"Tonia M. Simms, 37, and Melissa E. Weaver, 26 of Derry Township near Pitt burgh, are charged with statutory sexual assault, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, corruption of minors and indecent assault.

The 15-year-old boy involved told police he met Simms and Weaver through an acquaintance on July 8 and was invited over for pizza at Simms’ apartment in the Holiday Acres complex.

After eating pizza and drinking alcoholic beverages, Simms invited the teen and Weaver upstairs to her bedroom.

Weaver allegedly said to the teen: “What, you’ve never had a threesome before?'”

The women then allegedly had sex with the 15-year-old and had sex with each other."

The witches got that boy drunk and proceeded to rape him!
As if this wasn't bad enough, the court rewards them with incredibly low bail.
Simms was out on unsecured bond. Wednesday, a judge ordered police to take her into custody and jail her on $20,000 bond. Weaver remains out on unsecured bond. (!)
It seems to me that the American 'justice' system has two standards for prosecuting sex crimes, one for men ( where the bail amounts is rarely under a hundred thousand and often over a million dollars ) and one for women, which in this case the perpetrators were able to make bail with as little as two thousand bucks ( 10% of the bail amount).

Am I the only one on this Forum who's bothered by the obvious, in-your-face double standard that exists between Women and Men when it comes to jailing and punishing sexual predators?
How credible are feminism's claims as regards to working towards Equality in light of that blatant double standard?
What should be the punishment for these two women sexual predators?

Is a sexual crime against a minor a lesser offence bringing lesser punishment if it's committed by a woman? It seems to be the case, especially in light of other ridiculously lenient punishments handed down to previous sexual women predators.
Is that what they mean by "Equality between the genders"?

Shut-ins?

Why sure....not saying it's right...just that's the way it is. A simple perusing of the latest trend....woman teachers banging their students....will uphold that assumption also.
On a side note....there's also the issue of women claiming rape, being proven wrong, and the guy still getting his rep ruined for life while the accuser gets off Scott free.

And back to the OP story......

That lucky lil b@stard < Purposeful double standard post

Thanks for weighing in, RebelArcher. You're right, we still got guys in prison after the so called "victims" recanted their bs stories.
And I doubt the boy would really consider himself a 'lucky lil b@stard' after having been raped by two ugly and fat sexual predators.

now we all known about that pizza can causes some phyco activities then......more or less......huh~~~~~beburado....bojono.....OoooooYea~~~tasty like some sweetz butter.......Hmmmmm~~~~~~

Hmmmm... the way the unJustice System works you might as well be the judge

How is that a "reward?"
"Innocent until proven guilty, but before we go to trial we're going to throw you in a cage. We will let you out until the trial if you can give us a deposit."
"Yippee! Our deposit is less than some other people? Thanks for the recognition of what we do or who we are!"


Not necessarily.
You seem to be referring to bail level as problematic.
Bail isn't really part of the "prosecution."
Because court cases aren't held immediately, and can take months before "prosecution" starts, it has to be decided whether or not someone is going to try and run away before they go on trial, or need to be remanded to a cage in order to keep them around, whether they are an actual danger to anyone at anytime if they're loose, or if they don't represent an ongoing threat because they're a normal part of their community.


I'm not sure that is accurate.
I mean recently there was a guy that saw a woman jogging, jumped out of his car, and violently dragged her under an overpass and raped her.
A 90 year old woman near where I live had like a 20 year old guy break into her home and beat and rape her, before he ran off and did it to someone else a couple days later before police caught him.

Not all sexual predator cases are the same.
There are different levels of violence involved.
Different people have different pasts and motives for rape.
Some people are drunk, some are violent, some are crazy, some are premeditated, some are habitual/serial.

I would say "Obvious, in-your-face double standard that people believe exists because that's what they want to see, or they believe media conveys all relevant information allowing for an accurate and fair public trial before a case goes to court and is actually tried."


That presumes it's only their stories that led to the persons imprisonment.
If only their story or allegations were relevant it would have made the case something like "he said, she said," and those fail standards for putting people away.

If they are in prison, it's because there is other evidence tying them to a crime.

Victims of rape and domestic abuse (husband or wife rape) recant their story all the time. It's the medical records, police reports, witnesses, criminal background, all sorts of other things keeping someone in prison.

The law is like a nuclear weapon. Once you get it involved it's no longer about you and your story. It's set off with a life of its bureaucratic own and you can't run from it or say "just kidding!" and have it go away.
The legal process isn't customer service sitting around until you come by with a problem and define to it what you want it to do for you and can tell it to go away at any time or just leave the store rendering them powerless.


That's what happens when people read a news story in the media and come up with things like "raped by two ugly and fat sexual predators."
Not court documents. Not knowing the people involved at all.

Just "omg! The media told me so! They said 2 ugly fat women raped a kid, PLUS they were arrested, BUT they had low bail...so they MUST have done it but aren't being prosecuted for it before their trial! I want to see the exact same punishment harshly dealt as any other sexual predator that ever raped anyone else no matter what other circumstances are involved. Guy rapes a 2 year old? Guy beats and rapes his wife? Guy locks 8 women in his basement for 15 years serially raping them every day? Teacher molests 12 year old or 18 year old? One uses rohypnol, the other develops relationship for 3 years? It's all the same! No double standards! Sexual predators are sexual predators and the media said they were sexual predators!....unless they aren't...and then it's a shame their reputation was ruined...that shouldn't have happened!"


You could probably say it has millions of standards.
If there was really just 1 standard there would be no real need for judges, jury's, or trials.
Just a computer with touch screen and bubbles asking if behavior clearly indicates a violation of absolute laws.
"Touch yes, or no. Are you over 18?"
"Yes."
"Did you have sex with someone under 18?"
"Yes."
"Was there violence, or any mind altering substances involved at all in any way? Threats, guns, rohypnol, antidepressants, alcohol, marijuana, sugar?"
"Yes."
"That violates standardized law, state statutes 105-8b-1as and 8z.
Sexual predator. Prison. 10 years. Sex offender registration upon release. Please take ticket and give to officer in kiosk 14. Next!"

SOMEONE needs those two women to get HIM off....

That is the very attitude that leads to double standards! What part 'minor' is ambiguous to you? Doesn't matter if the victim enjoys it, it's still against the law and the values we've adopted in the western world.

At 15, Ida fricked a snake if someone held the head....
According to this article....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3814410/Two-women-sex-15-year-old-boy-pizza-party-asking-s-threesome.html

.....the 15 y/o and one of the women had been banging on the reg. Wonder if his parents found out or one of his buddies got jealous and ratted him out.


Either way, I guess the two ladies got a Meats Lovers with extra pepperoni.....

The BreadStick special.

What he said:


Had two men taken advantage, assaulted and raped a 15yo pizza delivery girl I can assure you that the bail wouldn't have been 20,000 and in fact I'm quite sure that bail wouldn't have been set at all or so high that it'd assured the perps stayed locked up.
What bothers me about it all is not only the double standard, although it's bad enough, but when it is found out later on that the would-be "perps" I just mentioned never touched the said girl, they're still left with a ruined reputation that follows them for the rest of their lives. That goes beyond double standards and it isn't fiction.

Okay, this is the kind of thing where it's extremely important that you get the facts correct, BEFORE everyone runs off about what ought tobe done, and what it means, and so on.

First of all, according to the story as told in the opening post, the thread title is a falsehood.

The boy was NOT delivering pizza. He was INVITED OVER to EAT pizza, that the women already had.

That's important to any judgment each person makes about this, because it is NOT a situation where the women set a trap, ordered a pizza and then assaulted the child who came to delver it, which is what the title implies.

As for the rest of the situation, that all comes down to the fact that the women were breaking the law because the boy was under the legal age of consent. In Pennsylvania, that age is 16 for sexual assault, and 18 for "corruption of minors." So since this boy was below both those ages, they did, according to the law deserve punishment.

As for comparing it to if the same thing happened with a female, we'd have to have the details of other such cases in Pennsylvania, to say anything pertinent.

The fact that some people HERE will get upset about it when it's a girl, and not when it's a boy, doesn't have anything to do with making a broad statement about "double standards" in society in general, or even in the United States overall.

You will need a lot more information, before anything you post will be other than your personal opinion.

Not saying I am at all supportive of what these women are said to have done, mind you, nor can I say without a lot more information, whether the judge acted correctly according to Pennsylvania legal standards or not.

But again, I think it is TREMENDOUSLY important that everyone has ACCURATE information to base their obviously very emotional reactions to this sort of thing on.

Can I get that address?

Wonder how they feel about playful older gentlemen?

To be honest, I usually am upset with the double standard in the justice system and the culture between male and female defendants

how women can physically assault men and have it shrugged off, but men can simply push or hit a woman even once and be labeled and outcast for life is wrong in my opinion

how a woman willfully becoming intoxicated can make her an automatic 'victim' but a man doing the same is rarely ever considered one,, when the inebriation leads to sex ,,,,? also wrong in my opinion


in this case, it seems like someone intentionally introduced him to this situation, he intentionally and willfully drank with the women, and they all had sex

sex crimes are a generally a very difficult type of crime especially in cases where the major reason the victimhood exists is because someone was 'too inebriated' to consent,(which is hard to prove after the fact and possibly harder for the other individual to have gauged, especially if they are also drinking)


but back to this,, 'statutory' is always a minimal thing to me because it implies no one was forced or unwilling but some other circumstance like someones age or their inebriation made them an automatic 'victim' ,,,

they consider the seriousness of the crime and any criminal past as well as ties to the community when setting bail,,,,Id have to read a similar case with the sexes reversed to understand if this was unusual or not

I know, damn lucky! Nothing like this ever happened to me when I was 15! I actually used to pray for it to happen too!

I wonder if these wo women are hot or not?