Raped at 12 by a gang of footballers who the judge frees...

Kimia

Here's the story:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2017823/Raped-12-gang-footballers-judge-frees--Victim-speaks-sickening-sex-attack.html

At first, she is almost too nervous to speak, but with her mother’s gentle encouragement, she tentatively begins to find the words.
She hopes, she says, that ‘people won’t judge her’ or think she is ‘messed up’ or that she is a ‘bad girl’.
‘I’m really not,’ she says pitifully.
That a 13-year-old girl should even feel the need to defend her reputation and character in such a way is perhaps the saddest aspect of what you are about to read.
Katie (not her real name) was just 12 when she and a friend, also aged 12, went with six young men to a park in Reading where ‘something terrible’ happened.
Sadly, it doesn’t take a genius to work out what that ‘something terrible’ was.
The six men — all promising local footballers — claimed they thought the girls were at least 16, but they were subsequently convicted of statutory rape because, in the eyes of the law, the girls were unable to give their consent.
Last week, though, the defendants were controversially freed from jail after the Appeal Court ruled that the girls had ‘wanted sex’.
In other words, according to the judgment, Katie and her friend — both just 12, remember — were not really victims at all.
Worse, it gave credence to the view, in the eyes of some, at least, that they were actually to blame for getting the six footballers, aged between 18 and 21, including a former member of Reading FC’s academy, into trouble and ruining their careers.

More...
Rapist who infected woman with hepatitis C is jailed indefinitely
'Depraved' mother who helped paedophile rape her own schoolgirl daughter before going shopping is jailed
Already, Katie has received a string of hateful text messages.
‘It’s all your fault,’ said one particularly vile response. Another asked: ‘How can you live with yourself?’
‘It didn’t make me feel very nice,’ says Katie.
The incident in the park, and its aftermath, have been a personal tragedy for Katie, who is now receiving counselling.
But the tragedy spreads wider, for the case also exposes the increasing sexualisation of children and the sickening culture of group sex, which somehow seems to have become acceptable behaviour for a growing number of predatory teenage males.


Two of the six footballers who went to the park with 12-year-old Katie and her friend: Dennis De Sousa (left), aged 19 and Jahvon Edwards (right), aged 19
Anyone who is in any doubt should read the comments of the original trial judge, who said that the six accused standing in the dock in front of him in March this year had treated Katie and her friend ‘as if they were pieces of flesh’, before sentencing them to two years.
The judge’s words seem especially chilling when you meet Katie.
She is in her school uniform, sitting anxiously in the living room of her home. Her exceptionally pretty features are framed by a sweet brown bob. Katie loves photography and is getting a camera for her birthday. She is doing well at school.
One of her favourite TV programmes is EastEnders. In her bedroom, which is as neat as a new pin, there are CDs of High School Musical and 17 Again, starring teen heart-throb Zac Efron. In the corner is a guitar.
‘I’m not very good,’ she says modestly.
‘Yes, you are,’ her mother says proudly.
Her parents split up when she was a baby, but she sees her dad regularly.
She lives with her mum and step-father, who runs his own business, in a detached house in a ‘picture postcard’ resort in the West Country. They moved there from their native Reading in 2009.
Katie, like many girls her age, has begun to wear make-up. She looks older than 13, but does not seem precocious in any way. On the contrary, when we meet, she is softly spoken and endearingly shy.
The reason her family allowed her to be interviewed is that they — but most importantly, Katie herself — want other girls to read her account of ‘what really happened’ and learn from it.
‘There is nothing to be scared of,’ her mother tells her before Katie begins to recount, in little more than a whisper, detail by harrowing detail, the chain of events that ended with her going to a park at night with six young men she had never met.


