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+.

Do rapists wear certain clothes?

Do they go out till the early hours?

Do they drink?

Are they looking all innocent in their school uniform?

Mousse i agree it's hard to tell the difference.
So what is the answer? For 12 year olds to be raped or for adults to be more careful (and take the rap if they get it wrong like they have to do in most other situations other than when men have sex)

While reading here, I can't help but think of studies showing that police often overestimate the ages of minorities. Viewing black children as adults has a dramatic effect on how police interact with them.

It's rather like how many people, but especially men, overestimate the ages of girl children in sexualized contexts (like drunken hookup culture hotspots late at night).

Who, in this thread, is saying that victims are identified by the clothes they wear?

People have said that children can sometimes be more easily identified as children when they are wearing school uniform.

So what a rapist looks like can't be answered Madonna

Why is that?

If everything is based on looks and appearances regarding this trial, then why can't we say what a rapist looks like?

So the police took one look at her and said she was 16?

No talking and no engagement?

Elendon Its a male (lets call him A) who puts his penis into the mouth, vagina or anus of another (lets call him or her, B), where B has not given her consent to this insertion.

It's not a perfect answer, but it'll do for now (bit rushed, I'm in the middle of making a fish pie).

It's rather like how many people, but especially men, overestimate the ages of girl children in sexualized contexts (like drunken hookup culture hotspots late at night).

And then patriarchal society bends over backwards with compassion for such men, as it's just normalised that this case is an acceptable in given such men an absolute discharge despite raping a 12 yr old by product of drunken hookup culture hotspots.

If everything is based on looks and appearances regarding this trial, then why can't we say what a rapist looks like?
For one thing, it wasn't just on appearances, it was also based on the victim's conversation with police officers.

But also, someone's physical appearance is relevant when making a subjective assesment of their age. That doesn't mean the assessment is objectively correct though.

When it comes to UK law's definition of rape, the only relavent physical characteristic is that the offender has a penis, but obviously that characteristic alone is wholly insufficient to determine whether someone has committed rape. I don't really understand the point you're trying to make.

While i find the notion of not knowing a 12 year old was underage a bit unbelievable, i will address the bigger issue. In law the mens raa test, meaning the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused seems to fall flat in cases like this. If a man meets a woman and "believes" she is over 18, (which any man in a bar, a club or out at 3am can reasonably expect), is therefore not guilty of "intention".

So the police took one look at her and said she was 16? No talking and no engagement?
Who is saying that?

StealthPolarBear

So what is the answer? For 12 year olds to be raped or for adults to be more careful (and take the rap if they get it wrong like they have to do in most other situations other than when men have sex

The answer, in a long term holistic way, is for the girl not to be there. That is not to say that men attacking adult women can blame the women for dressing inappropriately and just being there. That is a whole different thread.

But in this case we need to ask why was that child allowed to be there? Why did that child have the skills and experience to convince adults she was over 16? Some adults in her life have failed her badly and we need to look at those issues to prevent it happening again.

So there is no way of knowing if the person is a rapist, other than they appear male and have a penis.

No care for age?
Clothes?
Out at night?

Crikey, how do you men go out and socialise? If the criteria was just owning a penis then why do you bother going out at night or even to work? Why would you risk that?

What are you talking about?

If a man meets a woman and "believes" she is over 18, (which any man in a bar, a club or out at 3am can reasonably expect), is therefore not guilty of "intention".

But why would a man do this? He is a rapist after all. The only identifying thing he has to being a rapist is his penis. No one can identify him as a rapist by the clothes he wears, his age, his sobriety, his demeanour. He should stay inside and knit and sew.

Is this a reclaiming the streets type argument?

Why is he a rapist?

One characteristic to help to identify a dog is that it has four legs. Is everything with four legs a dog?

Just popping out to walk my table.

NoWin feigns stupidity when it comes to the obvious. Yet, is willing to give everyone the wisdom of their precious opinion.

She won't reply her table is being walked.

Opinion on what?

Men are not dogs NoWin My son is not a dog.

Who is saying that your son is a dog?

Why are you on this thread NoWin?

NoWin the opinion about your table. And the child who is not a dog. Obvs.

I would ignore them elendon