FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Adam Johnson
Adam Johnson
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What were you wanting, sobbing and wailing, or dancing in the isles"  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Bit OTT. Mind you, he'll only serve about 2 and a half." What's OTT? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"will that's what you get for putting your cock in a 15yr, I know a lot of 15yr can look a lot older but he know her age so wouldn't care if it had been twice that" Did he have sex with her? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"That's a pretty long Sentence compared to some other cases in the media." there is a general rule, 10 years between accused and victim means jail time. I expected 7 years | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"will that's what you get for putting your cock in a 15yr, I know a lot of 15yr can look a lot older but he know her age so wouldn't care if it had been twice that" Did he have full sex with her? I don't remember reading that he did. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"will that's what you get for putting your cock in a 15yr, I know a lot of 15yr can look a lot older but he know her age so wouldn't care if it had been twice that Did he have full sex with her? I don't remember reading that he did." Think he did with the 15yr and was grooming a second | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It should never have happened he was wrong but she was completely not innocent. Think the sentence is a bit high to say he did not have full sex there,s a lot that have done worse and got less but at the end of the day she is a child " And its a high profile case to warn others what will happen if they do the same | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Get slagged off for starting a thread Jesus." . No he got slagged off for throwing the money lenders out of the temple! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Bit OTT. Mind you, he'll only serve about 2 and a half. What's OTT?" Over the top you never heard of that   | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Bit OTT. Mind you, he'll only serve about 2 and a half. What's OTT? Over the top you never heard of that ". What a Luddite  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"i guess his now ex stacey flounders will be looking for a new cock, i don't mind putting my self forward for that"  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"i guess his now ex stacey flounders will be looking for a new cock, i don't mind putting my self forward for that "I'm sure she'd welcome that! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A bit OTT as in other cases of some men getting less for far worse on younger children" I'd say the issue is that other sentences are too lenient not that this is too harsh | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What were you wanting, sobbing and wailing, or dancing in the isles" He should of got an extra 5 years for wearing a sunderland shirt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What were you wanting, sobbing and wailing, or dancing in the islesHe should of got an extra 5 years for wearing a sunderland shirt" Can't argue with that 
But in a serious note , he did appear to be very naive .
He had to check whether what he did was illegal , and although he didn't actually have sex with her , he must have known it was wrong .
She was certainly not innocent , and encouraged him . But even so he shouldn't have done it .
With all the press attention and his status they had to be harsh with him .
And they were . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It should never have happened he was wrong but she was completely not innocent. Think the sentence is a bit high to say he did not have full sex there,s a lot that have done worse and got less but at the end of the day she is a child " it doesn't matter how "innocent " you may think she was. The hard fact is that she is a minor, under the age of consent and that is a hard and fast Law. She was under 16, he knew this and actively groomed her to have sex with her. GUILTY! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Bit OTT. Mind you, he'll only serve about 2 and a half. What's OTT? Over the top you never heard of that .
What a Luddite "Smart arses - I was inquiring as to what the poster thought was over the top | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A bit OTT as in other cases of some men getting less for far worse on younger children I'd say the issue is that other sentences are too lenient not that this is too harsh" Hmmmm fair point | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Bit OTT. Mind you, he'll only serve about 2 and a half. What's OTT? Over the top you never heard of that .
What a Luddite
Smart arses - I was inquiring as to what the poster thought was over the top"The sentence. It's not much less than actual paedophiles who assault toddlers get, I'm not saying what he did doesnt deserve punishment, but it shouldn't be put in the same bracket. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Bit OTT. Mind you, he'll only serve about 2 and a half. What's OTT? Over the top you never heard of that .
What a Luddite
Smart arses - I was inquiring as to what the poster thought was over the top
The sentence. It's not much less than actual paedophiles who assault toddlers get, I'm not saying what he did doesnt deserve punishment, but it shouldn't be put in the same bracket."He groomed a CHILD whether it's 2 years old or 15 years old it was a child. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"They tried to say that he developed a disorder when he became famous and a footballer. I know someone who has played football for years in a premiership standing as well and he isn't bad looking and never delevolped no disorders from being famous. He knew what he was doing, the 15 year somewhat knew what she was doing but at the end of the day he took advantage of a child...The sentence was fair and he will serve 3/4 of it and he will have to go through intensive CBT for sex offenders. " Do yo mean cognative behavioral therapy or compulsary bike test? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Bit OTT. Mind you, he'll only serve about 2 and a half. What's OTT? Over the top you never heard of that .
