Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

1 2 3

News

21 year old woman spared jail despite abusing 11 year old boy (sensitive)

69 replies

Sidge · 05/10/2015 17:59

Has anyone seen this case in the news?

www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Swindon-babysitter-paedophile-Jade-Hatt-judge/story-27924480-detail/story.html

So she has sex with an 11 year old but it was OK because he was "up for it" according to his dad (who I read on the DM page had also had a sexual relationship with her).

It beggars belief that she was treated with such leniency IMO. I also hope that Children's Services are involved with the boy and his dad who seem to have some dysfunctional attitudes - how can any child of 11 be "sex mad"?!

I think it's very worrying.

OP posts:

Report

Iliveinalighthousewiththeghost · 05/10/2015 23:56

An 16 year old can't consent, surely.
Well absolutely they can't. Thats exactly why there is an age of consent. 16.

ObsidianBlackbirdMcNight · 06/10/2015 08:47

The 21 year old was described as being emotionally immature and developmentally like a young teenager. And the dad, an adult man, had sex with her. And the judge gives weight to his judgement? What the ever loving fuck. I wonder whether the dad procured/groomed her into having sex with the son.

VoyageOfDad · 06/10/2015 09:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Sidge · 06/10/2015 09:20

Whilst I wouldn't refer to an 11 year old as a baby, I can't understand a world where anyone, let alone a judge, finds it acceptable that an 11 year old can be "sex mad" and "up for it" with another person, be it adult or fellow child.

I can only guess that the boy lives alone with his dad, who may have exposed him to inappropriate sexual images, films, magazines, attitudes and chat. 11 year olds should be out on their bikes, or playing FIFA on their xboxes or whatever. Not thinking about shagging their dad's ex girlfriend.

My concern is that the current legal boundary of a child under 13 not being able to consent to any sexual activity is now blurred and may set a precedent. Frightening.

OP posts:

prh47bridge · 06/10/2015 09:50

My concern is that the current legal boundary of a child under 13 not being able to consent to any sexual activity is now blurred and may set a precedent

That would only be the case if the judge had ruled that she could not be convicted. No such ruling was made. She was convicted of the offence. This does not therefore set a precedent allowing 11 year olds to consent to sexual activity.

This sentence is clearly outside the sentencing guidelines for this kind of offence. To quote the guidelines, "There will be very few cases in which immediate custody is not called for, even in relation to a young offender because the purpose of the legislation is to protect children under 13 from themselves, as well as from others minded to prey on them".

I hope there is an appeal against this sentence.

Sidge · 06/10/2015 10:26

Thanks prh47 that's reassuring. I'm not in any way legal so wondered what the implications were.

OP posts:

Andrewofgg · 06/10/2015 15:14

Imagine if the genders were reversed; an allegedly immature man of 20 and an allegedly sex-mad girl of 11 - somehow I don't think there would have been a suspended sentence.

I do not know whether this offence comes within the scheme for Attorney-General's references but I would lay money somebody in the Attorney's office does.

RickRoll · 07/10/2015 10:57

The normal sentence for this offence is five years in prison - she was in a position of trust, as a babysitter, and the offence is of the highest seriousness (full penetrative sex).

Anononooo · 07/10/2015 11:22

this is multiply awful - but I suspect she needs some sort of help.

HaloEveSteve · 07/10/2015 11:41

Absolutely horrible and if the child really was 'sex mad' then the reasons for that need to be investigated as that is abnormal for an 11 year old.

scatterthenuns · 07/10/2015 12:08

I agree with ObsidianBlackbirdMcNight.

An immature, under-developed (mentally) 21 year old is more like a young teenager. Let's say 13.

Dad has sex with her. This is dubious in itself.
But then, she has sex with the Dad's son, whilst the Dad is fine with it?

Very, very dodgy territory and I'd be seriously investigating Dad as well as her.

