I see where you're coming from Tobes, but it's the grooming part that gets me. He has chosee one who was the wrong side of the line, but he knew what age she was. This wasn't a spur of the moment decision he took in good faith etc. He knowingly pursued a CHILD over a period of time with an end result of touching her up / shagging her. He could have his pick of so many women (he's got a cracking mrs tbh) but he chose to go down that route. In my eyes, he's a sick **** n has something wrong with him. I'm fully of the belief as well that people like that never change and can not be rehabilitated.
for playing her part in grooming him....not every 15 year old shares her character. legally, he is guilty...cant really argue with that. Morally and her character must come into question too. I dont buy into her being innocent at all.
Just because the law has not accommodated for her playing her part does not mean i cant question her behaviour.
Well into Victorian times, the age of sexual consent was 12 (which was the age at which maidens could marry or become legally entitled to take property from the estates of their fathers). The "16 years old" limit was only placed on the statute books in 1885. Perhaps Johnson forgot what year it was, when he was interfering with that girl?
Tardis Nonce? Jimmy Savile didn't actually die, he just regenerated into Adam Johnson? You really are a lawyer, aren't you?
What do you know of her character? Not a dig genuinely asking. I do (sort of) understand the point you're trying to make, but without seeing the messages exchanged between the 2 you can't really judge can you? She shouldn't of got involved you say but maybe she fell for him? Young & Naive leads kids to not really know what they are getting themselves into and sick ****s like AJ prey on it. Do you have children? If your 15 year old daughter was exploited in the same way then would you be saying the same things? Highly doubtful.
temptation...for me she has played a role, deserves some reprimand. She wasnt shopping at Morrisons and he came and slammed one on her. It was an ongoing game, she enjoyed playing until her father found out.
The is a difference between going after prepubescent children (*****philia) and adults just under the age of consent. However the latter is still wrong. As JWP said above, you have to draw a line somewhere and we've chosen 16 and everyone knows that. And has to respect it. It is chosen because below that age people are not mature enough to make decisions like whether to have sex. Although a quick walk down Chatham High St would suggest many of them seem to think they are.
id be taking a very good look at her. As for her character i am going by what i have read in the media etc. That is my only source..as i dont know her. If she happens to be someone totally different to what my knowledge of the account is then i would reconsider my opinion. However from what i know, she has alot to answer to also.
Thing is mate, even if she had a crush on him and came onto him, he is the adult and should have told her to do one.
So what? She's a kid. She probably liked the attention, but he shouldn't have been giving it to her (oo-er, missus). He should know better. She shouldn't.
like i said..with regards to the law..he is wrong all day and guilty. however things like this cant be just confined to the law, it is not a motoring offence. When people make their judgments and debates then their own thinking on the situation also plays a role.
