Forum - View topicNEWS: UK Anime Club Leader Jailed For Teen Sex Abuse
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Brent Allison
 Posts: 2444 Location: Athens-Clarke County, GA, USA |
|
|||
Then Blood-, it was probably my fault for not writing that clearer, so apologies from me. |
||||
|
||||
partysmores
 Posts: 284 |
|
|||
|
I'm more concerned about whether the girls consented to sexual activity with him more then the age, and are just trying to get sympathy from the judge by claiming they were abused. I'm not saying this is what happened, it's just a theory; we need more information.
|
||||
|
||||
Draneor
 Posts: 355 |
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Animehermit
 Posts: 964 Location: The Argama |
|
|||
Doesn't matter. They were underage, it's still rape. |
||||
|
||||
Tempest
 I Run this place.ANN Publisher  Posts: 10425 Location: Do not message me for support. |
|
|||
|
A few people have complained about censorship and/or unfair treatment in this thread.
To avoid derailing the thread, my comments on this issue are here: animenewsnetwork.com/bbs/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=3225591#3225591 If you have any problems with these rules, either in general, or in how they were applied here, please post them in that thread. This thread should be for discussions about the news article, and related topics. |
||||
|
||||
|
Brent Allison
Posts: 2444 Location: Athens-Clarke County, GA, USA |
|
|||
Arguments about the age of consent on the Internet are literally older than the ages of consent in question. Even the higher ones. They're still going because there's no place for them to go except in circles at this level. Unless both sides want a headache, they should learn from Internet history and just not talk about it. Or discuss it in a way that goes beyond the "she was raped" vs. "she consented" dichotomy (it's almost always "she" in these cases). |
||||
|
||||
|
Zetacheesecake
Posts: 5 |
|
|||
Why on earth do you think random girls would conspire to send a man to jail if they were not truly abused? believe me, a british judge would send a man to prison on a whim, im a friend of one of the girls abused and the idea she would make up a claim of abuse and go through the hell of a trial is just ludicrous. It really is pretty worrying you would share that theory with others on here, you cant legally get consent for underage sexual activity because children are often underdeveloped and too naive to understand what exactly there giving consent too, that's why adults are not legally allowed to have sexual relationships with minors. in the first place. |
||||
|
||||
|
partysmores
Posts: 284 |
|
|||
Worse things have been faked. Like I said, I don't know the whole story here, and if it's confirmed there was no consent, I'll apologize. And I'd say once you're about 13 (Japan's age of consent) or so, you know what's going on and have two choices: a) Let's do this, baby b) No don't do that get the hell off me If their choices were b) and he still had sex with them, yes, he should be jailed. |
||||
|
||||
|
Zetacheesecake
Posts: 5 |
|
|||
Of course there was no consent, you CANT give consent to commit crime. any sexual activity with minors is against the law in the UK so its irrelevant whether or not the girls gave consent because there not legally allowed to do so. You must remember how adult predators lie and manipulate children to get them to agree to things. Also i suggest you read the story more because Nigel was not arguing whether or not he had consent to sexually abuse the girls he denied he did ANY abuse whatsoever which is why he got such a harsh sentence, his complete denial of any misjudgement or wrong doing caused unneeded distress to the victims. |
||||
|
||||
Polycell
 Posts: 4623 |
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
|
ANN_Lynzee
ANN Executive Editor
 Posts: 2948 Location: Email for assistance only |
|
|||
|
[quote="Polycell"]
And seeing how these girls went to court, confessed trauma and nightmares, we can assume that they did not "decide for themselves," or this thread can continue to assume there's some sort of conspiracy by the victims to convict a guy who didn't do anything that bad by manipulating an authority position to have sex with girls he knew were underage. The judge deemed him high risk, the girls stated the experiences were traumatic, and he was found guilty. But I'm sure this inquest will find facts the court overlooked because adults having sex with minors is totally arbitrary. Especially if he's got inept social skills. Seriously, this whole conversation is disgusting. Out. |
||||
|
||||
mglittlerobin
 Posts: 1071 |
|
|||
I agree, this whole thing is a disgusting mess. The fact that he manipulated these girls is wrong. and how could he not know what the age of consent IS, if this was consensual, which is apparently wasn't. And he has the intelligence of a two year old as you can see by his Facebook post which I could understand, despite his many spelling errors. |
||||
|
||||
|
Jack_Davis
Posts: 4 |
|
|||
|
He was the leader of a local club and teens who attend these clubs are regularly required to have their ages stated when they sign up, so he already knew ahead of time when he sexually exploited them. Whether it was non-consensual or not, does not matter as it is clearly is rape. And even if it was consensual, it still constitutes statutory rape as he clearly took advantage of the girls for his own means.
