2 year sentance for raping a 10 year old girl.

No seriously.... serious issues in here please..

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
garymcnally
Snail
Snail
Posts: 5923
Joined: 01 May 2003, 14:09
Location: Stoke on trent
Contact:

2 year sentance for raping a 10 year old girl.

Post by garymcnally » 25 Jun 2007, 14:41

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6237480.stm

This judge is scum! Saying that the decision was difficult because she looked 16 and was dressed provocativly.

If that judge has a wife, could I rape her if she wore a low cut dress and get away with some community service?

I dont usually like the idea of assasinations, but can someone off this fucker for me?
Happy now? :'-(

User avatar
LittleTill
Snail
Snail
Posts: 4758
Joined: 15 May 2004, 16:19

Post by LittleTill » 25 Jun 2007, 15:17

quite extreme gary. i guess she just looked old enough. why else would a judge make a decision like that, what i don't get is why it was such a short sentence for rape.
Lip up fatty

Dannnn
Cool Snail
Cool Snail
Posts: 7224
Joined: 09 Apr 2002, 00:21
Contact:

Post by Dannnn » 25 Jun 2007, 15:57

Judge Hall had said that the sentencing had been the most difficult decision he had ever made, but the girl had appeared to be 16.


So it's 'okay' to rape a 16 year old, then? Jesus, this judge needs a good kicking. In the face, preferably. :\
Image

User avatar
Jess
Cool Snail
Cool Snail
Posts: 6590
Joined: 16 May 2002, 23:09
Location: Newbury.
Contact:

Post by Jess » 25 Jun 2007, 17:35

Don't get me wrong I think rape is messed however old you are. But I'm guessing he's going by the fact that you're legal for sex at the age of 16 and lets face it alot more people are going to be angry about some man raping a child then a 30yr old woman.
Mirror mirror can you tell
If they are kneeling in confession or if they just fell?
The mirror looks back and it knows damn well
It's really hard living when you're living with yourself.

Dannnn
Cool Snail
Cool Snail
Posts: 7224
Joined: 09 Apr 2002, 00:21
Contact:

Post by Dannnn » 25 Jun 2007, 18:03

Yeah, that's true, but it shouldn't necessarily affect the amount of time a rapist should spend in prison.

Heh, how can somebody mistake a fuckin' 10 year old for a 16 year old? What sort of shit excuse is that? Fucking rapist cunts. Probably be out of prison within a few months, only to perv on kids again.
Image

User avatar
jo_rhymes
Ameoba of Satan
Ameoba of Satan
Posts: 381
Joined: 21 May 2007, 01:33
Location: Newbury
Contact:

Post by jo_rhymes » 25 Jun 2007, 19:07

According to that article it was consensual sex.

I completely agree with what Dr Michele Elliott said.

"It takes us back to the 1950s when the victim was blamed if they were dressed provocatively.

"No-one in my opinion could mistake a 10-year-old child, even dressed up, for a 16-year-old. They are just trying very hard to find excuses.

"You can never blame a child victim for sexual abuse when excusing the abuser of any kind of abuse."

The NSPCC added: "There is no excuse for having sex with a 10-year-old, no matter how she dresses."

User avatar
phillip_banks
Snail
Snail
Posts: 5178
Joined: 24 Sep 2003, 12:37
Location: Wood-To-Tha-Motherfuckin'-Cote
Contact:

Post by phillip_banks » 25 Jun 2007, 22:03

It's not rape, it's surprise sex.

metal_dave
Snail God
Snail God
Posts: 20772
Joined: 22 Jul 2003, 23:05
Contact:

Post by metal_dave » 26 Jun 2007, 07:54

hopefully the guy will get what he deserves in prison anyway. apparently the favourite for child rapists is a pot of boiling water and sugar in the face.
Image

User avatar
garymcnally
Snail
Snail
Posts: 5923
Joined: 01 May 2003, 14:09
Location: Stoke on trent
Contact:

Post by garymcnally » 26 Jun 2007, 11:28

I get the boiling water...but whats with the sugar?
Happy now? :'-(

User avatar
chippy
Snail Of Satan
Snail Of Satan
Posts: 30353
Joined: 18 Aug 2003, 20:39
Location: Newbury
Contact:

Post by chippy » 26 Jun 2007, 11:34

it sticks
Image They reckon one day you'll be able to wake up and eat a yoghurt you can have a conversation with.

User avatar
phillip_banks
Snail
Snail
Posts: 5178
Joined: 24 Sep 2003, 12:37
Location: Wood-To-Tha-Motherfuckin'-Cote
Contact:

Post by phillip_banks » 26 Jun 2007, 11:35

When sugar caramalises it turns into a sticky hot substance, like tar, thus sticking to the face causing severe pain etc. To be honest, it's good that he at least got convicted. Something silly like 90% of rape cases fail to end in a conviction.

