Cautions for rape

Unknown · June 2007

According to this BBC story, even rape is now being dealt with by means of cautions, rather than prosecution. Is is now time for murder to be added to the list?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/6717997.stm

nolf · June 2007

To be fair though there was that case for a guy who was found guilty of "Rape". He had sex with a consenting 13 year old (?) girl - who looked about 17/18- they broke up and he got done for rape.

Ended up living at home poor guy cause it ruined his life- a caution for a guy like him is entirely suitable and fair! Technically rape but no malicious intent.

Pride speaks, but Elephants listen...

Eat My Dust · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by nolf

Technically rape but no malicious intent.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Please explain?

]

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Eat My Dust

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by nolf

Technically rape but no malicious intent.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Please explain?

]

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

My recollection is that she was 11 but he believed that she was 16. She was below the cut off age (12?) for a defence of honestly believing that the girl was 16. He was however prosecuted rather than just cautioned. I wonder what the circumstances were in the 230 cases where cautions were administered?

Eat My Dust · June 2007

I don't think anybody can really say that they can't tell the difference between an 11 year old and a 16 year old, can they?

SNAPS

Gary Askwith · June 2007

Ivory-towered judiciary
Target obsessed administrative list-manipulation fiddling
Sheckel counting by number-mumblers
etc etc...happens all the time, justice? what justice?

civilisation has been nothing if not consistently narcissistic, domineering and exploitative. And it is consistent in its attempts to make these attributes seem natural, to make them seem as though nature itself is to blame for our exploitation of it. ('She was asking for it,' we can say with clean conscience as we pull up our pants and leave the darkened alley.) 

What justice indeed

Economic Growth; as dead as a Yangtze River dolphin....

ankev1 · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

[
My recollection is that she was 11 but he believed that she was 16. She was below the cut off age (12?) for a defence of honestly believing that the girl was 16. He was however prosecuted rather than just cautioned. I wonder what the circumstances were in the 230 cases where cautions were administered?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

One would hope that the 230 cases would be in the area of 17 yr old lad and 15 yr old girl. I think most people would probably be able to cope with that (providing of course that all was consensual).

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Eat My Dust

I don't think anybody can really say that they can't tell the difference between an 11 year old and a 16 year old, can they?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Personally I think I'd make every effort to avoid getting into a situation where I'd want/need to tell the difference.

I wouldn't rule out the possibility that there are people out there who look five years older than they are though, puberty doesn't seem to be that consistent on when it decides to strike!

11 years old does push the bounds of believability a bit though...

nolf · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Eat My Dust

I don't think anybody can really say that they can't tell the difference between an 11 year old and a 16 year old, can they?

SNAPS

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

When you saw her on the news she passed as 16.

Have a trawl through the BBC wesbite and you may come across a picture.

Pride speaks, but Elephants listen...

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by ankev1

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

[
My recollection is that she was 11 but he believed that she was 16. She was below the cut off age (12?) for a defence of honestly believing that the girl was 16. He was however prosecuted rather than just cautioned. I wonder what the circumstances were in the 230 cases where cautions were administered?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

One would hope that the 230 cases would be in the area of 17 yr old lad and 15 yr old girl. I think most people would probably be able to cope with that (providing of course that all was consensual).
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Wouldn't be rape then - it's unlawful sexual intercourse which is a much less serious offence.

ankev1 · June 2007

Then it is an odd one. It seems unconceivable that rape could be just cautioned. Is it because the police think they wouldn't get a prosecution in court or because the victim couldn't face the trial?

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by ankev1

Then it is an odd one. It seems unconceivable that rape could be just cautioned. Is it because the police think they wouldn't get a prosecution in court or because the victim couldn't face the trial?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

My very cynical take on it is that the police say to someone who is denying it, "Look matey, if you admit to it, we'll just caution you and you'll walk out in ten minute. If you continue to deny it, then we'll charge you, keep you in custody and you'll take your chances in Crown Court as to whether you get eight years or not."

Mosschops2 · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Eat My Dust

I don't think anybody can really say that they can't tell the difference between an 11 year old and a 16 year old, can they?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I've never been in that kind of situation, but I do recall at a family pool in the USA several years ago, there were several girls who you'd have sworn were 17, who were actually 11 or 12.....

Quite scary really. (Esp. as I have a daughter.....)

Have you ever tried pressing Alt+F4 ??

