old young women and they have sex. She is less than 16 and he is "older than the victim" so off he goes to prison again this time, 10 to 30 years.

The statute was again revised in 2006 to add the death penalty for a 2nd violation of 1st degree csc/wm and rambles on for eight pages concerning sexual or anal intercourse, mitigating and aggravating circumstances, and how much money the defense attorneys make per hour, not to exceed 25,000. There are no changes made from (A) to (B)(2) of 16-3-655.

2006 Act No. 342, Section 3, eff July 1, 2006:

C) (1) A person convicted of a violation of subsection (A)(1) is guilty ...on and on and on for 8 pages.

And again in 2006 but this time a major change puts Romeo back in the saddle with 14-year-old Juliet for sex but no petting because 16-15-140 is still on the books. Beware Juliet, this exception may only apply to males due to the word "he" used in the statute.

2006 Act No. 346, Section 1, eff July 1, 2006

(B) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the second degree if:

(1) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is fourteen years of age or less but who is at least eleven years of age; or (2) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is at least fourteen years of age but who is less than sixteen years of age and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than the victim. However, a person may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this item if he is eighteen years of age or less when he engages in illicit but consensual sexual conduct with another person who is at least fourteen years of age. In addition, mistake of age may be used as a defense.

This time Romeo has to be less than his 18th birthday [216 months] to have sex with 14-year-old [168 months] Juliet. There's a chance he could score even if Juliet is less than 14 if he believed her to be 14 or older based on the mistake of age defense. The mistake of age defense could possibly be used by a person in a "position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than the victim" who believed the victim was 16 years of age [192 months]. I know this last sentence sounds ridiculous, I'm just "quoting" it verbatim. This change created a firestorm in the media and Attorney General's Opinions about the age of consent and who could use the mistake of age defense. Two years later 16-3-655 was amended to remove the mistake of age defense. They also removed the word illicit.

2008 Act No. 335, Section 18, eff June 16, 2008

(B) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the second degree if:

(1) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is fourteen years of age or less but who is at least eleven years of age; or (2) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is at least fourteen years of age but who is less than sixteen years of age and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than the victim. However, a person may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this item if he is eighteen years of age or less when he engages in consensual sexual conduct with another person who is at least fourteen years of age.

It would have been so much simpler if the wording had said ...and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than 18.

Romeos less than their 18th birthday must be careful to make sure Juliet is at least 14 for sex but not petting because 16-15-140 is still on the books. No mistake of age defense for persons in a position of authority or Romeos older than 18.

Statute 16-3-655 was amended in 2010 to add trafficking in persons as an aggravating circumstance to (D)(2)(a).

2010 Act No. 289, Section 6, eff June 11, 2010

(ix) The crime was committed during the commission of burglary in any degree, kidnapping, or trafficking in persons.

Statute 16-3-655 was amended in 2012 to add 3rd degree csc/wm and repeal 16-15-140 Lewd Act on a Minor.

2012 Act No. 255, Section 1, eff June 18, 2012.

(C) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the third degree if the actor is over fourteen years of age and the actor willfully and lewdly commits or attempts to commit a lewd or lascivious act upon or with the body, or its parts, of a child under sixteen years of age, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of the actor or the child. However, a person may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this subsection if the person is eighteen years of age or less when the person engages in consensual lewd or lascivious conduct with another person who is at least fourteen years of age.

A person convicted of a violation of subsection (C) is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined in the discretion of the court or imprisoned not more than fifteen years, or both.

Finally, 18 years of age or less Romeo can engage in petting again with 14 years of age or older Juliet.

This is the way 16-3-655 is written today July 12, 2016. I did not download the whole statute as it is very long and written to confuse the reader with too much language designed to obfuscate the "or is older than the victim" language that still lingers there. You can find the latest versions of all South Carolina's laws at their website but good luck finding how they were worded in earlier versions. http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t16c003.php

SECTION 16-3-655. Criminal sexual conduct with a minor; aggravating and mitigating circumstances; penalties; repeat offenders.

(A) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the FIRST degree if:

(1) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is less than eleven years of age.

[D)(1) A person convicted of a violation of subsection (A)(1) is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned for a mandatory minimum of twenty-five years]

(2) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is less than sixteen years of age, and the actor has previously been convicted of, pled guilty or nolo contendere to, or adjudicated delinquent for an offense listed in Section 23-3-430(C) or has been ordered to be included in the sex offender registry pursuant to Section 23-3-430(D).

[A person convicted of a violation of subsection (A)(2) is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned for not less than ten years nor more than thirty years, no part of which may be suspended, nor probation granted.]

(B) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the SECOND degree if:

(1) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is fourteen years of age or less but who is at least eleven years of age; or (2) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is at least fourteen years of age but who is less than sixteen years of age and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than the victim. However, a person may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this item if he is eighteen years of age or less when he engages in consensual sexual conduct with another person who is at least fourteen years of age.

[A person convicted of a violation of subsection (B) is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned for not more than twenty years in the discretion of the court.]

Note: both (B)(1) and (B)(2) are considered 2nd degree even though (B)(1)'s victim's age is 11-14 and (B)(2)'s victim's age is 14-16. The reason I stated earlier was because a 12-year-old with an 18-year-old is as offensive to some people as a 15-year-old with a 35-year-old teacher, but now that "or is older than the victim" is a part of the statute this would include someone for simply being "older than the victim" but wait there's more, the Romeo exception would require the actor to be less than 18. An example would be a 14 year 6 month old Juliet could hook up with 17 year old Romeo until he turns 18 a year later when she would only be 15 years 6 months old still less than her 16th birthday; therefore, Romeo could then be charged for being "older than the victim" or they would have to practice abstinence until Juliet turns 16, then they can resume dating if Romeo is not in prison for 20 years for 2nd degree csc/wm.

Everything stated in the above paragraph applies in the subsection below, which is less severe in punishment due to no penetration required ---just petting.

(C) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the THIRD degree if the actor is over fourteen years of age and the actor willfully and lewdly commits or attempts to commit a lewd or lascivious act upon or with the body, or its parts, of a child under sixteen years of age, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of the actor or the child. However, a person may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this subsection if the person is eighteen years of age or less when the person engages in consensual lewd or lascivious conduct with another person who is at least fourteen years of age.

A person convicted of a violation of subsection (C) is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined in the discretion of the court or imprisoned not more than fifteen years, or both.

As of today’s date, July 12, 2016, this is South Carolina's three degrees of rape laws, notice they were enacted in 1977. Note: the 3 degrees of csc do not coincide with the 3 degrees of csc/wm.

SECTION 16-3-652. Criminal sexual conduct in the FIRST degree.

(1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with the victim and if any one or more of the following circumstances are proven:

(a) The actor uses aggravated force to accomplish sexual battery.

(b) The victim submits to sexual battery by the actor under circumstances where the victim is also the victim of forcible confinement, kidnapping, trafficking in persons, robbery, extortion, burglary, housebreaking, or any other similar offense or act.

(c) The actor causes the victim, without the victim's consent, to become mentally incapacitated or physically helpless by administering, distributing, dispensing, delivering, or causing to be administered, distributed, dispensed, or delivered a controlled substance, a controlled substance analogue, or any intoxicating substance.

(2) Criminal sexual conduct in the first degree is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than thirty years, according to the discretion of the court.

HISTORY: 1977 Act No. 157 Section 2; 1998 Act No. 372, Section 4; 2000 Act No. 355, Section 1; 2010 Act No. 289, Section 5, eff June 11, 2010.

SECTION 16-3-653. Criminal sexual conduct in the SECOND degree.

(1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the second degree if the actor uses aggravated coercion to accomplish sexual battery.

(2) Criminal sexual conduct in the second degree is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than twenty years according to the discretion of the court.

HISTORY: 1977 Act No. 157 Section 3.

SECTION 16-3-654. Criminal sexual conduct in the THIRD degree.

(1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the third degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with the victim and if any one or more of the following circumstances are proven:

(a) The actor uses force or coercion to accomplish the sexual battery in the absence of aggravating circumstances.

(2) Criminal sexual conduct in the third degree is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than ten years, according to the discretion of the court.

HISTORY: 1977 Act No. 157 Section 4.

Two Strikes Law Statute 17-25-45

The legislators recognized the "or is older than the victim" absurdity in 16-3-655(3) and exempted anyone convicted from being classified as a "most serious offense."

C. Section 17-25-45(C)(1) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:

(1) 'Most serious offense' means:

16-3-655 Criminal sexual conduct with minors, except where evidence presented at the criminal proceeding and the court, after the conviction, makes a specific finding on the record that the conviction obtained for this offense resulted from consensual sexual conduct where the victim was younger than the actor, as contained in Section 16-3-655(3). [16-3-655(B)(2)]

HISTORY: 1982 Act No. 358, Sections 1, 2; 1986 Act No. 462, Section 37; 1995 Act No. 83, Section 18; 1997 Act No. 113, Section 4; 1997 Act No. 136, Section 4; 1998 Act No. 402, Section 3; 2002 Act No. 176, Sections 1, 2, eff March 5, 2002; 2006 Act No. 342, Section 9, eff July 1, 2006; 2007 Act No. 72, Section 3, eff June 13, 2007; 2010 Act No. 273, Section 20, eff June 2, 2010; 2010 Act No. 289, Section 7, eff June 11, 2010; 2015 Act No. 7 (S.196), Section 6.C, eff April 2, 2015; 2015 Act No. 58 (S.3), Pt II, Section 7, eff June 4, 2015

If the victim is younger than the actor then the actor is older than the victim; therefore, someone convicted for "or is older than the victim" pursuant to 16-3-655(3) is exempt from "most serious offense." If you will notice subsection (3) on the end of the statute was there from 1977 until 2005 when it was changed to (C). Statute 17-25-45 has had the (3) there before 2006, so obviously they are exempting "or is older than the victim" prior to the 2005 Romeo exception. Romeo is less than his 18th birthday and wouldn't get charged anyway, but someone 18 or older would be subject to the "or is older than the victim" absurdity. As I stated earlier, I don't know of anyone in prison for a conviction under 16-3-655's "or is older than the victim" clause anyway.

The statute below exempts persons less than their 18th birthday with 14- to 16-year-old victims and persons less than their 16th birthday with victims of any age.

SECTION 23-3-430. Sex offender registry; convictions and not guilty by reason of insanity findings requiring registration.

(5) criminal sexual conduct with minors, second degree (Section 16-3-655(B)). If evidence is presented at the criminal proceeding and the court makes a specific finding on the record that the conviction obtained for this offense resulted from consensual sexual conduct, as contained in Section 16-3-655(B)(2) provided the offender is eighteen years of age or less, or consensual sexual conduct between persons under sixteen years of age, the convicted person is not an offender and is not required to register pursuant to the provisions of this article;

HISTORY: 1994 Act No. 497, Part II, Section 112A; 1996 Act No. 444, Section 16; 1998 Act No. 384, Section 1; 1999 Act No. 74, Section 1; 2000 Act No. 363, Section 2; 2004 Act No. 208, Section 14; 2005 Act No. 141, Section 2; 2008 Act No. 335, Section 16, eff June 16, 2008; 2010 Act No. 212, Section 3, eff June 7, 2010; 2010 Act No. 289, Section 8, eff June 11, 2010; 2012 Act No. 255, Section 5, eff June 18, 2012; 2015 Act No. 7 (S.196), Section 6.D, eff April 2, 2015.

http://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/06july14smith.pdf

Wednesday, July 20, 2016

PROSECUTION OF CHILD ABUSE IN SOUTH CAROLINA: A MANUAL FOR SOLICITORS AND INVESTIGATORS Sixth Edition December 2012

While every attempt has been made to ensure accuracy, errors are inevitable. Please inform us of errors, large or small, and we will make corrections in subsequent editions of this manual.

Thomas J. Leclair Senior Resource Attorney Children’s Law Center University of South Carolina School of Law 803-777-1979 tomleclair@sc.eduhttp://childlaw.sc.edu/frmPublications/Prosecution%20Manual%202012.pdf

[Note: the underlines and [brackets] below are mine to draw your attention to key words and errors.]

S.C. Code Ann. § 16-3-655 (Supp. 2011). Criminal sexual conduct with minors.

The Sex Offender Accountability and Protection of Minors Act of 2006 (effective July 1, 2006, and known as Jessie’s Law) changed a number of statutes addressing child sex abuse. The criminal sexual conduct with minors statute is one of the statutes substantially changed by Jessie’s Law, but the statute remains the primary charging statute for penetration offenses against children. Force, coercion (except for an offense under subsection (B)(2) when a person is older [or is older than the victim] but meets the conditions of the exception), and consent are irrelevant. Subsection (A)(1) applies to victims aged 0–10 [0-11] years, and subsection (A)(2) applies to victims under 16 years when a defendant has a prior sex offense. Subsection (B)(1) applies to victims aged 11–14 years. Subsection (B)(2) applies to victims aged 14–15 [14-16] years when the person committing the offense is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than the victim with one exception. The exception in Subsection (B)(2) applies when a [male] person who is 18 [less than his 18th birthday] years old or younger has consensual sex with another person who is at least 14 years old. A [male] person meeting the exception may not be charged with criminal sexual conduct with a minor. Jessie’s Law also increased punishments for offenses under subsections (A)(1) and (2) and provides for the death penalty for conviction under (A)(1) in cases when: a defendant has a prior sex offense conviction or adjudication under subsection (A)(1); and the penetration involved in the current and previous offenses was sexual or anal intercourse or intrusion by an object. With respect to the death penalty provision, solicitors should consider the potential impact of Kennedy v. Louisiana, 128 S. Ct. 2641 (2008) (Eighth Amendment prohibits death penalty for child rape).

In the 2011 – 2012 legislative session, the General Assembly in Act 255 repealed S.C. Code § 16-15-140 (lewd act upon a child under sixteen), see 2012 Act 255, section 14, and added criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the third degree to S.C. Code § 16-3-655 as follows:

2012 Act 255, section 1.

The addition of criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the third degree and the repeal of the lewd acts statute eliminate the inconsistency between the prior criminal sexual conduct with a minor statute that had a teenage sex exception and the lewd acts statute that did not have a teenage sex exception. The conduct that was formerly charged under the lewd acts statute is now charged as criminal sexual conduct with a minor statute in the third degree and is subject to a teenage sex exception.

[1. Why didn't this publication address the absurdity of the "or is older than the victim" language in 16-3-655?

2. Applying Second degree punishment with victims 11-14 same as victims 14-16?

3. Romeo could have sex with Juliet when he's 17 years 6 months and she's 14 years 6 months but one year later when he's 18 years 6 months and she's 15 years 6 months he is now "older than the victim" and subject to 20 years in prison?

4. Punishing Romeo for being "older than the victim" the same as a person in a position of authority who coerces the victim to submit?