Jahson Downes (left), aged 20 and Luke Farrugia (right), aged 21. All but two of the six footballers come from broken homes
Those events unfolded one weekend in February last year, when Katie and her mother returned to Reading to visit relatives.
During the visit, Katie met the girl who had once been her best friend. We shall call her Lucy.
Lucy, who as we shall see is certainly old beyond her years, invited Katie to a ‘sleepover’, and in the evening they both attended a family birthday party in a local hall.
Soon, Lucy began exchanging text messages with a boy, or rather a young man, whose number she had obtained three weeks earlier (she told him she had found his number on someone else’s phone and ‘wanted to get to know him’). The young man’s name was Jahvon Edwards.
Edwards, 19, used to play for Henley Town and was now a part-time football coach. Lucy told him she was 16.
She received the first text from Edwards at around 8pm. The ‘conversation’ went like this:
Edwards: ‘Out in my car. You?’
Lucy: ‘Who you with? Should we come too?’
Edwards: ‘Five friends.’
Lucy: ‘We can have three each.’
Edwards: ‘Yes ... Who you having?’
Lucy: ‘Whoever wants me?’
Shortly afterwards, Jahvon Edwards and his ‘five friends’ pulled up outside the hall, where the family gathering was still in full flow, in two Vauxhall Corsa cars.
Lucy then asked Katie to come outside with her.
‘I went with her because I didn’t want to leave her on her own,’ says Katie.
She says she wasn’t aware of what Lucy had told Edwards in the text messages. Katie reluctantly got into one vehicle, Lucy in the other.
Katie says she went along because she thought they were only going for a short drive and would be back in ‘five minutes’.
Lucy’s parents (her father is a driver, her mother works in an office) were unaware the girls had left.
When they stopped at a garage in Reading, the girls got out and Katie says she started to cry.
‘I told Lucy I was scared and that I wanted to go back, but she said there was no way we would be able to on our own because we had gone too far.’


Courtney Amos (left), aged 20 and Ashley Charles (right), aged 20. In the run up to their court appearance, several of them were busy exchanging crude jokes
So Katie returned to the car. She and Lucy were taken to a local park, where they went to the toilet before splitting up. Katie says she saw Lucy disappear behind a tree, from where she then began calling Edwards and his friends over ‘one by one’ for sex.
Shocking? Degrading? Yes. But it was not the first time 12-year-old Lucy had indulged in such activities.
When the case subsequently came before Reading Crown Court earlier this year, it emerged that Lucy had done ‘exactly the same thing’ at least three times before. There was also a fourth occasion while Edwards and his co-defendants were awaiting trial.
Indeed, ‘shocking’ and ‘degrading’ hardly do such revelations justice.
Meanwhile, back in the park, Katie went and sat on a bench and her eyes began to well up again. One of the footballers wouldn’t leave her alone, however, and kept pestering her to perform a sex act on him, which, legally, is still classed as rape.
‘I kept saying “No, no”, but he kept on, so I gave in,’ she says, her voice faltering.
‘I have never done anything like that before, and I would never do it again. That’s the truth.’
Cynics might doubt her words. I do not. Talking to Katie left me utterly convinced that this was a girl — however foolish and naive she might have been — who was telling me the raw, simple truth.
Afterwards, she and Lucy were driven back to town and dropped off near to where Lucy lived. By now, Lucy’s parents had realised the girls were missing and had called the police. They were found wandering along a lane in the vicinity of her home at 2am.
Katie was reunited with her mother at the police station and, for the third time that night, broke down in tears.
‘I cuddled her and told her everything was going to be all right,’ her mother says.
The following day, Katie and Lucy were interviewed by detectives.
Jahvon Edwards, who lives with his mother in Reading, was subsequently arrested and charged with rape, along with Dennis De Sousa, 19, Jahson Downes, 20, Ashley Charles, 20, Courtney Amos, 20, and Luke Farrugia, 21.
All but two of them are from broken homes.
In the run-up to their crown court appearance, several of them were busy exchanging crude jokes about sex and prostitutes on Twitter.
Take de Sousa, whose own father spent much of the Eighties and Nineties in and out of prison for crimes including affray and conspiracy to supply drugs.
‘Love me some **** (the name given to a particular sex act) and I LOVE a woman that likes to do it,’ he tweeted, followed by: ‘Like what you see, but don’t touch it hoe (street slang for prostitute).’
Amos, brought up by his mother and who, until his rape conviction, was hoping to pursue a career as a children’s football coach.
He re-tweeted this offering from a friend: ‘I use to be a shy boy when I was young, until I lost my virginity and started **** ******** (slang for pleasuring a woman) females like no tomorrow.’
Or Charles, who has a conviction for assault, and used the ‘hashtag’ (a keyword used to categorise a Tweet) TheJoyOfTeenSex — a reference to the Channel 4 series of the same name. He later describes what he might like to do to a friend’s mother.
These, then, are some of the individuals who had sex with two 12-year-old girls in a park on the weekend of February 20, 2010.
Earlier this week, three of the six, who became friends while studying sports science at the same Reading college, agreed to meet the Mail at a bar in the town centre.
It was apparent that they see themselves, not the girls, as the real victims of what happened that night. Their conviction remains but their sentences have now been suspended, and they will remain on the Sex Offenders’ Register for ten years.
‘Our lives have been ruined, and none of us are now able to go on and follow the careers that we would have chosen for ourselves,’ said de Sousa, who now lives in a council flat with his father.
‘I feel we were tricked into going to the park with them’ (a reference to the fact that Lucy claimed she was 16 on her Facebook page).
De Sousa, accompanied by Edwards and Downes, says he felt disgusted when he discovered the truth.
‘I’ve got a little sister that age’, he said.
But isn’t the crux of the matter that he and his five friends were quite prepared to take two young girls, regardless of how old they thought they may or may not have been, to a park with the specific intention of having sex with them?
Repeat: Six boys. Two girls.
The judge who jailed them certainly thought so.
‘It is clear to me,’ he told them, ‘that all of you were utterly reckless in what you did that night. Those girls were utterly unknown to you.
‘You saw those girls as utterly willing sexual partners, which they were, and behaved towards them as if they were simply pieces of flesh, not people.’
The Appeal Court took a more lenient view. You can be the judge of who was right.

