Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Raped 10-year-old "responsible because she looked older"

Story.

So this man has been given a two-year prison sentence because the ten year old he raped "looked older" and might have been wearing a short skirt. Because that makes it all right.

I hope the sentence is overturned, but its helpful to show that what I have been saying all along is true- if you wear a short skirt the judiciary think that you are to blame. The fact that they even extend this to small children is even worse, but sadly not surprising.

If she hadn't been ten he'd have been acquitted completely- that's the thing that really makes my piss boil.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Is the judge saying is that the rapist thought the child was over 16, therefore he should be treated 'just' as a rapist instead of a rapist and a paedo? They really go out of their way trying to excuse their actions don't they? :rolleyes:

    Even if that was the case I find it incredible that someone found guilty of rape gets 2 years.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Erm, just to point out, it's "raped" in the purely legal sense, rather than the "forced to have sex" sense. Though from what I've read about this story, they did kinda encourage her rather than her coming onto them, even if they thought she was 16. This judge has got a shit record with this sort of thing though. Apparently, he recommended a paedophile should buy his victim a bike as compensation.

    Other than that, without seeing the girl in question, none of us can really comment on how old she looks.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I refuse to believe that she looks 16, or acts 16, unless she's from Chernobyl.

    Rape is only in the "forced to have sex" sense in this county; sex with a girl under the age of 13 is, technically, not rape if she consented.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »
    sex with a girl under the age of 13 is, technically, not rape if she consented.

    How you work that one out?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »
    I refuse to believe that she looks 16, or acts 16, unless she's from Chernobyl.

    So what? You've never seen her, so you can't comment. I've looked into this story quite a bit though, and I honestly don't believe they thought she was 16. There was a case a few months ago with a 10 year old girl where the bloke was let off (well had to sign the sex offenders register) because the girl looked unusually old.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    From the BBC:
    Lawyers for the defendants stressed that the sex had been consensual, and was only termed 'rape' because of the framework of law.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »
    I refuse to believe that she looks 16, or acts 16, unless she's from Chernobyl.

    Rape is only in the "forced to have sex" sense in this county; sex with a girl under the age of 13 is, technically, not rape if she consented.

    i swear they brought the if they're under 13 its rape no matter what law in 2003 sexual offences act?

    some guy got off recently after having sex with an 11 year old with a community sentence, even though the CPS didnt want to prosecute as they both consented (the guy was 18 btw) but he had to be found guilty - social services said in that case the girl was very sexually active by her own reckoning and she done ntohing to suggest she was under 13/16
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lawyers for the defendants stressed that the sex had been consensual, and was only termed 'rape' because of the framework of law.

    So? Is consensual sex with a ten year old consensual or "consensual"? The law says they're not old enough to make that call. Psychology would tend to agree. That sentence doesn't account for possible manipulation, the child's state of mind etc.

    Also, saying that someone was dressed provocatively - in pro-rape speak that means "she was asking for it" - is not a defence. Well, it is, which is the worst thing, but it's the lamest defence ever. It's the old-ladies-discussing-it-on-a-bus defence: "Shouldn't have been wearing that skirt, should she!"
  • Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    This is disgusting. A) This isn't justified. Rape is rape, regardless, he hould get life. B) A short skirt adds 6 yers to your age or more does it? Fuck off.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So? Is consensual sex with a ten year old consensual or "consensual"? The law says they're not old enough to make that call.

    "Consentual" of course. But if the men had the reasonable belief that she was 16 (and we can't possibly know, because we haven't seen her) then there is no intent. And without intent to rape, the only real crime is a failure to properly ascertain her age resulting in a rape taking place. Is this just as bad? Well in terms of it's effect on the victim, probably. However, in terms of the risk to other 10 year old girls from the convicted (and therefore, the decision about a prison term), certainly not. But this is why none of us can have an opinion, because "I thought she was 16" may be a valid defence in some cases, and not in others, based on the circumstances, and the age the girl looks (not what she's wearing). But I'd like to see another trial based on the judge's past record and comments upon sentencing, which are clearly not up to scratch in my view.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Did they ever ask for her age and did she ever tell them (truth or not)?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yeah, she said she was 16. Tbh, if I met a girl on her own in the park, looked borderline legal age, dressed provocatively, and she told me she was 16, it'd certainly set alarm bells ringing in my head. Enough to at least not shag her until I knew she was old enough. It seems to others it may set off an easy defence if it turns out she isn't 16, which is a huge problem.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    This merely proves that, when it comes to rape, our legal system is a complete arse. And you all wonder why I have no confidence in this system?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Teh_Gerbil wrote: »
    This is disgusting. A) This isn't justified. Rape is rape, regardless, he hould get life. B) A short skirt adds 6 yers to your age or more does it? Fuck off.

    Agreed
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I didnt read the bbc version i read this one
    http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21969117-2,00.html as i saw it on a link on somebodies live journal.
    I cant understand how a 10 year can look 16 yeah maybe if she was 14/15 she would look 16 if she got dressed up but thats still no excuse for what he did.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I can easily understand how a 10 year old can look 16 if you dress them up right. I was regularly believed to be 21 at the age of 14 (which is know is slightly different but not far off).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    That judge should be sacked. They really don't live in the real world
  • Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    Whowhere wrote: »
    That judge should be sacked. They really don't live in the real world

    You think? I've been saying this for years, between this and the happy slap murders, I can see our judicial system either needs an overhaul or complete replacing.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I can understand how a 10-year-old can look 13, which is an important distinction, but 16? Nah.

