I still feel 6 years is far too long for the crime. Only last year, a teacher had sex with one her pupils 80times when he was 15 and found herself with a suspended sentence. Another one that comes to mind not so long ago and made some headlines. A woman pretended to be a man and deceived her victims by shagging them with a strap on, and seemed pretty sick in the head. 3 years. Isn't death by dangerous driving less than the sentence he was given?
Maybe those other sentences were too short? I don't think it is too long for that crime. He groomed an only just 15 year old. If you want to say "There have been other crimes with under aged children where the sentences weren't as heavy" then fair enough, but for me the sentence is right.
My gripe is with our justice system, even though we probably have one of the best ones in the world. I just find it all rather subjective. I personally feel that 6 years is too much. I was expecting a similar one to Ched Evans.
Always hard to do comparisons between sentencing...the minimum for Johnson was 5, so he only got a bit above that because of another offence. It's the grooming side that makes him creepy....as it wasn't a moment of stupidity. He won't serve six years anyway. I do like some flexibility permitted to judges as crimes vary....though sometimes it will mean sentencing that seems crazy to the average person....usually too light. Ched Evans is of course appealing with new evidence....strange that something has come up after all this time. May be a retrial....though he has already served his sentence. If innocent (of a crime, not of being a tosser), he will want his name cleared as it has an impact on his subsequent life...far more than if he was guilty of robbery or fraud.
You don't think grooming a child and beyond is worthy of a 6 year term? Is that because of previous case sentences or you just don't think it's that bad a crime?
No, I don't. Especially at this low end of grooming and a mixture of previous case sentences. I like to see consistency and equality in everything and I find that rarely ever happens. Again, as mentioned, it's all subjective and down to opinion.
You rarely get equality in the crimes committed. I'm assuming/hoping that the "No I don't" is aimed at the sentence question but not the 'bad crime' question. Do you have kids?
People without experience of raising children don't always know just how young and foolish a girl (or boy) of fifteen is.....and this girl was only just fifteen. They can look grown up and they pretend to be grown up and to know everything, but they are so easily led because of their fear of not being seen as cool or sophisticated. A young girl may even practice by flirting....but all decent men indulge them a bit but keep well away. That is why the law protects them.
I don't see how you can say this is the "low end" of grooming. Johnson admitted his intention was to have sex with an underage girl. How is that in any way "low end"? As Fran says, unless you have had experience of raising teenage children you have no idea how completely stupid they can be, and he took complete advantage of that.
I suppose what SaintsForTheWin might mean is that she wasn't jumped on in the street after dark. She has been affected but not terrified. However, she has been verbally attacked in the street, at school and at the Sunderland ground, so her life has been affected in an unpleasant manner for being silly. I feel very sorry for her....she should be having fun not going to counselling and having to stay indoors. If at all possible, I would move for her sake....not always easy I know.
Reasons why it's not more serious: Her age. Doing this with a 15 year old is less serious than if it was a 10 year old. Lack of pre-meditation. He didn't go looking for a child to have sex with, the situation arose and he took advantage. He didn't abduct, restrain or physically attack her. He didn't ply her with drink or drugs. From memory he doesn't seem to have deliberately psychologically manipulated her The aggravating factors seem to me to be his taking advantage of his fame and his not guilty plea, which has led to her being bullied and abused. Mind you, the guy seems to have some psychological problems of his own.
At the time of his crime there were countires within the EU where you could get married younger than she was, and I'd say her emotional damage wasn't caused by Johnson but by her bragging about it and it backfiring. I have no sympathy with either party tbh, and won't be surprised if she gets a load of 'compensation' for being a cheap skank whilst someone who has been a real victim gets a pittance because her attacker isn't rich.
When listening/reading opinions on this case and others of a similar nature. I think there is a real misunderstanding about what grooming actually is. Puck, I take you point about acting from memory on the case, but if you read some of the texts messages between Johnson and the girl. It's pretty clear that he has taken a situation which is just fandom from the girls viewpoint and completely sexualised it to his own advantage and to the point that before they meet he has planted the seeds. Grooming is getting children into a state of trust and taking advantage.
If all 15-yr-old boys and girls experimenting with sex are skanks, that has written off a large % of the population. Don't pretend to know about present day youth, but even in the early 60s that would have been about 25%....suspect it's a lot higher now.
You are right....the texts show that she was trying to hold him off and it was him that kept turning it round. She wouldn't even send him a sexy shot, so it shows she wasn't the most forward kid in the world.
What relevance does the age of consent in another country have too this case? I do find it somewhat worrying by the number of people who 'appear' to be either inferring the crime is a two way thing here, or is not that bad a crime. Before I'm shot, I'll emphasise that this is my understanding when reading certain posts. People may not quite mean it like that, but it's how they've come across to me. It makes me worry for my kids.