I feel like I'm being very cynical but this article seems to be to be bollox tbh. I mean, the rape was statutory, but consensual and one of the girls claimed to be 16 and was totally fine with it. I don't know if there was any force involved so to me I don't know if it can be classed as rape because there was consent.

It's a difficult thing to understand. One the one hand I feel like the girls went along with it and wanted the thrill of acting older than they are. They weren't forced into anything.. But on the other hand there must be something wrong if a girl is fine being used like a piece of meat where she is happy to have sex with one man after the other at the same time in a park. The lack of self-respect there scares me. Coupled with the fact that they are SO young - what the hell is going on with young uns these days?

What about the parents - are they not responsible here for their children being out and about at night meeting strange guys for sex? Its all well and good to blame the guys but where were their parents? I would be HORRIFIED if I had a young girl who thought she had to carry on like this for fun.

What do you think?

Edit - I also hate the way the DM has portrayed this. Such shítty 'reporting'. The writer also hangs the other girl 'the girl who certainly acts older than she is' out to dry while trying to portray the other girl as being hoodwinked into everything.

mike65

As its so poorly formatted I'll just say tl'd or whatever it is your kids do.

Minstrel27

article wrote:

All but two of the six footballers come from broken homes

So what.

Namlub

Hate to make the predictable comment but it's the Daily Mail, of course it's bollox. 'Awww diddums, Katie wants a camera for her birthday'...um, so?

Kimia

mike65 wrote: »

As its so poorly formatted I'll just say tl'd or whatever it is your kids do.

Sorry, I just copied and pasted. The link is there to the article which has better formatting.

Kimia

Kimia wrote: »

I feel like I'm being very cynical but this article seems to be to be bollox tbh. I mean, the rape was statutory, but consensual and one of the girls claimed to be 16 and was totally fine with it. I don't know if there was any force involved so to me I don't know if it can be classed as rape because there was consent.

I'm not sure either. Doesn't statutory rape legislation imply that consent cannot be given by a minor? If so then this case theoretically throws that out the window because if they "wanted sex" then that means they can give consent.

7sr2z3fely84g5

Kimia wrote: »

I feel like I'm being very cynical but this article seems to be to be bollox tbh. I mean, the rape was statutory, but consensual and one of the girls claimed to be 16 and was totally fine with it. I don't know if there was any force involved so to me I don't know if it can be classed as rape because there was consent.

i believe the law allows a person benefit of doubt if they made sure the person was legal age,there was case donegal with the 13 year old girl,numberous men were convicted for having sex with her,except one who met her in a nightclub so the responsiblity fell on the club security-

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/man-acquitted-of-unlawful-sex-with-13yearold-in-diary-case-2464622.html

Birneybau

If anybody quotes the entire first post they will get a kick in the h0le!

Lux23

A 12 year old can't decide they want to have sex with someone, thats the law and anyone breaking it regardless of how willing the victim was should be imprisioned. Kimia you are basically saying its ok for people to have sex with 12 year olds!!

Helix

Lux23 wrote: »

A 12 year old can't decide they want to have sex with someone, thats the law and anyone breaking it regardless of how willing the victim was should be imprisioned. Kimia you are basically saying its ok for people to have sex with 12 year olds!!

except the girl said she was 16, and in england 16 year olds ARE allowed to decide they want to have sex with someone

Lux23

But she wasn't 16, she was 12. Thats no defense at all, even if it is very hard to tell.

Kimia

Lux23 wrote: »

A 12 year old can't decide they want to have sex with someone, thats the law and anyone breaking it regardless of how willing the victim was should be imprisioned. Kimia you are basically saying its ok for people to have sex with 12 year olds!!

Come on that's a bit straw man Lux, and I'm disappointed you would say that because I've seen lots of your posts and respected them - I would have thought you would have shown me the same courtesy as I've seen you show others.

I am just throwing this article out there to get other people's views. It's hard to understand if the system works when the child lies about her age - how is the 'rapist' supposed to know? Ask for id?

And I'm asking what role the parents have here. Why would a 12 year old girl think it's ok to have sex with a bunch of men! There's some major fúck up going on in her life for her to think that's normal.

Helix

Lux23 wrote: »

But she wasn't 16, she was 12. Thats no defense at all, even if it is very hard to tell.

of course its a bloody defence

she said she was legal, they didnt knowingly go out and do a bloody 12 year old ffs. if they did, thats a whole different kettle of fish. are people supposed to ask for passports now?

7sr2z3fely84g5

Lux23 wrote: »

But she wasn't 16, she was 12. Thats no defense at all, even if it is very hard to tell.

As i said earlier it can be if person can proved they made an honest mistake,i showed a link in donegal in a nightclub-

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/man-acquitted-of-unlawful-sex-with-13yearold-in-diary-case-2464622.html

Amirani

Lux23 wrote: »

But she wasn't 16, she was 12. Thats no defense at all, even if it is very hard to tell.

Yes it is, it's a perfectly reasonable defense. Hence why they've been released.

I find it strange that the girls have been named here? Does it not tend to be the case that minors who have been raped retain anonymity?

Helix

niallsparky wrote: »

Yes it is, it's a perfectly reasonable defense. Hence why they've been released.

I find it strange that the girls have been named here? Does it not tend to be the case that minors who have been raped retain anonymity?

the girls werent named

Namlub

niallsparky wrote: »

I find it strange that the girls have been named here? Does it not tend to be the case that minors who have been raped retain anonymity?

It says they're not their real names. Well, Katie's anyway. The journalist probably didn't think that heathen Lucy deserved anonymity...

