22 year old spared jail over sex with 15 year old - "it was utterly inappropriate but fully consente
275 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Snowmew;46565010]But a very clear distinction needs to be made between forceful rape and statutory rape when it comes to the legality of consent.
This guy forcefully kidnapping these girls and raping them against their will is a totally different animal from manipulating them into sex. Both are wrong, but both need to be treated differently by the legal system, because both are done by totally different people.
To that end, the reason judges have discretion is because not all cases are textbook. This guy was being prosecuted under the same law that would have been applied for a 62-year-old threatening a 13-year-old into consenting to sex. Yet again, two totally different scenarios.
For clarification, I don't personally condone what this guy did. But it's important that we treat each case according to its own facts, and apply it to society's norms. Regardless of what you think about the subject, this sort of thing is [i]extremely[/i] common today. The judge sentenced the guy accordingly, because the law is not always black and white. Sodomy was illegal in 14 US states until 2003 - would you argue that all people engaged in sodomy before then should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law?[/QUOTE]
My point is that this guy was prosecuted on a technicality. The judge appears to believe that there was consent, but the law doesn't allow it.
And the law is what's wrong here.
[QUOTE=Ownederd;46565025]they don't just choose a random number for laughs and i have no idea where u got that idea from[/QUOTE]
They might as well have. Or do you really believe that 18 years is the exact age when every human being has mentally developed enough to take responsibility for themselves and be allowed to vote, drink, drive, have sex, etc.?
[QUOTE=Ownederd;46565081]a 15 yr old cannot consent because the possible ramifications from having sex w/ a person 7 years older than them isn't likely to be comprehended by the 15 year old - they won't understand that there's a power issue being involved, for one[/QUOTE]
So, given a AOC of 16 for the UK, does it mean that a 16 year old is suddenly absolved of something like a power issue in a situation like this? We wouldn't even be having this discussion had the girls been 16.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;46565103]My point is that this guy was prosecuted on a technicality. The judge appears to believe that there was consent, but the law doesn't allow it.
And the law is what's wrong here.[/QUOTE]
I don't really disagree with you, but in this case, there was no legal consent. It was obtained through undue influence, so it is not legally valid, nor does it truly qualify as consent. The judge was right in his sentencing, but for the wrong reasons.
[QUOTE=EditOutJ;46565122]So, given a AOC of 16 for the UK, does it mean that a 16 year old is suddenly absolved of something like a power issue in a situation like this? We wouldn't even be having this discussion had the girls been 16.[/QUOTE]
The UK distinguishes between ages in its sentencing of sex with minors. Them being 15 essentially qualified the guy for a light sentence. If they had been 14 or 13, it would have been harsher, and had they been 12 or younger, we would have gotten into "this is seriously bad you need to go to jail period" territory.
[QUOTE=EditOutJ;46565122]So, given a AOC of 16 for the UK, does it mean that a 16 year old is suddenly absolved of something like a power issue in a situation like this? We wouldn't even be having this discussion had the girls been 16.[/QUOTE] 16 is still kind of gross and basically the same as a 15 year old, but the government eventually has to step in and say "okay we're not wasting money throwing people in jail for this"
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;46565140]16 is still [B]kind of gross[/B] and basically the same as a 15 year old, but the government eventually has to step in and say "okay we're not wasting money throwing people in jail for this"[/QUOTE]
Problem is, "kind of gross" isn't what should dictate laws.
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;46565140]16 is still kind of gross and basically the same as a 15 year old, but the government eventually has to step in and say "okay we're not wasting money throwing people in jail for this"[/QUOTE]
Something being "kind of gross" should never be a reason for it to be illegal.
[QUOTE=squids_eye;46565148]Something being "kind of gross" should never be a reason for it to be illegal.[/QUOTE] when i said "kind of gross" i meant its still manipulating underage people who don't understand the repercussions of their actions but i didnt want to type that out look now what you made me do
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;46565103]They might as well have. Or do you really believe that 18 years is the exact age when every human being has mentally developed enough to take responsibility for themselves and be allowed to vote, drink, drive, have sex, etc.?[/QUOTE]
no 2 people compared side by side will have the same developmental output but 18 is a common reference point because that's when the human body has matured to a certain stage. a 15 year old is going to have more problems comprehending the consequences of banging a 22 year old.
[QUOTE=maxumym;46565144]Problem is, "kind of gross" isn't what should dictate laws.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1407571&p=45326072&viewfull=1#post45326072[/url]
lol
[QUOTE=Snowmew;46565127]I don't really disagree with you, but in this case, there was no legal consent. It was obtained through undue influence, so it is not legally valid, nor does it truly qualify as consent. The judge was right in his sentencing, but for the wrong reasons.
The UK distinguishes between ages in its sentencing of sex with minors. Them being 15 essentially qualified the guy for a light sentence. If they had been 14 or 13, it would have been harsher, and had they been 12 or younger, we would have gotten into "this is seriously bad you need to go to jail period" territory.[/QUOTE]
I never really considered any of what you just posted. Both your responses are very useful for discussions on this topic.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;46564704]A 15 year old is well capable of saying no.[/QUOTE]
you're absolutely clueless, have you no idea what peer pressure is?
