For Sampson, Tijuana: Bangkok of Mexico

[krazykhrystyne]

Sampson, if he's the same lawyer that advised Burt that prostitution is legal in Mexico... nevermind.
And if this same lawyer told Burt that the law discrimintates an impure woman from a pious woman...

I just don't think so.

Well, let me express it in another way: He might get the inside info from a top lawyer, but what Burt writes here is a big "no-no"

And you know I have aske Burt many times to post the links to the laws he says backs his posts.
And he has never done it.

Contrary to that, I have posted tons of laws, regulations that are aplied in the State of Baja California and the norms that are law in Tijuana.

Everything is just a link away, even in Mexico.

 

[Shil]

I don't want to mention any names, but I do know that Burt got his information from one of the highest powered lawyers in Tijuana.

 

[METROPOLIS1]

Goodquestions, Mexico did have a nice compendium of outdated laws, really stupid laws that in the bottom line were sexist and were written with a corrupt and decadent moral point of view.

If you see it that way you would understand why a "chaste and pure" woman (be it minor or an adult) would have all the rights over an impure woman (be it prostitute or an unfaithful wife).

That really fits with Burt's description of his law.

I think he quoted a really outdated version of a law.

 

[Pompal 09.]

I thought that the way Burt explained it didn't sound so well. How can the law exclude children that have been corrupted? I mean they are probably the ones who would have the most to gain from these laws. And I don't think there is any country in the world that would have laws that applied differently to each child.

 

[Mr.Pants!]

Took me a little while but I found the Codigo Penal del Estado de Baja California.

http://www.ordenjuridico.gob.mx/Documentos/Estatal/Baja California/wo19497.pdf

Everything starts at Articulo 261.

I have a feeling... maybe Burt is getting his info on several law articles that have been reformed and deleted from the Codigo Penal... maybe he read an old Codigo Penal that might have included the "chaste" thing....

Between TV comercials I remembered that the State of Nuevo Leon had their own things going with "chaste and pure", pertaining women seeking damages for divorce procedures.
The former law did not cover them if they were, for example, prostitutes or women that were know to be sexually active in any form.
Reasoning was that how can a person ask for damages when she was not "caste and pure".... this related ONLY to women.

Of course this was tossed out of the Penal Code of Nuevo Leon in the early 90's.

Sounds exactly the same...

 

[Dr. Ernest J Folk]

Burt... You made me laugh as you always do when you quote Mexican laws.

Are you quoting your interpretation Codigo Penal Federal or Ley del Estado de Baja California????

Or a Presidential decree???

Again, as I've told you time and time again... I want the:

1. Website
2. Capitulos, Articulos y Transitorios of this... this thing your wrote down.


No... nevermind, here it is:

This is the Codigo Penal Federal.

http://info4.juridicas.unam.mx/ijure/tcfed/8.htm?s=

Read... sorry it's in Spanish but nowhere will you read this ridicilous part "the law only applies to "chaste" minors."

(By the way... is this only for females, or are we talking "chaste males"???)

Chaste minors... HELL!!!
Mexico might be populated by corrupt individuals, but the law is THE LAW and it can not be written to favor a certain individual over others.
That the judge can be bought, that is another story, but to DESCRIMINATE a "unpious" individual over a "chaste" one is STUPID


(By the way again... what is this: "I have discussed many Mexican laws--including the laws that govern "mongering"--with Mexican attorneys.".... and to what point? Consenting adults dealing with adult prostitution is not covered by any law. Sex Tourism is a criminal offense since the Baja California laws defines it as a criminal offense when it realtes to prostitution when minors are involved.)


Back to Leyes... read:

This is the Federal Penal Code.

LIBRO SEGUNDO
TحTULO DةCIMOQUINTO. DELITOS CONTRA LA LIBERTAD Y EL NORMAL DESARROLLO PSICOSEXUAL
CAPحTULO I HOSTIGAMIENTO SEXUAL, ABUSO SEXUAL, ESTUPRO Y VIOLACIسN


Artيculo 259 bis. Al que con fines lascivos asedie reiteradamente a persona de cualquier sexo, valiéndose de su posiciَn jerلrquica derivada de sus relaciones laborales, docentes, domésticas o cualquiera otra que implique subordinaciَn, se le impondrل sanciَn hasta de cuarenta dيas multa. Si el hostigador fuese servidor pْblico y utilizace (sic) los medios o circunstancias que el encargo le proporcione, se le destituirل de su cargo.
Solamente serل punible el hostigamiento sexual, cuando se cause un perjuicio o daٌo.
Sَlo se procederل contra el hostigador, a peticiَn de parte ofendida.


