Would you have convicted the boy of rape in this circumstance? Watch

username196545
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#21
Report 9 years ago
#21
Tell me guys, how old would you say this girl is? Yeah, she's 12!


Or this girl: http://69.90.174.251/photos/display_...67977780,2.jpg
quote
reply
Titanomachy
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#22
Report 9 years ago
#22
10-12?
0
quote
reply
Ella_belle
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#23
Report 9 years ago
#23
The complainant, a girl aged 12, had said in a video-recorded interview that the sexual intercourse had not been consensual but had been terrified of attending court and had been content that the prosecution accept the basis on which the appellant’s plea of guilty had been made.
Therefore the girl didn't say that she had told him she was 15, or that she had consented to the sex. She merely said that she would rather not attend court since he had plead guilty. He is the one that said that she had told him she was 15 and consented. In which case I probably would convict him, yes.

It seemed a bit odd that the case would have even gone to court if both parties were saying that the sex was consensual, as this sort of thing tends to be at the discretion of the judge if both parties are under 16. In fact, the only case that I've heard of where there was a technical 'grey area' as to whether or not the person should be convicted whether or not the sex was consensual was when the girl was 10 and the man was 35 (and claimed that the girl had said she was 16). He was convicted though, in the end, partially because the girl was saying that it had been rape (I seem to remember) and partially because that alibi was really never going to hold water.
0
quote
reply
User192499
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#24
Report 9 years ago
#24
(Original post by Anony mouse)
A 15-year-old boy had sexual intercourse with a 12-year-old girl. The boy was charged with rape of a person under 13. The victim admitted that she told the defendant that she was 15 years old and that the sexual intercourse was consensual.

The defendant appealed against his conviction for rape of a person under 13 years old on the basis that such a conviction contravened his Human Rights notably the presumption of innocence and the right to respect for private life.

His appeal was rejected.

Would you have convicted the boy of rape in this circumstance?

Without a doubt his conduct, according to the law, fell within the ambit of the offence of sexual activity with a child. This is necessary to protect children vulnerable to exploitation; hence the law suggests that children under 13 are not capable of giving valid consent.

Nevertheless, I disagree with the conviction for the offence of rape of a person under 13. This conviction attracts negative consequences, which are disproportionately severe to his culpability. The offence is designed for a much more serious situation.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle4174966.ece

Hittin' ya with a reply from the uber-smart Oxford lawyer downstairs:

Right, I’m sorry but this has to be cleared up, at least on legal terms.
The crime of rape of a child under 13 is defined under section 5 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The mental fault element is (in legal terms) strict liability as regards the child’s age. What this means is that it is irrelevant whether the accused knew her to be under 13, believed her to be under 13 or believed her to be 15; if he intentionally penetrates her he commits an offence. This is because the law regards such an act on a child under 13 as wrong regardless of the penetrator’s thoughts, beliefs or intentions, or indeed the child’s own motivations.
Secondly, the boy himself is 15, thus in the eyes of the law he cannot consent to sexual intercourse either. He therefore was aware that ANY sexual act he entered into would involve a breach of the law, with himself either victim or perpetrator depending on the circumstances.

To those who are suggesting that the girl herself should be culpable: the offence here is one which is aimed at protecting the victim, arguably from herself as much as others. Even though by lying about her age she may have encouraged the boy, she cannot be guilty of encouraging or assisting an offence, contrary to s.44 of the Serious Crime Act 2007, because section 51 provides that a victim cannot incite an offence which itself is there to protect the victim – in other words you cannot encourage an offence against yourself, see the Tyrell case for further information.

All of this said, the Crown Prosecution Service were issued with guidelines accompanying the Sexual Offences Act that state that in many cases an offence may be made out against an accused but they should not be tried for policy reasons. It is arguable that the instant case fits this category. Nevertheless, the boy has committed blameworthy conduct with the necessary intention to make out the offence. The only issue should be sentencing.
0
quote
reply
helraizer
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#25
Report 9 years ago
#25
(Original post by sulpicia)
Yes I would. Although certain factors would have to be taken into account. And I'm not sure about the merits of custody. The issue of consent is, I believe not rel. for children.
Why can't they consent..? if they know what sex is, they don't do it to have kids they do it because it's fun (which it is).

"Do you want some juice?"
"Yes"
They've said yes to juice, they get juice..

"Do you want to play on the Wii?" (that's not a euphemism! :p:)
"Yes"
They've understood and said yes to playing the Wii.

why would it be any different consenting for sex?

That's what I don't understand..
If they know what it is and they've said yes then they've said yes. How can they be "too young" to consent at 12-13? Most girls have started puberty by then and by definition puberty is the body becoming capable for reproduction so they're able to have sex they're just "not allowed". =\

(Original post by EducatingBrogan)
Hittin' ya with a reply from the uber-smart Oxford lawyer downstairs:

What this means is that it is irrelevant whether the accused knew her to be under 13, believed her to be under 13 or believed her to be 15; if he intentionally penetrates her he commits an offence.
Just out of interest, how can it be unintentional? "Oops, I tripped! *shifty eyes*"
0
quote
reply
dougiemacs
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#26
Report 9 years ago
#26
wow, i feel really sorry for the kid, i mean either hes a bit of an idiot or she developed REALLY early, but still, he did no moral wrong.
0
quote
reply
Dionysus
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#27
Report 9 years ago
#27
(Original post by TheMeister)
How on earth could a 12-year-old look like a 15-year-old? They're completely different age ranges, even though only a few years apart.
Have you ever seen Jodie Foster in Taxi driver?

