Transgender boy in care drugged and raped

[QuietContraryMary]

www.9news.com.au/2019/02/21/16/54/lawyer-argues-vic-teen-gave-sex-consent

"A Melbourne man facing jail for giving a 14-year-old boy GHB and having sex with the youth four times has reduced culpability because the victim was an "active" participant, a barrister argues.

Prosecutors described 28-year-old Andrew Castles' victim as a vulnerable transgender boy in state care, but Castles' lawyer claimed the offending was less grave because the boy signed up to gay dating app Grindr to "seek out" experiences with drugs and sex.

Castles drove the victim to his Ballarat home, gave him a moderate 0.5ml dose of GHB before sexually penetrating him twice, Ms Bates said.

The victim was then given 0.7ml of GHB, three vodka shots and sexually penetrated twice more.

Castles, who had also used GHB, then took a naked photo of the victim sleeping.

The next day he gave the victim more GHB and drove him to a train station."

"Mr Westmore said Castles had misguided beliefs about adolescent sexuality and believed he was helping the victim."

These are the sorts of children Mermaids et al want to 'help'. Confused children living in care who believe they are actually boys, and then men like Andrew Castles are there to drug and rape them.

I am not sure, in a way, if the victim's gender identity makes a difference to the story, save that it would seem that being a gay man has meaning in terms of lifestyle, anatomy, etc., and clearly a 14-year-old biological female is in no way equipped for any of that.

What sex is the victim?

Why is that not made clear?

QuietContraryMary I don't think it matters ehat sex the victim is, I think it matters that they are 14, and in care, therefore doubly vulnerable. Perhaps the fact they are transgender actually make a them vulnerable again. Because maybe they are looking for validation and the perpetrator here knew thus and took advantage of all these factors, evil barstard.

Rogueaccountant

"What sex is the victim?" - female

"Why is that not made clear?" - all trans men and boys are biologically female.

So this vulnerable young person

A. Consented while drugged
B. Was “ helped” by their rapist

That sounds plausible

Even though the age of consent is 16 in Victoria.

I didn’t know the age of consent mattered any more. Rapists all over the place are getting off because their underage victims ‘consented’.

Raped. The girl was raped, repeatedly.

Murderers are getting off because their victims “consented”.

These children are just so vulnerable to predators who will use their confusion about their gender to abuse them, and then again to get off with it without consequences. A child being confused about their gender or sexuality is not a defence for raping them.

How can anyone consent after GHB??

This happened to a child - children cannot consent regardless of whether they went on grindr or not.

What a disgraceful decision.

This has nothing to do with mermaids.

Didn't we have a similar case here where a girl went onto a dating ap and then was abused and there was loads of sympathy for the abuser.

This is about the abuse of a vulnerable child in care, victim blaming and pathetic sentences.

"I don't think it matters ehat sex the victim is, I think it matters that they are 14, and in care, therefore doubly vulnerable."

Well I think it does if they are in care, confused, damaged, etc., and then role playing as a gay man.

www.fridaymonday.org.uk/drug-types/gbl-and-ghb/

"The drug has a reputation for making people horny. Its relaxing effect can be used to help take things up the arse.

Less welcome is that it can make it harder to come or lower your inhibitions, making unsafe sex more likely – and with it passing on infections such as HIV, syphilis or hep C. If you’re a bit out of it – or totally dead to the world – it’ll be hard to control what’s happening or even remember what had happened when (or if) you come round. Guys have reported being sexually assaulted or raped while unconscious on G."

Gay men use poppers, GHB, etc. because they don't have vaginas, and as put above you might need help to 'take things up the arse'.

And again, as mentioned above, there is a (much, like 100x) higher risk of many STDs from receptive anal sex when compared to receptive vaginal sex.

You have to wonder to what extent this child has been validated to believe they are a gay man.

Because you know, gay men don't get pregnant.

QuietContraryMary "Well I think it does if they are in care, confused, damaged, etc., and then role playing as a gay man"

Yes, I absolutely agree. But an adult male drugging and penetrating a 14 year old boy would also be an evil crime. The additional element for the female child is risk of pregnancy. Of course. But what I meant was, whether the victim was female or male the crime is vile.

I think the sex of the victim probably mattered to the judge.

I was surprised at the judge's gross victim-blaming comments because for some reason I initially parsed this story as being about a male boy. Now I understand it's about a female boy it's much less surprising.

(I'm open to being wrong, I don't have that much data on how judges behave when male children are raped. )

I agree, Homestar. The classic victim blaming towards a female. I don't think most judges, or most people even, actually believe TWAW and TMAM - despite the mantra.

That judge would have seen a female victim, regardless of their presentation.

Appalling

GHB was used by the serial killer Stephen Port to drug and rape his victims.

There are many reported accidental fatalities from the recreational use of GHB. The difference between a dose needed to get an enjoyable effect and a lethal dose is quite small.

The very idea of giving such a dangerous substance to a minor is repellent.

Minors cannot consent to sex and also incapacitated people cannot consent to sex. Horrible on so many levels.

Ithink the sex of the victim probably mattered to the judge

I agree.

"Mr Westmore said Castles had misguided beliefs about adolescent sexuality and believed he was helping the victim."

Don't most child rapists claim that children "want it really"?

How can a lawyer argue that a 14 year old "consented" and not be ridiculed. The law exists to protect children from predatory adults, no matter how "enthusiastically" a teenager might seek sex it is not legally possible for them to consent. I hate to appeal to a slippery slope logical fallacy but.......

Homestar "I think the sex of the victim probably mattered to the judge."

I think you are entirely correct there.

"I was surprised at the judge's gross victim-blaming comments"

I should clarify that James Westmore seems to be the defence lawyer. There are no comments from the judge that I've seen.

"I was surprised at the judge's gross victim-blaming comments"

I should clarify that James Westmore seems to be the defence lawyer. There are no comments from the judge that I've seen.

"I was surprised at the judge's gross victim-blaming comments because for some reason I initially parsed this story as being about a male boy."

It's vile. I hope people will call for the judge to reprimanded, I cannot imagine how a judge could say such things.

When girls were groomed for sex and 'used as prostitutes by gangs', I know that terms such as child prostitute are used. How can a child ever be a prostitute. The judge should be sevearley reprimanded.

Oh sorry, just saw it was not the judge but the defence lawyer.

It wasn’t the judge it was the barrister, and I hope the pieces of silver he earned were worth it, repellent individual though he is.

"Mr Westmore said Castles had misguided beliefs about adolescent sexuality and believed he was helping the victim.

"I thought it would be safer if the complainant learnt these things from me," he quoted from Castles."

I cannot believe anyone could take these comments in any way seriously. It's just so vile.