5. Uses "he" for the actor in 2nd degree and "person" (gender neutral) for the actor in 3rd degree?

http://www.timesanddemocrat.com/articles/2007/03/27/new...74ce9f1113927634.txt

Lawmakers: Age of consent law in S.C. is antiquated

By SEANNA ADCOX, Associated Press Writer Tuesday, March 27, 2007

COLUMBIA – The South Carolina Constitution allows an unmarried 14-year-old woman to legally consent to sex, and some legislators want to do away with what they call an antiquated provision. A proposal set for debate Tuesday in a Senate committee would let voters decide whether the line should be deleted from the state constitution. The meeting adjourned without any vote on the legislation. “It’s a relic of an era in which women married at 14 and weren’t going to college – a preindustrial era when that was the norm,” said the bill’s main sponsor, Sen. Chip Campsen, R-Isle of Palms. “Certainly, we need to get that out of the constitution." The rule applies to women only and contradicts state law which sets the age of consent at 16 in most cases. Campsen and other lawmakers fear defense attorneys could take advantage of the inconsistency. "There’s a concern that until it’s changed, it might possibly inhibit the prosecution of folks for sexual offenses involving young women in that gray area between 14 and 15,” said Sen. Larry Martin, R-Pickens, one of 11 co-sponsors. James Brown Jr., president of the South Carolina Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said a lawyer could argue in court the inconsistency denied a client’s right of due process. But he knew of no case in South Carolina where such a defense was used. "Any time there’s ambiguity about what’s legal and what’s not, it’s hard to say due process was provided to citizens,” Brown said. "Legislators are trying to fix a problem that doesn’t exist," prosecutor Trey Gowdy said. "In 1936, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled the constitutional clause has no bearing on criminal law. That hasn’t been an issue for 71 years,” he said. "The 14-year-old “unmarried woman” provision also may violate the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause," Gowdy said. The Spartanburg-based prosecutor thinks lawmakers have better things to do than concentrate on deleting a line from the state constitution. Instead, he wants them to focus on clarifying state law regarding the age of consent. “They can’t even agree within a four-year age bracket where the age of consent should be,” Gowdy said. “An issue like that ought to reflect public sentiment. What makes no sense is every other year changing it. It creates utter havoc for prosecutors." Last year, South Carolina lawmakers used a bill strengthening penalties against child sex offenders to lower the age of consent for girls to 14 years old in cases where they have consensual sex with men 18 and younger. The amendment also allowed a suspect to argue he was mistaken about his partner’s age. In an opinion last July, Attorney General Henry McMaster said the so-called “Romeo clause” is unconstitutional because it applies only to male defendants. Nationwide, the age of consent for sex varies between 16 and 18 years old – the majority at 16. Georgia and North Carolina also allow consensual sex at 16, and in South Carolina, teens can marry at 16, with their parents’ permission. A bill introduced in the House in January would increase South Carolina’s age of consent to 18 years old, or 17 if the person has graduated from high school. The legislation stemmed from an investigation at Ware Shoals High School, where authorities said two South Carolina National Guardsmen and a former cheerleading coach each had sex with students, but the adults faced no sex charges because the students were at least 16 – old enough to consent. The bill has not made it out of committee. Whether a law sets the age of consent at 16 or 18, the state constitution should be changed because 14-year-olds can’t fully comprehend the real-life consequences of having sex and getting pregnant, said Campsen, the father of a 15-year-old son.

[My interpretation of what they said in the newspaper article above and applying the law: The South Carolina Constitution ...Article 3 Section 33 we need to get that out of the constitution ...Legislators cannot remove it, only the voters at the poll can. The rule applies to women only and contradicts state law which sets the age of consent at 16 ...The "rule" considers 14 year old women more competent to consent than it does 14 year old males just as the 2006 Romeo clause considers women 16 and 17 more responsible for their actions and will prosecute them for having sex with 14 and 15 year old males but will not prosecute 16 and 17 year old males for having sex with 14 and 15 year old females... gray area between 14 and 15 ... should have said 14 and 16... fear defense attorneys could take advantage of the inconsistency ...Defense attorneys do know about this "inconsistency," that's why no one has had ever been prosecuted for having sex with a 14- or 15-year-old unless that person was in a position of authority over the minor... he knew of no case in South Carolina where such a defense was used ...I guess he has not researched many SC cases. I know of many cases where it was used! A better question would be ... do you know of any cases where someone was prosecuted and went to prison for having sex with a 14- or 15-year-old for being "older than the victim"?... 18 and younger ...means less than the males 18th birthday. If an 18-year-old male has sex with a 14- or 15-year-old female, he could be charged with the absurd language in the statute ... "or is older than the victim."...but there are no cases to confirm this has ever happened. Charged yes, but convictions, no... teens can marry at 16 ...age of consent for sex has nothing to do with the age to marry. In 1936, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled the constitutional clause has no bearing on criminal law ...The 1936 case was a statutory rape case involving a different statute called carnal knowledge of a woman child 16-3-650 that was repealed in 1977. It's not clear in the 1936 case as to whether there was coercion or the actor being in a position of authority. Regardless, the new 1977 sex law called criminal sexual conduct with minors 16-3-655 did have the age of consent set at 14, that's why there are no cases on record since 1977 where anyone was convicted for having sex with a 14- or 15-year-old unless the person raped, coerced or was in a position of authority over the minor. “Any time there’s ambiguity about what’s legal and what’s not, it’s hard to say due process was provided to citizens,” Brown said...Does this mean if there are any cases then the person may be innocent? "Romeo clause” is unconstitutional because it applies only to male defendants ...because 16 to 18 year old females are more mature than 16 to 18 year old males and are held accountable for their actions whereby males are not held accountable until they reach their 18th birthday... the real-life consequences of having sex and getting pregnant, said Campsen, the father of a 15-year-old son ...interesting that he's so concerned about his 15 year old son who could get a young girl pregnant. If they want to amend the law so it makes sense, here is my proposal. (2) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is at least fourteen years of age but who is less than eighteen years of age and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit.]

Note: The below discussion was written in 2007 and the bills to amend 16-3-655 did not become law but the one to remove the age of consent from the SC Constitution did.

To make research easy, I am quoting the SC Constitution and SC's statutory rape law. For purposes of this poll, don't consider the SC Constitution's age of consent.

SC's Constitution Art 3, Sec 33:

"SECTION 33. Age of consent. No unmarried woman shall legally consent to sexual intercourse who shall not have attained the age of fourteen years. (1999 Act No. 3, Section 1, eff February 16, 1999)"

SC's statutory rape statute:

"SECTION 16-3-655. Criminal sexual conduct with a minor; aggravating and mitigating circumstances; penalties; repeat offenders.

(A) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the first degree if:

(1) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim [victim 0-11 years of age] who is less than eleven years of age; or

(B) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the second degree if:

(1) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim [victim 11-14 years of age] who is fourteen years of age or less but who is at least eleven years of age; or

(2) the actor engages in sexual battery [intercourse] with a victim [victim 14-16 years of age] who is at least fourteen years of age but who is less than sixteen years of age [less than their 16th birthday] and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than the victim.

[The below is what's known as the Romeo clause. The statute was amended in 2006 to allow Romeo to have sex with Juliet when she "attained the age of fourteen years." However, Romeo must be below the age of 18 else he can be charged for being "or is older than the victim" as stated in the above statute. Therefore, when Romeo attains the ADULT age of 18 and Juliet is now 15, Romeo can go to prison for 20 years for being OLDER than Juliet.]

........................ROMEO CLAUSE

However, a person may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this item if he [Romeo] is eighteen years of age or less [less than his 18th birthday] when he engages in illicit but consensual sexual conduct with another person [Juliet] who is at least fourteen years of age. [Below is the mistake of age clause. Romeo can't use the mistake of age because he knew how old Juliet was. The mistake of age defense might work for an older stranger, however, who could argue he thought Juliet was 16.]

.........................MISTAKE OF AGE

In addition, mistake of age may be used as a defense."

Question:

Which one of the choices below would be legal by the statute? The male and female below are the same people. Their names are Romeo and Juliet. There is a three-year age difference between them. Romeo is older than Juliet. Do not use mistake of age defense in this poll. Assume the victim's age is known to the male. Do not consider the SC Constitution for the purposes of this poll.

Choices:

10 yr old female with 13 yr old male

11 yr old female with 14 yr old male

12 yr old female with 15 yr old male

13 yr old female with 16 yr old male

14 yr old female with 17 yr old male

15 yr old female with 18 yr old male

This statute is so vague I can't answer.

Note: The bills discussed below did not become law, but the reason they are being presented here is to show the absurdity had they passed.

There are currently two bills in the SC Senate to amend the statute being discussed. The link ishttp://www.scstatehouse.net/cgi-bin/query.exe The bill numbers are S 190 and S 127

Session 117 (2007) - S 190

Summary: Sex offender treatment... Campsen, Richardson, Mescher, Knotts and Fair

A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 16-3-655, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH MINORS, TO PROVIDE THAT...

Session 117 (2007) - S 127

Summary: Criminal sexual conduct... General Bill, By Bryant, Ryberg, Vaughn, Mescher and Fair

A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 16-3-655(A)(2) OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH MINORS, TO PROVIDE THAT...

I have not read them carefully enough yet to determined just what they're up to. Appears one wants to raise the age of consent to 18 and the other to 17. Also appears they're trying to redo the confusing "or is older than the victim" language.

Note: On January 31, 2007, they added another bill; posted further down on this thread, look for H 3397

S190

SECTION 1. Section 16-3-655 of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 346 of 2006, is further amended to read:(2) the actor person engages in sexual battery with a victim who is at least fourteen years of age but who is less than sixteen eighteen years of age and the actor person is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than the victim. However, a person may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this item if he is eighteen years of age or less when he engages in illicit but consensual sexual conduct with another person who is at least fourteen years of age. In addition, mistake of age may be used as a defense.

