Comments about ‘Fast-food boss was sexting with teen employee, police say’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Aug. 8 2013 9:20 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Say No to BO
Mapleton, UT

I can only hope that the courts will convince Kofoed that there is no such thing as consensual when it involves a 16-year-old.

Chieftess
Ivins, UT

"West Jordan Police Sgt. Dan Roberts said detectives believe the texting, though illegal, was consensual between the two."
My understanding is that a minor is not emotionally capable of giving consent, especially to a person in a position of authority, which means it is not possible for this type of activity to be consensual on her part. Ever. Sgt. Roberts mis-spoke to suggest that. I think what he meant was that the minor was not aware her emotional immaturity was being taken advantage of. She didn't "feel" that she was being used. Yet. I am glad her parents caught on and put a stop to it.

I know it. I Live it. I Love it.
Salt Lake City, UT

She is of course a victim, but my concern is that we should not be dis-acknowledging her ability to choose. 16 year old girls, while easily targeted by predators, are also very capable of making smarter decisions than sexting. Teenagers still choose the activities they participate in. She didn't take pictures of herself by his forceful hand.

My only concern here is that by pretending they don't somehow have agency, we put them at greater risk and deny them proper responsibility and accountability for their own actions. As much as I believe that we should remind adult males to stay away from minors, we should also be educating minors on how to protect themselves. You can't do that by pretending their always innocent and perfect. Every teenager thinks about sex at some point, and anyone with any sense will recognize that they think about it a lot (as most do at that age).

Assume their either sexting, have before, or have at least been tempted to. Then teach them the danger is very real and very close to home. Teach them to save themselves for marriage, and to avoid such situations completely.

mattrick78
Cedar City, UT

I haven't the slightest inclination to "sext" anyone overage let alone underage. But to those who do, isn't there at one point a thought that crosses your mind that says, "I could get arrested for this" before you click SEND?

Frankly, I just don't get it!

mrjj69
bountiful, UT

a 27 year old should know better.

BlueEyesBrittany
Paris, 00

I agree with previous post that sex is a very normal urge at this age and a normal part of life. That said, i personally would never text pictues of myself where i appear hardly clothed.

No matter what, sex is a very hot topic and i dont know wgat can be done so that it is turned into something healthy, stable and safe.

How can this normal urge be satisified in a healthy way that anyone's health, emotional stability is not compromised or any abuse is perpetrated is something i am not sure we have a solution for ?

In all cases, it should be safe and consensual between adults, a minimum i am sure we all agree on.

Kalindra
Salt Lake City, Utah

Utah law allows consensual sex for 16 and 17 year olds with individuals who are no more than 10 years their senior. He misses it by a year.

For me, the greater concern is the power differential between the two since he was her supervisor.

I had a job when I was a hormonal 16 year old - and there were some attractive older men that worked there. Having them in positions of power just made them more attractive.

Consensual doesn't mean right and he, being the adult and the supervisor, should have known better.

Miss Piggie
Pheonix, AZ

@mattrick78:
"... isn't there at one point a thought that crosses your mind that says, 'I could get arrested for this' before you click SEND?"

How anyone can be arrested for carrying on a conversation with another person boggles the mind... regardless of the conversation content. I thought everyone was guaranteed 'freedom of speech' under our Constitution's First Amendment.

I know the Bible says: 'let your conversations be yea, yea; nay, nay' (Matt 5:37)...' but there was no punishment for additional verbiage.

And supposing it was two teens sexting... would that be illegal?

"Frankly, I just don't get it!"

Neither do I.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

know, live, love
perhaps his position as her immediate supervisor gave him undue influence over her. She is not entirely without fault, as you suggest, but the bulk of the blame has to remain with him.

Neanderthal
Pheonix, AZ

@lost in DC:
"perhaps his position as her immediate supervisor gave him undue influence over her."

If they are both on the job I can see that there might be a problem...

But, can't the girl just not answer the text? And, for sure not send a sext or even a mundane text. Sexting is a two-way street, seems to me.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

Neanderthal,
only if she doesn't plan on coming to work again

I know it. I Live it. I Love it.
Salt Lake City, UT

lost in DC,

If she were emancipated or a 16 year old that was married, as the law does allow, then he would seem less like the predator everyone now sees him as. The simple fact is that she was willing. Does that make him a calculating hardened evil man? No. It makes him a guy who let urges dictate choices that he knew he should avoid, but didn't. Rarely do most men who give full heed to sexual desire think about how their choices affect women, but the fact is that it does. He hurt her, but his actions are far less of a "problem to society" (or whatever) than a rapist, etc.

In pegging everything on him, we not only are treating him as if he was a rapist, forcing the choice out of her... but we also neglect her own choices.

Do I defend any of their choices? No. But I do believe that mis-directing blame (as those interested in blaming always do), only causes harm. It helps no one.

Teach him a lesson. Teach her one. Move on and be happy. I believe that's productive here.

I know it. I Live it. I Love it.
Salt Lake City, UT

Miss Piggie,

I agree. A mere conversation shouldn't.

However...

The meaning of the law is something judges have always considered, even the founding fathers did.

The meaning of the law is to protect minors. A minor sharing a picture is their choice and so I can understand your concern in that his accepting a picture does her no direct harm. I don't love it. But if I were his judge I could give him that credit. But as a judge, being that she simply sent him pictures, the first thing I'd think isn't about age.

The primary concern is that he had authority over her.

1) That makes his behavior abusive.
2) That also makes her age come into play. A teen girl sending a 27 year old guy a picture is a choice she makes. But if he's welcoming it and he has authority over her AT ALL, then it is as much an age abuse.

She can "tango" to her hearts content. But him "tangoing" back is taking advantage of someone at an age that they don't FULLY realize their actions & consequences.

Therefore, it's more than simply a "conversation".

moniker lewinsky
Taylorsville, UT

know, live, love:
He might not pose the threat to society of a rapist or pedophile but he'll go on the same registry as the rest of them until he's 90 years old and dead in the ground. Because as far as the state's concerned, a child is a child and an offender is an offender. So his mug will be grouped with all the others. Hope you enjoyed the first 27 years of your life, dude. Because there's no coming back from this one. Hope you don't have a wife or kids (for their sake). Because you'll be lucky to get a job in a fast food restaurant once you're branded for life. Housing? Ha! Hope you own something and you'll be allowed to reside there.
Hope it was worth it.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments