I totally wanna party with this kid

so wait...in Australlia you can legally have sex at the age of 16?

Think of it this way, if you're 16+ and having sex with a 15-year-old, you can go to jail.

On topic: http://www.bustedtees.com/shirt/sunglasses/male

so wait...in Australlia you can legally have sex at the age of 16?

That's correct

http://www.break.com/index/australian-p ... thony.html

Did you check out his website he gave in that interview?

Those guys tricked Opie and Anthony badly.

Think of it this way, if you're 16+ and having sex with a 15-year-old, you can go to jail.

No, you won't...

In Australia, sex is legal once you are 12yrs old. However, until you are 16, you can only have sex with someone +-2yrs.
A 12yo could only have sex with a 12-14 yr old, a 15yo could fuck a 13-17yo

A 40yo can have sex with a 16yo

Only once you are over 18 can you have sex with teachers, etc.

Doesn't matter though, if she's 15, she's under the age of consent. He's 16, so he's over the age of consent. If he's taken any photos of anyone under 16, he's gonna get done.

That doesnt make it bad... just cos its illegal, its not highly immorale or anything like that.

In Australia, sex is legal once you are 12yrs old.

Wtf? Do you live in an Aboriginal colony or something? The age of consent is 16.

In Australia, sex is legal once you are 12yrs old. However, until you are 16, you can only have sex with someone +-2yrs.
A 12yo could only have sex with a 12-14 yr old, a 15yo could fuck a 13-17yo

This just isn't true.

ACT: It is a defence if the younger party was aged 10 years + and the offender was not more than 2 years older. This doesn't make it legal, just that it can be used as a defence in court.
NSW: No such exception exists
NT: No such exception exists
QLD: No such exception exists
SA: Age of consent is 17, however it is a defence if both parties were 16 at the time or married.
TAS: Age of consent is 17, however it is a defence if no anal sex occurred and the younger person was of or above 12 years and the older was not more than 3 years older.
VIC: Age of consent is 16, it is a defence if the younger party was aged 10 and the offender was not more than 2 years older.
WA: No such exception exists.

The age of consent is a legal barrier to the minor being able to give consent and as such obtaining consent is not in general a defence to having sexual relations with a person under the prescribed age. However, there are some defences in some jurisdictions. Common examples include:

* Limited mistake of age - Where the accused can show mistaken belief that the victim was not under the age of consent. However, where such a defense is provided, it normally applies only when the victim is close to the age of consent or the accused can show due diligence in determining the age of the victim. (ex: A 17 year old who used a fake ID to get into a bar for people 21 & older.)[citation needed]
* Marriage - In those jurisdictions where the marriageable age is less than the age of consent.[citation needed]
* Rape - where someone under the age of consent binds and rapes someone over the age of consent.[citation needed]

These different defenses can change dramatically from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, even between neighbouring states of the same union with the same age of consent.

It's not legal anywhere and not every state has those defences. What you were talking about would be an age exception, those do exist in some other countries but over here we have defences, which are different.

That doesnt make it bad... just cos its illegal, its not highly immorale or anything like that.

If only i could use that when disputing speeding tickets.

The latest:

Yesterday he said he had gone to the house with friends but feared seeing his mum and stepdad would end the fun he was having with his newfound fame.

"I drove past it with my mates early this morning," he said while relaxing at the beach with friends.

"I decided not to in the end. I'm sure that they'll be angry at me, but I'm having fun with it and I don't want to go in yet."

With his yellow sunglasses and bare chest one of the fastest spreading images on the internet, Corey is already in demand from some of Australia's biggest youth-oriented brands.

Big Brother and the lads' mag Zoo Weekly have both approached the bleach-haired teen, while Universal Music is believed to be considering a reissue of the Beastie Boys classic Fight For Your Right (To Party) in Corey's image.

"That's pretty good, I like that," Corey said about the Beastie Boys rumour. "It's pretty good if it pulls through. Who doesn't like money?

When it was suggested he take his antics to the US and party girls Paris Hilton or Britney Spears, he said: "I reckon I'd be too high class for them."

Corey said he had been asked to host hundreds of "informal" parties, but talk of being offered $10,000 to host nightclub events had so far come to nothing.

He had no regrets about refusing to take off his sunglasses in an interview with A Current Affair's Leila McKinnon - an exchange that seems destined for classic status.

"I reckon it's hilarious and so do my mates," he said.

Asked if his new fame had helped his chances with the ladies, Corey said: "They either want to get to know me or they hate me, there's no in the middle right now.

"It's fun, it's awesome. I'm famous, I like being famous."

