Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Keith...please..that's a bit dark
Is anything not horrible happening in the news?:-(
i thought you were calling me a paedo
i.e. it counts as rape 'cos she was too young to consent rather than 'cos he forced her into it.
I'm not sure if that made a difference.
"Fenn removed all her clothes and raped her, then Wright took her to his home in Mount View, Henley-on-Thames, and sexually assaulted her."
Is it legal to have sex in a park in the UK ?
but from the judge's summary in the newspaper it seemed like the word "rape" was only being used as a legal technnicality (it would always be "rape" in this country if someone had sex with someone under 12, no matter whether or not hey consented).
I could be wrong though.
Or the fact he took her home would have been considered as abduction.
Sex in a park really is legal ?
if you were spotted and reported you could be charged with public indecency or indecent exposure or something similar. But I don't think having sex outdoors is actually illegal in itself.
rape is unconsented sex. Under thirteen you cannot legally consent to sex, so anyone who has sex under that age has not consented in the eyes of the law.
Graeme Logan, representing Wright, said: "He is deeply, deeply ashamed and remains in deep shock at finding out her age."
Soon he'll sue the girl for the mental damages she had done to him by looking older and forcing him to rape her...
Really? Surely, like. No?
But unless they're in uniform, I plead complete ignorance.
a 10 year-old that looks like a 16 year-old that dress like one but looks like a 10 year-old !
When I was at primary school there was a girl in our year who had passed puberty and looked no different some 16 odd years later when I bumped into her, at the age of 26...
doesn't help the title.
I didn't know she was only 10 inches.
That's how I keep reading it.
I'll stop now, though. If you don't mind
because of it was "rape rape" they would have got massive sentences, just for one guy screwing her in the park and his mate "sex acting" her at home leads to statuory rape. Hey, if she concented, its def only stat rape
...I went to the pictures yesterday and there was a girl dolled up to the nines wearing a pink top with the words "I'm looking for my footballer" written on it.
She could have been anything between about twelve and (I'm guessing) fifteen.
While I don't condone anyone jumping on children, I do question the wisdom of parents letting an underage daughter wearing an obviously sexualised costume.
And i'm not going into any kind of 'she was asking for it' type bollocks, but the manufacturers of such things are playing a dangerous game.
that it is probably true that younger children (male and female) arent really capable of fully understanding and dealing with sexuality, and forcing a "grown up" view point upon them, a male advertisers view point, really isnt going to help anyone.
People should be allowed to develop there own sexual identity, not feel like they have to conform to some "ideal" that no-one really likes. For example, the playboy range for kids. No one (well, heff does) really likes the big busted, blonde bimbo look, yet its sold as something kids should aspire too.
However, stopping people dressing how they like incase they get raped seems like too far the other way, though considering we dont live in a perfect world, you have to think about these things before you go out. =(
Apparently the judge has a history of being lenient in cases like this.
A guy put his hand down a kid's trousers, and this judge ordered him to buy her a bike to "cheer her up".
Sorry thats a fucking digrace.
feel me up if they bought me a bike.
You'll be swimming in bmx's before the week is out
not that long ago, the girl was 10, the guy was 19 or something, he got a leniant sentence aswell as the girl did look 16 and she had been sexually active before.
all it costs is a PS3
She didn't look ten. Everyone admitted that, including the police. They all admit it was a mistake. He didn't rape her, they can constenting sex but as she's under 13 it was considered rape by law.
Anyway, all this adds up to soem bloke having sex with a young girl and not checkig her age. Hardly the "paedo rapist" the press have branded him.
I'm not saying he shouldn't be punished but the tabloids love a shock story but it just isn't like that. He's fucking stupid, not a paedo.
the thing that disgusts me most is the way the whole thing is handled, and the Judge in particular. How could he have gotten away with his previous ruling for a paedophile? The man is fucking vile.
I still think the alleged paedophile is still of a pretty questionable character if he's goes out looking to shag some young girls in a park shortly after meeting them. But that's not really the issue, I suppose...
'iffy'. I reckon they'll find his secret porn den soon.
maybe she looked older. But 16 ?
And I can't believe he had not doubt about her age when it started to become 'serious'.
He just thought he could get away with it.
It nearly worked ( if you don't count the months he already had in jail that might have been not very pleasant... )
Whilst im not condoning the action, or the lenient sentence, its just been twisted so they can further this issue that Mail readers obviously love getting annoyed about.
did you ACTUALLY read it?
it was STATUTORY Rape....
or is your irony machine just in need of a service?
and it's hard to detect Irony on the internet.
I'm still not sure there was any there
then definitely sarcasm
22:01 post by the way.
I just noticed the other one.
But I can assure you it'd be "adios-da-bye-bye" in California. Two years? No. Try two-hundred years.