To ask, was it rape?

[ivneverspokeaboutthisbefore]

Iv never spoken about this other than to my now husband who talked me into telling my mum for the protection of my younger siblings.

When I was 14 a family friend was doing work on our house, he watched me grow up and was in his late 20's at the time.

I didn't have the best upbringing and was already sexually active and had an older boyfriend (we wasn't together at the time)

I ended up doing sexual things with this man that I consented to, my husband say's it was rape as I was under 16 and therefore couldn't make that decision, the thing is I text this man for years in my teens and not only that but from what iv heard he had a thing for my older sisters to!

I'd never be able to come out in the open with this but the reason I'm asking is because my dad still speaks to this man, but if I told my dad he would probably end up getting arrested! I dont know what to do.

The certainly did at ds's middle and high schools .

And what constitutes a sexual offence. And victim psychology. And anything else really that helps to break through all these stupid,ridiculous and misogynistic rape myths.

And the one in the Bradford case who was throwing ul the alcohol they'd given her while she was being raped by more than one of them.... Well what were they supposed to do, poor guys; seduced by a brazen Lolita like that

I am not wrong, ridiculously or otherwise.

For it to be "statutory rape" there has to be a statute which makes it illegal. You follow?

Rape in statute is presently either the:

s.1 offence (no consent/no reasonable belief in consent/age irrelevant)

OR the

s.5 offence (child under 13/consent no defence)

So whilst the BBC bitesize website may claim otherwise, there is no other offence of rape to provide for the where the victim is between 13 and 16. \

Whilst the age of consent is 16, that still doesn't make intercourse with consent in that very specific bracket rape. It is a different offence. The same applies historically.

You may believe so @RumpoleoftheBaileys. The law disagrees with you.

The Age of Consent in United Kingdom is 16 years old. The age of consent is the minimum age at which an individual is considered legally old enough to consent to participation in sexual activity. Individuals aged 15 or younger in United Kingdom are not legally able to consent to sexual activity, and such activity may result in prosecution for statutory rape or the equivalent local law.

You need to read what you copied and pasted SLOWLY:

The Age of Consent in United Kingdom is 16 years old - agree

The age of consent is the minimum age at which an individual is considered legally old enough to consent to participation in sexual activity - agree

Individuals aged 15 or younger in United Kingdom are not legally able to consent to sexual activity, and such activity may result in prosecution for statutory rape or the equivalent local law - agree. If they are under 13 that is statutory rape, if they are over, then the equivalent, so SAWAC.

This is like the playing chess with a pigeon meme...

But by all means, please direct me to the new offence under the SOA...

This is like the playing chess with a pigeon meme...

It is, @RumpoleoftheBaileys
You accept that people can be prosecuted for statutory rape, but are splitting hairs about it not being described in law as a single statute. Like that makes any difference whatsover to the party who has been raped.

And both of us are diverting attention away from OP & her dilemma, so I'm going to stop now. Pip pip.

No - again you misunderstand. Deliberately or otherwise. I have explained this to the OP.

The statute creates multiple offences. It is not the case that sex with someone under 16 automatically equals rape. There are different offences.

So yes, pip pip yourself.

Here’s the actual legislation. It lists the actual offences that are defined as crimes under British law:

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/contents

‘Statutory rape’ is not an offence. He would be guilt of rape if the OP was under 13. As it is, he is guilty of sexual activity with a child and/or incitement of sexual activity with a child.

Name changed for this because it might out me. I reported a ‘family friend’ to the police under similar circumstances to you @ivneverspokeaboutthisbefore. It’s taken a very long time, but the CPS have charged him with several counts of sexual assault. He is due in court very soon.
I met him when I was 14. My DM and Ex-SD lived with him and his partner. My family life was extremely stressful and chaotic. I won’t go into detail in case it goes to trial. Don’t want to jeopardise anything. He was in his mid 30s. He knew full well how vulnerable I was and groomed me until he gained my full trust. He started the sexual stuff when I turned 15. He didn’t have sex with me until I was 16. Looking back, I bet he thought he could only get in trouble for having full sex with me. Wrong. Arsehole.

You will be believed if you decide to report him. I’m happy to see so many of the supportive posts on here. Also upset to see some of the views on this.

Sorry about the long post. I wouldn’t worry about what him and his family have to say. Of course he will deny it. I doubt anyone would readily admit to doing what he has done. I don’t know if he could be charged with rape in terms of the law, but he could be charged with sexual assault based on my case. He is a sexual predator. He was in a position of trust and took advantage. Don’t ever doubt yourself on this.

That's it, exactly.

There seems to be some confusion here as everyone knows the term "statutory rape" as a legal term from the U.S.A. It doesn't actually exist as such in the U.K. - there is no offence called Statutory Rape to charge anyone with. But to muddy the waters, some people here are referring to it by that term as a general concept (the fact that someone under the age of consent can't legally "consent" to sex, so having sex with them is automatically illegal) - and I think that's how the websites kettrickenSmiled referenced meant it as well. I'm pretty sure the suggestion on those sites that someone can be guilty in the UK of an offence called Statutory Rape is, technically, simply wrong. Which is surprising in the case of the BBC, but they're not at the end of the day a legal authority.

The man was guilty of sexual activity with a child.

Not that it particularly matters in terms of the OP's substantive point. It was obviously wrong, and definitely illegal.

Oh my goodness,late 20's thought it said early 20's as that is the only way my brain could compute it mightve been an of the time thing. No definitely abusive if that's the case and yes unlawful. I would actually say it was rape given that age gap and you were not responsible !

Yep. Children under 13 are deemed not to have capacity to consent, above that but under16 they are considered to be capable of consent even though they are under the legal age of consent.

Non consensual sex with a 14 year old is ‘rape’, consensual sex with a 14 year old is ‘sexual activity with a child’.

How do you feel now op?

i read this and feel your pain. i went through years of flashing and alot of other stuff to find a man i trusted and loved and adored. Married and four years later after our fourth child he got a promotion and decided to bring his authority home.he was only home 4 days a month for 15 years. one night he he home. he picked me up and sat me on the banister. am only 5ft1 he is 6fy4 he grabbed me off it and carried me up stairs.he pulled my leggs apart and said you know your going to love it whenits inside you and i went along with it to believe it wasnt rape. i think it was. i got pregnant from that and i wanted an abortion,but i held on because i have the most beautiful intelligent funnyst thing in the the world but i cant see past what he has done x