Talk

Advanced search

Another rapist paedophile changing gender & erasing previous identity

(39 Posts)
QuietContraryMary Fri 25-Jan-19 11:28:34

www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/17384498.worcester-transgender-woman-previously-convicted-of-rape-breaches-order/

This is Christopher Worton, who pleaded guilty to five counts of rape against a child aged between 13 and 15 in 2014.

He is now known as Zoe Lynes, having changed his name in 2017.

His defence lawyer, defending him in a charge of breaching his sexual harm prevention order by visiting a home where he knew children would be present said

'the defendant had experienced isolation as a result of her gender transition.'

So not because he's a paedo rapist then?

QuietContraryMary Fri 25-Jan-19 11:30:15

note that he was not punished for the breach beyond £258 fine/costs

Popchyk Fri 25-Jan-19 11:42:11

But this never happens.

feelingverylazytoday Fri 25-Jan-19 12:59:40

At least the word transgender is in that headline, so credit due there.

feministfairy Fri 25-Jan-19 13:09:41

Just look at the stories underneath shock

All detailing minimum sentences for men who stabbed / assaulted their wives / girlfriends and a "high risk sex offender" (paedophile) who assaulted a 3 year old being spared jail despite repeatedly breaching their court orders.

Oxytocindeficient Fri 25-Jan-19 14:23:19

I am in a permanent state of rage today, so many stories like this. This is just insanity.

GerryblewuptheER Fri 25-Jan-19 14:26:00

Never happens

Not proper trans

The victim is a liar

Only need because they are trans. Report is transphobic

Have i missed anything?

ArcheryAnnie Fri 25-Jan-19 14:33:21

'the defendant had experienced isolation as a result of her gender transition.'

So not because he's a paedo rapist then?

Spot on.

BettyDuMonde Fri 25-Jan-19 14:35:31

Why do the trans paedophiles almost always change their surnames when they get their ladynames? It couldn’t possibly be because they want a completely new identity that isn’t associated with their crimes, could it?

Everyone knows you need to keep track of paedos because of their high rates of reoffending. That’s why we have an official register of sex offenders.

Much harder to keep track of people who change their names, isn’t it?

QuietContraryMary Fri 25-Jan-19 14:58:19

It does sound like his presence was unwanted at the supposed close friend's house.

"Nicola Ritchie, prosecuting, said Lynes’ friend questioned why [Lynes] was there, when [Lynes] arrived at [his friend's] door on December 10, 2017.

The prosecutor said the defendant’s friend, [the defendant's friend's] son and [the defendant's friend's] sister were in the home at the time.

The two friends spoke in the doorway for a few seconds before Lynes left, the court heard."

(i have changed/removed some pronouns as it is confusing otherwise.)

Incidentally I agree about the other articles there.

"A SELF-confessed ‘woman-beater’ who subjected his police officer girlfriend to a campaign of manipulative and demeaning bullying has escaped jail.

Judge Anthony Potter ordered him to undertake a Building Better Relationships programme, to take part in a rehabilitation activity and to do 200 hours of unpaid work."

Photo attached.

I wouldn't hold much hope of 'Building Better Relationships' with that

QuietContraryMary Fri 25-Jan-19 15:01:18

Christ it's all horrendous

www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/17384495.mark-smith-given-suspended-jail-sentence-after-admitting-stabbing-wife-in-a-crime-of-passion/

"Smith was told by his wife she wanted another man and hated him, which led to him feeling suicidal as he still loved her, Mr Siva said.

At 7.30am, on October 10, Smith took a knife and went to her caravan and, as soon as she answered the door, he grabbed her by the throat and said “I am going to kill you.” Smith then dragged over a sofa, at which point his wife noticed he had a bread knife in his other hand.

Mr Siva said, after a struggle, Smith stabbed her in the back “more than once,” causing puncture wounds of around 2cms"

Smith was given a 12 month jail sentence, suspended for 12 months. He was also ordered to complete 20 rehabilitation days, and to take a ‘better relationships’ course.

And this is just one town....

MoltenLasagne Fri 25-Jan-19 16:02:17

Christ these men don't need "Better Relationships", they need to fucking stay away from women, for good.

Jesus, I can guarantee that all that course does is give them psychobabble they will use to manipulate the next poor woman into believing their DARVO crap.

