Around here, people are clamoring for a judge to be recalled because she is on top of rights for defendants. A recent one I watched on Zoom was a prosecution motion to revoke bail:

Prosecutor: "Because blah blah blah, and in addition the defendant shows no signs of taking responsibility for his actions, we..."

Judge, cutting her off: "I'm going to stop you there. The defendant entered a plea of not guilty, and as of this moment has not been found guilty at trial. In the eyes of the court, he has precisely zero obligation to take responsibility for alleged actions at this point in time."

Prosecutor was not happy.

Legally it can mean a case where a man met a women in a bar, she was not drunk and wanted to go home with him. She explicitly consented. Later it ends up that she was using a fake ID to get into the bar, she was only 17.9 years old in a state where the age of consent is 18. Or alternatively, the guy recently moved a block over. In his old location the age of consent was less than 18, but now he moved and he committed rape (aka, the opinion that got Richard Stallman to step down).

And no, there is no exception for mistaking the age. https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?art...