The strange reaction to the death of a child rapist drag queen

What DO you consider the nuance to be in 4 convictions for rape of a child under the age of 16?

Bearing in mind that in 1999 the homosexual age of consent was 18 and thus both Sewell and his victim could’ve been charged with a crime if the sex were consensual and the police and judiciary were being harsh and homophobic.

The law distinguishes children under 13 from those 13 or over. A young child is under 13.

Also 4 counts of rape of a child is:
Charge 1: rape of a child
Charge 2: rape of a child
Charge 3: rape of a child
Charge 4: rape of a child

That is four children.

As we don't know the nuance, but you can guarantee the judge did the fact stands he raped children. That's all the nuance I need to know.

it’s good to be rigorous and to think critically when considering these new stories but arguing for nuance in regards to a conviction for 4 counts of rape seems rather disrespectful to the victim

I'm not arguing for nuance. I'm considering the nuance. As clearly none of us know the full detail about it 🙄

There is no way to know if there is any nuance unless a victim of Sewell’s comes forward.

I’m sure being able to handwave away 4 counts of rape as some sort of misunderstood consensual sexual relationship in a homophobic society was extremely convenient for Sewell and his ability to make money on the Cardiff LGBT scene.

Clearly not all community members were on board with such a palatable explanation as Sewell hit the tabloids in 2018 after bar patrons raised objections with the management:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6109327/Bar-hires-convicted-sex-offender-makes-Jimmy-Savile-jokes-drag-act.html

Sewell’s own barrister said that Sewell ‘no longer had any sexual interest in young children’ at the 2011 restrictions breach hearing, so there must be of been least some evidence that Sewell had a ‘sexual interest in young children’ in the 1999 case.

A 14 year old is a child, but I cannot see any reasonable person describing a 14 year old as a ‘young child’ - secondary school starts from the academic year in which they turn 12 so I don’t think it’s unreasonable to assume that ‘young children’ refers to children no older that primary school age, ie, under 11.

Also, as you can see in my previous post with the CPS link, in 1999 a 14 year old was old enough to BE a rapist, so clearly ‘14’ was not a ‘young child’ in terms of sex offence laws.

it’s good to be rigorous and to think critically when considering these new stories but arguing for nuance in regards to a conviction for 4 counts of rape seems rather disrespectful to the victim.

It’s really fucking hard to secure a rape conviction and evidence in regards to the lack of consent is often a key part in securing a conviction.

Sewell's husband raised nearly £7,000 for his funeral. The gofundme he started is still open.

Do have the impression the people on FB were meaning the police been ignoring what everyone else knows full well?

On that page it was alleged by people claiming to be local to the area that the victims (plural) in the case in 1999 were known in the local area (gave details of where they claimed it was) and much younger than him.

Some clueless American man was weighing in at length about their "anti-drag" prejudice but he didn't seem to understand that there might not be a record accessible to the public due to all parties being underage so the absence of evidence wasn't proof that the local people were lying.

I don't think it was about the police or the original conviction which for all anyone knows fully reflected what happened, it's more about the OTT funeral and people saying that he hasn't done anything wrong.

Yes he broke the law. I still think the circumstances and nuance is important. Even if you don't. As I said, we all hold different opinions. Fortunately.

I see reports from 25th Jan saying a man aged 50 was arrested in connection with the death. Is there follow-up on this?

But the nuance is important too.

No it's not.. He made a choice. He broke the law.

Thanks for the link CryptoFascistMadameCholet

Ereshkigalangcleg · Today 13:07

The whole reporting around the funeral has been really odd. I was on a local Facebook selling page last night and there was a huge post (diatribe) about this chap. It actually called him, his partner and others the ‘P’ word in full and capitals

I've seen similar on a different FB page.

Do have the impression the people on FB were meaning the police been ignoring what everyone else knows full well?

Were they meaning the original crime? Or were they alleging even more afterwards?

Thanks for posting. Yes, it is scary how this new religion washes away all sin. And offenders don't even have to repent or desist.

Well we're all free to hold different opinions on the situation and what happened. It may have been against the law. But the nuance is important too.

There were a number of changes to rape laws about 5 years before Sewell’s conviction.

This included the reclassification of Sewell’s
later offence from ‘Nonconsenual buggery’ to ‘Rape’, same charge as already applied to the rape of a female victim.

It was also around that time that it became possible to charge rapists who committed their crimes while under the age of 14.

Seems to me to be a rather enlightened change in terms of gay equality and understanding of underage perpetrators of sex offences?

Sewell was convicted of 4 Counts of Rape of a boy under the age of 16.

He was sentenced to 36 months of youth offender detention time - if the judge was motivated by homophobia it could’ve been a much harsher sentence.

Same as his 2011 breach of conditions - that could’ve resulted in prison time but the judge chose to impose a sex offenders treatment programme, a curfew and 300 community service hours instead.

Homophobia is real and wrong but I’m not seeing any evidence of it in Sewell’s conviction and subsequent sentencing.

Screenshots from CPS: www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-7-key-legislation-and-offences

The whole reporting around the funeral has been really odd. I was on a local Facebook selling page last night and there was a huge post (diatribe) about this chap. It actually called him, his partner and others the ‘P’ word in full and capitals

I've seen similar on a different FB page.

Don't particularly care which exact age group of children he liked to rape was personally.

Don't care if he was a child himself.

He didn't have the right to do what he did.

There was enough evidence to take it to trial and for him to be found guilty. Therefore it wasnt consensual.

He was a raper of children.

The child was under 14.

James Esses, the author, is a former criminal barrister so it seems unlikely he’d make a sloppy mistake when discussing a convicted criminal.
Editing/sub editing can always cause unintended issues, of course.

You could tweet/email Esses or the speccie for clarification?

IIRC, when the details were originally reported, the victim was said to be under the age of 14.

Can you provide evidence is abused just one? It seems there are several media reports who are using children - plural. Why are you presuming they are wrong?

Of the many motivations that cause people to go under the trans umbrella there is one I call Tabula Rasa Trans, where men who have been terrible people convince others that by performing femininity they have actually become a woman and:

• their past behaviour was caused by trauma over their gender identity
• by declaring themselves a woman they have actually become a new person, completely divorced from the person who engaged in bad behaviour
• by performing femininity they become incapable of male-pattern behaviour and pose the same statistical risk as a female, not a male.

It seems unhinged, but people actually go along with this; the same people who would actually accept Tyson Fury having a female body if he suppressed his testosterone for a few months and wanted to compete in women's boxing.

If there are more perps involved than just Sewell I hope the local police are investigating them thoroughly (surely they already need to follow any leads re: Sewell as his death could be connected? I don’t condone vigilante violence but it is a thing that exists so it must be an avenue of inquiry?)

That said, most people don’t usually resort to blurting out loads of allegations against named people online unless they’re already disillusioned with the proper channels.

Thanks, do you have a link for that please? I haven't seen anything but the conviction re a single victim.