Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

To think the result of this rape trial is disgusting

999 replies

joystir59 · 17/03/2017 20:48

Man gets off completely Scot=free for raping a 12 year old girl, and that this result gives such a wrong message to men, in a world in which girls are never considered too young anyway. I'm enraged!
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-39305042

OP posts:
TheFallenMadonna · 18/03/2017 00:06

Did your studies cover strict liability?

RJnomore1 · 18/03/2017 00:06

Excuse me I've studied plenty of law and I think you missed the CONVICTIONS I mentioned

Ffs

I didn't disagree you absolute muppet the courts did. People convicted of offences without intention for not taking due care.

I could sleep tonight. I don't know if people are deliberately obtuse or just looking for an argument.

RJnomore1 · 18/03/2017 00:07

And this man did not use a defence he pleaded guilty BECAUSE HE WAS

TheFallenMadonna · 18/03/2017 00:07

Um. He is a rapist. There is no defence to sex with a child under 13. That is the law.

AssassinatedBeauty · 18/03/2017 00:07

Not only did he plead guilty, he was found guilty. The issue is with the sentencing. He was given an absolute discharge. So essentially saying that you can get away with no actual penalty if you have sex with a child as long as the child is considered to look 16+.

SuperBeagle · 18/03/2017 00:07

Did your studies cover strict liability?

Hmm

Yes. What's your point?

SuperBeagle · 18/03/2017 00:10

I didn't disagree you absolute muppet the courts did. People convicted of offences without intention for not taking due care.

Mate. Obv. The standard of proof for manslaughter etc. is lower. If you can't prove intention, a person can still be convicted of a crime, but not a crime at the highest level (which is exactly what I said on the last page). You're not going to get a murder conviction without proving intention and/or a reckless indifference to human life.

TheFallenMadonna · 18/03/2017 00:10

The law does not allow for "common sense" if the child is under 13. If you wanted it to, you would have to change it to remove or lower the limit. Would you?

TheFallenMadonna · 18/03/2017 00:10

So why do you say he is not a rapist?

Slinkymalinky1 · 18/03/2017 00:11

She didn't just look over 16, she told him she was and consented.

SuperBeagle · 18/03/2017 00:12

Um. He is a rapist. There is no defence to sex with a child under 13. That is the law.

There is a defence. There are precedents for this case. The outcome is what it is because of those precedents. If someone leads you to believe that they are above the age of consent, and a reasonable person would believe that what they are saying is true, you can use that as a defence if it turns out that the person was deceiving you.

RJnomore1 · 18/03/2017 00:12

Please reread your post of 23.56. I cannot cut and paste.

I do hope you are not an actual lawyer.

Slinkymalinky1 · 18/03/2017 00:13

No I wouldn't lower the age of consent. It's a safety net. A safetnet open to abuse, from both sexes.

TheFallenMadonna · 18/03/2017 00:13

I have a teenage son. I sincerely hope he understands that having sex with a drunk girl he met in a taxi queue in the early hours, who says she is just over the age of consent, is somewhat risky. And probably best avoided.

AssassinatedBeauty · 18/03/2017 00:14

Well, if she told him then that's all right. Must be her responsibility as a child not to lead an adult man on.

TheFallenMadonna · 18/03/2017 00:14

Only if the child is 13 or over.

maddening · 18/03/2017 00:15

If.the girl was sexualised in order to be telling men that she was over the age of consent and have - from her pov not the legal definition- consensual sex - then her behaviour has nothing to do with the man who has not knowingly carried out a crime as he had been defrauded. He was conned by either a very mature 12 year old or a 12 year old who had been sexualised to this point with parents who seemingly did not mind their 12 year old to be out in the middle of town in the middle of the night.

And I do remember being 12 and I was quite aware of my own behaviour and did know right from wrong. She lied and he has been dragged through the courts and vilified because of her lie - whoever should have been caring for the 12 year old child and not let her roam the streets and potentially who has failed in her upbringing/been negligent or even abusive enough to bring this behaviour out in her is to blame here. Whatever the reason is for her behaviour it was not this young man (not even out of his teens himself)

TheFallenMadonna · 18/03/2017 00:16

Slinkmalinky, I don't mean 16. I mean the 13 age limit below which there is no wiggle room. Would you change that?

Slinkymalinky1 · 18/03/2017 00:17

No, I don't think, as a child, it was her responsibility. She's vulnerable, clearly! But, i also do not think a 19 year old should be banged up for rape under these circumstances.

TheFallenMadonna · 18/03/2017 00:17

Superb eagle. There is no defence if the child is under 13. He was convicted. The mitigation is in sentencing only.

TheFallenMadonna · 18/03/2017 00:18

SuperBeagle!!

BastardBloodAndSand · 18/03/2017 00:19

I feel more sorry for the bloke tbh. Poor sod's had his life ripped apart because a silly girl decided to lie. He will have to live with the stigma of being a 'child rapist' for the rest of his life.

Everyone involved thought she looked older which is why it's such an unusual case.

Slinkymalinky1 · 18/03/2017 00:21

Thefallenmadonna ah ok, I see what you mean....do you know what, I get it, I get why there can't be any grey area with that. But I just really feel sorry for this man. He's barely out of childhood, he's had sex with a girl he doesn't know, something people do all the time, now he's a rapist.

TheFallenMadonna · 18/03/2017 00:21

Yes, he is.

FreeTibet · 18/03/2017 00:22

Her parents/guardians have a lot to answer for letting her out dressed the way she was dressed if she looked like 20. She was a 12 year old child. She shouldn't have been out at that time of night.