Quote:
Originally Posted by anniek76
Mmm wonder if the barrister is a parent? 13 is no age for consent IMO. Many 13 year olds haven't (or only just) hit puberty then. It's just too young.
I wonder if this barrister is a parent? I agree there are have been many crimes of a vicious sexual nature but that still doesn't excuse anyone of touching children inappropriately. I am sure there are some cases in the latest lot that would have gone unreported had it not been for the Saville inquiries but some of her comments don't seem particularly well thought out.
|
While I agree with everything you say, Annie, I am not a parent. Being a parent doesn't give you a special insight into right and wrong, as many parents who beat and even kill their own children prove. Everyone on this forum has a link to a 13 year old inasmuch as we all used to be one and can look back and see how terribly childlike we were at that age, although at the time we thought we were very grown up.
I'm sure all 13 year old think that they're very sophisticated. You've only got to walk past a secondary school emptying out and see the girls dressed up like street walkers to know that. Many young teenage girls are very provocative, but they are not adult enough to make informed choices and that's why the law must protect them. The barrister involved in this is an
idiot.