YankeeDad Fri 25-Jan-19 16:21:58

Just from reading the article and doing a bit of math, Christopher Worton's prior offenses may have been either a heinous crime or a criminalisation of something that teenagers have done since time immemorial.

The article says the child was between 13 and 15. If (s)he's now 22 then he would have been 18 in 2014.

It's statutory rape for an 18-year old boy to have sex five times (or once) with his 15-year old girlfriend even if they both feel it's consensual, but I would question whether that means this individual is more likely than the average person to assault a 2-year old child four years later.

I agree 100% that a convicted criminal should not be able to expunge their past deeds from the record by changing their name or legal sex/gender. I also think that this particular example might not be the strongest one for making that case.

QuietContraryMary Fri 25-Jan-19 16:30:06

Oh, look, it's a rape apologist identifying as a 'Dad'

It is NOT rape for a 18yo to have sex with a consenting 15yo.

Only those 12 yo and under are deemed incapable of consent. At age 13 to 15 an offence would be committed by a 16yo or older boyfriend having consensual sex but it would NOT be rape.

He is a rapist.

YankeeDad Fri 25-Jan-19 18:01:07

I may well be ignorant of legal practices in this area.

It had been my understanding that an 18-year old could be convicted of rape for having sex with a consenting 15-year old, even if prosecutorial discretion makes that rare.

QuietContraryMary Fri 25-Jan-19 18:08:51

No, that is not the case. Maybe in the US. 100% not in England

SinceYouAskMe Fri 25-Jan-19 18:16:25

That’s correct: consensual sex with a minor between the ages of 13 and 15 is a different specific offence. It’s only classed as rape if the minor does not consent.

SlinkyDinkyDoo Fri 25-Jan-19 18:17:15

They'll all be at it soon. FFS. This fucking bullshit.

Doesn't do much for transgenerism does it?

BettyDuMonde Fri 25-Jan-19 18:17:40

In the U.K. the scenario you describe would be prosecuted as ‘sexual activity with a child’ although it’s very unlikely that charges would actually be brought, unless the younger person was deemed especially vulnerable or there was evidence of grooming or deceit.

It’s really fucking hard to even get a rape case to court, let alone secure a conviction. The U.K. system will not waste time and money on two teenagers participating in consensual acts.

BettyDuMonde Fri 25-Jan-19 18:18:20

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_rape#United_Kingdom

YankeeDad Fri 25-Jan-19 18:51:01

That would make England more sensible about those cases than the US, where if the parents (typically the girl's dad it would seem) disapprove of a consensual relationship between two teenagers, then one of them (typically the boy) can basically have his life ruined.

abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/story?id=4444516&page=1

Anyway … sorry for hijacking your thread. I do agree 100% with your main point, which is that a convicted criminal should not be able to expunge their past deeds from the record by changing their name or legal sex/gender.

SirVixofVixHall Fri 25-Jan-19 19:13:52

So the consensual sex issue - are there any age restrictions on the man, eg must be only be 18 or under for it to be a lesser crime? I know of a teenager who was essentially groomed at 14 by a young man, who was 18 or 19. I thought that legally under 16 was a child ?

SinceYouAskMe Fri 25-Jan-19 19:28:54

It is illegal for a seventeen year old to have consensual sex with a fourteen year old (the offence is “sexual activity with a child”) but the CPS guidelines say that as a matter of policy it is rarely in the public interest to prosecute in such cases unless there is some form of aggregating factor. Where the older person is above the age of 18 it’s more likely to be prosecuted but still pretty rare.

SirVixofVixHall Fri 25-Jan-19 19:33:28

I am quite shocked by that! I have a 14 year old, she is still a child. Does that mean that if a thirteen or fourteen year old girl was groomed by a man in his twenties or thirties, he would not be charged with rape ? I am really 😮 . I assumed that under 16 you could not consent, because you are a child.

QuietContraryMary Fri 25-Jan-19 20:29:53

Sexual activity with a child covers all kinds of sexual activity. Penetration is Category 1, and if there is ANY aggravating factor (age disparity, grooming , alcohol, racial abuse) then the sentencing range is 4-10 years. If there is NO aggravating factor then the range is community order up to 2 years' prison.

So not rape, but within the sentencing range for rape, wheee there is a significant age disparity

Join the discussion

Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Get started »