S127

SECTION 2. Section 16-3-655(B)(2) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 346 of 2006, is amended to read: "(2) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is at least fourteen years of age but who is less than sixteen seventeen years of age and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than the victim. However, a person the actor may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this item if he is eighteen years of age or less when he engages in illicit but consensual sexual conduct with another person who is less than seventeen years of age but who is a least fourteen years of age, the actor is no more than two years older than the other person, and the sole basis for charges being filed against the actor under this item was that the actor was older than the person with whom he engaged in sexual conduct. at least fourteen years of age. In addition, mistake of age may be used as a defense."

........................S 190S 0190 General Bill, By Ritchie, Campsen, Richardson, Mescher, Knotts and Fair A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 16-3-655, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH MINORS, TO PROVIDE THAT CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT IN THE FIRST DEGREE OCCURS WHEN COMMITTED AGAINST A CHILD LESS THAN TWELVE, RATHER THAN ELEVEN, YEARS OF AGE, TO ADJUST THE AGE RELATED TO CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT IN THE SECOND DEGREE ACCORDINGLY, TO PROVIDE THAT CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT IN THE SECOND DEGREE WITH A MINOR PERPETRATED BY A PERSON IN A FAMILIAL POSITION OR POSITION OF AUTHORITY OCCURS WHEN THE VICTIM IS EIGHTEEN, RATHER THAN SIXTEEN YEARS OF AGE,.............. 12/13/06 Senate Prefiled12/13/06 Senate Referred to Committee on Judiciary01/09/07 Senate Introduced and read first time SJ-11101/09/07 Senate Referred to Committee on Judiciary SJ-11101/17/07 Senate Referred to Subcommittee: Hawkins (ch), Sheheen, Lourie, Vaughn.

I posted bills S190 and S127 separately so they can be addressed separately. I have also posted the bill description above to show the intent was to remove the "or is older than the victm" clause from the statute without doing it directly. It says, "PERPETRATED BY A PERSON IN A FAMILIAL POSITION OR POSITION OF AUTHORITY" and does not include "or is older than the victim."

Addressing Romeo if S127 becomes law: "consensual sexual conduct with another person who is less than seventeen years of age but who is at least fourteen years of age, the actor is no more than two years older than the other person" Romeo is 3 years older than Juliet.

jail 10 yr old female with 13 yr old male

jail 11 yr old female with 14 yr old male

jail 12 yr old female with 15 yr old male

jail 13 yr old female with 16 yr old male

jail 14 yr old female with 17 yr old male

jail 15 yr old female with 18 yr old male

jail 16 yr old female with 19 yr old male

However, Ralphel [Romeo's younger brother] is 2 years older than Juliet and can legally have sex with Juliet at 14.

jail 10 yr old female with 12 yr old male

jail 11 yr old female with 13 yr old male

jail 12 yr old female with 14 yr old male

jail 13 yr old female with 15 yr old male

ok 14 yr old female with 16 yr old male

ok 15 yr old female with 17 yr old male

ok 16 yr old female with 18 yr old male

Since Romeo will have to break up with Juliet or go to jail, he will have to start dating Juliet's older sister Georgette who is one year older than Juliet. Romeo is 2 years older than Georgette.

jail 10 yr old Georgette with 12 yr old Romeo

jail 11 yr old Georgette with 13 yr old Romeo

jail 12 yr old Georgette with 14 yr old Romeo

jail 13 yr old Georgette with 15 yr old Romeo

ok 14 yr old Georgette with 16 yr old Romeo

ok 15 yr old Georgette with 17 yr old Romeo

ok 16 yr old Georgette with 18 yr old Romeo

The amendment will not prevent Romeo from having sex with a minor; it just means he will have to date someone 2 years younger rather than 3 years younger.

I couldn't resist cutting and pasting the whole article that was in today's State paper about the exact issue being discussed.

Posted on Mon, Jan. 29, 2007, WARE SHOALS SCANDAL

Lawmakers -question age of consent

Ware Shoals case has some wanting to raise legal age to 18

By SEANNA ADCOX

Some South Carolina lawmakers say an investigation at Ware Shoals High School involving students, a cheerleading coach and two National Guardsmen should prompt the Legislature to consider changing the age at which teenagers can legally consent to sex. A S.C. National Guardsman and a former cheerleading coach each had sex with students, according to Greenwood County sheriff’s reports. But the adults do not face sex charges because the students were at least 16 — old enough to consent in South Carolina. “We should certainly change that to 18,” said House Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston. “The fact that a 16-year-old can consent is not something I was aware of until this occurred. I suspect a lot of members of the Legislature and citizens of South Carolina did not know.” Rep. Anne Parks said she thought teens couldn’t legally consent until they turned 18. “I just learned yesterday it was 16. I was very surprised,” the Greenwood Democrat said. “I still consider 16 to be a minor.” Former cheerleading coach Jill Moore, 28, is charged with supplying alcohol and cigarettes to students numerous times and contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Moore, who also was a guidance clerk, resigned earlier this month. Moore was having an affair with Sgt. 1st Class Thomas Fletcher, 29, a recruiter she met at the school, and took two cheerleaders with her to meet him at locations including the Guard armory in Greenwood, according to the reports. Another guardsman, 21-year-old Sgt. Jeremy Pileggi, began a sexual relationship with one of the cheerleaders last year, the reports said. The reports also accuse Moore of having sex with a male student at the school. Moore, a married mother of two, maintains her innocence. Her lawyer, W. Townes Jones, said he believes much of the allegations are “echoed transmission of a rumor and gossip.” Moore’s father, the Rev. Marcus Bishop, has resigned his post from the school board to let the legal process “take its course,” Jones said. Principal Jane Blackwell also is accused of ordering cheerleaders not to talk about the allegations against Moore, according to the sheriff’s reports. She was charged Monday with obstruction and maintains her innocence. Though the guardsmen, who were suspended from duty, face no criminal charges, the National Guard is conducting its own investigation and could charge them with violations under the State Military Code [age 16 also]. If found guilty, punishments could range from confinement to a bad conduct discharge to a fine, the Guard said. Rep. Gloria Haskins, R-Greenville, said lawmakers should revisit the age of consent. "Sometimes it takes an incident like this to bring up a debate,” she said. “Sixteen-year-olds don’t know what they’re doing. ... They don’t know how to fend off someone who would be enticing them to do something they shouldn’t be doing.” Most states set the age of consent for sex between 16 and 18 years old. Georgia and North Carolina also let teens consent at 16, and in South Carolina, teens can marry at 16, with their parents’ permission. “I would be happy if the General Assembly just wouldn’t lower the age of consent,” said Spartanburg prosecutor Trey Gowdy. Last year, South Carolina lawmakers lowered the age of consent to 14 years old in some cases, in an amendment to a bill strengthening penalties against child sex offenders. The so-called “Romeo” clause exempted men 18 and younger who have consensual sex with 14- and 15-year-old girls. Harrell said that needs to be corrected, and a bill already has been introduced in the Senate to do so. Gowdy said lawmakers can respond to the allegations in the Ware Shoals case without raising the age of consent, which might not “work practically in the current culture,” he said. Instead, he suggested lawmakers enhance sentencing against adults who abuse their positions of trust. [Is he trying to draw a distinction between someone in a "position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit" versus someone "or is older than the victim."] “The age of consent is one issue. Entrusting your children to a school system and the military department ... is the most troubling aspect” if these allegations are correct, Gowdy said. .http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/16569492.htm

This is the third bill filed to change the age of consent.....H 3397

H 3397 General Bill, By Scott, Parks and Govan

A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 16-3-655, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR, SO AS TO INCREASE THE AGE OF CONSENT FOR PURPOSES OF CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR IN THE SECOND DEGREE FROM SIXTEEN TO EIGHTEEN OR SEVENTEEN IF HE HAS GRADUATED FROM HIGH SCHOOL.

01/31/07 House Introduced and read first time.

01/31/07 House Referred to Committee on Judiciary--------------------------

H. 3397A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 16-3-655, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR, SO AS TO INCREASE THE AGE OF CONSENT FOR PURPOSES OF CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR IN THE SECOND DEGREE FROM SIXTEEN TO EIGHTEEN OR SEVENTEEN IF HE HAS GRADUATED FROM HIGH SCHOOL.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina: SECTION 1. Section 16-3-655(B)(2) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 346 of 2006, is further amended to read:

"(2) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is at least fourteen years of age but who is less than eighteen years of age, or who is at least seventeen years of age provided he has graduated from high school, and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than the victim. However, a person may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this item if he is eighteen years of age or less when he engages in illicit but consensual sexual conduct with another person who is at least fourteen years of age. In addition, mistake of age may be used as a defense."

