[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

If someone cannot consent, it is rape, a failure in the system to recognise that doesn't change the facts.

The facts say you are wrong

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

The facts say you are wrong

Nope. If someone cannot consent to sex, it is rape. Are you saying that non-consensual sex ISN'T rape, Sheriff?

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Nope. If someone cannot consent to sex, it is rape. Are you saying that non-consensual sex ISN'T rape, Sheriff?

Clearly in this case the boy consented otherwise it would of been rape

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

Clearly in this case the boy consented otherwise it would of been rape

The boy is under the age of 16, and thus he does not have the legal capacity to consent to sex. Nonconsensual sex = rape, and the failure of the court to classify it as such does not change that.

Would you be so quick to downplay the rapist's actions if the genders were reversed?

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

The boy is under the age of 16, and thus he does not have the legal capacity to consent to sex. Nonconsensual sex = rape, and the failure of the court to classify it as such does not change that.

Would you be so quick to downplay the rapist's actions if the genders were reversed?

I’m not down playing anything I’m just stating the law in this case

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

I’m not down playing anything I’m just stating the law in this case

And the law is incorrect, since non-consensual sex IS rape. The law is not absolute, it is flawed and it's cases like this that prove such statements to be true.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

Clearly in this case the boy consented otherwise it would of been rape

I don't understand your reasoning, so if a 14 year old girl went willingly to a man 13 years her senior and had sex, would that not be rape? she can't consent she is underage

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I don't understand your reasoning, so if a 14 year old girl went willingly to a man 13 years her senior and had sex, would that not be rape? she can't consent she is underage

Every case is different for the case in this thread the police cps did not charge the woman with rape so she has not been convicted of rape but convicted of sexual activity with a child

[bots]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

Every case is different for the case in this thread the police cps did not charge the woman with rape so she has not been convicted of rape but convicted of sexual activity with a child

a woman can't be charged with rape in the uk

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

a woman can't be charged with rape in the uk

A thing that should most definitely be changed, way too many women get away with things like this because of it, it’s shocking

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

Clearly in this case the boy consented otherwise it would of been rape

He can't consent, just like all children can't. Do you think a senile old woman can consent to signing all her money to some gold digger? It's (sort of) the same thing.

Tbh i think the age of consent should be eighteen.

[Ammi]

...I understand that she herself had been in an abusive relationship and wasn’t in a good place...which is horrific for her...but that doesn’t in any way excuse nor should it be considered in the sexual abuse of a child...she absolutely knew what her actions were according to the court reports as she had tried to persuade the child to delete the messages/images and also admitted guilt in the original interview...the not guilty plea was then submitted for the purposes of her trial and I would presume it was something that was advised by her defence for a lesser sentencing...