Tonyandthewhale

I didn't read all of this because it's really terrible reporting but I don't see how "I thought she was at least 16" is an excuse when there are six of you between the ages of 19 and 21. That's still incredibly depraved. I'm not morally opposed to group sex and I think it was superfluous of the judge and the reported to focus on the male to female ratio but when you're engaging in that sort of activity you have to remember to draw the line between youthful spontaneity and fucking a 12 year-old child in the park with five of your mates. Part of being an adult is taking personal responsibility for your actions, the other part is not having sex with children.

I don't think this is necessarily as horrific as some of the rape cases out there but I would still class it as rape. Even if there was no force involved the potential for force when there are six grown men versus two 12 year old girls stranded in a park doesn't bear thinking about. Katie and Lucy may have wanted sex, they may not have, either way, given their age, maturity and the situation they had gotten themselves into they didn't have much choice.

Lux23

I think its disgraceful that they were released, they should have served their sentence. It should not be acceptable in any society to have sex with a 12 year old girl. I know in some countries they have much lower ages of consent but I don't agree with it and think it is pretty disgusting for a grown up to sleep with someone of that age. Thats my opinion.

Helix

Tonyandthewhale wrote: »

I didn't read all of this because it's really terrible reporting but I don't see how "I thought she was at least 16" is an excuse when there are six of you between the ages of 19 and 21. That's still incredibly depraved

depraved or not, 16 is legal in the uk so they werent aware they were breaking any laws (aside from sex in public)

Helix

Lux23 wrote: »

I think its disgraceful that they were released, they should have served their sentence. It should not be acceptable in any society to have sex with a 12 year old girl. I know in some countries they have much lower ages of consent but I don't agree with it and think it is pretty disgusting for a grown up to sleep with someone of that age. Thats my opinion.

agreed, if they knew that she was a 12 year old girl

they didnt

7sr2z3fely84g5

Lux23 wrote: »

I think its disgraceful that they were released, they should have served their sentence. It should not be acceptable in any society to have sex with a 12 year old girl. I know in some countries they have much lower ages of consent but I don't agree with it and think it is pretty disgusting for a grown up to sleep with someone of that age. Thats my opinion.

For the fifth time,the law allows an honest mistake on the age of consent if the person can prove they believed the person was legal age of consent.

I still dont know why people are getting into flap into this,thing is,children are getting more used to sex nature with the tv and internet,if anyone would see a photograph of junior cert students on a night out they could probably pass for legal age consent in ireland in way they dress up,how many students in this pic would be legal age?-

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/junior-cert-students-get-an-a-in-partying-1882763.html

Tonyandthewhale

Helix wrote: »

depraved or not, 16 is legal in the uk so they werent aware they were breaking any laws (aside from sex in public)

Yes I accept that they weren't knowingly breaking the law but I'm still disgusted by their attitudes and while I wouldn't want them given the same sentencing as someone who knowingly ****s a 12 year old I still feel uneasy that these people are allowed walk the streets as they don't seem to be showing any remorse or even basic comprehension of the wrong they have done (although this could be down to the obvious bias of the reporter).

Helix

Tonyandthewhale wrote: »

Yes I accept that they weren't knowingly breaking the law but I'm still disgusted by their attitudes and while I wouldn't want them given the same sentencing as someone who knowingly ****s a 12 year old I still feel uneasy that these people are allowed walk the streets as they don't seem to be showing any remorse or even basic comprehension of the wrong they have done (although this could be down to the obvious bias of the reporter).

why shouldnt they be allowed to walk the streets? as far as they were concerned at the time they were having sex with a consentual girl of legal age

Kimia

Tonyandthewhale wrote: »

Yes I accept that they weren't knowingly breaking the law but I'm still disgusted by their attitudes and while I wouldn't want them given the same sentencing as someone who knowingly ****s a 12 year old I still feel uneasy that these people are allowed walk the streets as they don't seem to be showing any remorse or even basic comprehension of the wrong they have done (although this could be down to the obvious bias of the reporter).

She has succeeded with you.

brummytom

I'd probably blame her 'best friend' ('Lucy') tbh.

