To the editor:

I am not a lawyer, but as a mother and grandmother, I am indignant about recent rulings by Judge Martin.

At 13, the law requires you to attend school, but prevents you from voting, driving a car, getting married, joining the military, buying tobacco, drinking alcohol, etc. The job of parents, teachers, law enforcement, judges, etc., is to protect those not mature enough to always make good decisions.

At 18, you can’t buy or drink alcohol, but you can vote, drive, get married, join the military, buy tobacco and hopefully have better judgment since the law allows you to purchase weapons and ammunition.

When an 18-year-old has sex with a 13-year-old child, it is statutory rape. There is no “willing participant” even if she is intoxicated and doesn’t say “no.” This also applies to a 28-year old who “takes indecent liberties with a child.” (Definitive word: CHILD.)

In the involuntary manslaughter trial in 2002, Judge Martin said she based sentencing on the advice/opinion of the victim’s siblings. Why spend all the time and money on a trial; let’s just call the victim’s family and it is either “thumb’s up or thumb’s down.” If they had recommended the death penalty, would she have gone along with that?

Peggy Showalter,

Lawrence