Support NeoGAF

[Bogey]

Not only should that girl be locked up for quite some time, but also they should probably seriously reconsider the father's right of custody as well...

What beats me - the article reads a lot like his father was the one who called the police after seeing hickeys and text messages (the latter of which meaning that he most likely also immediately knew who did that).
Why does he first call the police and have them investigate, just to later do his best to defend that very girl in front of court? [Conspiracy theory]Did he have any skeletons in the closet she could have blackmailed him with?[/Conspiracy Theory]

 

[The Incarnation]

Seeing as it's here in UK, this sentence doesn't surprise me one bit.

 

[timetokill]

I guess it's pretty much open season for women raping little boys.

Disgusting ruling.

Poor kid.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

Yup, let's not rule on the actual law, but how we interpret situations.

And she did the father as well. Dear lord.

 

[besada]

I've not defended the babysitter at all.

I just pointed out that I agree with the judge, who is an expert in UK law and it's application has come to a decision. Also, the court, judge etc will be privy to a lot more information than what's presented in a newspaper article that's designed more to stir up a fuss and get clicks.

I'm defending my legal system goddamit.

I don't see the CPS, Police, Parents objecting to the finding either.

Your legal system is fucked up. Its rape laws are outdated, making it impossible for a woman to land in the top tier of rape charges because they specify penetration of the vagina, rather than a more modern definition.

Regardless, by your own listing of the offenses, the sentence was too lenient. No one's denying genital to genital contact, which, according to your own listing has a penalty of:

Type/nature of activity: Contact between naked genitalia of offender and naked genitalia or another part of victim's body, particularly face or mouth

Starting points: 2 years custody
Sentencing ranges: 1 - 4 years custody

There's no non-custodial penalty listed there, but you're defending what appears to be an incredibly light sentence that is outside of the very guidelines you just posted.

 

[muu]

Sentencing aside will she be registered as a sex offender now?

 

[Reishiki]

I'm defending my legal system goddamit.

I'm not sure why.

 

[cameron]

Sentencing aside will she be registered as a sex offender now?

For 7 years.

A six-month jail term suspended for two years with supervision was imposed and Hatt was told she must register as a sex offender for seven years. Mousley also imposed a sexual harm prevention order banning her from having unsupervised contact with young boys for two years.

 

[Breraa]

Your legal system is fucked up. Its rape laws are outdated, making it impossible for a woman to land in the top tier of rape charges because they specify penetration of the vagina, rather than a more modern definition.

Regardless, by your own listing of the offenses, the sentence was too lenient. No one's denying genital to genital contact, which, according to your own listing has a penalty of:


There's no non-custodial penalty listed there, but you're defending what appears to be an incredibly light sentence that is outside of the very guidelines you just posted.

The law she was convicted under came into force in 2003. They modernised Sex offence laws.

I put it to you that it's the US legal system that is fucked up.

In the US, she'd get 10 years or something silly!

 

[dity]

The law she was convicted under came into force in 2003. They modernised Sex offence laws.

I put it to you that it's the US legal system that is fucked up.

In the US, she'd get 10 years or something silly!

10 years isn't much compared to the rest of that poor boy's life.

 

[Symphonia]

The law she was convicted under came into force in 2003. They modernised Sex offence laws.

I put it to you that it's the US legal system that is fucked up.

In the US, she'd get 10 years or something silly!

You're logic is fucked up.

Let me ask you this. As you seem perfectly fine with the idea of a fully-matured 21-year old female raping an immature 11-year old male, where do you stand in regards to a fully-mature 40-something make having sex with an immature teenage female and downloading child porn? I am, of course, referring to the Jared Fogle case. Going from your reaction in here, I'm guessing you were part of the Fogle Defense Force.

 

[Breraa]

1. This isn't a case of rape, otherwise she would have been on trial for rape.
2. That Jared dude is a peado and deserves everything he gets.

I'm not sure some of you guys understand the (UK) law.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

2. That Jared dude is a peado and deserves everything he gets.

And she's not??

 

[Brian Griffin]

1. This isn't a case of rape, otherwise she would have been on trial for rape.
2. That Jared dude is a peado and deserves everything he gets.

I'm not sure some of you guys understand the (UK) law.

Yes it is, the UK's definition of rape is fucking asinine.

She put his penis in her vagina, thus engaging in sexual intercourse with a minor. There was no consent because he's 11 and can't give consent for sex. She raped him.

 

[Beefy]

1. This isn't a case of rape, otherwise she would have been on trial for rape.
2. That Jared dude is a peado and deserves everything he gets.

I'm not sure some of you guys understand the (UK) law.

I'm not sure you understand what rape is and the babysitter is a paedo as well. As a person from the UK the laws are shit and need updating.

 

[Symphonia]

1. This isn't a case of rape, otherwise she would have been on trial for rape.

2. That Jared dude is a peado and deserves everything he gets.

I'm not sure some of you guys understand the (UK) law.

1. Yes, this is rape.
2. And she's not a pedo?

 

[Breraa]

Yes it is, the UK's definition of rape is fucking asinine.