Source

It's pathetic that his poor behaviour and smug attitude may not only win him 15 minutes of fame but some income as well. What a message: "Be a smarmy little brat and all this can be yours!" I sincerely hope that when the time comes for him to enter the real world, it chews him up and spits him out. He deserves no better.

to put it nicely, i think that kid is a fucking retard

He's one of those people who wins 6/49 then loses it all in 3 months with constant partying, drugs, and alcohol then suddenly finds himself sipping soup at the homeless shelter.

Wow, just for being an idiot, he became famous and he can earn lots of money as well.

im starting to think this guys just a wanker, and i agree with what jae said, hes just milking his 15 minutes for all its worth

Teenagers are being targeted by the market once again, and no one can do anything about it but themselves. I hope no one will ever buy his stuff, but then again, they're teenagers, what can you expect?

Any news if his parents disowned him yet?

I don't think they've disowned him per se but in the latest report his mother has been quoted as saying he won't be living with them "for some time". Supposedly she's still talking to him though.

Also, this kind of rubbish doesn't help things at all. Is his fashion sense the most important issue here? It doesn't change the fact he's a bratty little punk whose behaviour shouldn't be celebrated or rewarded. Sure, it's another perspective on someone who's suddenly in the public eye but why encourage him by making him relevant?

At least he's being fucking honest about it. I'm not sure how we would deal with fame at 16. After I said that, I still think he's a bitch.

So much post-pubescent male flesh was on display he could have been mistaken for a rent boy

Wow, just for being an idiot, he became famous and he can earn lots of money as well.

we can all thank people like paris hilton for that kinda shit

It's pathetic that his poor behaviour and smug attitude may not only win him 15 minutes of fame but some income as well. What a message: "Be a smarmy little brat and all this can be yours!" I sincerely hope that when the time comes for him to enter the real world, it chews him up and spits him out. He deserves no better.

Why are you so upset by him?

Alright, gonna put in 2 cents here.
1.The Kid threw a party, it got out of hand. 16 years old is old enough to know right from wrong, and should've known it would get nuts. Throw the book at him if he thinks he shouldnt have to pay for everything other kids broke. It's your street not theirs kid, you're the one who's going to be fucked by the long dick of the law *end superbad reference*
2. The bitch interviewing him deserved. Had a little experience with press myself on national television and they always try to get the emotion and the tears and the sap going. Fuck that, its not always part of the story. Big approval on handling that anchor bitch flawlessly.

http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Corey_Delaney

The kid kinda reminds me of some posters here in NLSC

Fitzy

VIC: Age of consent is 16, it is a defence if the younger party was aged 10 and the offender was not more than 2 years older.

I guess I was mistaken by saying 12yo then, you can do it when you are 10.

Jae, if you are going to argue with what I said, why go ahead and post something that just confirms it?

Victoria

Under the Victorian Crimes Act, the age of consent for all forms of sexual intercourse is 16. However, the legislation does offer a number of defences. Firstly, the legislation does not apply to married couples. Secondly, consent will be a defence if the person:

* Reasonably believed their partner was 16 or over, or
* Was not more than 2 years older than the victim, or
* Reasonably believed they were married to the victim

This final defence is unique to Victoria and it is strange that the other states that offer marriage as a defence do not also offer a defence of reasonable belief of marriage. Victoria also imposes a relatively harsh penalty, with a maximum term of 15 years imprisonment.

http://users.tpg.com.au/users/taboo/Nov ... beagle.htm

I cant edit my post before, so Ill add this...

*I didnt know the laws were state to state, I only knew Victoria - assumed it was aus. wide. Either way, it doesn't matter, because this happened in Victoria.
* I got 12yo confused with 10yo... No biggy

A defence does make an act legal... If you use defencive homicide as a defence to murder, it changes your actions from unlawful homicide to lawful homicide.
Defences do make crimes legal... Otherwise you wouldn't be acquitted

Jae, if you are going to argue with what I said, why go ahead and post something that just confirms it?

Wtf? I didn't post anything that confirms it. I told you there is a difference between an age exception and a defence. We have defences here, not age exceptions.

A defence does make an act legal... If you use defencive homicide as a defence to murder, it changes your actions from unlawful homicide to lawful homicide.
Defences do make crimes legal... Otherwise you wouldn't be acquitted

No, you're wrong. You can roll your eyes all you want, but for that to be the case with the underage sex laws it would have to be a guaranteed acquittal for it to be legal, but it isn't. For example...

* Reasonably believed their partner was 16 or over

That doesn't mean every person who claims that they thought their partner was over 16 would be acquitted of any crime. It might lessen the punishment but it won't just give them a free pass automatically every time.

*I didnt know the laws were state to state, I only knew Victoria - assumed it was aus. wide. Either way, it doesn't matter, because this happened in Victoria.

It does matter, because this is what you said...

In Australia, sex is legal once you are 12yrs old.

You didn't say Victoria, you said Australia.