Just found out my 17yr.old son has been having sex with a 38 yr.old lady and she's also been supplying him and friends with beer. This is in the state of WV. Is there anything I can legally do about it? I know she knows better cause she's employed with the law enforcement

The age of consent in WV is 16.
But WV has a 'no exception' provision to the drinking age of 21, except for one tiny one:
*The code does not prohibit a person from furnishing alcohol to a person under the age of 21 if the recipient is a blood relative or relative by marriage, but it is illegal for the underage recipient to consume the alcohol.
Source: procon.org

The age of consent in WV is 16.
But WV has a 'no exception' provision to the drinking age of 21, except for one tiny one:
*The code does not prohibit a person from furnishing alcohol to a person under the age of 21 if the recipient is a blood relative or relative by marriage, but it is illegal for the underage recipient to consume the alcohol.
source: procon.org So there's nothing I can do??

So there's nothing I can do????

Turn her in to the authorities for furnishing alcohol to minors.

The law to which Joy referred is being violated, evidently.

So there's nothing I can do????

Well That is really messed up, that she can get away with it, am sure if it was a 38 yr.old man and a 17 yr.old girl it would be different. That is 21 years difference

Go back and read again what Joy and I have told you.

The genders don't matter. The law is clear. The advice you are being given to pursue the fact that she is furnishing alcohol to a minor. If getting her in trouble is your goal. Have you talked to him? Her? Them together? Is this lust, love? DO you even know?

Well That is really messed up, that she can get away with it, am sure if it was a 38 yr.old man and a 17 yr.old girl it would be different. That is 21 years difference

What about Joy's post didn't you understand? The age of consent is 16. That means whether the 17 yr old is male or female, they can consent to sex. However, providing alcohol to someone under 21 is illegal so you can report her for that, if you can prove it.

Your son was free to have sex at 16 with anyone over 16.
If he were your daughter, same.
The age difference above 16 doesn't matter under the law.
The drinking age is 21. So she is endangering your son, contributing to delinquency, whatever it is called where you are. You can try to get her for that. You might have to catch her in the act if your son denies past events.
Keep in mind that this could mean your son will have nothing to do with you. It's a dilemma many parents face every day.

This is confusetoday and my son knows I'm doing this. I just found out about it and she is sending texts to my son to try to continue this affair which he ended a couple of months ago.I will be taking out charges for the alcohol on her. I have plenty of witnesses. Also she is employed with the (SBI or FBI) My son knows,and I'm sure they will be interested in this.But I always thought it was 18, being the legal age. But I'll just do what I have to do

Your son was free to have sex at 16 with anyone over 16.
If he were your daughter, same.
The age difference above 16 doesn't matter under the law.
The drinking age is 21. So she is endangering your son, contributing to delinquency, whatever it is called where you are. You can try to get her for that. You might have to catch her in the act if your son denies past events.
Keep in mind that this could mean your son will have nothing to do with you. It's a dilemma many parents face every day. Have just replied to you under here, my internet is messing up. I will do what y'all have said and contact her employer, which my son knows which they are. There are 10-15 witnesses of all ages that are willing to go to court. So Thanks to all of y'all for your advice and answers

Have just replied to you under here, my internet is messing up. I will do what y'all have said and contact her employer, which my son knows which they are. There are 10-15 witnesses of all ages that are willing to go to court. So Thanks to all of y'all for your advice and answers

NO! Do not contact her employer. Go directly to the police. Let them take care of it. Since your son appears willing to testify and there are corrobating witnesses, I think the DA will prosecute.

NO! Do not contact her employer. Go directly to the police. Let them take care of it. Since your son appears willing to testify and there are corrobating witnesses, I think the DA will prosecute. Well she works for the FBI or SBI. My son knows which one it is. I just figured I'd do both, the police and work, Am tired of her continue to text him, wanting him to come over. It's been over with them for a couple of months.

Whatever you do, do NOT go to her employer. It doesn't matter where she works, FBI, SBI, it doesn't matter. Go directly to the police. Do not pass GO, do not collect $200.

Well she works for the FBI or SBI. My son knows which one it is. I just figured I'd do both, the police and work, Am tired of her continue to text him, wanting him to come over. It's been over with them for a couple of months.

Again, NO. If you want her to be arrested and prosecuted then you do not go near her employer.

West Va has always had one of the lowest ages of consent but this doesn't really make sense to me. ---such person, being 16 years old or more, engages in sexual intercourse or sexual intrusion with another person who is less than 16 years old and who is at least 4 years younger than the defendant. If 16 can be with no one under 16 but can be with anyone over 16 what does the 4 years younger mean?

West Va has always had one of the lowest ages of consent but this doesn't really make sense to me. ---... . if 16 can be with no one under 16 but can be with anyone over 16 what does the 4 years younger mean?

First, let's make clear which statute we are discussing:

"2012 West Virginia Code
...
§61-8B-5 (http://law.justia.com/codes/west-virginia/2012/chapter61/article8b/61-8b-5/). Sexual assault in the third degree.

(a) A person is guilty of sexual assault in the third degree when:
...
(2) The person, being sixteen years old or more, engages in sexual intercourse or sexual intrusion with another person who is less than sixteen years old and who is at least four years younger than the defendant and is not married to the defendant ...".

Then break it down by examples:

The accused turns 16 today (d/o/b is 7/6/97), and he has sex with a person who turns 12 tomorrow : guilty.

Same accused, but the victim had his/her 12th birthday yesterday, not guilty.

The accused is 18 (d/o/b is 7/6/95) and he has sex with: someone more than 4 years younger; in this example aged 14 or less (d/o/b on or after 7/7/99) - guilty.

Same accused, but victim had his/her 15th birthday also today, or before: not guilty.
The accused is 20 (d/o/b is 7/6/93) and she has sex with a person who, as in the obove two examples, is less than 4 years his junior, - guilty. Note, in this example the victim could be born as late as 7/7/97 for guilt to be established.

Finally, the accused is 21 (born 7/6/92), but if the other person is 16 or over, the difference in ages no longer matters. Not guilty..

OK, I realize all of that can be confusing. So let's forget about the subtle distinctions which come from looking at the exact age differences, and instead aproximate:

A person over 16 can get in trouble for having sex with someone four years or more younger than himself. Specifically,


A person who is 16 years old is committing a crime if the other person is age 12 or less.
A person who is 17 years old is committing a crime if the other person is age 13 or less.
A person who is 18 years old is committing a crime if the other person is age 14 or less.
A person who is 19 years old is committing a crime if the other person is age 15 or less.
A person who is 20 years or older is committing a crime if the other person is less than age 16
.
In OP's situation, the person is over 20, but OP's son is over the age of 16, so the crime of the type normally referred to as "statutory rape" has not occurred.

What I thought but the way they worded the sentence I quoted makes it sound confusing