She put his penis in her vagina, thus engaging in sexual intercourse with a minor. There was no consent because he's 11 and can't give consent for sex. She raped him.

Rape needs an element of force/threat/trickery.

None of that is present.

Re: Paedophlia, from wiki:

Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger.[1][2] As a medical diagnosis, specific criteria for the disorder extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13.[1] A person who is diagnosed with pedophilia must be at least 16 years of age, but adolescents must be at least five years older than the prepubescent child for the attraction to be diagnosed as pedophilia.[1][2]

I'm not sure you understand what rape is and the babysitter is a paedo as well. As a person from the UK the laws are shit and need updating.

It as updated in 2003

 

[stufte]

The law she was convicted under came into force in 2003. They modernised Sex offence laws.

I put it to you that it's the US legal system that is fucked up.

In the US, she'd get 10 years or something silly!

How silly!

 

[Beefy]

It as updated in 2003

Is it 2003?

 

[norinrad]

1. This isn't a case of rape, otherwise she would have been on trial for rape.
2. That Jared dude is a peado and deserves everything he gets.

I'm not sure some of you guys understand the (UK) law.

I do not necessarily agree with 1. and I'm no lawyer, but an 11 year old cannot make that decision. She took advantage of him.

7 years is pretty long but being 21, she can get her life together and move on.

 

[Breraa]

I do not necessarily agree with 1. and I'm no lawyer, but an 11 year old cannot make that decision. She took advantage of him.

7 years is pretty long but being 21, she can get her life together and move on.

That's why she was CONVICTED of sexual activity with a child.....!

 

[Brian Griffin]

Rape needs an element of force/threat/trickery.

None of that is present.

So having sex with a blackout drunk person isn't rape then? What about a quadriplegic against their will? Or a coma patient? You would not need to threaten, force, or trick any of these people in order to have sex with them so are they not able to be raped in the UK?

 

[Reishiki]

That's why she was CONVICTED of sexual activity with a child.....!

And should be of rape. I'm not sure why you're not getting this.

 

[Symphonia]

Rape needs an element of force/threat/trickery.

None of that is present.

Re: Paedophlia, from wiki:

It as updated in 2003

She forced the CHILD to sleep with her. As he is not of age or mentally mature enough to consent, it was forced, or rape. What do you not get about this? Either you're retarded or you're the father.

 

[BajiBoxer]

Rape needs an element of force/threat/trickery.

None of that is present.

Re: Paedophlia, from wiki:





It as updated in 2003

So she's a pedophile who raped a child.

 

[FyreWulff]

Rape needs an element of force/threat/trickery.

None of that is present.

No it doesn't. Shut the fuck up.

 

[Sai-kun]

Rape needs an element of force/threat/trickery.

None of that is present.

what? this is so fucking ignorant

 

[Jawbreaker]

So she's a pedophile who raped a child.

Regarding the part about pedophilia, I believe the distinction being made is that pedophilia requires "a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children." In other words, an adult committing an act of sexual aggression against a minor doesn't necessarily mean they're a pedophile, as it could have been done for other reasons such as power/dominance (see: prison rape). This is not to say the woman in question isn't (I honestly don't know), just offering a clarification on what the poster probably meant.

 

[Dominican Power]

I wish I had a babysitter like that when I was 12.

 

[Beefy]

Regarding the part about pedophilia, I believe the distinction being made is that pedophilia requires "a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children." In other words, an adult committing an act of sexual aggression against a minor doesn't necessarily mean they're a pedophile, as it could have been done for other reasons such as power/dominance (see: prison rape). This is not to say the woman in question isn't (I honestly don't know), just offering a clarification on what the poster probably meant.

The girl said she liked it. She didn't talk down to him etc. She must have had some kind of attraction towards the kid.

 

[Beefy]

I wish I had a babysitter like that when I was 12.

Here we go again....

 

[Ishida]

I wish I..........

You might want to edit that... I've seen people getting banned for posts like that. Something about "promoting rape" I think.

 

[shira]

.

 

[Razmos]

I wish I had a babysitter like that when I was 12.

Wow another one? what a thread.

 

[Symphonia]

I wish I had a babysitter like that when I was 12.

What the fuck is wrong with you people?

 

[BajiBoxer]

I wish I had a babysitter like that when I was 12.

Don't be stupid.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

I wish I had a babysitter like that when I was 12.

Posts like this make me sick.

 

[Makonero]

No need to gang up, Mods have been notified.

This whole thing disgusts me. Why isn't there any pressure in the UK to update these laws to current standards?

 

[Beefy]

No need to gang up, Mods have been notified.

This whole thing disgusts me. Why isn't there any pressure in the UK to update these laws to current standards?

There's been a few petitions with even MPs agreeing it needs to be updated but nothing talked about seriously. Far more needs to be done to bring the law up to date.

 

[s_mirage]

Ah welcome to the worthless update to the legislation that was the Sexual Offences Act 2003. From what I recall, there had been an expectation that the definition of rape would be updated to something that made sense, instead the definition was tightly worded so that only a man can commit rape (rape requires a penis, so sayeth the SOA).

 

[Transhuman]

Rape needs an element of force/threat/trickery.

...or an authority figure abusing their position?