    My understanding of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is that having sex with a girl under the age of 13 is not rape if she consented, but it is an equivalent offence to rape, so the distinction is moot. But I could be mistaken on that, its a while since I did anything to do with that area of law.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why should the fact a woman "dressed provocatively" ever remove any responsibility from the rapist and put some responsibility on the survivor?

    It's degrading to men that because a woman has her boobs out a bit, that he cannot control his urges to bone her, whatever her age, whatever her wishes.

    It also suggests that a woman is responsible, or was asking for it.

    The only person ever responsible for rape is the man, that is why it is called 'sexual violence', no woman ever asks to be raped, it's f*cking horrible and to suggest that it happened because of something she did is disgusting.

    Re: the kids age

    Sorry, but I don't see how you can mistake a 10 year old for a 16 year old. For starters, whilst some people are early bloomers as regards menstruation (like my friend for example), they do not usually have the curves and physique a 16 year old has.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I would also point out that someone must have complained, and if the girl was as "gagging for it" as the defence and judge indicate, then how did anyone find out?

    It's only rape if the victim didn't consent.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »
    My understanding of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is that having sex with a girl under the age of 13 is not rape if she consented, but it is an equivalent offence to rape, so the distinction is moot. But I could be mistaken on that, its a while since I did anything to do with that area of law.
    From what I understand, 13-16 isn't rape if she consented, under 13 is automatically rape no matter the circumstances. However, whilst they're automatically found guilty if it's proven they had sex, the judge is still free to give a sentence based on the circumstances surrounding the offence, so he can take into account the fact that the defendent genuinely believed her to be 16 and reduce the sentence accordingly. I don't think it carries an automatic prison term, because I remember another similar case a month or two ago, where a man got a non-custodial sentence.

    As for he not looking 16, well doctors examining her believe her to be in her "mid teens." But naturally if it's borderline, it's the adults responsibility to be sure of her age or suffer the consequences.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Namaste wrote: »
    Sorry, but I don't see how you can mistake a 10 year old for a 16 year old. For starters, whilst some people are early bloomers as regards menstruation (like my friend for example), they do not usually have the curves and physique a 16 year old has.

    Sorry, but this opinion has no merit. Yes in most of our experiences, a 10 year old can't look 16, but without seeing the girl, none of us can have an opinion on this defence. We just have to trust the judge (which I don't, and is why I would like to see a retrial, that I think is going ahead).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »
    I would also point out that someone must have complained, and if the girl was as "gagging for it" as the defence and judge indicate, then how did anyone find out?
    Telling someone you've had sex doesn't equal complaining that you've had sex. How do any reports of underage sex come out? Kids talk, that's how.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    From what I understand, 13-16 isn't rape if she consented, under 13 is automatically rape no matter the circumstances.

    I think that's how it works in practice, but AFAIK its a separate offence to have sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 13. Certainly if the girl is aged 13 or over, and she consented, its a much lesser offence.

    I'm going to have to check that when I go back to work, because I'm not sure now...

    I can definitely see how she could be seen to be 13 or 14, but even that's by the by. She was a girl who was raped, and the rapist has been given a pathetic sentence because she wore a short skirt.

    I'm sure kids do talk, but someone must have pressed charges and the girl must have told the police all about what happened.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The bit that really got me was when she was interviewed by police, they asked her whether she consented, and she said "I'm not sure. Yes and no." I think a retrial is definitely in order, because it sounds to me that she was obviously at the very least pressured into it. The other thing that worries me is that when you think about it, it is completely believable that a girl that looks 13 or 14 could be 16. My sister looked about 14 when she was 16, and a few girls from my year did. When does "I thought she was 16 and just looked young for her age" become an acceptable excuse?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think the appeal will go through, and the Attorney General will add about 24 months to the sentence. He can't not.

    They've been convicted, at least, thank God. If she'd been any older I bet they wouldn't have been, though.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    at the moment im thinking it came to court as a rape case as being a 10 year old it's legally 'impossible' to consent - not as an underage sex case

    i also believwe the judge said it was one of the hardest cases he's ever dealt with
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sod castration for paedophiles, I say we start with the judges...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The bit that really got me was when she was interviewed by police, they asked her whether she consented, and she said "I'm not sure. Yes and no." I think a retrial is definitely in order, because it sounds to me that she was obviously at the very least pressured into it. The other thing that worries me is that when you think about it, it is completely believable that a girl that looks 13 or 14 could be 16. My sister looked about 14 when she was 16, and a few girls from my year did. When does "I thought she was 16 and just looked young for her age" become an acceptable excuse?
    Obviously wasn't good enough for that Chelsea fella (Graham Rix?) to avoid jail.

    However you can see a difference between that case and someone who knowingly has sex with a young child. If the girl Rix slept with had been 3 months older he would not have committed a crime, distasteful as such act would have been. Still, he should have checked some ID...
Sign In or Register to comment.