Therefore, his jail sentence is well-suited for him. |
||||
|
||||
Mad_Scientist
 SubscriberModerator  Posts: 3011 |
|
|||
So, here's a question for you then. Do you believe all age of consent laws should be abolished entirely? That it should be perfectly legal for a 45 year old man to have sex with a 6 year old child as long as the child gives "consent"? If your answer is "yes, the above should be legal," well... I'm not sure how to respond to that right now. So for the moment, I'm going to assume your answer is "no", and that you're perhaps thinking of accusing me of engaging in hyperbole, or replacing your position with a strawman. Understandable, I suppose. But let's see how we can make my example illegal, in a way that doesn't restrict the sexual freedom of mature teens. The simple answer is to make a law that prevents 6 year old kids from being able to legally give consent. Make the age of consent 7. Fine, but really, an age of consent of 7? Do we believe that the moment a kid turns 7, they magically have the maturity necessary for sex? Of course not. 7 years old, 6 years old, these kids haven't even gone through puberty yet. So let's save time and bump things up a bit and make the age of consent 13. Ok, but how many people have completed puberty at age 13? And how many are there who haven't even started puberty at that age? Just how many have the mental and emotional maturity for sex at that 13? I'm not an expert on human development, but I imagine the number of 13 year old teens that are truly ready for sex is incredibly small, assuming the number isn't actually 0. So let's bump it up again, 14. Except, there are still plenty of people at 14 that aren't developed or mature enough for sex, so maybe... The simple fact is that any age of consent law is flawed. I agree with you that people develop at different rates, so any law that uses a specific age is going to have issues. Set the age too low, and tons of children will be left unprotected. Set the age too high, and you're restricting the freedom of mature individuals perfectly able to give consent. Set the age just right, in the perfect balance... and you do both. So our only options are to either have no law, and allow 5 year olds to be raped if they give "consent," or have a law, and prevent that, but have the law be imperfect. Personally, I think having a law is the better option. Now, that's not to say I think attempts to improve age of consent laws should be ignored on the basis that "the laws will never be perfect anyways." I know the US age of consent laws at least are a horrible mess, with every state having different conflicting laws that are full of oversights, archaic thinking, and weird quirks, laws that in my opinion are sometimes too harsh and yet at the same time way too lax. But really, that all has little to do with the current story. Based on the details we've I've seen so far, this was certainly not a case of flawed age of consent laws messing things up for people. No, this seems like a case where the laws are serving their purpose. Well, it would have been better if they had been enough of a deterrent to stop this from happening in the first place, but this is better than no laws existing and the guy going unpunished and being free to abuse others. Of course we don't know the full details, and we never will, because we aren't involved in the case. And given this case doesn't seem like one that will get a ton of media attention, we probably won't ever know much if anything beyond the bare details we've got so far. That's normal. The only reason why we've even heard of this case is because of the slight anime connection. Expecting more details is foolish. If you really want to know, asking in this thread is pointless, and you would be better served contacting the site that first reported on this case (sourced by ANN in their article). Or go even further and contact local authorities where the events took place. Of course there is always the slight chance the guy was wrongly convicted. That does happen sometimes unfortunately. But it some comments give me the impression that people are operating under that assumption. I get "innocent until proven guilty", but "innocent even after proven guilty"? As I said, I understand wrongful convictions do sometimes happen, and I'm certainly not going to be burning this guy in effigy or anything, but I still don't understand the tone of some of this discussion. It really does give the impression that some aren't just honestly curious, but are pushing some agenda or viewpoint with their comments. |
||||
|
||||
faintsmile1992
 Posts: 295 Location: England |
|
|||
|
Its silly to treat the age of consent as an absolute, and if people were sensible about judging cases and enforcing it, it doesn't really matter at what age its set - prosecution would only happen where there is strong evidence for psychological or physical abuse during or before sex otherwise it would not even be allowed to get to court. In this context its best to remember that the Victorians introduced an age of consent not out of prudery but to prevent the abuse of impoversished young girls by Britain's pimps, not some sentimental nonsense about childhood and virginity. Egyptian Mo is a danger to girls; Natalie Williams is not a danger to boys. God knows the facts about Captain Anime.
|
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group