BarbarianMum · 07/10/2015 16:33

scatterthenuns · 07/10/2015 17:07

I assumed as such, because the judge said this Barbarian:

Mousley said she was immature, while the boy was mature for his age, and he felt able to step outside normal sentencing guidelines.

I can't fathom a world where just immaturity is enough to mean that she only got a suspended sentence for raping an 11 year old.

You are quite right that we don't know either way.

scatterthenuns · 07/10/2015 17:12

This is what I had read that caused me to make that assumption, apologies:

Mr Ross said petite Hatt "clearly doesn't operate at the level of a 20-year-old"

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 07/10/2015 17:18

I don't know the full story (obvs) but it sounds almost as if the father is the perpetrator and the boy/babysitter both victims.

AnyoneButAndre · 07/10/2015 17:23

According to this statement from her defence she has learning difficulties and a low IQ, and a very tough upbringing including 2 years in hospital with leukaemia as a small child. I wonder how old she was when the father started sleeping with her? He sounds like a prince amongst men.

hedgehogsdontbite · 07/10/2015 17:44

How did this come to the attention of the authorities, does anyone know?

RickRoll · 07/10/2015 17:50

The defence would say that wouldn't they?

She's completed F.E., and she's apparently well functioning enough to sort out her own housing: www.spareroom.co.uk/flatmate/4156932

and post adverts online.

The bit about leukaemia is a load of bollocks, it happened when she was FIVE. Her IQ is almost certainly below average, but most (male) prisoners have below average IQ, so that really doesn't make her a special snowflake does it?

And I don't think pinning all the blame on the father is appropriate either. She is 20 years old, and she is fully entitled/capable to have a sexual relationship with the father, and vice versa. He's not necessarily any brighter than she is.

shutupanddance · 07/10/2015 17:53

I find that shocking. I hope the boy is remived from his father who clearly isn't fit for parenting.

BernardlookImaprostituterobotf · 07/10/2015 19:21

I'm absolutely appalled, that poor little boy. His father won't advocate for him or protect him and now the law has done the same. He is absolutely not being a fit parent.
There are plenty of male sexual offenders in custody with low IQs, learning difficulties and/or their own very troubled backgrounds. Her actions certainly seem to show she is equally predatory as some of them.
I can't scroll back to CP the comment about sex reversal but I certainly do remember a fairly recent case of a young girl described as, paraphrasing, up for it and judges comments about her pursuing the male (teacher I think) I'm sure I read it here too but I can't seem to find the thread. Happy to be corrected on any details I've got wrong but sadly there do seem to be some judges who are woefully falling short in protecting children.

Rivercam · 07/10/2015 20:51

I heard about this and was appalled. Being immature doesn't excuse you. The boy was 11! It's not like he was a strapping 15 year old ( my 15 Year old is 6ft so looks older).

As other posters have said, if he was an immature male and she was a younger girl, then the book would be thrown at him and everyone would be calling him a sexual predator, paedophile etc.

The judge has seriously made an error here.

LuluJakey1 · 07/10/2015 20:57

My understanding is that under the age of 13, consent can not be given and it is statutory rape so not sure how the judge has handed down this load of inappropriate shit. She should be jailed and on a sex offenders' register.

HaloEveSteve · 07/10/2015 21:33

I was immature in some ways as a 20 year old but that didn't mean I was sexually interested in children! It is no excuse. The dad sounds dodgy as fuck.

I don't agree it would have necessarily been a different sentencing had sexes been reversed as I've read of cases where it is implied the girls were 'up for it' etc. Victims of sexual assault and rape rarely get justice it seems.

HaloEveSteve · 07/10/2015 21:35

The dad sounds dodgy AF too, that should say.

DiscoGoGo · 07/10/2015 21:44

Really revolting verdict, awful. The law says children can't consent below 13, no ifs no buts no excuses. This is not the first time that a judge had decided there's an exception to that, it's just not right.

People saying it wouldn't happen the other way around, it has unfortunately.

The judges need some Fucking training or sacking of something. Every time this happens everyone says how awful and then it happens all over again.

Flip

1 2 3

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.