Woman jailed for sex with boy, 15

[joe-90]

In what way is it nonsense? The boy was 15 - she got jailed. If he were 16 then the sentence would be.... ? (over to you Trazor)

Obviously their would be no offence committed.
But an age limit has to be set, and adhered to, but you have no answer to that have you.
Or are you saying their should be no age limit.....well

It's quite simple really. If a 50 year old man has sex with an six year old girl that's a big crime and deserves a big punishment.

If a 35 year old woman has sex with a 15 year old boy (who is probably sexually active anyway) then that's a small crime and a warning or loss of job should suffice.

What part of that don't you understand?

 

[noseall]

So all children are children at 15 years 11 months and 31 days - then they become adults overnight?

Stupid law.

there are many laws, rules, regulations tax brackets, speed limits etc, that state, if you are beyond the numerical value that defines its legal parameter, then you are breaking that law.

if you do not understand this joe then you are dumber than i thought.

the law does not recognise as to whether any person is an adult or not, simply whether, in the eyes of the law, they are a child or not.

geddit?

 

[joe-90]

So if I do 36mph in a 30mph zone I'll get the same punishment as if I did 120 mph in a 30 zone?

If I steal a fiver I'll get the same punishment as if I stole a million?


How stupid are you?

 

[Trazor]

So if I do 36mph in a 30mph zone I'll get the same punishment as if I did 120 mph in a 30 zone?

If I steal a fiver I'll get the same punishment as if I stole a million?


How stupid are you?

You have still not answered the question, what age limit would you set....?
Or would you rather have no age limit, and let the lawyers(who you love) fight every individual case.

Do you not understand their must be an age limit.
Your kneejerk reactions solve nothing.

 

[noseall]

a crime against a child will carry no flexible parameters because the measurements for defining a child's age are universal and simple to understand.

we as a civilized nation voted for 16 as the legal age for which sex becomes permissible.

if you think that the definition of a child should be flexible as say the measuring equipment for a speedometer for example then you place less value on a human being than that of a mechanical object.

as to the degree of punishment, regarding crimes against children.

call me stupid, but i do not remember saying that the levels of punishment should or should not vary upon the severity of a crime committed against a child?? wtf???

 

[joe-90]

So if I do 36mph in a 30mph zone I'll get the same punishment as if I did 120 mph in a 30 zone?

If I steal a fiver I'll get the same punishment as if I stole a million?


How stupid are you?

You have still not answered the question, what age limit would you set....?
Or would you rather have no age limit, and let the lawyers(who you love) fight every individual case.

Do you not understand their must be an age limit.
Your kneejerk reactions solve nothing.

The age limit is fine where it is (though many want it lowered to 14). The closer a child gets to the age of consent - then the less of a crime is committed. Do you disagree?

 

[joe-90]

call me stupid,

Stupid.

 

[imamartian]

i don't think that there should a legal age of consent anymore.. who decides when someone is ready to have sex? Mother nature of course !

So the law is simple... is it a consensual act? yes - it's ok then, no? then it's rape.

But that's a bit to simplistic so we need to add a bit of human morality. What needs to be added is an age difference... so a 14 yr old can have sex with a 15 year old, but not with a 35 yr old... so maybe whilst aged upto 15 you can have consensual sex with someone a year younger than you, upto 17 you can have consensual sex with someone 2 years younger.....

I haven't thought about the maths in great detail, but you get the idea?

Oh and contraception needs to be controlled and enforced... blah blah blah...

 

[Zampa]

I notice it was in Norfolk..where they are one big happy family..literally!

Yer sister is ya mother,
ya father is ya brother
you all **** one another..the norfolk family

D'd'd'der-der..

I can see where Joe is coming from..and lets be honest if it was the other way around we would all be calling for the guy to be hung by the ging gangs..

Maybe because the male is supposed to be the 'hunter' or whatever but it just doesnt seem as serious.

But..the law is the law, and you cant have a seperate law for males and females or maybe you can??

But this has also got to impact on the age of consent...I cant see the age of consent being 15 for a boy (providing it with a woman) and sixteen for a girl..thats just not going to happen, and rakes up the age of consent for gays arguement.

Maybe the age of consent should be tied to the persons partner...i.e...16 for a girl providing the male partner is over say...18...but younger than 25 and 15 for a boy providing the partner is under the age of 20 but over the age of 16..

Two lads who i worked with on a job at a school took out two girls..and the obvious happened..the boys where both 16 the girls 15..they got done, fined. They didnt have to talk the girls into anything..its what teenagers do..girls and boys...but thats a world away from a 50 year old man doing the same to a sixteen year old girl.

Whats the score if bother parties, male and female are underage?...are they both classed as sex cases?

Im sure if it was a sixteen year old girl and a 15 year old boy the beak would have looked at it differently

She was 35 and should have 'known better'...

I can see joes point..but there HAS to be a byline...this isnt Turkey!

 

[noseall]

The age limit is fine where it is (though many want it lowered to 14). The closer a child gets to the age of consent - then the less of a crime is committed. Do you disagree?

i agree, in that a sex crime against a baby or toddler should result in the offender being instantly castrated without anaesthetic and then punished/jailed.

the other offences that you refer to, should result in the offender being jailed.

when you say many who are you referring to?

and by many are you referring to a majority?

i find it abhorrent that these people embrace the principle that 14yr old children are ready to have a family of their own.

 

[joe-90]

There was talk in parliament a few years ago but it was shelved. Why do you think it's wrong for a fifteen year old boy to have sex? Why does it become right on his 16th birthday? Should he wear boxing gloves at night? Why are you so prudish?

 

[JohnD]

we are talking about an adult in a position of authority having sex with a young person in their care.

Do you recognise that this is a form of abuse that is to be discouraged, or not?

This isn't Jersey.

 

[noseall]

it is not necessarily the physical side that's problematic but the potential consequences of having sex.

you ask why am i prudish.

i am not a prude.

i ask you why are you so blinkered? can you not read?

i don't disagree with the fact many young teenagers are capable of the physical side to sex. but do we really want to encourage our children to become teenage mums and dads and endure the wonders of std's.

 

[Sylvan Tieger]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/7613350.stm

Despite my best efforts I couldn't get laid when I was 15, this woman deserves a medal!

Well she did her job teaching and if the government has a problem with a teacher willing to teach show and tell is better then any book then send her here as this is very common place in America were female teachers break a young lad in.

Mine was two women on holiday from their husbands I was just out of boot camp 17 years old Navy and hitch hiking when they picked me up in a caddy and we spent an entire week end .


Best hands on training I ever received from them one was in her late 30's the other one was in her early 40's and they were gentle and caring.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

But that's a bit to simplistic so we need to add a bit of human morality. What needs to be added is an age difference... so a 14 yr old can have sex with a 15 year old, but not with a 35 yr old... so maybe whilst aged upto 15 you can have consensual sex with someone a year younger than you, upto 17 you can have consensual sex with someone 2 years younger.....

I haven't thought about the maths in great detail, but you get the idea?

Some countries do have age-of-consent laws based on that principle.