Artيculo 260. Al que sin el consentimiento de una persona y sin el propَsito de llegar a la cَpula, ejecute en ella un acto sexual o la obligue a ejecutarlo, se le impondrل pena de seis meses a cuatro aٌos de prisiَn.
Si se hiciere uso de la violencia fيsica o moral, el mيnimo y el mلximo de la pena se aumentarلn hasta en una mitad.

Artيculo 261. Al que sin el propَsito de llegar a la cَpula, ejecute un acto sexual en una persona menor de doce aٌos de edad o persona que no tenga la capacidad de comprender el significado del hecho o que por cualquier causa no pueda resistirlo o la obligue a ejecutarlo, se le aplicarل una pena de dos a cinco aٌos de prisiَn.
Si se hiciere uso de la violencia fيsica o moral, el mيnimo y el mلximo de la pena se aumentarلn hasta en una mitad.

Artيculo 262. Al que tenga cَpula con persona mayor de doce aٌos y menor de dieciocho, obteniendo su consentimiento por medio de engaٌo, se le aplicarل de tres meses a cuatro aٌos de prisiَn.

Artيculo 263. En el caso del artيculo anterior, no se procederل contra el sujeto activo, sino por queja del ofendido o de sus representantes.

Artيculo 264. (Derogado).

Artيculo 265. Al que por medio de la violencia fيsica o moral realice cَpula con persona de cualquier sexo, se le impondrل prisiَn de ocho a catorce aٌos.
Para los efectos de este artيculo, se entiende por cَpula, la introducciَn del miembro viril en el cuerpo de la vيctima por vيa vaginal, anal u oral, independientemente de su sexo.
Se considerarل también como violaciَn y se sancionarل con prisiَn de ocho a catorce aٌos, al que introduzca por vيa vaginal o anal cualquier elemento o instrumento distinto al miembro viril, por medio de la violencia fيsica o moral, sea cual fuere el sexo del ofendido. (DR)IJ

Artيculo 265 bis. Si la vيctima de la violaciَn fuera la esposa o concubina, se impondrل la pena prevista en el artيculo anterior.
Este delito se perseguirل por querella de parte ofendida.

Artيculo 266. Se equipara a la violaciَn y se sancionarل con la misma pena:

I. Al que sin violencia realice cَpula con persona menor de doce aٌos de edad;
II. Al que sin violencia realice cَpula con persona que no tenga la capacidad de comprender el significado del hecho o por cualquier causa no pueda resistirlo; y
III. Al que sin violencia y con fines lascivos introduzca por vيa anal o vaginal cualquier elemento o instrumento distinto del miembro viril en una persona menor de doce aٌos de edad o persona que no tenga capacidad de comprender el significado del hecho, o por cualquier causa no pueda resistirlo, sea cual fuere el sexo de la vيctima.
Si se ejerciera violencia fيsica o moral, el mيnimo y el mلximo de la pena se aumentarل hasta en una mitad.

Artيculo 266-bis. Las penas previstas para el abuso sexual y la violaciَn se aumentarلn hasta en una mitad en su mيnimo y mلximo, cuando:

I. El delito fuere cometido con intervenciَn directa o inmediata de dos o mلs personas;
II. El delito fuere cometido por un ascendiente contra su descendiente, éste contra aquél, el hermano contra su colateral, el tutor contra su pupilo, o por el padrastro o amasio de la madre del ofendido en contra del hijastro. Ademلs de la pena de prisiَn, el culpable perderل la patria potestad o la tutela, en los casos en que la ejerciere sobre la vيctima;
III. El delito fuere cometido por quien desempeٌe un cargo o empleo pْblico o ejerza su profesiَn, utilizando los medios o circunstancia que ellos le proporcionen. Ademلs de la pena de prisiَn el condenado serل destituido del cargo o empleo o suspendido por el término de cinco aٌos en el ejercicio de dicha profesiَn;
IV. El delito fuere cometido por la persona que tiene al ofendido bajo su custodia, guarda o educaciَn o aproveche la confianza en él depositada.

 

[bluebacker35]

I've only been approached once by meseros if I wanted under age girls/morras. Before they said another word my buddies and me bolted out of there. I could see the way the bar was set up to "hide" these under age girls eventhough they were within sight.

That same night I must have seen about a handful of under age girls standing outside near the bar where the meseros were offering us underage girls. Nobody was saying anything and I wonder why they were allowed to stand outside if they were acting like little girls. I don't like being anywhere near girls of questionable age.

 

[Russell M]

We gringos think we know it all but I have noticed that every so often we could learn a thing or two from Mexico.

 

[Mountian_Baby]

I'll go with the former. I wasn't specifically talking about US law. And I guess that's why I'll never be a judge as my common sense is apparently wrong. I mean, of course I should trust that the bar is not hiring prostitutes that are underage. I should certainly take their word for it that they are verifying the age of their whores by legal means. This is not a shady profession at all so I think all customers should trust a bar that is only out to get your money by any means that the girls are of age. What was I thinking? My apologies to all offended. Carry on.............

 

[Stoic]

Obvious you know nothing about Mexican law in this area. If you did then you'd know what the judge did makes perfect sense.

Loosely translated the law that prohibits a man from having sex with a minor is entitled "The Corruption of Minors Act." Mexico is either "behind the times" or Mexican legislators are wiser than their American counterparts (take your pick) because the law only applies to "chaste" minors. It specifically excludes minors who have had a child, minors who are strippers, prostitutes, etc.

In short, once a girl has been "corrupted" she is no longer covered by The Corruption of Minors Act. It's very reasonable for a judge to conclude that a minor frequenting bars has been corrupted and isn't a "chaste" girl.

Additionally, The Corruption of Minors Act contains "safe harbors." Meaning that a man is protected from prosecution if it were reasonable for him to believe the girl is of age. (He's also protected if it's an "honorable relationship" meaning that with parental consent he's engaged/dating the girl.) Since a person has to be 18 or older to enter a bar it is reasonable (in most cases) for a man meeting a girl in a bar to believe she is of age.

Now do you see why what the judge did makes perfect sense?

--------------------

A little about me:

I'm an Anglo who for years has lived full or part time in Tijuana. I speak Spanish well. My gf's (deceased) father was a minor official in the PRI party and over the years I've become acquainted with various "doctors, lawyers, and Indian chiefs" in Tijuana.

I have discussed many Mexican laws--including the laws that govern "mongering"--with Mexican attorneys. Including a friend (the husband of my gf's former employer) who has held the Mexican position that is equivalent to a US District Attorney.

 

[I FANCY YOU :) and VOTTO]

In the law, the concept is called "reasonableness." Can one reasonably expect that the women in a bar are of age because the bar is supposed to screen out minors? Normally. But as Sampson already mentioned, if the chica in question appears to be underage, even though the bar is supposed to have prevented her from being in the bar, it would be prudent to ask her for an ID card. (I think it would be even more prudent to just stay away from her.)

 

[loriel]

I was aware of a guy on another site that would change people comments and twist them around. I think most can see what is going on here. I would never advocate being with a minor. I would not see them out. When you are in a bar that must screen employees for their age, you should not have to have your guard up. The judge already ruled on the law.

BTW I had a friend who bought drinks all night for a minor in a US bar, and the judge dropped contributing to the delinquency of a minor as he stated it was the bar at fault for allowing a minor to enter.

Now if you are with any women on this planet and you are not sure she is of legal age, I would advise to ask for ID or to pass. In my situation, we were going to a restaurant.

 

[goodluckwithhat]

Yes.......no risk at all. I have changed my mind. I would trust the bar completely and when thrown in front of a judge in a foreign country would use the ignorance defense that the bar hired her so she MUST be of legal age. Absolutely the right way to think.

 

[Kiya*~]

As I thought it was quite slanted, but still people understand that they are not at risk in a bar.

 

[Leslie J]

Underage discussion. Here is rule number 1 for this board.

1.This site has a Zero Tolerance Policy for any mention of, or reference supporting child prostitution, abuse of women/children or any type of sex with a person under the age of 18. This site is for consenting adults only.

We, including me, are mentioning underage stuff.

 

[Todd]

"this subject is technically taboo"

What subject? discussing newspaper articles on the general public and local authorities erronous point of view of the night life of Tijuana?

We have done that many times on this forum.

 

[yadi yadi yadi]

What is the poll question?

 

[djeter_girl_2]

Just a piece of info........since this subject is technically taboo on this board, I did a poll on another board about this subject and it's 80% to 20% so far in my favor. The poll runs for a week and after it's finished, I'll post the results and the link to the poll.

 

[Sahara]

Thank you Mutunus for your 2 centavos.

Yes you are right in the sense that Mexico is part of an international signed treaty that supposedly fights human trafficking.

Once in a while Mexico must give signs that it is doing its job in this.
The thing is that when "experts" go into the field, they find nothing as big as it is told to them.

Believe me the media here in Monterrey made an enormous wave to stop "minor pedling# in the streets, based on statements given by one girl.

Of course they couldn't find anything once the media walked the streets....

 

[drhnk07]

Ok. I disagree wholeheartedly but I can see you won't change your mind.