User avatar
garymcnally
Snail
Snail
Posts: 5923
Joined: 01 May 2003, 14:09
Location: Stoke on trent
Contact:

Post by garymcnally » 26 Jun 2007, 12:04

That judge should be locked away though.
Happy now? :'-(

User avatar
phillip_banks
Snail
Snail
Posts: 5178
Joined: 24 Sep 2003, 12:37
Location: Wood-To-Tha-Motherfuckin'-Cote
Contact:

Post by phillip_banks » 26 Jun 2007, 12:39

Gary, I think you should look at the bigger picture sometimes instead of jumping on bandwagons.

MattEvenIfItKills
Slug
Slug
Posts: 1236
Joined: 09 Nov 2003, 13:24
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by MattEvenIfItKills » 26 Jun 2007, 14:10

Doesn't adding sugar allow the temperature of the liquid to increase above 100 degrees celsius - therefore making the effects more devastating.

Thats what I heard somewhere.

User avatar
jo_rhymes
Ameoba of Satan
Ameoba of Satan
Posts: 381
Joined: 21 May 2007, 01:33
Location: Newbury
Contact:

Post by jo_rhymes » 26 Jun 2007, 15:06

rape cases are really really hard to sort out.

no one really knows what went on.

User avatar
phillip_banks
Snail
Snail
Posts: 5178
Joined: 24 Sep 2003, 12:37
Location: Wood-To-Tha-Motherfuckin'-Cote
Contact:

Post by phillip_banks » 26 Jun 2007, 21:48

Exactly. Unless there's conclusive physical evidence or witness reports (which there rarely is), then it's just one person's word versus another.

User avatar
jeff_crap_in_the_head
Snail Trainee
Snail Trainee
Posts: 3995
Joined: 21 Jul 2005, 14:43
Location: Chad
Contact:

Post by jeff_crap_in_the_head » 27 Jun 2007, 18:04

IamCoop wrote:When sugar caramalises it turns into a sticky hot substance, like tar, thus sticking to the face causing severe pain etc. To be honest, it's good that he at least got convicted. Something silly like 90% of rape cases fail to end in a conviction.


Maybe something to think about there.
Pogonophobia is the fear of beards.
Image

User avatar
Chris
Snail
Snail
Posts: 5192
Joined: 14 Dec 2004, 02:04
Contact:

Post by Chris » 27 Jun 2007, 22:52

Lawyers for the defendants stressed that the sex had been consensual, and was only termed 'rape' because of the framework of law.


So... the fact that she looked 16 has everything to do with it. Cheers.
Image

User avatar
chippy
Snail Of Satan
Snail Of Satan
Posts: 30353
Joined: 18 Aug 2003, 20:39
Location: Newbury
Contact:

Post by chippy » 28 Jun 2007, 09:29

The repeated used of the word rape in that article is very emotive and I'm quite surprised at the BBC for using it like that. If it was consensual the charge is statutory rape, which isn't exactly the same thing. It maybe have been obvious she wasn't 16 but he may have thought she was 14 or 15 and girls of that age are often sexually active. Whether you think that's right or not, it's a bit different from actually forcing himself upon her.
Image They reckon one day you'll be able to wake up and eat a yoghurt you can have a conversation with.

User avatar
-dabadanselecta-
Ameoba of Satan
Ameoba of Satan
Posts: 397
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 16:03
Location: Thatcham
Contact:

Post by -dabadanselecta- » 28 Jun 2007, 14:09

its screwed up whatever went on. ive learned that lawers generally do not care in the slightest what happened in the case they are just there for the money (obviously) and to compete against the other lawer. the case circumstances dont mean shit to them particullaly its lawer against lawer. i personally think that all prisoners should be put in solitairy comfinement bread and water + fruit and veg and made to generate electricity on a human size gerbil wheel -make some use of them- pass the time quicker, get fit and help make green energy to power the country. i work in school catering and the company i work for also does catering in prisons , the criminals get more £ spent on there food daily than the kids of this nation and have a far larger variety that they can choose from (that takes the piss)
sheeple - I need a laptop -

User avatar
jo_rhymes
Ameoba of Satan
Ameoba of Satan
Posts: 381
Joined: 21 May 2007, 01:33
Location: Newbury
Contact:

Post by jo_rhymes » 28 Jun 2007, 17:06

2 minor criticisms with what you're saying dan.

1- it's LawYer.

2- remember how you categorised all police as scum and then you met a nice police dude? Lawyers = the same.
Please stop putting people in boxes and labelling them.

We're all individuals, we are all different. People's jobs do not define who they are, what's important to them, and what action they take.

There are some awesome lawyers out in the world, who aren't just in it for the money.

Open that small peanut shaped head of yours.

User avatar
-dabadanselecta-
Ameoba of Satan
Ameoba of Satan
Posts: 397
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 16:03
Location: Thatcham
Contact:

Post by -dabadanselecta- » 28 Jun 2007, 17:52

1-thanks for correcting my spelling error, i do know that word lawyer just wasnt paying attention.

2-i made sure i said generally about lawyers as to say i am generalizing here and i know its not allways the case.

