Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: Are we beginning to see Justice wake up?
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
In The Know |
JK2006 wrote:
Incidentally, whilst I am allowed to have consensual sex with a 16 year old, the Sex Offenders legislation bans me from WORKING with anyone under 18.
Alice in Wonderland?
There are also other "quirks"
You cannot gamble under 18 (but you can buy lottery tickets at 16 !)
You cannot marry without parental consent till you are 18, but you can join the army at 17 (and knock bastards out at ANY age !) |
|
JK2006 |
Correct ITK - www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/15/...r-pupil-sex-sentence
I love this comment...
“This is the wrong use of the word grooming, it’s the wrong message to teachers, parents and pupils, and it’s wrong to suggest that a vulnerable child is in any way responsible for their own abuse,” said Barnardo’s executive director of children’s services, Sam Monaghan.
It is about time the absurd word GROOMING got investigated. But this woman clearly DID groom the teacher, the judge makes it quite clear that the teacher SHOULD have resisted and punished him for not doing so, but anybody except a moron can see she was NOT "vulnerable" and not, at 16, a "child" - another word that needs examination.
The Children and Young Person's Act of 1933, never repealed, describes a child as "a person under 14". Someone between 14 and 18 is "a young person".
A 16 year old can consent to have sex. The teacher/pupil relationship affects that (rightly in my opinion) but it doesn't turn a consenting adult into a child.
Incidentally, whilst I am allowed to have consensual sex with a 16 year old, the Sex Offenders legislation bans me from WORKING with anyone under 18.
Alice in Wonderland? |
|
In The Know (as always) |
He's infor a disappointment, then - the AG's office have said there is "no scope" for a review of the sentence. |
|
Jo |
MWTWATCHER wrote:
Am awaiting an MWT tweet but of course he may need to be blind to this case.
twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/555462445238853632 |
|
JK2006 |
Ah yes - the Green Ink brigade kicks in and gets a sensible Judge's conclusions changed (probably). Not that they sat through the details of the case, of course. A five word headline is all their poor little brains need to come to the simple conclusion. Information? Depth? Complexity? Enough already. Superficial society 2015 only needs the basic tabloid slogan, thank you.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2909756...ays-groomed-HER.html |
|
|
|