SECTION 2. The repeal or amendment by this act of any law, whether temporary or permanent or civil or criminal, does not affect pending actions, rights, duties, or liabilities founded thereon, or alter, discharge, release or extinguish any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred under the repealed or amended law, unless the repealed or amended provision shall so expressly provide. After the effective date of this act, all laws repealed or amended by this act must be taken and treated as remaining in full force and effect for the purpose of sustaining any pending or vested right, civil action, special proceeding, criminal prosecution, or appeal existing as of the effective date of this act, and for the enforcement of rights, duties, penalties, forfeitures, and liabilities as they stood under the repealed or amended laws. SECTION 3. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor.

----XX----

I see what they're trying to do. They want to allow high school graduates, male and female, to have sex at 17, but if you're under 18 and still in school, no.

If H3397 passes, Romeo, who is 3 years older than Juliet, can have sex when she's 14, but cannot when she's 15 and 16, and if she graduates at 17, it's OK, but if she does not graduate, they will have to wait until she's 18. http://www.scstatehouse.net/cgi-bin/query.exe?

Regardless of making changes to 16-3-655, unless 16-15-140 is amended also, Romeo is still in big trouble ----15 years' worth.

SECTION 16-15-140. Committing or attempting lewd act upon child under sixteen.

It is unlawful for a person over the age of fourteen years to willfully and lewdly commit or attempt a lewd or lascivious act upon or with the body, or its parts, of a child under the age of sixteen years, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust or passions or sexual desires of the person or of the child. A person violating the provisions of this section is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined in the discretion of the court or imprisoned not more than fifteen years, or both.

I am including this statute which is sometimes used to charge people who have sex with minors less than 18 years of age. This is what the guardsmen pled guilty to involving the 16-year-old girls.

SECTION 16-17-490. Contributing to delinquency of a minor.

It shall be unlawful for any person over eighteen years of age to knowingly and willfully encourage, aid or cause or to do any act which shall cause or influence a minor:

(1) To violate any law or any municipal ordinance.

(2) To become and be incorrigible or ungovernable or habitually disobedient and beyond the control of his or her parent, guardian, custodian or other lawful authority.

(3) To become and be habitually truant.

(4) To without just cause and without the consent of his or her parent, guardian or other custodian, repeatedly desert his or her home or place of abode.

(5) To engage in any occupation which is in violation of law.

(6) To associate with immoral or vicious persons.

(7) To frequent any place the existence of which is in violation of law; (8) To habitually use obscene or profane language.

(9) To beg or solicit alms in any public places under any pretense.

(10) To so deport himself or herself as to willfully injure or endanger his or her morals or health or the morals or health of others.

Any person violating the provisions of this section shall upon conviction be fined not more than three thousand dollars or imprisoned for not more than three years, or both, in the discretion of the court. This section is intended to be cumulative and shall not be construed so as to defeat prosecutions under any other law which is applicable to unlawful acts embraced herein. The provisions of this section shall not apply to any school board of trustees promulgating rules and regulations as authorized by Section 59-19-90(3) which prescribe standards of conduct and behavior in the public schools of the district. Provided, however, that any such rule or regulation which contravenes any portion of the provisions of this section shall first require the consent of the parent or legal guardian of the minor or minors concerned.

I thought I should add this statute which could apply to someone in a position of authority to coerce persons over the age of 16.

SECTION 16-3-654. Criminal sexual conduct in the third degree.

(1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the third degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with the victim and if any one or more of the following circumstances are proven:

(a) The actor uses force or coercion to accomplish the sexual battery in the absence of aggravating circumstances.

(2) Criminal sexual conduct in the third degree is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than ten years, according to the discretion of the court.

Note: 16-3-654 is the only sexual battery statute that is nonviolent 16-1-60.

Regardless of what changes the legislators make to the statutes that affects the age of consent, they still need to change the South Carolina Constitution's age of consent. It appears that is exactly what they are doing in the bill below, which by the way, only applies to females. To change a state constitution, the proposed amendment must be submitted to the qualified electors at the next general election for representatives; this means the people must decide at the polls what the age of consent is for females in South Carolina. If the people leave it as is, it will remain 14. If the people remove the provision, the age of consent will be whatever the legislators say it is by statute.... probably 18 for males and females.

This next bill appears to decriminalize sex with actors over the age of 18 if the sex is consensual and the victim is at least 14.

H. 4401

A BILL

TO AMEND SECTION 16-3-655, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR OFFENSES, SO AS TO EXPAND THE PURVIEW OF OFFENSES OF CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT IN THE SECOND AND THIRD DEGREES UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN THE ACTOR IS IN A POSITION OF FAMILIAL, CUSTODIAL, OR OFFICIAL AUTHORITY TO COERCE THE VICTIM TO CONSENT AND TO PROVIDE AN EXCEPTION WHEN THE ACTOR ENGAGES IN A NONCOERCED CONSENSUAL ENCOUNTER WITH ANOTHER PERSON WHO IS OVER THE AGE OF FOURTEEN.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:

SECTION 1. Section 16-3-655(B) and (C) of the 1976 Code, as last amended by Act 255 of 2012, is further amended to read:

(B) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the second degree if:

(1) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is fourteen years of age or less but who is at least eleven years of age; or

(2) the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is at least fourteen years of age but who is less than sixteen years of age and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than the victim. However, a person may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this item if he is eighteen years of age or less when he engages in consensual sexual conduct with another person who is at least fourteen years of age; or

(3) the actor is over eighteen years of age and engages in a nonconsensual sexual battery with a victim who is under the age of eighteen, and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to consent. However, a person may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this item if the actor engages in a noncoerced consensual encounter with another person who is over the age of fourteen.

(1) the actor is over fourteen years of age, and the actor wilfully and lewdly commits or attempts to commit a lewd or lascivious act upon or with the body, or its parts, of a child under sixteen years of age, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of the actor or the child. However, a person may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this subsection if the person is eighteen years of age or less when the person engages in consensual lewd or lascivious conduct with another person who is at least fourteen years of age; or

(2) the actor is over eighteen years of age and the actor wilfully and lewdly commits or attempts to commit a nonconsensual lewd or lascivious act upon or with the body, or its parts, of a child under the age of eighteen, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of the actor or the child, and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to consent. However, a person may not be convicted of a violation of the provisions of this item if the actor engages in a noncoerced consensual encounter with another person who is over the age of fourteen.

Next is the bill to amend the SC Constitution

South Carolina General Assembly 117th Session, 2007-2008

Download This Bill in Microsoft Word format Indicates Matter Stricken

Indicates New Matter S. 389 STATUS INFORMATION Joint Resolution

Sponsors: Senators Campsen, Bryant, Vaughn, Grooms, Martin, Verdin, Scott, Richardson, Fair, Ryberg, Thomas and Gregory

Document Path: l:\s-jud\bills\campsen\jud0052.gec.doc Introduced in the Senate on January 31, 2007

Currently residing in the Senate Committee on Judiciary Summary: Age of consent HISTORY OF LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS Date Body Action Description with journal page number-------------------------------------------------------------------------------1/31/2007 Senate Introduced and read first time SJ-211/31/2007 Senate Referred to Committee on Judiciary SJ-212/12/2007 Senate Referred to Subcommittee: Martin (ch), Malloy, Campsen, Williams View the latest legislative information at the LPITS web site VERSIONS OF THIS BILL 1/31/2007(Text matches printed bills. Document has been reformatted to meet World Wide Web specifications.)

A JOINT RESOLUTION PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 33, ARTICLE III OF THE CONSTITUTION OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1895, RELATING TO AGE OF CONSENT, SO AS TO DELETE THE PROVISION THAT NO UNMARRIED WOMAN SHALL LEGALLY CONSENT TO SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WHO SHALL NOT HAVE ATTAINED THE AGE OF FOURTEEN YEARS.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina: SECTION 1. It is proposed that Section 33, Article III of the Constitution of this State be amended to read: "Section 33. No unmarried woman shall legally consent to sexual intercourse who shall not have attained the age of fourteen years. (Reserved)"

SECTION 2. The proposed amendment in SECTION 1 must be submitted to the qualified electors at the next general election for representatives. Ballots must be provided at the various voting precincts with the following words printed or written on the ballot: "Must Section 33, Article III of the Constitution of this State be amended so as to delete the provision that no unmarried woman shall legally consent to sexual intercourse who shall not have attained the age of fourteen years?

