Shock as rape conviction, life term overturned!

[Fudzy]

Do you know why crime is high in SA? Because life is not respected and valued.

If that was the case we'd be quite a heartless/cold bunch which isn't true, perhaps I don't know enough criminals.

 

[ponder]

The main reason the judges came down with this decision in South Africa, is because your society has not kept up with civilised standards as evidenced by the excuses given here, and therefore the judges merely reflect that.

Strange that they should have statutory rape laws in other western/civilised countries as well then.

 

[KleinBoontjie]

Problem with people is as soon as someone screams 'rape' they get out the pitch forks, shovels & start a bonfire. What actually transpired is irrelevant to them. 11yr old & 53yr old, pregnant, case is obvious, done & dusted deal, burn him.

+1

So if a 3 year old says yes, it's statutory rape?

My question too????

She is 11 !!! Dont matter what she volunteered for !

Agree, the law should change and see that an 11 year can't make informed choices. Even if they shoot someone (in the news a while ago), the court said: "That they were too young and couldn't have known the dangers."......ditto.....and WTF

 

[killadoob]

He isn't at all arguing that it isn't rape. I thought he made it clear when he called it statutory rape.



Not really the difference is pretty superficial. They are both non consensual sex from a legal standpoint. That is my understanding anyway.

Again, no emotion here. Please don't try to pretend that there is.

So you agree if he didn't violently force himself on the girl a 20 - life sentence would be harsh?

 

[porchrat]

So you agree if he didn't violently force himself on the girl a 20 - life sentence would be harsh?

Not sure on this. I think it depends on the individual child in question. If the child is deemed competent to have been able to avoid the situation and chose not to then fine. However at the age of 11 it is going to pretty easy to convince the child to do what you want. Coercing or manipulating a young child into sex is in my mind the same as forcing yourself onto someone.

 

[OzzieCapie]

Strange that they should have statutory rape laws in other western/civilised countries as well then.

Yes, and read what circaumnstances I said it applies to.

A 17 yo boy and a 16yo girl is quite different to 11 yo vs 48 yo.

In the case of an 11 yo forcibly raped by a 48yo - with criminal history to boot- you can bet he won't get 5 yrs.

 

[noxibox]

Unfortunately I have to agree. This situation would not arise if the lower courts convicted and sentenced people according to the law. The law states that statutory rape is less severe than rape. Regardless of how he enticed her, all the evidence points to stat rape. The lower courts hit him with full rape and a life sentence for whatever reason, BUT were not following the law when they did.
This story would not have gotten out if he had received his 5 yr sentence from the beginning, it would not be a blow to the abuse of women and children, because there would be no high court reduction. The fault is with the regional court in being either too incompetent to sentence him correctly, or too emotionally involved to.

The problem may be that these lower courts have been sucked into this idea of sending a message instead of sticking to the law.

Not really the difference is pretty superficial. They are both non consensual sex from a legal standpoint. That is my understanding anyway.

There can be a huge difference. The one is a case where there was consent, but the law uses some arbitrary age line to declare that consent invalid.

The main reason the judges came down with this decision in South Africa, is because your society has not kept up with civilised standards as evidenced by the excuses given here, and therefore the judges merely reflect that.

If you'd bothered to read you'd know the decision is based on the law. Now the wild ozzies might convict people for very long sentences on near non-existent evidence. Maybe they don't even bother with trials and move straight to the crowd with pitchforks. How old does a sheep have to be there before it can give consent?

If he 'knew' that she was 15 and even if she consented, then he would also be regarded as a paedophile. He would not only serve punishment but also be permamanemtly on the sexual offenders list even if there was no sexual penetration.

Typically and ridiculously you can even get onto those lists for statutory rape. The scenario above is still statutory rape. Calling it paedophilia makes a mockery of genuine abuse of children.

 

[porchrat]

There can be a huge difference. The one is a case where there was consent, but the law uses some arbitrary age line to declare that consent invalid.

Still involves sex without consent. I personally see no difference. I only see statutory rape laws as being a little ridiculous when someone a little over the limit has sex with someone a little under when technically they are both of very similar ages. 11 is nowhere near that limit in this country though so that particular conundrum doesn't feature here.

 

[JerryMungo]

There can be a huge difference. The one is a case where there was consent, but the law uses some arbitrary age line to declare that consent invalid.

Your solution? What if someone convinced a 5 year old or even younger to agree to sex? Where do YOU draw the line?

 

[JerryMungo]

If you'd bothered to read you'd know the decision is based on the law. Now the wild ozzies might convict people for very long sentences on near non-existent evidence. Maybe they don't even bother with trials and move straight to the crowd with pitchforks. How old does a sheep have to be there before it can give consent?

Aussie law is considered too lenient in many civilized places