What a Luddite
Smart arses - I was inquiring as to what the poster thought was over the top
The sentence. It's not much less than actual paedophiles who assault toddlers get, I'm not saying what he did doesnt deserve punishment, but it shouldn't be put in the same bracket.
He groomed a CHILD whether it's 2 years old or 15 years old it was a child. "I was a fool when I was 15 and what made me so vulnerable was that I was a naive fool. Had it not been for the fact that my parents had me on a pretty short leash I could have got into all sorts of problems as it was I found myself in some dodgy situations. Adults should protect vulnerable children and when they don't we as a society should send a clear message that its wrong in my opinion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"He actively groomed her. He knew her age. And he even researched the age of consent. His texts were predatory and showed that he was set on meeting her for sex. I think it's great it sends a very clear message out that taking advantage of a schoolgirl's infatuation and arguably their niavity is in no way acceptable " what your saying is right, he was in the wrong and deserves jail time but let's be honest 15 years old isn't a child, they aren't niave at that age & certainly can't be taken advantage of. Maybe as people get older they forget what it's like being that age & you actually believe that they are innocent children but they're not. Most teens especially nowadays have more sex than adults do. Basically yes he was in the wrong but so was she becuase she knew what she was doing as well | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's a strange case - she actively pursued and knew exactly what she was getting herself into but at the same time he should have had more control and walked away. One of the pitfalls of being a footballer is that this kind of trouble will find you. Given that he got so long without actually having sex with her it would be interesting to find out if anything ever happens to the men responsible for all of the pregnant 15 year olds out there." The trouble didn't "find him" he actively pursued it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It should never have happened he was wrong but she was completely not innocent. Think the sentence is a bit high to say he did not have full sex there,s a lot that have done worse and got less but at the end of the day she is a child " she had only just turned 15.... he knew that because in all of the text he did ask when she turned 16..... he is an adult who should have known better and actively groomed her to have sex with her...... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"He actively groomed her. He knew her age. And he even researched the age of consent. His texts were predatory and showed that he was set on meeting her for sex. I think it's great it sends a very clear message out that taking advantage of a schoolgirl's infatuation and arguably their niavity is in no way acceptable what your saying is right, he was in the wrong and deserves jail time but let's be honest 15 years old isn't a child, they aren't niave at that age & certainly can't be taken advantage of. Maybe as people get older they forget what it's like being that age & you actually believe that they are innocent children but they're not. Most teens especially nowadays have more sex than adults do. Basically yes he was in the wrong but so was she becuase she knew what she was doing as well " I haven't forgotten what it was like to be 15 and if I had I've recently had experience of our daughter being 15. Quite simply at 15 most people do not have the life experience to know how a situation is likely to pan out and when something does happen they don't have the experience to deal with it. People often don't realise this until they're older  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"He actively groomed her. He knew her age. And he even researched the age of consent. His texts were predatory and showed that he was set on meeting her for sex. I think it's great it sends a very clear message out that taking advantage of a schoolgirl's infatuation and arguably their niavity is in no way acceptable what your saying is right, he was in the wrong and deserves jail time but let's be honest 15 years old isn't a child, they aren't niave at that age & certainly can't be taken advantage of. Maybe as people get older they forget what it's like being that age & you actually believe that they are innocent children but they're not. Most teens especially nowadays have more sex than adults do. Basically yes he was in the wrong but so was she becuase she knew what she was doing as well I haven't forgotten what it was like to be 15 and if I had I've recently had experience of our daughter being 15. Quite simply at 15 most people do not have the life experience to know how a situation is likely to pan out and when something does happen they don't have the experience to deal with it. People often don't realise this until they're older "Some of the young girls round my way are at it like rabbits jeeeezus! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"He actively groomed her. He knew her age. And he even researched the age of consent. His texts were predatory and showed that he was set on meeting her for sex. I think it's great it sends a very clear message out that taking advantage of a schoolgirl's infatuation and arguably their niavity is in no way acceptable what your saying is right, he was in the wrong and deserves jail time but let's be honest 15 years old isn't a child, they aren't niave at that age & certainly can't be taken advantage of. Maybe as people get older they forget what it's like being that age & you actually believe that they are innocent children but they're not. Most teens especially nowadays have more sex than adults do. Basically yes he was in the wrong but so was she becuase she knew what she was doing as well I haven't forgotten what it was like to be 15 and if I had I've recently had experience of our daughter being 15. Quite simply at 15 most people do not have the life experience to know how a situation is likely to pan out and when something does happen they don't have the experience to deal with it. People often don't realise this until they're older
Some of the young girls round my way are at it like rabbits jeeeezus! "Yep I know that 15 year olds are sexually active quite often boys too . I don't see how some 15 year olds being sexually active means this girl has to share the blame for a man ten years older than her grooming her.