[Yes]

[No]

Those voting in favor of the question shall deposit a ballot with a check or cross mark in the square after the word 'Yes', and those voting against the question shall deposit a ballot with a check or cross mark in the square after the word 'No'."

----XX----

Let's consider what it means if the legislators are attempting to remove that part of the state constitution that defines the age of consent.

1. Until it is removed is the age of consent 14 for females?

2. Even though the current age of consent in the state constitution is 14 for females, can it be raised to 16 or higher by statute?

3. If the age of consent for females could not be raised unless they removed the state constitution's age of consent first, then does this mean the age of consent has always been 14?

4. If the age of consent provided in the state constitution can be superseded by a state statute, then why have the legislators proposed this bill to remove the age of consent from the state constitution?

5. If the age of consent has always been 14 for females and someone was convicted under the state statute that purports to have raised it to 16, was that person illegally convicted?

ARTICLE 19

Trafficking in Persons

SECTION 16-3-2010. Definitions.

As used in this article:

(1) "Business" means a corporation, partnership, proprietorship, firm, enterprise, franchise, organization, or self-employed individual.

(2) "Charitable organization" means a charitable organization pursuant to Section 33-56-20.

(3) "Debt bondage" means the status or condition of a debtor arising from a pledge by the debtor of his personal services or those of a person under his control as a security for debt, if the value of those services as reasonably assessed is not applied toward the liquidation of the debt or the length and nature of those services are not respectively limited and defined or if the principal amount of the debt does not reasonably reflect the value of the items or services for which the debt was incurred.

(4) "Forced labor" means any type of labor or services performed or provided by a person rendered through another person's coercion of the person providing the labor or services.

This definition does not include labor or services performed or provided by a person in the custody of the Department of Corrections or a local jail, detention center, or correctional facility.

(5) "Involuntary servitude" means a condition of servitude induced through coercion.

(6) "Person" means an individual, corporation, partnership, charitable organization, or another legal entity.

(7) "Sex trafficking" means the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for one of the following when it is induced by force, fraud, or coercion or the person performing the act is under the age of eighteen years and anything of value is given, promised to, or received, directly or indirectly, by any person:

(a) criminal sexual conduct pursuant to Section 16-3-651;

(b) criminal sexual conduct in the first degree pursuant to Section 16-3-652;

(d) criminal sexual conduct in the third degree pursuant to Section 16-3-654;

(e) criminal sexual conduct with a minor pursuant to Section 16-3-655;

(f) engaging a child for sexual performance pursuant to Section 16-3-810;

(g) producing, directing, or promoting sexual performance by a child pursuant to Section 16-3-820;

(h) sexual battery pursuant to Section 16-3-651;

(i) sexual conduct pursuant to Section 16-3-800; or

(j) sexual performance pursuant to Section 16-3-800.

(8) "Services" means an act committed at the behest of, under the supervision of, or for the benefit of another person.

(9) "Victim of trafficking in persons" or "victim" means a person who has been subjected to the crime of trafficking in persons.

HISTORY: 2012 Act No. 258, Section 1, eff December 15, 2012; 2015 Act No. 7 (S.196), Section 3, eff April 2, 2015; 2018 Act No. 238 (H.3329), Section 1, eff May 17, 2018.

Effect of Amendment

2015 Act No. 7, Section 3, in (7), substituted "person performing the act" for "person forced to perform the act"; deleted former (7)(g), relating to Section 16-3-800; and redesignated the remaining paragraphs accordingly.

2018 Act No. 238, Section 1, in (7), substituted "by any person" for "by another person" at the end; and deleted (9), which related to the definition of "trafficking in persons", and redesignated (10) as (9).

SECTION 16-3-2020. Trafficking in persons; penalties; minor victims; defenses.

(A) A person is guilty of trafficking in persons if he:

(1) recruits, entices, solicits, isolates, harbors, transports, provides, or obtains, or so attempts, a victim, knowing that the victim will be subjected to, or for the purposes of, sex trafficking, forced labor or services, involuntary servitude or debt bondage through any means or who benefits, financially or by receiving anything of value, from participation in a venture which has engaged in an act described in this subsection, is guilty of trafficking in persons;

(2) aids, abets, or conspires with another person to violate the criminal provisions of this section; or

(3) knowingly gives, agrees to give, or offers to give anything of value so that any person may engage in commercial sexual activity with another person when he knows that the other person is a victim of trafficking in persons.

(B) A person convicted of a violation of subsection (A) is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction:

(1) for a first offense, must be imprisoned not more than fifteen years;

(2) for a second offense, must be imprisoned not more than thirty years;

(3) for a third or subsequent offense, must be imprisoned not more than forty-five years.

(C) If the victim of an offense contained in this section is under the age of eighteen, the person convicted under this section is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned not more than thirty years. For a second or subsequent offense, if the victim is under the age of eighteen, the person convicted under this section is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned not more than forty-five years.

(D) A business owner who uses his business in a way that participates in a violation of this article, upon conviction, must be imprisoned for not more than ten years in addition to the penalties provided in this section for each violation.

(E) A plea of guilty or the legal equivalent entered pursuant to a provision of this article by an offender entitles the victim of trafficking in persons to all benefits, rights, and compensation granted pursuant to Section 16-3-1110.

(F) In a prosecution of a person who is a victim of trafficking in persons, it is an affirmative defense that he was under duress or coerced into committing the offenses for which he is subject to prosecution, if the offenses were committed as a direct result of, or incidental or related to, trafficking. A victim of trafficking in persons convicted of a violation of this article or prostitution may motion the court to vacate the conviction and expunge the record of the conviction. The court may grant the motion on a finding that the person's participation in the offense was a direct result of being a victim.

(G) If the victim was a minor at the time of the offense, the victim of trafficking in persons may not be prosecuted in court pursuant to this article or a prostitution offense, if it is determined after investigation that the victim committed the offense as a direct result of, or incidental or related to, trafficking.

(H) The human trafficking specialized service providers must be certified by the Attorney General through criteria established by the Human Trafficking Task Force. The Attorney General, through the task force, must also establish necessary criteria for Human Trafficking Acute Crisis Care and Resource Centers to be established in the communities of South Carolina. Once the service providers are certified and the assessment centers are open, the information must be disseminated to the family court bench and bar as well as law enforcement to be utilized in carrying out the mandates of this statute. The court must determine the most appropriate way to provide specialized services to the juveniles to address the concerns relating to human trafficking.

(I) Evidence of the following facts or conditions do not constitute a defense in a prosecution for a violation of this article, nor does the evidence preclude a finding of a violation:

(1) the victim's sexual history or history of commercial sexual activity, the specific instances of the victim's sexual conduct, opinion evidence of the victim's sexual conduct, and reputation evidence of the victim's sexual conduct;

(2) the victim's connection by blood or marriage to a defendant in the case or to anyone involved in the victim's trafficking;

(3) the implied or express consent of a victim to acts which violate the provisions of this section do not constitute a defense to violations of this section;

(4) age of consent to sex, legal age of marriage, or other discretionary age; and

(5) mistake as to the victim's age, even if the mistake is reasonable.

(J) A person who violates the provisions of this section may be prosecuted by the State Grand Jury, pursuant to Section 14-7-1600, when a victim is trafficked in more than one county or a trafficker commits the offense of trafficking in persons in more than one county.

HISTORY: 2012 Act No. 258, Section 1, eff December 15, 2012; 2015 Act No. 74 (S.183), Section 1, eff June 8, 2015; 2018 Act No. 238 (H.3329), Section 2, eff May 17, 2018.

Effect of Amendment

2015 Act No. 74, Section 1, in (E), added a comma following "and"; in (G), added the second sentence; and in (J), added the last three sentences.

2018 Act No. 238, Section 2, rewrote the section, restructuring the offense of trafficking in persons, providing a penalty when the victim is a minor under the age of eighteen, and ensuring the protection of minor victims.

SECTION 16-3-2030. Criminal liability of principal owners of business; loss of profits and government contracts; penalties.

(A) The principal owners of a business, a business entity, including a corporation, partnership, charitable organization, or another legal entity, that knowingly aids or participates in an offense provided in this article is criminally liable for the offense and will be subject to a fine or loss of business license in the State, or both. In addition, the court may consider disgorgement of profit from activity in violation of this article and disbarment from state and local government contracts.

(B) If the principal owners of a business entity are convicted of violating a section of this article, the court or Secretary of State, when appropriate, may:

(1) order its dissolution or reorganization;

(2) order the suspension or revocation of any license, permit, or prior approval granted to it by a state or local government agency; or

(3) order the surrender of its charter if it is organized under state law or the revocation of its certificate to conduct business in the State if it is not organized under state law.

HISTORY: 2012 Act No. 258, Section 1, eff December 15, 2012; 2015 Act No. 74 (S.183), Section 2, eff June 8, 2015.

Effect of Amendment

2015 Act No. 74, Section 2, in (A), added the last sentence.

SECTION 16-3-2040. Restitution for victims of trafficking.

(A) An offender convicted of a violation of this article must be ordered to pay mandatory restitution to the victim as provided in this section.

(B) If the victim of trafficking dies as a result of being trafficked, a surviving spouse of the victim is eligible for restitution. If no surviving spouse exists, restitution must be paid to the victim's issue or their descendants per stirpes. If no surviving spouse or issue or descendants exist, restitution must be paid to the victim's estate. A person named in this subsection may not receive funds from restitution if he benefited or engaged in conduct described in this article.

(C) If a person is unable to pay restitution at the time of sentencing, or at any other time, the court may set restitution pursuant to Section 16-3-1270.

(D) Restitution for this section, pursuant to Section 16-3-1270, means payment for all injuries, specific losses, and expenses, including, but not limited to, attorney's fees, sustained by a crime victim resulting from an offender's criminal conduct pursuant to Section 16-3-1110(12)(a). In addition, the court may order an amount representing the value of the victim's labor or services.

(E) Notwithstanding another provision of law, the applicable statute of limitations for a victim of trafficking in persons is pursuant to Section 16-3-1110(12)(a).

(F) Restitution must be paid to the victim promptly upon the conviction of the defendant. The return of the victim to his home country or other absence of the victim from the jurisdiction does not prevent the victim from receiving restitution.

HISTORY: 2012 Act No. 258, Section 1, eff December 15, 2012; 2015 Act No. 74 (S.183), Section 3, eff June 8, 2015.

Effect of Amendment

2015 Act No. 74, Section 3, in (D), inserted ", including, but not limited to, attorney's fees,", and added the last sentence.

SECTION 16-3-2050. Interagency task force established to develop and implement State Plan for Prevention of Trafficking in Persons; members; responsibilities; grants.

(A) The Attorney General shall establish an interagency task force to develop and implement a State Plan for the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons. The task force shall meet at least quarterly and should include all aspects of trafficking in persons, including sex trafficking and labor trafficking of both United States citizens and foreign nationals, as defined in Section 16-3-2010. The Attorney General also shall collect and publish relevant data to this section on their website.

(B) The task force shall consist of, at a minimum, representatives from:

(1) the Office of the Attorney General, who must be chair;

(2) the South Carolina Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation;

(3) the South Carolina Police Chiefs Association;

(4) the South Carolina Sheriffs' Association;

(5) the State Law Enforcement Division;

(6) the Department of Health and Environmental Control Board;

(7) the Office of the Attorney General, South Carolina Crime Victim Services Division;

(8) the South Carolina Commission on Prosecution Coordination;

(9) the Department of Social Services;

(10) a representative from the Office of the Governor;

(11) a representative from the Department of Employment and Workforce; and

(12) two persons appointed by the Attorney General from nongovernmental organizations, especially those specializing in trafficking in persons, those representing diverse communities disproportionately affected by trafficking, agencies devoted to child services and runaway services, and academic researchers dedicated to the subject of trafficking in persons.

(C) The Attorney General shall invite representatives of the United States Department of Labor, the United States Attorneys' offices, and federal law enforcement agencies' offices within the State, including the Federal Bureau of Investigations and the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement office, to be members of the task force.

(D) The task force shall carry out the following activities either directly or through one or more of its constituent agencies:

(1) develop the state plan within eighteen months of the effective date of this act;

(2) coordinate the implementation of the state plan; and

(3) starting one year after the formation of the task force, submit an annual report of its findings and recommendations to the Governor, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the President of the Senate on or before December thirty-first of each calendar year.

(E) The task force shall consider carrying out the following activities either directly or through one or more of its constituent agencies:

(1) coordinate the collection and sharing of trafficking data among government agencies, which data collection must respect the privacy of victims of trafficking in persons;

(2) coordinate the sharing of information between agencies for the purposes of detecting criminal groups engaged in trafficking in persons;

(3) explore the establishment of state policies for time limits for the issuance of Law Enforcement Agency (LEA) endorsements as described in C.F.R. Chapter 8, Section 214.11(f)(1);

(4) establish policies to enable state government to work with nongovernmental organizations and other elements of civil society to prevent trafficking in persons and provide assistance to United States citizens and foreign national victims;

(5) review the existing services and facilities to meet trafficking victims' needs and recommend a system to coordinate services including, but not limited to, health services, including mental health, housing, education and job training, English as a second language classes, interpreting services, legal and immigration services, and victim compensation;

(6) evaluate various approaches used by state and local governments to increase public awareness of the trafficking in persons, including United States citizens and foreign national victims of trafficking in persons;

(7) mandatory training for law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, and other relevant officials in addressing trafficking in persons;

(8) collect and periodically publish statistical data on trafficking, that must be posted on the Attorney General's website;

(9) prepare public awareness programs designed to educate potential victims of trafficking in persons and their families on the risks of victimization. These public awareness programs must include, but are not limited to:

(a) information about the risks of becoming a victim, including information about common recruitment techniques, use of debt bondage, and other coercive tactics, risk of maltreatment, rape, exposure to HIV or AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, and psychological harm related to victimization in trafficking cases;

(b) information about the risks of engaging in commercial sex and possible punishment;

(d) methods for reporting suspected recruitment activities; and

(e) information on hotlines and available victims' services;

(10) preparation and dissemination of awareness materials to the general public to educate the public on the extent of trafficking in persons, both United States citizens and foreign nationals, within the United States and to discourage the demand that fosters the exploitation of persons that leads to trafficking in persons.

(a) The general public awareness materials may include information on the impact of trafficking on individual victims, whether United States citizens or foreign nationals, aggregate information on trafficking in persons worldwide and domestically, and warnings of the criminal consequences of engaging in trafficking in persons. These materials may include pamphlets, brochures, posters, advertisements in mass media, and other appropriate media. All materials must be designed to communicate to the target population.

(b) Materials described in this section may include information on the impact of trafficking in persons on individual victims. However, information on the experiences of individual victims must preserve the privacy of the victim and the victim's family.

(F) To the extent that funds are appropriated, the task force may make grants to or contract with a state agency, local government, or private victim's service organization to develop or expand service programs for victims. A recipient of a grant or contract shall report annually to the task force the number and demographic information of all victims receiving services pursuant to the grant or contract.

HISTORY: 2012 Act No. 258, Section 1, eff December 15, 2012; 2015 Act No. 7 (S.196), Section 5, eff April 2, 2015; 2015 Act No. 74 (S.183), Section 4, eff June 8, 2015.

Code Commissioner's Note

Pursuant to 2017 Act No. 96, Section 14, the reference to "State Office of Victim Assistance" in (B)(7) was changed to "Office of the Attorney General, South Carolina Crime Victim Services Division".

Effect of Amendment

2015 Act No. 7, Section 5, in (B)(2), inserted "Department of"; deleted former (B)(7), relating to the U.S. Dept. of Labor; and redesignated the remaining paragraphs accordingly; and in (C), inserted "Department of Labor, the United States" and inserted a comma following "Attorneys' offices".

2015 Act No. 74, Section 4, added (F).

SECTION 16-3-2060. Civil action for victim of trafficking; statute of limitations.

(A) A person who is a victim of trafficking in persons may bring a civil action in the court of common pleas. The court may award actual damages, compensatory damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, and other appropriate relief. A prevailing plaintiff also must be awarded attorney's fees and costs. Treble damages must be awarded on proof of actual damages when the defendant's acts were wilful and malicious.