3-dont be so rude calling my head peanut shaped tut tut its a beautiful peanut shape noggin and you know it.


i remember the cop story you refer to well , i also have a friend who is a lawyer and is sound , but as i say in general or the majority are not really caring that much , plus i know lawyers who earn not very much at all im talking under 20 g for their work a year.
sheeple - I need a laptop -

User avatar
phillip_banks
Snail
Snail
Posts: 5178
Joined: 24 Sep 2003, 12:37
Location: Wood-To-Tha-Motherfuckin'-Cote
Contact:

Post by phillip_banks » 28 Jun 2007, 19:52

They're obviously shit lawyers then. Or do you mean soliciters? Considering you're using an american term, i'm not sure I understand which one you mean. If you mean you know barrister's that don't earn fuck all then they can't be very good. Being a Barrister is one of the few jobs where, if you get results and are good at what you do, you'll very quickly earn a lot of money. Obviously it can also be flipped as incredibly shit Barristers can earn shitloads purely because they went to Eton, regardless of their talent. But the majority of good barristers will earn good money. Unless you meant soliciters, who don't particularly earn a lot of money.

User avatar
-dabadanselecta-
Ameoba of Satan
Ameoba of Satan
Posts: 397
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 16:03
Location: Thatcham
Contact:

Post by -dabadanselecta- » 28 Jun 2007, 23:55

i dunno coop im a dumbass in it
sheeple - I need a laptop -

User avatar
Chris
Snail
Snail
Posts: 5192
Joined: 14 Dec 2004, 02:04
Contact:

Post by Chris » 29 Jun 2007, 08:39

IamCoop wrote:They're obviously shit lawyers then. Or do you mean soliciters? Considering you're using an american term, i'm not sure I understand which one you mean. If you mean you know barrister's that don't earn fuck all then they can't be very good. Being a Barrister is one of the few jobs where, if you get results and are good at what you do, you'll very quickly earn a lot of money. Obviously it can also be flipped as incredibly shit Barristers can earn shitloads purely because they went to Eton, regardless of their talent. But the majority of good barristers will earn good money. Unless you meant soliciters, who don't particularly earn a lot of money.


Soooo....... I was listening to Radio 4 the other day and it proved you wrong on this point. Apparently it's not the barristers that make shitloads in this country at all.... infact there is a startling number of barristers who end up having breakdowns and needing therapy due to the high levels of stress involved, which aren't reflected in the money they make.

ps. DON'T ASK ME TO BACK THIS UP I HEARD IT ON THE RADIO AND I DON'T CARE ENOUGH TO LOOK INTO IT FURTHER.
Image

User avatar
Chris
Snail
Snail
Posts: 5192
Joined: 14 Dec 2004, 02:04
Contact:

Post by Chris » 29 Jun 2007, 08:42

Also, regarding Dan's point about lawyers not caring about the truth of the case, and simply arguing for whichever client they represent.... surely that's the whole point of our legal system? It's not the lawyer's job to determine whether or not a client is right or wrong... it is their job to present their client's case to the best of their ability.
Image

User avatar
LittleTill
Snail
Snail
Posts: 4758
Joined: 15 May 2004, 16:19

Post by LittleTill » 29 Jun 2007, 09:27

my friend is a solicitor and earns a shit load. Dan is your head peanut shaped - blatently gonna compare it with some peanuts when i next see you
Lip up fatty

User avatar
jo_rhymes
Ameoba of Satan
Ameoba of Satan
Posts: 381
Joined: 21 May 2007, 01:33
Location: Newbury
Contact:

Post by jo_rhymes » 29 Jun 2007, 13:01

he tastes like a peanut. :point:

User avatar
phillip_banks
Snail
Snail
Posts: 5178
Joined: 24 Sep 2003, 12:37
Location: Wood-To-Tha-Motherfuckin'-Cote
Contact:

Post by phillip_banks » 29 Jun 2007, 23:47

Inertia Creeps wrote:
IamCoop wrote:They're obviously shit lawyers then. Or do you mean soliciters? Considering you're using an american term, i'm not sure I understand which one you mean. If you mean you know barrister's that don't earn fuck all then they can't be very good. Being a Barrister is one of the few jobs where, if you get results and are good at what you do, you'll very quickly earn a lot of money. Obviously it can also be flipped as incredibly shit Barristers can earn shitloads purely because they went to Eton, regardless of their talent. But the majority of good barristers will earn good money. Unless you meant soliciters, who don't particularly earn a lot of money.


Soooo....... I was listening to Radio 4 the other day and it proved you wrong on this point. Apparently it's not the barristers that make shitloads in this country at all.... infact there is a startling number of barristers who end up having breakdowns and needing therapy due to the high levels of stress involved, which aren't reflected in the money they make.

ps. DON'T ASK ME TO BACK THIS UP I HEARD IT ON THE RADIO AND I DON'T CARE ENOUGH TO LOOK INTO IT FURTHER.



I know a lot more about this subject than you do Chris. Lets leave it at that.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests