Man admits to rape of a 12 year old

Roar87 said:
He should have been able to judge her age by what, psychic powers? Serious question here, do you think we should all ask for photo ID?
Click to expand...

Even if that was required it wouldn't make enough of a difference because photo ID isn't absolute proof of age by itself. It can be faked or belong to someone else. The photos on ID cards are well noted for often not looking entirely like how the person looks normally. It's so common a thing that's it's a routine source of humour. How many people here have looked at photo ID for someone else and laughed about how bad the photo is? Or shown their photo ID to friends and joked about how bad you look in the photo? It's particularly true for women - a photo of a woman for ID purposes taken with hair back an no make-up can look quite different to how she looks on a day to day basis. It's not all that uncommon for a person to resemble a sibling closely enough to match their sibling's ID photo well enough to pass for them, especially with the plausible differences between a person's appearance and an ID photo of them and even more so with skilled use of make-up. A person shows you photo ID with a photo taken in harsh lighting with her hair back, no makeup and a static (obviously, since it's a photo) image of her looking at the camera with a rather blank expression because a photo showing too much of an expression can't be used for photo ID. She jokes about how bad the photo is. Her hair is styled differently, which changes the appearance of her face. Is it actually a photo of her or is it a photo of her sister, who looks quite similar to her? How can you be sure of being absolutely 100% correct about that, every time?

I know of cases in which people have used a sibling's ID and been caught out for reasons other than the photo ID they presented being detected as not being theirs (e.g. someone who knows the sibling knew that the sibling was somewhere else at the time). I know of cases in which a person has been caught out only because they gave a different date of birth to the one on the ID they showed and weren't able to bluff their way out of it when challenged about the discrepency. It often comes down to how a person behaves, which is no surprise. How successful a person is in deceiving others usually does. People have strolled into places and strolled out again having stolen loads of stuff solely because they're convincingly behaved as though they have good reason to do so. In some cases, they've even managed to fool the people they're robbing into helping them take the stuff away. If you behave like nothing is wrong, people will usually not be suspicious.
 
Angilion said:
It can be and it should be in any fair legal system.

You seem to have misunderstood the idea that ignorance of the law shouldn't be a legal defence.

I'll use a less emotive example to encouraging thinking rather than emoting. Here's a note for the hard of thinking - this does not mean that two different crimes are the same.

Imagine a scenario in which you buy a used CPU in a private sale. You have every reason to think it's a legit sale. There is no indication at all that the CPU was stolen. None of the circumstances are unusual or in any way suspicious. The person selling it to you has proof of purchase and the original packaging. But the cpu is stolen. Would you consider yourself guilty of handling stolen goods? Theft? Breaking and entering? Or do you consider your ignorance to be a reasonable defence since you had no reason to think the CPU was stolen and good evidence that it was not?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure he has misunderstood that, he didn't specify 'ignorance of the law', he stated, correctly, that ignorance can't be used as an excuse in the eyes of the law(I think everyone is well aware that sleeping with a 12 yr old is illegal - the ignorance being referred to here is clearly the the fact she's under 16 not the law making it illegal). If he's referring to this case rather than in general then he's quite correct, it isn't a defence thus the reason the defendant was advised to plead guilty. Had the girl been a few months older then it would be a defence.
 
Last edited:
I see the "all sex is rape" crowd made it onto that thread in mumsnet!

It makes for tragically hilarious reading with them calling for him to be jailed :D
 
Of course, what this thread illustrates beautifully is...

The monstrous injustice that is represented by "Strict Liability Offences".

They only exist as a means to aid easy convictions in cases that would otherwise be difficult if not impossible to prove by any conventional investigation or trial. In practice they are little different from a Bill of Attainder

They are simply a "Get into jail free" card for the state to play as a "We will get you because we can" strategy.

As presented, were it not for the "Strict Liability" aspect to this, This case would have gone to trial, and with the evidence that everybody who had any contact with this girl that evening (Including Police Officers) thought she was very much older, and he would almost certainly have been acquitted and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Indeed, He might not even have been charged (The Police officers statements alone would have been grounds for taking no further action)

:(

Having said all that, The sort of person who picks up random strangers from bus/taxi stops and takes them back home to have sex with them seems a bit of a **** really. "Fly with the Crows, Get shot with the Crows" comes to mind (Not quite the correct usage of the saying, but it did make me think of it)
 
Richie said:
Seriously... no one has mentioned any sort of irony from Iron Warrior posting :confused:
Click to expand...

You mean, the irony from everyone else?

Because it seems it's okay by everyone to **** underage girls who lie about their age and who may look older and get away with it.

Maybe that's a Scottish thing, but let's remember, he's the victim and not the 12 year old girl.

Just liberal things I guess. :rolleyes:
 
IronWarrior said:
You mean, the irony from everyone else?

Because it seems it's okay by everyone to **** underage girls who lie about their age and who may look older and get away with it.

Maybe that's a Scottish thing, but let's remember, he's the victim and not the 12 year old girl.

Just liberal things I guess. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I don't see what is wrong about this from his point of view, could you explain your reasoning please? Is it just an emotive thing?
 
I've a huge amount of sympathy for the 12 year old girl in this case. Without passing blame (I don't know the specifics of how she came to be in a club partying at 0400), its clear she could probably do with a little more guidance and support. After all 12 years old children shouldn't be allowed access to adult only spaces or substances, and most 12 year olds would be unable to pull of the charade as convincingly as she did for as long as she did. Something has gone wrong in her up bring thus far.

I also have a huge amount of sympathy for the guy. I'd suspect it was probably an excuse, had there not been so many other, unrelated people, including police officers who were not only convinced by the way she lookedat a distance but interacted with her and found her behaviour to be consistent with her story.

I don't think either of them have to be legally at fault. Just because he's not a peado doesn't make her a criminal. In my mind they're both victims of their circumstances.
 
Orionaut said:
The monstrous injustice that is represented by "Strict Liability Offences".
Click to expand...

This I agree with. Strict liability is politicians pre-judging a trial without ever having to deal with the inevitably individual details of a real case. It removes judgement from Justice.
 
Well technically the judge didn't feel it was a valid defence, he pled guilty anyway as there wasn't a valid defence. The judge did however take into account the circumstances when sentencing.
 
Mark A said:
When I was at school at 12 I don't remember any of the girls looking 20. The kids in year 12 looked like adults to me at that age and none of my year looked anything like the year 12 kids.
Click to expand...

Local nightclub used to be full of 13-14 year girls. When I was at boarding school a local girl would give BJs for a packet of fags.
 
Greebo said:
Local nightclub used to be full of 13-14 year girls. When I was at boarding school a local girl would give BJs for a packet of fags.
Click to expand...
Not unusual. We had a girl in my school pop out triplets by the time she was 15.
 
dowie said:
Well technically the judge didn't feel it was a valid defence, he pled guilty anyway as there wasn't a valid defence. The judge did however take into account the circumstances when sentencing.
Click to expand...

It was a guilty plea with mitigating circumstances. Unfortunately our sentencing guidelines in such cases don't allow dismissal, which, imho is what should have happened.

I genuinely feel sorry for this lad, despite the sentencing effectively being a confirmation he is a normal good person who got unlucky, because his name has been publicized his life has been ruined.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom