WHEN WILL IT ALL END ?

[Micilin]

Should there really be a statute of limitations for abusing children? If so what should it be?

I was born late 60s and at no time do I remember it being acceptable to have sex with children, so I don't buy the 'different times' arguments.

Also the defence that there were young teens looking for sex just comes under the cliched 'she was asking for it' rapist's justification.

The whole point of an age of consent is that people in positions of trust and power don't take advantage of young people who are not mature enough to make sensible decisions. Saying they were consenting is no defence.

 

[Micilin]

But teeny boppers were asking for it - literally.

That's the point joe.

That's why there is an 'age of consent' needed to have sex with someone younger than you, not just their 'consent'.


Whether they literally were asking for it or not is irrelevant. If you knew or suspected they were underage then it's rape/abuse

And 'consent' is loaded in an unequal relationship with womeone who is not emotionally mature, reagrdless of how old they look.

 

[JohnD]

I'm surprised and shocked that there are still people trotting out the same tired old, discredited excuses used by child molesters and rapists through the ages.

 

[ellal]

I'm surprised and shocked that there are still people trotting out the same tired old, discredited excuses used by child molesters and rapists through the ages.

Quite right...

Joe's comments are particularly worrying!

 

[JohnD]

no, and I never shagged a schoolgirl either.

when did you stop?

 

[joe-90]

When we left school.

 

[Norcon]

Why do they have to be 'celebs' though?

Bigger compo payout when its a "celeb".

 

[EddieM]

There have been a few cases in the past where a woman has falsely accused a man of rape.

And vastly, overwhelmingly, enormously more cases where a woman has truthfully accused a man of rape, and the man has falsely denied it.

You do agree, don't you?

With all due respect that was not the point that was being made.

 

[JohnD]

It is a common ploy used by rapists, child molestors and their supporters to raise doubts in the minds of the gullible, and to point a finger of suspicion at their victims.

It also has the added benefit (for the rapists and child molestors) of making their victims, especially if young or vulnerable, relectant to complain or stand up in court.

The effects of this wicked ploy are so vile that it is the duty of those of us who are not rapists, child molestors, or their supporters to speak up against it.

 

[Space cat]

The whole point of an age of consent is that people in positions of trust and power don't take advantage of young people who are not mature enough to make sensible decisions.

While that's a fair comment, it's not quite why we have an age of consent (which, incidentally, varies quite a bit, even within the EU). That law was introduced because people with no power and even less money were selling their own children for sex just as soon as they thought somebody would pay.

It's also worth noting that the go-betweens or 'procurers' - those we would now call pimps - were mostly women and, get this, the children were often drugged and comatose.

 

[wingcoax]

Has anyone noticed that although the "celebrities" have been named there are also other people who have been charged and not named. WHY? are they not people in the public eye and therefore do not sell papers? A bill was proposed in parliament last year with the aim of not naming accused offenders until proven guilty, this was defeated on the grounds that victims would not come forward. What a load of *&^t.

 

[EddieM]

It is a common ploy used by rapists, child molestors and their supporters to raise doubts in the minds of the gullible, and to point a finger of suspicion at their victims.

It also has the added benefit (for the rapists and child molestors) of making their victims, especially if young or vulnerable, relectant to complain or stand up in court.

The effects of this wicked ploy are so vile that it is the duty of those of us who are not rapists, child molestors, or their supporters to speak up against it.

In this respect I couldn't agree more, but it is manifestfly unfair for suspected rapists / child molestors names to be in the public domain before conviction is it not?

 

[JohnD]

I don't know. Is it unfair for accused murderers or burglars, or fraudsters, or bankers?

 

[EddieM]

I don't know. Is it unfair for accused murderers or burglars, or fraudsters, or bankers?

Of course until conviction they have done nothing wrong.

 

[JohnD]

So you meant "all arrested people" and not "suspected child molestors and rapists?"