*Julie - teen girl raped by Paris firefighters - age of consent

[OhHolyJesus]

Julie Bindel writes brilliantly on this case of a vulnerable young girl being groomed by firefighters in Paris.

It's a horrible story so I share with a trigger warning, I don't know which bit is the worst part but this sounds like rough sex defence in the way that a man would excuse himself of any responsibility:

During questioning, two of the accused men admitted they had had “group sex” with Julie while on duty and wearing their uniforms. Another admitted a sexual act in a toilet cubicle of a Parisian hospital where Julie had been admitted, yet claimed to have not noticed that the child displayed any signs of vulnerability.*

The fact she was in hospital escaped him did it and that this is where he was when he committed a sex crime against a minor? Sick bastards, I hope they throw away the key but as with so many other similar crimes the victim will likely not see justice.

Anyway, it's an important challenge for the age of consent on its own, even without the emergency service grooming gang.

My thoughts are with this brave young girl.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/07/outrage-over-french-girls-case-sparks-demand-for-law-to-protect-minors?fbclid=IwAR1kLGEZBvIH8ytNW1inZ70PS65_d7IQwODfJ4GVfw7WB5HPX926m5ya1Rw

Oh god :( poor poor girl

@TheBuffster

I may be being incredibly naive here, but would the reason against the 2018 law being changed have something to do with not wanting to prosecute teens from sexual activity with eachother?

I know we have a problem here where teens have been placed on the sex offenders register for sharing consensual sexting.

In an ideal world we'd teach teens not to do this but teens like to push boundaries.

It just goes to show predators will take advantage of loopholes if they are there.

Poor girl.

Some countries have close-in-age exceptions.

That's good. I don't think the law should treat children the same as predatory adults.

This girl was obviously abused and groomed by adults in a position of trust. It should be really obvious it's rape/abuse.

I read this article earlier. The investigation took EIGHT years.

@Gcnq

So basically their law is sex with and under 15 year old is ok, but not if you can prove the girl faught back? Against a grown man? Any young girl at any age has to prove this?

Not quite, they still broke the law, just a less serious one.

In England, anyone who has intercourse with an under-16 is legally a rapist. There is no "she asked for it" defence, though some of the less-honourable defence solicitors may try that line anyway.

In France, apparently they would only be charged with the equivalent of indecent activity with a child. The sort of law that in England would be for non-penetrative acts is, in France, the most severe law which can be used for penetrating a child, unless it can be proven that it was a rape according to the same definition you'd use for adults.

Out of interest, are French firefighters effectively paramedics too?

I think the stuff about it being to protect consensual sex amongst older children (teens) is a red herring.

There are many ways of writing laws etc to work this in.

There is also the point that someone would have to report it- if it's consensual then who will do that?

UK has guidelines explicitly stating that it's not in the public interest to prosecute consensual sex between young people. The law exists in order to be able to do something when there is a larger age gap etc.

The other thing of course is that in the UK although the laws are ok in practice they're not enforced at all.

We had Rotherham etc with systematic sexual abuse of vulnerable girls over a number of years and the authorities weren't interested.

When we read these things from other countries we say terrible but our own house isn't exactly in order.

@TheBuffster I think the issue is more with U18s sending dick pics and sharing nudes rather than just dirty talk and rude messages. It’s not the fact that u18s are engaging in sexual acts, it’s that it’s child pornography. It often gets shared without consent and can end up in the hands of Paedophiles or used for blackmail/bullying purposes. Hence the law is pretty strict on it and parents need to educate their children about it.

'In England, anyone who has intercourse with an under-16 is legally a rapist. There is no "she asked for it" defence, though some of the less-honourable defence solicitors may try that line anyway.'

This is not true.

The law is that there is no defence in law for sex with a child under 13.

13, 14, 15 there is more nuance.

Kizzy why under 18s?

President Macron was 14 when he met his wife who was a teacher at his school some 25 years his senior. These Lolita type dynamics seem to be more normalised in France.

Christ that poor girl. 20 bastards

“I thought he was the last person to do such a thing because he had helped her so many times and saw how vulnerable she was.” this broke my heart

@NiceGerbil - what do you mean? Under 18s are children in the eyes of the law and so sexualised photos of them are classed as indecent images of a child and are covered by Protection of Children Act 1978 and Criminal Justice Act 1988.

That’s why you have to be over 18 to be a porn star even though age of consent is 16. 16 year olds can have sex, but they are still legally children.

@MrsSchadenfreude

When DD1 was at school in Paris, one of the teachers had a long standing relationship with one of the pupils and got her pregnant. The school effectively had their hands tied as the teacher hadn’t broken any laws - she was over 15, the age of consent, and they couldn’t sack him. They finally got him to leave, but he then went on to write a “novel” about their “romance”, to great acclaim, until people discovered it wasn’t fiction.

The legal side is incredibly fucked up in France.

"French legislation says that it is an offence for someone in a position of authority to have sex with a person under the age of 18."

Why didn't this law apply in that situation MrsSchadenfreude ? Or is it very new?

This is all so deeply depressing. Reminds me of the vulnerable girls in the Rotherham scandal who the authorities characterised as "wanting it".

How exactly would a young teen (or any female) be able to fight back against a firefighter?

Kizzy yes I was thinking of 16 for sex which is what the thread is about.

The lack of age of consent in France explains why “coming of age” French films are weird.

If you read the article I linked earlier it's very interesting about this topic.

The thing that really bothered me about pics. Seeing as it's been raised.

There was a thing in the news about how a girl maybe 14 was approached by someone on maybe watsapp. They chatted a bit and he asked for for a topless shot and she sent it. This was an adult man somewhere.

The girl was silly to do it but you know, 14.

Anyone the bit that disturbed me was that after the girl thought that's dodgy and went and told her mum.

The mum told the police.

It was in the papers at the time.

The police said, thanks for the report. We may well need to charge your daughter for child pornography.

In none of the reports I read did it say anything about trying to find this man. Who was preying on a young girl.

On MN there was a large amount of posters who said she should be charged to 'teach her a lesson'.

That really bothered me a lot and I've googled since and never been able to find what happened next.

The message to parents, girls, and creepy men. From that story being so widely circulated, and the response of a lot of people. Was a message that imo was entirely unhelpful.

So, did the courts not consider the firefighters to be in a position of authority?

I am thinking the sentences involved for sex with a minor are more important than whether they call it rape or something else. The nuances of words in different languages aren't the same anyway. If they found these guys guilty of interference or whatever they call it, and gave them a proper prison sentence, that's the important thing.

If you read the article it's not been taken seriously.

The crimes of rape and.. whatever they went with have very different maximum penalties.

If you read the link it's all in there.

@ChestnutStuffing

So, did the courts not consider the firefighters to be in a position of authority?

I am thinking the sentences involved for sex with a minor are more important than whether they call it rape or something else. The nuances of words in different languages aren't the same anyway. If they found these guys guilty of interference or whatever they call it, and gave them a proper prison sentence, that's the important thing.

There's a difference of 15 years.

20 for rape, 5 for sex with a minor that isn't rape (aka no violence,coercion,threat or surprise whatever that is).

That even applies to 11 yos. It took massive outrage for the judge to change the charge to rape, and the defence attorney did go for "she was nearly 12,she consented ".

@NiceGerbil

If you read the article it's not been taken seriously.

The crimes of rape and.. whatever they went with have very different maximum penalties.

If you read the link it's all in there.

Yes, that was my point.

What they call it is not so significant in itself - if the penalties seemed more comparable or appropriate. There isn't necessarily only one way to write laws or define crimes that is workable.

@Thelnebriati

How is this legal within Europe?

Jimmy saville??

But the difference in sentencing maximums and the fact they can seem this to be consensual due to lack of fighting back etc...

I don't understand your point.

@NiceGerbil

But the difference in sentencing maximums and the fact they can seem this to be consensual due to lack of fighting back etc...

I don't understand your point.

Just that I don't know that it's necessarily the most straightforward approach to say that they should adopt laws that use the same sort of categories as other countries. They could probably change the sentencing limits within the laws they have and it might be quicker and easier.

Sometimes we can get stuck thinking about the construction of the laws as if there is only one way to do it so that there is justice. But usually that isn't true, there can be several ways to conceptualise crimes.

I mean, rape on the basis that someone is a minor is already differentiated from rape on the basis of threats or violence in many places, simply by calling the former statutory rape. A person can be charged with both in relation to the same crime, because they are seen as different, though both are bad. That wouldn't be substantially different if they changed the name of statuary rape to something like interfering with a minor, if the sentencing was't changed.