What could 'friends' admission mean? [Warning: relates to sexual offence against minor]

[sticklebrickstickle]

Some time ago I found out through a friend that another old school friend, who I'll call A, had been required to register as a sex offender. I was good friends with A at school and for some years afterwards but we stopped being in regular contact some years ago. I felt a bit concerned by this information and brought this up with another friend. He confirmed that this was true, although didn't divulge any details about the case. He said A had committed an offence but that he immediately realised what he'd done was wrong, had pleaded guilty and was not going to do it again. A did not receive a jail sentence and continues to live in our home town (where I believe the offences occurred) and many of my friends remain good friends with him.

However I have just found out through reading a newspaper report that A pleased guilty to sexually assaulting three girls aged under 13. He admitted to assaulting the girls whilst he was between the ages of 16 and 25 (he is now in his late twenties) and a judge described the case as both 'unusual' and 'serious'.

Now I have these details the whole thing is just making me feel sick. What I am really struggling with is that many of my friends have remained friends with him. I can't imagine how anybody could stay friends with somebody who has sexually assaulted a child or forgive that.

I talked this through with another friend (who does not know A) who pointed out the friends who have remained friends with him are not parents (I have a 1yo DD) and as such may not feel that so strongly. She also said that 'sexual assault' may not mean any of the very violent crimes I am imagining but, due to the ages of the children involved, could refer to any consented act of intimacy (eg: kissing). Is this true? She pointed out he has not received a jail sentence or been forced out of his community so the crime may not be as serious as I'm thinking.

I don't wish to justify what this man has done, however I do want to justify my friends remaining friends with him. They have the facts regarding his sentence and what he did and I do not, so they are in a better position to judge whether they can forgive him.

So I guess what I want to know is how broad is the term 'sexual assault?' Are there any crimes the term covers which might be 'forgiveable' even against a child? Or will he have definitely committed a violent crime against these children?

Thanks in advance for anyone with any legal knowledge around these terms who can offer any explanations.

[prh47bridge]

Sexual assault of a child under 13 means intentional contact of a sexual nature regardless of whether or not the child consented to the contact. If the offender did not receive a custodial sentence there cannot have been any violence involved nor can the offence have involved touching naked breasts or genitalia. If you take a look at the sentencing guidelines for sexual offences you can see that a non-custodial sentence for sexual assault of a child under 13 is only used in the least serious cases and even then there need to be mitigating factors. So, with 3 girls involved, for there to be no jail sentence I think your friend is probably correct that the offences were some kind of consensual acts of intimacy.

[sticklebrickstickle]

Thank you. That document is very helpful in at least understanding what was not involved, especially for example that his crime would not have been violent or involved naked genitalia etc.

I still don't feel I can justify any contact of a sexual nature, with or without consent, with a child even if it is 'just' kissing or similar but I do feel more comfortable with understanding why many of our friends may have felt able to do so.

Thank you again.