It's entirely possible. I think when the male is only 15 himself, the court should be able to make a judgement as to whether he was mislead.
0
quote
reply
User192499
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#28
Report 9 years ago
#28
(Original post by Dionysus)
Have you ever seen Jodie Foster in Taxi driver?

It's entirely possible. I think when the male is only 15 himself, the court should be able to make a judgement as to whether he was mislead.
The boy himself is 15, thus in the eyes of the law he cannot consent to sexual intercourse either. He therefore was aware that ANY sexual act he entered into would involve a breach of the law, with himself either victim or perpetrator depending on the circumstances.
0
quote
reply
Kyte
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#29
Report 9 years ago
#29
If the mistake was made genuinely then there shouldn't be a convicton, and there's a precedent on this with very similar facts.
0
quote
reply
a_t
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#30
Report 9 years ago
#30
We did this case in criminal law a few weeks ago, is it most definitely rape if you follow the letter of the law
0
quote
reply
adilmorrison
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#31
Report 9 years ago
#31
(Original post by TheMeister)
How on earth could a 12-year-old look like a 15-year-old? They're completely different age ranges, even though only a few years apart.
:ditto:

He should have been convicted of stupidity...
0
quote
reply
Dionysus
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#32
Report 9 years ago
#32
(Original post by EducatingBrogan)
The boy himself is 15, thus in the eyes of the law he cannot consent to sexual intercourse either. He therefore was aware that ANY sexual act he entered into would involve a breach of the law, with himself either victim or perpetrator depending on the circumstances.
I know the law's position on it, but as someone pointed out, the law is in this situation, as it is so frequently, an ass.
0
quote
reply
User192499
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#33
Report 9 years ago
#33
(Original post by Dionysus)
I know the law's position on it, but as someone pointed out, the law is in this situation, as it is so frequently, an ass.

I wouldn't call it an ass, although the term "rape" seems inappropriate if the sex was consensual... but ultimately the boy should have known that sex with anyone under 16 was illegal. I know plenty of kids do it, but well... they're breaking the law. If the **** then hits the fan due to unexpected circumstances, well it can't be said they had no warning.
0
quote
reply
helraizer
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#34
Report 9 years ago
#34
(Original post by adilmorrison)
:ditto:

He should have been convicted of stupidity...
Not necessarily true. 2 words.. Make Up.

There was a girl in the supermarket, my mum knew her mum so they talked and we talked (nothing like that); if you were to have asked me how old I thought she was, I was sure she was about 17.. she was 13. So it's easily doable.

Same goes the other way round too, older people can look younger. I ID'd someone for alcohol at work because I thought he looked about 15, he turned out to be 27. So looks can be deceiving!
0
quote
reply
Allthewayhome
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#35
Report 9 years ago
#35
(Original post by TheMeister)
How on earth could a 12-year-old look like a 15-year-old? They're completely different age ranges, even though only a few years apart.
I know 19 that look like 15 years and I certainly know 12 years old that look 15.

People's bodies develop at different rates.
There is no standard.

The boy shouldn't have been charged.
0
quote
reply
SimonM
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#36
Report 9 years ago
#36
(Original post by helraizer)
why would it be any different consenting for sex?
*facepalm
0
quote
reply
numb3rb0y
Badges: 3
#37
Report 9 years ago
#37
(Original post by EducatingBrogan)
I wouldn't call it an ass, although the term "rape" seems inappropriate if the sex was consensual... but ultimately the boy should have known that sex with anyone under 16 was illegal. I know plenty of kids do it, but well... they're breaking the law. If the **** then hits the fan due to unexpected circumstances, well it can't be said they had no warning.
"It's the law and he knew it so he deserved what he got" is a profoundly stupid justification for this. Do I really need to Godwin this thread to demonstrate why?
quote
reply
Allthewayhome
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#38
Report 9 years ago
#38
(Original post by EducatingBrogan)
I wouldn't call it an ass, although the term "rape" seems inappropriate if the sex was consensual... but ultimately the boy should have known that sex with anyone under 16 was illegal. I know plenty of kids do it, but well... they're breaking the law. If the **** then hits the fan due to unexpected circumstances, well it can't be said they had no warning.
Valid point but why is law one sided?

Shouldn't the girl be charged too? (talking about two 15-15)
0
quote
reply
Allthewayhome
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#39
Report 9 years ago
#39
(Original post by helraizer)
Not necessarily true. 2 words.. Make Up.

There was a girl in the supermarket, my mum knew her mum so they talked and we talked (nothing like that); if you were to have asked me how old I thought she was, I was sure she was about 17.. she was 13. So it's easily doable.

Same goes the other way round too, older people can look younger. I ID'd someone for alcohol at work because I thought he looked about 15, he turned out to be 27. So looks can be deceiving!
Well not if its against the law! :p:
0
quote
reply
Kreuzuerk
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#40
Report 9 years ago
#40
No.
quote
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Were you ever put in isolation at school?

Yes (147)
27.68%
No (384)
72.32%

Watched Threads

View All