Edwards: ‘Five friends.’
Lucy: ‘We can have three each.’
Edwards: ‘Yes ... Who you having?’
Lucy: ‘Whoever wants me?’

She claimed the girls were 16, and from the above exchange, made it seem like what happened was consensual. Obviously what happened would have been very distressing for 'Katie', but her friend knew exactly what she was getting into.

Lux23

Helix wrote: »

agreed, if they knew that she was a 12 year old girl

they didnt

Well I am saying that shouldn't matter. I don't believe its an acceptable defence or excuse, if you sleep with a child no matter what they say to you, your serve the same sentence if you had known.

Lux23

Tonyandthewhale wrote: »

Yes I accept that they weren't knowingly breaking the law but I'm still disgusted by their attitudes and while I wouldn't want them given the same sentencing as someone who knowingly ****s a 12 year old I still feel uneasy that these people are allowed walk the streets as they don't seem to be showing any remorse or even basic comprehension of the wrong they have done (although this could be down to the obvious bias of the reporter).

I agree, gangbanging a 16 year old is bad enough anyway.

Helix

Lux23 wrote: »

Well I am saying that shouldn't matter. I don't believe its an acceptable defence or excuse, if you sleep with a child no matter what they say to you, your serve the same sentence if you had known.

that's absolutely bollox

7sr2z3fely84g5

Lux23 wrote: »

Well I am saying that shouldn't matter. I don't believe its an acceptable defence or excuse, if you sleep with a child no matter what they say to you, your serve the same sentence if you had known.

So if an 17 year old slept with an 16 year old *child is under 17 in irish law* they should go to jail?.

Mike 1972

Love the way some posters are speculating about the application of technicalities of Irish rape law relating to an incident which allegedly took place in England.

Lux23

Jett Short Vine wrote: »

So if an 17 year old slept with an 16 year old *child is under 17 in irish law* they should go to jail?.

Yes or else why have the law? Why not have a free for all?

Why is it bollox? Are you going to defend someone who has sex with 12 year olds?

Sonics2k

Helix wrote: »

of course its a bloody defence

she said she was legal, they didnt knowingly go out and do a bloody 12 year old ffs. if they did, thats a whole different kettle of fish. are people supposed to ask for passports now?

Robert Downey Jnr.

Just sayin

Jesus Wept

Sleep = Sleep

Carry on.

Yakult

I bet if it were 6 women footballers and two 12yo boys it wouldn't be such a big deal. (well, maybe not :pac:)

I hate reading these cases, alot of 12/13yo can easily look about 17-18 when somewhat dressed up, they were up for the roide and those guys thought they were of age. Still a bit weird what they did etc.

You might as well have to ask to see a girls i.d before you even look at them because you can easily be tricked.

I blame society for selling sex to young girls.

7sr2z3fely84g5

Lux23 wrote: »

Yes or else why have the law? Why not have a free for all?

Why is it bollox? Are you going to defend someone who has sex with 12 year olds?

im not defending a case if someone knew their age,i speak if someone made a genuine error like an irish case-

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/man-acquitted-of-unlawful-sex-with-13yearold-in-diary-case-2464622.html

The accused man told the trial that he had met the 13-year-old in a pub where she had purchased alcohol.
He said she dressed older than her age, wearing "stylish clothes" and "big, fancy high-heeled boots".
Judge John O'Hagan told jurors that a mistake about the age of a young person could be raised by the defence.
If the jury concluded that there had been such a mistake, then the defendant must be given the benefit of the doubt.
But if they rejected it, then they must convict.
The judge recalled the defence's case that the girl was not refused admission by pub bouncers and had bought drinks at various bars.

Helix

Lux23 wrote: »

Yes or else why have the law? Why not have a free for all?

Why is it bollox? Are you going to defend someone who has sex with 12 year olds?

if they believed she was of legal age? then yeah, its hardly their fault shes a liar

Lux23

These girls were in a park, now I can understand that if they met them in a pub that it could be an honest mistake but they still need to accept that they have had sex with a child and serve their time. I don't think mistakes like these would be made if there was a deterrent there.

