Male Columbia professor charged with incest, female parter is not

I'd like a legal explanation for how this guy is charged with incest, but his female "partner", who was over 18 and apparently a consenting participant (I base that on the quote that "the two often exchanged twisted text messages") somehow avoids it.

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/12/09/2010-12-09_columbia_professor_is_charged_with_incest_accused_of_bedding_young_relative_for_.html

That IS odd. The whole thing doesn't make any sense...is someone out to "get" him?

:shrug:

Which might explain why she's not charged... the power dynamic there would seem to make him the more responsible party, since he (I assume) raised her in an environment in which he made sending each other "twisted messages" acceptable.

Thanks for finding that. The article makes little sense w/out that crucial piece of info. That makes for an abuse of power type case.

That's pretty odd, don't you think? Especially when his actions are editorialized as "sick" in the very first sentence.

Willing adults and all that...

If it really was his daughter that complicates things a bit. I am reluctant for the state to tell ANY adult who they can have sex with, or how. On the other hand you'd have to think it likely that he used his position as father figure to lay the groundwork for this relationship and that goes against everything I believe in. Parents need the trust of their children to be effective, and abusing that trust is an unthinkable breach.

The law treats men and women differently sometimes. Usually to the detriment of men.

from TFA: "the victim was over 18 when the relationship began"

It could easily result in the birth of children with severe deformities. The state has an interest in banning it.

If realtionships like this are condoned, there are major genetic issues and family roles become hopelessly confused.

Are you suggesting incest and even marriage between family members be permitted?

I think that's everybody's business.

and therefore legal business.

while i know the world may seem like black and white to you, its not, especially not when it comes to parenting and children. regardless of when the sex began, the child was groomed to believe that sex between her and her father is in the realms of possibility. it will be ultimately up to the judge/jury/prosecutors etc to determine whether or not child abuse occurred. just washing ones hands off, saying that the actual sex occurred when she was an adult, is pretending that she was not at one time the child of this man who is now having sex with her. the law has a responsibility to look into what happened when she was a child, that made the sex between her and her father possible as an adult.

make no sense.

more to it than just that. you also have an incredible ability for abuse of power here.

inappropriate boundaries to a child, groom a confused teen, and then take advantage once she was over 18, making it look like it was consensual. I think it's difficult to establish true consent in a parent-offspring relationship.

I can't remember it accurately, but it's fairly common to only charge one person under these laws- and that's almost always the older person.

In addition, the father is the one in a position of power, and for this to happen some pretty heavy duty "grooming" and likely abuse took place while she was a minor.

and not the child.

It's about the abuse of power/authority.

A 40-something year old mother doing the same thing to her 18 year old son would and should be prosecuted too.

over having sex with their sons. Usually these cases are of long separation when mother gives her child up and then they find each other years later. So this has nothing to do with gender at all.

Presumably there is unequal distribution of power in such a relationship as alleged even if both people are over the age of consent.