Man walks free from court after statutory rape

[AssassinatedBeauty]

Saw this news case today, and am not sure what I think:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-39305042

I feel that it gives the message that it's ok for men not to worry about the age of girls/women they have sex with if they have reasonable grounds to believe they're 16+.

Oh and to all the awful "mums" posting earlier in this thread - I'm turning 17 on Sunday. Going to be out in pubs near me tomorrow, trying to get served, when my friends and I find a pub which will serve us we'll stay there and drink as much as possible. Our parents think we'll just have a couple. We do NOT want male attention nor do we want to look older than we are to anyone except the bar staff. We do not want to talk to any men. We are not responsible for any sexual assaults. You will blame us if anything happens, because you are victim blaming scum.

Thank you very much, RJ, and thank you for all your posts on this thread xxx

His name is public because he was found guilty of a crime. It's been reported like any other crime whether minor or major. I don't know why there should be an exception in this case?

Amy - I don't think its most women on this thread - and just because its the feminist board doesn't mean all posters are feminists. Friday night, people pick up whatever looks interesting in active convos. But its depressing to see anyone not putting the rights and needs of the child first and foremost.

His name is all over the Internet, in astonished people on here think he deserves this

It's this thing called the law. As I said earlier if it bothers you so much go and campaign for the age to be lowered or abolished because that is what you are advocating.

You are advocating that it isn't always against the law to have sex with a child younger than 13. That it depends on how the child acted. What the child said. Where the child was. What the child looked like.

Amy you are absolutely right! Enjoy your birthday and I hope with all my heart you are and remain safe from such offenders.

I'm absolutely appalled by many of the comments on fb, mn and elsewhere on this case. She's TWELVE here in Scotland where this happened that's primary/1st year of secondary age!!!

That's rape! Not sex with a minor, not 'an accident' or 'a mistake' but RAPE and he should have been convicted and sentenced as a RAPIST!

"But no one is questioning if he could possibly be lying" exactly!

And the police officers that 'missed' her AND the girl they were supposed to be looking for - they have a vested interest in defending him else they're in the shit too! And their crap observation skills means they shouldn't be in the job!!

"I reserve my sympathy for the abused 12 year old personally" me too! I consider the rapist most responsible but I also think it highly likely this CHILD has been repeatedly failed by those meant to care for her. Parents, guardians, is she a child in care? Is there a history of sexual abuse against this girl? Again I think that is highly likely.

"I'd be amazed if any of those police officers were female." Me too!

"OverthinkingSpartacus: if you wouldn't serve alcohol to someone you had doubts about just based on their word, then maybe don't stick your dick in them either."

Kids lying about their age isn't a defence when it comes to other age restriction laws WHY is it acceptable for this one? Correct answer - it's NOT!

"She got anonymity. So why not him. He's now doomed. Poor lad." Because HE is a RAPIST and she is a VICTIM!

REGARDLESS of the victims age, a rape victims sexual history, clothes, level of intoxication are NO DEFENCE TO RAPE.

Thank you Graphista and I entirely agree with your great post!

He genuinely thought this.

How long and hard did he think about it? a child might look somewhat older than she is (especially to people of dissimilar age, eg the taxi diver) but surely if you talk to someone for a while you would have doubts.

I'm confused. Are the "outraged" posters saying no teenagers should have sex with each other until they have certified proof of each other's ages? Because that's the vast majority of teenage boys and girls you're labelling as potential "sex offenders" there. And frankly, even supposedly "certified" proof is pretty easy to fake these days.

Of course this poor girl was badly let down - but she was let down by her parents/guardians/carers, not by some random guy who thought he was a teenager having consenting sex with another teenager.

OrchidsAndLace you are utterly clueless. Please excuse yourself if you're ever called for jury duty, you're dangerous.

The girl was 12. Not a teenager, a child who was not capable of consenting to sex. The law is different if you're talking about two 14 year olds having sex with each other. The law is very clear about an adult (19 year old man in this case) having sex with a child under 13.

OrchidsAndLace

She wasn't a teenager.

He is a rapist. He raped a little girl. He is a grown man.

He didn't have consent because she was a child.

So it was rape.

Do you understand this?

Oh and one more thing before I go to bed - I just have to say this - all you grown women saying "this poor man thought she was 16". I can tell the difference in maturity when I talk to girls in Year 8/9 in my school through our "peer mentoring scheme". It's obvious they're far younger and far less mature than me (and that's saying something, because I'm pretty immature). You lot think a 19 year old can't tell a 12 year old is 12? Drunk or not? During a conversation? What the fuck did they talk about? "What do you do for a living?" "Oh I just did my 11+...I mean GCSEs...I mean I'm a lawyer, you?" For fuck's sake, stop being rape apologists.

You are advocating that it isn't always against the law to have sex with a child younger than 13. That it depends on how the child acted. What the child said. Where the child was. What the child looked like.

No I'm not. Just because you say something doesn't make it true.

How can you hold him accountable for this? The judge made entirely the correct decision. These were exceptional circumstances

How can you hold him accountable for this?

Because she was a little girl and he is a grown man.

Also it's the law

You are saying he shouldn't be accountable for having sex with a child because of the way the child behaved and looked.

That is why my statement in bold is entirely accurate and all you have done with your post is provide further evidence of this.

He genuinely thought this.

How long and hard did he think about it?  a child might look somewhat older than she is (especially to people of dissimilar age, eg the taxi diver) but surely if you talk to someone for a while you would have doubts.

Where is the requirement in the law to talk to people for a set amount of time before you have sex?

These are utterly exceptional circumstances which is why it is a story

some random guy

Well...most teens who have sex know each other, to some extent, don't they? They know the age by which school year they're in.

A man (even a young one) picking up a teenager is a very different situation. Actually, he does seem to know he let her down too, he pleaded guilty and showed contrition. I've no idea why anyone needs to defend him, the judge has been lenient.

He is accountable because he broke the law. She is a CHILD!

OrchidsandLace I agree with amy, please don't ever be a juror on any sexual abuse/sexual harassment/rape case.

This is not about two 15 year olds who kne each other or know of each other.

It's about an adult picking up a drunk child almost 8 years younger than him.

Excuse it all you like but hope it doesn't happen to your child.

DPspottedmyusername do you have children?

Where is the requirement in the law to talk to people for a set amount of time before you have sex?

There isn't one. There is a requirement not to have sex with kids though and does the above may help with meeting that requirement when you have just tapped off with a "16 year old" in a taxi rank.

miffer what would you have had him done differently?

He pleaded guilty- the judge was the one who didn't sentence him

It's an unfortunate set of circumstances - which occurred because of her upbringing - not her own behaviour - why on earth do you blame him? If the police couldn't tell she was so young nor independent witnesses why do you think his life should be ruined?