There are people out there who will deliberately target wayward teenagers and use this excuse when they are caught out.

Lux23

Helix wrote: »

if they believed she was of legal age? then yeah, its hardly their fault shes a liar

But it is their fault they they chose to have sex with her? Do you not understand what I am saying here, even if she lied as an underage girl she is not reponsible for what they did to her?

Helix

Lux23 wrote: »

These girls were in a park, now I can understand that if they met them in a pub that it could be an honest mistake but they still need to accept that they have had sex with a child and serve their time. I don't think mistakes like these would be made if there was a deterrent there.

There are people out there who will deliberately target wayward teenagers and use this excuse when they are caught out.

should the girls face the same sentence for knowingly lying to the guys about their age or should they get off scott free then?

Lux23

Helix wrote: »

should the girls face the same sentence for knowingly lying to the guys about their age or should they get off scott free then?

No, you honestly really don't understand what I am saying here, do you?

Helix

Lux23 wrote: »

But it is their fault they they chose to have sex with her? Do you not understand what I am saying here, even if she lied as an underage girl she is not reponsible for what they did to her?

they chose to have sex with a girl who was of legal age

it turns out she wasnt, but its not their fault she wasnt, it was hers

Helix

Lux23 wrote: »

No, you honestly really don't understand what I am saying here, do you?

i do, its just so unbelievably devoid of common sense that it's baffling

Namlub

Lux23 wrote: »

These girls were in a park, now I can understand that if they met them in a pub that it could be an honest mistake but they still need to accept that they have had sex with a child and serve their time. I don't think mistakes like these would be made if there was a deterrent there.

There are people out there who will deliberately target wayward teenagers and use this excuse when they are caught out.

So an honest mistake can occur if they met in a pub, but not a park?

7sr2z3fely84g5

Lux23 wrote: »

But it is their fault they they chose to have sex with her? Do you not understand what I am saying here, even if she lied as an underage girl she is not reponsible for what they did to her?

Looks like the girls set themselfs up,from the same article-

Edwards, 19, used to play for Henley Town and was now a part-time football coach. Lucy told him she was 16.

so unless she turned up in a school uniform?.

Glenster

Minstrel27 wrote: »

So what.

So they're paedophiles.

QED

dr.bollocko

Kimia wrote: »

Here's the story:

dailymail

Kimia wrote: »

I feel like I'm being very cynical but this article seems to be to be bollox tbh.

Nail on head.

Sonics2k

Glenster wrote: »

So they're paedophiles.

QED

Firstly, thats not paedophilia.

Secondly, if she did truly inform them she was of legal age, then it's directly their fault.

I'm not defending their actions, rape is rape.
But in circumstances like this, it is not fair to hold the man directly responsible.

Having worked as a doorman at plenty of teen-disco's over the years, I can honestly say I have seen 15 year old girls walking around, and if it wasn't for the fact they're in a teen-disco, you'd really believe these girls are over 18.

Namlub

Glenster wrote: »

So they're paedophiles.

QED

You have no idea what a paedophile is.

Fremen

Lux23 wrote: »

Well I am saying that shouldn't matter. I don't believe its an acceptable defence or excuse, if you sleep with a child no matter what they say to you, your serve the same sentence if you had known.

The law operates on the principle of mens rea.

That is all.

Pete_Cavan

The defence of "well they told me it was legal" doesnt wash for me. That defence wouldnt work any other crimes so I dont see why it should work here. Did it really come as that big a shock to them that the girl whose number they had obtained three weeks ago on facebook to gangbang in the park turned out to be under 16?

You may say it is stupid to ask for ID but if you are aware of the statutory rape laws, and go around riding young girls in parks without any proof of age, then you knowingly leave yourself open to some very serious problems. The guys are adults and so should take personal responsibility for their actions. The girls are just that, girls, and for one of them at least may not have understood the consequences of her actions.


They should be banged up I say.