man jailed after meeting 12 year old girl on a dating app who pretended to be 19

And??
Well funnily enough paedos don’t go hunting for kids on adult dating sites. I imagine the guy was horrified to discover she’s under age.

When I was a wee thing I had men all paying a lot of attention to me at a wedding. Naturally I loved it when they told me I looked 18 or 21. However, unlike this girl I really enjoyed telling them I was 13. (For the looks on their faces )

I have had a look at the photos later and I looked - 13! I do seriously wonder about men who say they didn’t know how old a child was.

I fail to see how people think this is a complex issue.

If a shopkeeper served a 12 year old alcohol believing her to be 19 they would be prosecuted. It is your responsibility to check you are on the right side of the law. All over 18s have proper ID these days, they have to. I had to carry mine up until around 30 to guarantee getting served alcohol.

It's a good reminder for many people, particularly loser men in their late 20s who prefer hook ups with teenagers.

She is not a femme fatale trying to ruin decent men's lives. She is a fucked up child and society needs to protect her.

Im saying the adult should not be held accountable

^

Definiton of an adult? Accountability.

In this case the girl herself admits that she lied though. And she was on an adult dating site.

^

And??

Read this last night.

2 and a half years?

I wonder, if it would have been a 12 year old boy, would he have got longer?

Fucking dispicable. The judge especially.

In this case the girl herself admits that she lied though. And she was on an adult dating site.

Sheesh.

"She said she was 18 and she looked it so I believed her"

Paedophile rings would have an absolute field day. They'd be making fake ID and the works, and getting off scott free.

I’m not saying the 12yo should be held accountable. I’m saying the adult should not be held accountable if there was good reason to believe the child was an adult.

So, what you're saying is that the 12 year old was a sexual aggressor and should be held accountable for the crime perpetrated against her, Aeonium ?

Is that all 12 year olds or just this child? Are 12 year old boys who are preyed upon either by women or men also sexual aggressors if they do something you believe makes them culpable? Were the 12 year olds in Rotherham also responsible for what men did to them there because they were in a brothel?

It depends if the adult knew the child was underage

You mean you want a reasonable belief clause added as in rape trials ? I think that would be a disaster.

The adult is not expected to just know. They are expected to find out for certain, before engaging in potentially criminal acts. Ignorance is not a defence. If you can't be certain then don't have sex. It's not rocket science. The onus is on each adult to check they're not about to do something criminal!

Children, even very damaged ones who are acting out dangerous and unhealthy behaviour, need to be protected by adults.

I am astonished and sickened by the sheer number of posters here willing to place all or some of the blame/responsibility on children.

Do you genuinely believe that no adult should be punished for having sex with a child, if the adult can show that the child was involved in creating the situation?
It depends if the adult knew the child was underage. If the adult knew (either it was obvious or the child disclosed it) then obviously they should be prosecuted. But if the child convincingly presented as an adult in an adults-only environment and claimed to be an adult then I don’t see how the other adult can be expected to know. In the Scottish case mentioned above, even the police thought the 12yo was an adult.

Hmmm, I actually looked like 16 at that age but I sure as hell didn't think or talk like I was 16.

Well, we'll have to each believe the other is wrong then because I'm not going into work on Monday and telling my very experienced (written textbooks on the topic, regularly testify in court on the topic) colleagues that our policies are wrong because someone on the Internet read a lot of newspaper articles.

I'm sorry, newspaper articles don't show you a 10th of what really happens. This hit the press because of the man had his life ruined angle. 11 year old girl in a council estate has a relationship with her parents friend? You might have to search harder for it. I also did follow your link and the legal definition of rape for under 13s categorically does not mention consent.

The law also doesn't see a difference between someone's husband having sex with them in their sleep and a stranger breaking into their home and raping them by force. Or (at least in terms of charges, disappointingly he wasn't convicted) a man breaking into a room where his friend was having sex with a woman, swapping in without even asking her and leaving again.

Rape is about consent, not force. A child cannot consent. An unconscious woman cannot consent. You don't need bruises to have been raped. This matters.

The amount of woman arguing that he definitely thought she was over 18 and she should not "get away with it" is bonkers.

No wonder Rotherham etc happened >

Way too many people see teen girls even young teen girls in a really worrying way. And are very happy to give enormous benefit of doubt to fully grown definitely adult men.

She was twelve and he was 27 let's just reiterate that.

"If someone creates a profile on an adult dating site then at least in some respects they have had agency."

Would you like the law around sexual contact with minors (12 and under) changed and if so in what way.

"situation that she created"

He was the one who took her home, gave her booze, got some sex, photoed her and sent it to her mates.

He was hardly passive in all this.

Littletabby so you see no difference / or that the law sees / should see no difference between this situation and a situation where a man goes into a child's room and forces them to have sex?

I don't understand.
All my reading of similar cases has only had one charge, even where there was penetrative sex.
There is no allowance in law to differentiate between nonconsent because the child can't consent because they are too young, and nonconsent ie they have been attacked.

I am simply totally sure you are wrong.

I see a difference between this case (if there had been penetration) and a case where a man breaks into a house and rapes a child. You claim the law does not. That's just not true and if it was the MRA types would be up in arms.

I don’t believe grown men are unable to tell 12 year old girls from adults.

I'm not a fan of making men legally the sex 'doers' and women legally 'done to'. This casts all women as passive in their own private lives.
She was TWELVE. What does this have to do with adult women? She was firmly a child.

If someone creates a profile on an adult dating site then at least in some respects they have had agency.

The idea that twelve year old girls have agency when it comes to sex is as old as the hills and seems still a commonly held belief.

He was found not guilty of rape and guilty of sexual activity with a child under 13.

If they are the same then why guilty of one and not the other.

According to him there was no penetrative sex and as there's no other evidence he can't be found guilty of rape, @NothingOnTellyAgain

"I think she bears some culpability for what’s happened and the man in question shouldn’t bear sole responsibility or be punished for a situation that she created."

Do you genuinely believe that no adult should be punished for having sex with a child, if the adult can show that the child was involved in creating the situation?

"I'm not a fan of making men legally the sex 'doers' and women legally 'done to'. This casts all women as passive in their own private lives."

People have talked about adults being responsible for ensuring their partners can consent, which includes checking they are old enough to consent. It's not just about men.

"If someone creates a profile on an adult dating site then at least in some respects they have had agency."

I don't know how this is relevant. "Agency" doesn't bypass the law. A child cannot consent to sex. Children as young as 12 who are creating profiles on adult dating sites need help and protection.

I read your link and the rest of the document. It confirms my work policies, Safeguarding training and recent experience. Consent is not a factor in the rape of under 13s.

My 'logic' is that because a child is too young, they lack the capacity to consent. Rape isn't just physical forcing, it is sex with the lack of consent. If a child cannot consent, it is rape.

Neither of us are going to convince the other, because in the end a stranger on the Internet whos expertise in the topic you know nothing about is not the most convincing.