[editline]24th November 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=maxumym;46565144]Problem is, "kind of gross" isn't what should dictate laws.[/QUOTE]
no, people in a position of power in relationships with people who are nowhere near fully developed or mature yet should probably be taken into account though
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;46565214]you're absolutely clueless, have you no idea what peer pressure is[/QUOTE]
Clearly every time a 15 year old has sex with an older dude it's because of peer pressure.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;46565268]Clearly every time a 15 year old has sex with an older dude it's because of peer pressure.[/QUOTE]
what
this post is so embarrassing
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;46565268]Clearly every time a 15 year old has sex with an older dude it's because of peer pressure.[/QUOTE]
You didn't really have to post that. I have some spare boxes in my closet if you need them, you should have just asked.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;46565268]Clearly every time a 15 year old has sex with an older dude it's because of peer pressure.[/QUOTE]
i didn't say that at all and you're just trying to make a snarky comment, grow up
[editline]24th November 2014[/editline]
peer pressure isn't the only factor (goes without saying) but to completely ignore the fact that it's there is just silly
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;46565311]i didn't say that at all and you're just trying to make a snarky comment, grow up
[editline]24th November 2014[/editline]
peer pressure isn't the only factor (goes without saying) but to completely ignore the fact that it's there is just silly[/QUOTE]
Of course there's 15 year olds who are affected by it. Just as there's 18 year olds who are affected by it.
But that's no reason to say that 15 year olds in general can't consent.
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;46565354]Of course there's 15 year olds who are affected by it. Just as there's 18 year olds who are affected by it.
But that's no reason to say that 15 year olds in general can't consent.[/QUOTE]
they can't because they cannot fully understand the consequences yet
Funny how they say 15 isn't consensual, yet shove that fucking army recruitment shit down our throats the moment we enter high school.
[QUOTE=Ownederd;46564981]you seriously don't know?
when you hit 18 years of age, that's when your mental and physical development has matured to a certain stage[/QUOTE]
when you hit X years of age, that's when your mental and physical development has matured to a certain stage
[QUOTE=Megadave;46565374]Funny how they say 15 isn't consensual, yet shove that fucking army recruitment shit down our throats the moment we enter high school.[/QUOTE]
this is a different issue altogether, and one reason why the army targets teenagers in high schools is because it's not uncommon for people of that age to feel like they're tough shit
p much sadly
[QUOTE=Ownederd;46565364]they can't because they cannot fully understand the consequences yet[/QUOTE]
I was fully aware of the consequences of having sex at 15.
[QUOTE=Skarr;46565429]I was fully aware of the consequences of having sex at 15.[/QUOTE]
do u understand the concept of a power issue related to something like this
[QUOTE=Ownederd;46565364]they can't because they cannot fully understand the consequences yet[/QUOTE]
Please show me the study that says "no 15 year old is capable of understanding the consequences of sex".
(Which, by the way, shouldn't amount to much as long as you use protection anyway. So you had sex. Big deal.)
[QUOTE=DrTaxi;46565442]Please show me the study that says "no 15 year old is capable of understanding the consequences of sex".
(Which, by the way, shouldn't amount to much as long as you use protection anyway. So you had sex. Big deal.)[/QUOTE]
v
[QUOTE=Ownederd;46565435]do u understand the concept of a power issue related to something like this[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Ownederd;46565435]do u understand the concept of a power issue related to something like this[/QUOTE]
My comment has nothing to do with this particular situation. I am only stating that some 15 year olds are aware of the consequences of having sex.
He was their dance coach, they could just have left.
He held no actual power over them.
[QUOTE=Skarr;46565467]My comment has nothing to do with this particular situation. I am only stating that some 15 year olds are aware of the consequences of having sex.[/QUOTE]
'some' ? this isn't really the place for personal anecdotes, and it is related to this situation because adult on young teenager sex is more often than not a power issue
Everyone in here defending this ruling is defending a clear cut sex crime. It doesn't matter if the girls consented, because they're under the age of consent. He's 8 years their senior, and in a position of power over them. 15 year olds do not understand the ramifications or consequences of sex (It's possible some do, but you can safely say that's not the majority), and even if you make an argument against this, [I]the teacher was caught because of nude pictures.[/I] He has literal child porn.
[quote]On another occasion one of the girls took a naked photo of herself in the shower, which was later discovered by her mother.[/quote]
And even if you find some way to defend that, [B][I]THE GIRLS FEEL USED BY HIM.[/I][/B]
[quote]After the case unravelled the girls felt ‘tricked and sullied’, the court heard.
Lisa Judge, defending, said: 'Had these girls been kicking and screaming, he would have been charged with rape.'[/quote]
What this boils down to is a judge bent the law to let a pedophile successfully have his way with two young girls. This is illegal in every way, and this man should be in jail. It's fucking shameful and disgusting that so many people here are genuinely defending this sick fuck and the judge who let him walk free.
isn't the AoC in the UK 16
so what people are saying is, if these people had been less than one year older (presumably unless it was their birthdays), that it would have been [I]fine?[/I]
stands to reason to me that if you think this was morally reprehensible, then you have greater concerns than this one incident, and actually have objections to the AoC as it stands.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.