Ashtrayhead · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by ankev1

Then it is an odd one. It seems unconceivable that rape could be just cautioned. Is it because the police think they wouldn't get a prosecution in court or because the victim couldn't face the trial?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

My very cynical take on it is that the police say to someone who is denying it, "Look matey, if you admit to it, we'll just caution you and you'll walk out in ten minute. If you continue to deny it, then we'll charge you, keep you in custody and you'll take your chances in Crown Court as to whether you get eight years or not."
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Don't you mean CPS? They're the ones who make the decisions these days.

'Don't Walk, Don't Smoke, Don't Drink', Don't Think'

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Ashtrayhead

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by ankev1

Then it is an odd one. It seems unconceivable that rape could be just cautioned. Is it because the police think they wouldn't get a prosecution in court or because the victim couldn't face the trial?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

My very cynical take on it is that the police say to someone who is denying it, "Look matey, if you admit to it, we'll just caution you and you'll walk out in ten minute. If you continue to deny it, then we'll charge you, keep you in custody and you'll take your chances in Crown Court as to whether you get eight years or not."
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Don't you mean CPS? They're the ones who make the decisions these days.

'Don't Walk, Don't Smoke, Don't Drink', Don't Think'
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Good point - I'd overlooked that they make the charging decision now.

top_bhoy · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by nolf

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Eat My Dust

I don't think anybody can really say that they can't tell the difference between an 11 year old and a 16 year old, can they?

SNAPS

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

When you saw her on the news she passed as 16.

Have a trawl through the BBC wesbite and you may come across a picture.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I'm surprised they would have film of an 11/12yo involved in such a case or then go on to show pictures of her on a website. Female adults in sexual cases normally have their anonimity protected under all but exceptional circumstances and is it not the case that to reveal the womans identity probably results in a contempt of court charge.

This is my bike:
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure001.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure002.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure003.jpg

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Top_Bhoy

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by nolf

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Eat My Dust

I don't think anybody can really say that they can't tell the difference between an 11 year old and a 16 year old, can they?

SNAPS

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

When you saw her on the news she passed as 16.

Have a trawl through the BBC wesbite and you may come across a picture.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I'm surprised they would have film of an 11/12yo involved in such a case or then go on to show pictures of her on a website. Female adults in sexual cases normally have their anonimity protected under all but exceptional circumstances and is it not the case that to reveal the womans identity probably results in a contempt of court charge.

This is my bike:
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure001.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure002.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure003.jpg
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

And if the person is under 17, the Children and Young Persons Act has a whole lot of additional restictions on publishing details involving children.

Unknown · June 2007

The case in question happened in Haverfordwest, not very far from me. The girl was actually 10 and sexually active. She met the lad when she absconded from the care of a social worker on a day out. He asked her age and she lied about it. The girl did not appear in court as the guy admited the offence, and when the judge was shown her photograph he said that he could easily understand how someone would believe she was sixteen. he was given a community service order instead of a custodial sentence and placed on the sex offenders register. He was said to have been shocked and in tears when the police told him of the girls real age, and to have been deeply traumatised.

I think this is one instance where the sentence was not a soft one, as it appears at face value. For one thing, as the girl was already sexually active and cannot have been said to have been damaged by that one instance (she refused to identify the guy and would not co-operate with police, he was charged because he immediatly admitted everything), it is an entirely different case to one where somebody had groomed an innocent child and seduced her.

Nobody ever got laid because they were using Shimano

Jon G · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by ankev1

One would hope that the 230 cases would be in the area of 17 yr old lad and 15 yr old girl. I think most people would probably be able to cope with that (providing of course that all was consensual).
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Wouldn't be rape then - it's unlawful sexual intercourse which is a much less serious offence.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Quite true. Either the authorities are being very soft or these are very borderline cases, perhaps where the question of consent is confused because those involved were very drunk (e.g. where the woman has no recollection of events and the case rests upon the man coming forward and admitting to sex with her when, looking back, he is not sure she was compos mentis enough to realise what was happening). In such a case if he were to change his plea in court he wiould probably be aquitted for lack of evidence against him, so the Police probably would caution him before he had time to change his mind about admitting to it.

Jon

Tourist Tony · June 2007

There are a lot of varying definitions of rape. Being harangued once by a "Women Against Rape" harridan, I was told that asking somebody out could be rape.
But then, as she went on to tell me, all men are rapists.

