The instant she said she was 15, he had to say "No, thanks". No ifs, no buts, no worrying about whether it'd be legal in another country (!), no matter if she looked 25, no matter if she had been texting him naked pictures of herself and begging him to come and see her. When she said she was 15, he was in the wrong from the moment he didn't respond with "this stops now." He's the adult in this situation; he needed to act like one and he didn't. No blame whatsoever attaches to the girl. Calling her a "skank" is disgraceful. Vin
Beef, there have always been a proportion of the male population, and a smaller proportion of the female population, who insist on blaming the victims of sexual offences. In certain situations they may have a point, but this definitely isn't one of them.
Indeed. In fact my opinion of Johnson and Evans is unlikely to change regardless of appeals, interpretation of law etc because of the language they used towards and about women. I know it's not illegal to use certain terms but I admit I'm biased and 'judge' any sentence they receive in that context. I'm not some PC campaigner, in fact I look back with some shame on terms we used in the 70s and 80s when actually we should have known better. Language is a powerful tool, it forms attitudes and opinions.
Sorry I can't agree with this unless you are someone who can't remember their own teenage years and have had absolutely no contact with teenage children at all. Just to clarify I'm not commenting on the rest of the discussion just this part.
oh sorry, she went off with him in his flashy motor so she could read him passages from the bible. And then he viciously attacked her
I've tried to not get too embroiled in discussion about the 'whys and wherefores' and to keep my opinion out of this. But I'm gonna speak up here. If you read the text messages she's just after a signed shirt when they start talking. She meets him in the car, talks about football with him - audio of that has been leaked, gets her signed shirt and leaves. They're in the car for a short amount of time. He then starts with all the lewd texts about getting a 'thank you' from her: kissing and so on. He lured her in and he knew what he was doing. It didn't happen by accident and he knew he could get away with the way he was behaving towards her because she really liked Sunderland and more importantly she really liked him. The fact she (legally a child, remember...) wasn't telling him 'no' doesn't mean he had the green light to break the law.
Spot on DTLW. And before you reply, Big Ern, please stick to the facts of the case and try not to libel the innocent parties. This is a public forum don't forget.
He can read minds to get peoples telephone numbers? You need to get out into the real world, he's a twat for going after her, for sure, but she don't portray her as some unwilling innocent victim in swaddling clothes.
In my 62 years, 40 of them spent in the NHS, and adding in my wife's experience as a Community Psychiatric Nurse, plus all the experience of all our colleagues, I have actually seen quite a lot of the real world sunshine. I have no idea what world you live in, but in mine children are held to be innocent until their life experiences make them otherwise. The girl in this case was, as far as any of us know, guilty of nothing more than hero-worship of a scheming, manipulating, lying scumbag. You have absolutely no grounds for suggesting anything else, and I have already warned you not to. If you wish to take any further part in this discussion I suggest you remember that.
That's the offence though and there's no question an offence took place. It doesn't make it a more serious offence - if that hadn't happened there would be no offence at all. I should probably have included the word "intensely" (or something similar) in that point. What I was saying is that (based on the evidence that's been published) he doesn't seem have been putting enormous pressure on her. Some, yes, and the lack of intense pressure may only be because the story got out before things got to that level but you hear of much worse grooming than what he actually did. For me, it's really the denial and the ensuing social media campaign against the girl that's led to the sentence he got.
800 odd messages of some description or another is cleverer than 'pressure' Puck, it's calculated, tactical manipulation, otherwise translated as 'pressure' The only part of your earlier statement I can agree with is that it is worse on a 10 year old than a 15 year old, however (and this is the key part for me) it doesn't make it any less wrong because she was 15 and not 10. Wrong is wrong and if we want to trivialise it, she was only 4 weeks passed being 14. Does that make it any more or less wrong?
Now he's been jailed I reckon this thread should be closed. It's not a nice subject and the trial is over.
I'm inclined to agree Tom. I'll leave it a bit to give others a chance to post, and then I'll close it in a couple of hours. Possibly reopen it when the appeal comes around?
I don't think it's whether he subject is nice or not but that this thread now just leaves it self open to being trolled
Man oh man I really cannot for the life of me understand some folk!! For goodness sake comparing the rules of marriage in some countries is like comparing Hitler to the Pope!! Does that mean you believe it right for a girl of 10/11 to be married and to men damn near 3 times her age? For goodness sake the girl was barely 15 and as others have said very impressionable. Weren't we all at that age? Yes, she made a mistake by bragging about what happened instead of going home and complaining to her parents. Who wouldn't have done much the same at that age? He was her hero, her icon her mentor, he was adored by a lot of the other girls too. She was naive to not realise the back lash she would get for her bragging. That in its self though is learning about life. However wisdom comes with age and experience does it not? There should be no doubt he took full advantage of the opportunity to pick her cherry. (Sorry ladies) The girl was so ripe for picking. You could have told her till the cows came home that she was vulnerable and she would not have believed you, again do they ever at that age? He took full advantage and some. She was a child and needed to be protected and treated as such. If it had been me sentencing he would have got the maximum for each section he was guilty of. Each sentence to be served one after the other!!!!! No one will be able to convince me any different. He deserves all he is going to get in prison, I will be surprised if he doesn't come out from the sentence, singing an octave to two higher as he deserves it!! Nah no sympathy from me..........