(B) Pursuant to Section 16-3-1110, the applicable statute of limitations for a crime victim who has a cause of action against an incarcerated offender is tolled and does not expire until three years after the offender's sentence is completed, including probation and parole, or three years after release from commitment pursuant to Chapter 48, Title 44, whichever is later. However, this provision does not shorten any other tolling period of the statute of limitations which may exist for the victim.

(C) The statute of limitations for the filing of a civil suit does not begin to run until a minor victim has reached the age of majority.

(D) If a victim entitled to sue is under a disability at the time the cause of action accrues, so that it is impossible or impractical for him to bring an action, then the time of the disability is not part of the time limited for the commencement of the action. Disability includes, but is not limited to, insanity, imprisonment, or other incapacity or incompetence.

(E) The running of the statute of limitations may be suspended when a victim could not have reasonably discovered the cause of action due to circumstances resulting from the trafficking situation, such as psychological trauma, cultural and linguistic isolation, and the inability to access services.

(F) A defendant is estopped to assert a defense of the statute of limitations when the expiration of the statute is due to conduct by the defendant inducing the victim to delay the filing of the action or placing the victim under duress.

HISTORY: 2012 Act No. 258, Section 1, eff December 15, 2012.

SECTION 16-3-2070. Compensation for victims of trafficking; identity of victim and victim's family confidential.

(A) Victims of trafficking in persons pursuant to this article are considered victims for purposes of the Victims' Bill of Rights and are entitled to all appropriate forms of compensation available pursuant to the South Carolina Victim Compensation Fund in accordance with the provisions of Article 13, Chapter 3, Title 16. Victims of trafficking in persons pursuant to this article also are entitled to the rights provided in Article 15, Chapter 3, Title 16.

(B) In addition to the provisions of subsection (A), in a prosecution for violations of the criminal provisions of this article, the identity of the victim and the victim's family must be kept confidential by ensuring that names and identifying information of the victim and victim's family are not released to the public, including by the defendant.

(C) Pursuant to Section 16-3-1240, it is unlawful, except for purposes directly connected with the administration of the victim compensation fund, for any person to solicit, disclose, receive, or make use of or authorize, knowingly permit, participate in or acquiesce in the use of any list, or names of, or information concerning persons applying for or receiving awards without the written consent of the applicant or recipient. The records, papers, files, and communications of the board, its panel and the director and his staff must be regarded as confidential information and privileged and not subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act as contained in Chapter 4, Title 30.

HISTORY: 2012 Act No. 258, Section 1, eff December 15, 2012.

Code Commissioner's Note

Pursuant to 2017 Act No. 96, Section 14, the reference to "State Crime Victim's Compensation Fund" in (A) was changed to "South Carolina Victim Compensation Fund", and the reference to "victim's compensation fund" in (C) was changed to "victim compensation fund".

SECTION 16-3-2080. Unlawful disclosure; trespassing notice; unlawful entrance or presence on grounds of domestic violence or trafficking shelter; exceptions; penalties.

(A) For purposes of this section:

(1) "Domestic violence shelter" means a facility whose purpose is to serve as a shelter to receive and house persons who are victims of criminal domestic violence and that provides services as a shelter.

(2) "Trafficking shelter" means a confidential location which provides emergency housing for victims of trafficking in persons.

(3) "Grounds" means the real property of the parcel of land upon which a domestic violence or trafficking shelter or a domestic violence or trafficking shelter's administrative offices are located, whether fenced or unfenced.

(B) A person who maliciously or with criminal negligence publishes, disseminates, or otherwise discloses the location of a trafficking victim, a trafficking shelter, a domestic violence shelter, or another place designated as a trafficking shelter or domestic violence shelter, without the authorization of that trafficking victim, trafficking shelter, or domestic violence shelter, is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned not more than three years.

(C) It is unlawful for a person who has been charged with or convicted of a violation of Section 16-3-2020 to enter or remain upon the grounds or structure of a domestic violence or trafficking shelter in which the victim resides or the domestic violence shelter's administrative offices or the trafficking shelter's administrative offices.

(D) The domestic violence shelter and trafficking shelter must post signs at conspicuous places on the grounds of the domestic violence shelter, trafficking shelter, the domestic violence shelter's administrative offices, and the trafficking shelter's administrative offices which, at a minimum, must read substantially as follows: "NO TRESPASSING-VIOLATORS WILL BE SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL PENALTIES".

(E) This section does not apply if the person has legitimate business or any authorization, license, or invitation to enter or remain upon the grounds or structure of the domestic violence or trafficking shelter or the domestic violence or trafficking shelter's administrative offices.

(F) A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than three thousand dollars or imprisoned for not more than three years, or both. If the person is in possession of a dangerous weapon at the time of the violation, the person is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than five thousand dollars or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.

HISTORY: 2012 Act No. 258, Section 1, eff December 15, 2012.

SECTION 16-3-2090. Forfeiture.

(A)(1) The following are subject to forfeiture:

(a) all monies used, or intended for use, in violation of Section 16-3-2020;

(b) all property constituting the proceeds obtained directly or indirectly, for a violation of Section 16-3-2020;

(c) all property derived from the proceeds obtained, directly or indirectly, from any sale or exchange for pecuniary gain from a violation of Section 16-3-2020;

(d) all property used or intended for use, in any manner or part, to commit or facilitate the commission of a violation for pecuniary gain of Section 16-3-2020;

(e) all books, records, and research products and materials, including formulas, microfilm, tapes, and data which are used, or which have been positioned for use, in violation of Section 16-3-2020;

(f) all conveyances including, but not limited to, trailers, aircraft, motor vehicles, and watergoing vessels, which are used or intended for use unlawfully to conceal or transport or facilitate a violation of Section 16-3-2020. No motor vehicle may be forfeited to the State under this item unless it is used, intended for use, or in any manner facilitates a violation of Section 16-3-2020;

(g) all property including, but not limited to, monies, negotiable instruments, securities, or other things of value furnished or intended to be furnished by any person in exchange for any kind of services under Section 16-3-2020, and all proceeds including, but not limited to, monies, and real and personal property traceable to any exchange under Section 16-3-2020; and

(h) overseas assets of persons convicted of trafficking in persons also are subject to forfeiture to the extent they can be retrieved by the government.

(2) Any property subject to forfeiture may be seized by the investigating agency having authority upon warrant issued by any court having jurisdiction over the property. Seizure without process may be made if the:

(a) seizure is incident to an arrest or a search under a search warrant or an inspection under an administrative inspection warrant;

(b) property subject to seizure has been the subject of a prior judgment in favor of the State in a criminal injunction or forfeiture proceeding based upon Section 16-3-2020;

(c) the investigating agency has probable cause to believe that the property is directly or indirectly dangerous to health or safety; or

(d) the investigating agency has probable cause to believe that the property was used or is intended to be used in violation of Section 16-3-2020.

(3) In the event of seizure, proceedings under this section regarding forfeiture and disposition must be instituted within a reasonable time.

(4) Any property taken or detained under this section is not subject to replevin but is considered to be in the custody of the investigating agency making the seizure subject only to the orders of the court having jurisdiction over the forfeiture proceedings. Property is forfeited and transferred to the government at the moment of illegal use. Seizure and forfeiture proceedings confirm the transfer.

(5) For the purposes of this section, whenever the seizure of property subject to seizure is accomplished as a result of a joint effort by more than one law enforcement agency, the law enforcement agency initiating the investigation is considered to be the agency making the seizure.

(6) Law enforcement agencies seizing property pursuant to this section shall take reasonable steps to maintain the property. Equipment and conveyances seized must be removed to an appropriate place for storage. Monies seized must be deposited in an interest bearing account pending final disposition by the court unless the seizing agency determines the monies to be of an evidential nature and provides for security in another manner.

(7) When property and monies of any value as defined in this article or anything else of any value is seized, the law enforcement agency making the seizure, within ten days or a reasonable period of time after the seizure, shall submit a report to the appropriate prosecution agency.

(a) The report must provide the following information with respect to the property seized:

(i) description;

(ii) circumstances of seizure;

(iii) present custodian and where the property is being stored or its location;

(iv) name of owner;

(v) name of lienholder; and

(vi) seizing agency.

(b) If the property is a conveyance, the report shall include the:

(i) make, model, serial number, and year of the conveyance;

(ii) person in whose name the conveyance is registered; and

(iii) name of any lienholders.

Age of Consent

Thursday, September 7, 2023

Blog Archive

About Me