If I had a stalker, I would hug it and kiss it and call it George...or Dick

Cunobelin · June 2007

There can also be a "Mental health issue"

I will try and google this later....

There was a case where a young guy in his early 20's was charged after (consenting) sex with a 13 - 14 year old.

THe defence was that he had a mental age the same as that of the girl and therefore found relating to someone that age natural, there was no cse of "Older man corrupts young girl", therefore it should be treated as if they were tha same age.

He that buys land buys many stones.
He that buys flesh buys many bones.
He that buys eggs buys many shells,
But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.
(Unattributed Trad.)

Tom Butcher · June 2007

From what I saw on the news I got the impression the rapes that were cautioned were because the victim didn't want the case to go ahead. Whether that is a good reason for not pursuing the case is another matter.

Warning about well known bike shop removed at request of moderators.

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Tourist Tony

There are a lot of varying definitions of rape. Being harangued once by a "Women Against Rape" harridan, I was told that asking somebody out could be rape.
But then, as she went on to tell me, all men are rapists.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

People like her are their own worst enemies. By being so silly, they undermine the seriousness of rape.

Buggi · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Tourist Tony

There are a lot of varying definitions of rape. Being harangued once by a "Women Against Rape" harridan, I was told that asking somebody out could be rape.
But then, as she went on to tell me, all men are rapists.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

People like her are their own worst enemies. By being so silly, they undermine the seriousness of rape.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
sorry don't agree with this at all. firstly it's not "unlawful intercourse", it's statutory rape. sex with a minor is called statutory rape because minor's are not considered old enough to understand.

if you don't know a girl's real age, then maybe these men should be asking themselves if they truly know the girl and whether they should be having sex with her, even if they believe she is 16.

this guy knew she was young. did he even bother to really get to know her? meet her parents... old fashioned dating perhaps? think not, probably took her back to his and got off her kegs and probably didn't even know her surname.

girls like this are often "broken in" at a young age, parents don't give a ****, abused, etc etc. or they are doing it through peer pressure or they are doing it because they're boyfriends are badgering them. i have to say, most of my mates feel like they were pressured into first time sex by boyfriends who just wouldn't let the subject alone.

if a girl is sexually active and this promiscous, in and out of care homes all her life, then this is a true example of why this law is in place, to protect her from herself.

The onus is on the man to find out the true age of the girl, and that's the way it should be.

stop making excuses for rape. mostly they get given a caution because the cops, social workers, CPS and the girl all know there guilty but they've got feck all evidence to prove it.

only 6% of rape cases that are reported go to court and of that about 2% are found guilty. don't forget that's 2% of reported rape cases, not the amount of rapes that actually happen. it's about time men took responsibility for their actions and stop blaming women. They do have a brain, unfortunately most of them keep them in their d*cks.

and ask yourself this, have you ever slept with a minor? No? maybe that's because your a decent bunch who are actually bothered about your girlfriends welfare. These men are not.

too often girls are told they are silly, for walking down a dark alley, getting in a car with a stranger, getting too drunk. It's not what they did that got them raped, it's the fact that a guy who is a rapist knows that mitigating circumstances such as these can get him off in court. why pick the sober woman to rape, when you can pick a drunk one, use it against her in court and not get found guilty?

_____________________________________________

To infinity... and beyond!
my epic adventure: www.action.org.uk/~Antonia

Cunobelin · June 2007

Just to be controversial....

STatutory rape?

An age limit is only a number, improperly set in most cases. You cannot apply a random statutorylimit to all cases.

It is up to the individual surely to assess at what age it is safe to have sex. The individuals will always act responsibly in these matters and therefore there is no need for such legislation.

Statutory rape is simply a victimisation of otherwise law abiding individuals.

(Does that sound a familiar argument?)

He that buys land buys many stones.
He that buys flesh buys many bones.
He that buys eggs buys many shells,
But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.
(Unattributed Trad.)

purpleR · June 2007

(in Scotland) statutory rape is sex with a girl 12 or under. Age 13 to 15 (plus older ages in some situations) is unlawful sexual intercourse.

A girl 12 or under is seen to be incapable of giving consent, even if she is asking for sex. This lack of consent is why sex with this girl is seen to be rape.

From age 13 up (or - I think - 14 for boys, although there is no offence of male/ anal rape in Scotland...), consent can be given so although it's not automatically rape, it's still unlawful intercourse.

Cautions for rape

Comments

Categories