Ps how do you know about all these rabbit-like girls? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's a strange case - she actively pursued and knew exactly what she was getting herself into but at the same time he should have had more control and walked away. One of the pitfalls of being a footballer is that this kind of trouble will find you. Given that he got so long without actually having sex with her it would be interesting to find out if anything ever happens to the men responsible for all of the pregnant 15 year olds out there. The trouble didn't "find him" he actively pursued it." I'm not saying he didn't do wrong - but she messaged him first, continued to meet him knowing where he wanted it to lead. Yes, he took advantage of the fact he was a footballer but then she was only there because he was a footballer. Again, I'm not condoning his actions but there was the female teacher who has sex with a 15 year old pupil on many occasions and she was spared jail - the law needs to have consistency and in my opinion she abused trust more that him | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's a strange case - she actively pursued and knew exactly what she was getting herself into but at the same time he should have had more control and walked away. One of the pitfalls of being a footballer is that this kind of trouble will find you. Given that he got so long without actually having sex with her it would be interesting to find out if anything ever happens to the men responsible for all of the pregnant 15 year olds out there. The trouble didn't "find him" he actively pursued it. I'm not saying he didn't do wrong - but she messaged him first, continued to meet him knowing where he wanted it to lead. Yes, he took advantage of the fact he was a footballer but then she was only there because he was a footballer. Again, I'm not condoning his actions but there was the female teacher who has sex with a 15 year old pupil on many occasions and she was spared jail - the law needs to have consistency and in my opinion she abused trust more that him" I agree that the law needs to be consistent but that again isn't the fault of a 15 year old girl. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"He actively groomed her. He knew her age. And he even researched the age of consent. His texts were predatory and showed that he was set on meeting her for sex. I think it's great it sends a very clear message out that taking advantage of a schoolgirl's infatuation and arguably their niavity is in no way acceptable what your saying is right, he was in the wrong and deserves jail time but let's be honest 15 years old isn't a child, they aren't niave at that age & certainly can't be taken advantage of. Maybe as people get older they forget what it's like being that age & you actually believe that they are innocent children but they're not. Most teens especially nowadays have more sex than adults do. Basically yes he was in the wrong but so was she becuase she knew what she was doing as well I haven't forgotten what it was like to be 15 and if I had I've recently had experience of our daughter being 15. Quite simply at 15 most people do not have the life experience to know how a situation is likely to pan out and when something does happen they don't have the experience to deal with it. People often don't realise this until they're older
Some of the young girls round my way are at it like rabbits jeeeezus!
Yep I know that 15 year olds are sexually active quite often boys too . I don't see how some 15 year olds being sexually active means this girl has to share the blame for a man ten years older than her grooming her.
Ps how do you know about all these rabbit-like girls?"They drink in the pubs i go in and are all pissed aswell and some of their parents are there it beggers belief | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's a strange case - she actively pursued and knew exactly what she was getting herself into but at the same time he should have had more control and walked away. One of the pitfalls of being a footballer is that this kind of trouble will find you. Given that he got so long without actually having sex with her it would be interesting to find out if anything ever happens to the men responsible for all of the pregnant 15 year olds out there. The trouble didn't "find him" he actively pursued it. I'm not saying he didn't do wrong - but she messaged him first, continued to meet him knowing where he wanted it to lead. Yes, he took advantage of the fact he was a footballer but then she was only there because he was a footballer. Again, I'm not condoning his actions but there was the female teacher who has sex with a 15 year old pupil on many occasions and she was spared jail - the law needs to have consistency and in my opinion she abused trust more that him I agree that the law needs to be consistent but that again isn't the fault of a 15 year old girl." why not? Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's a strange case - she actively pursued and knew exactly what she was getting herself into but at the same time he should have had more control and walked away. One of the pitfalls of being a footballer is that this kind of trouble will find you. Given that he got so long without actually having sex with her it would be interesting to find out if anything ever happens to the men responsible for all of the pregnant 15 year olds out there. The trouble didn't "find him" he actively pursued it. I'm not saying he didn't do wrong - but she messaged him first, continued to meet him knowing where he wanted it to lead. Yes, he took advantage of the fact he was a footballer but then she was only there because he was a footballer. Again, I'm not condoning his actions but there was the female teacher who has sex with a 15 year old pupil on many occasions and she was spared jail - the law needs to have consistency and in my opinion she abused trust more that him I agree that the law needs to be consistent but that again isn't the fault of a 15 year old girl.why not? Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it." You are dangerously close to blaming the victim in this. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"He actively groomed her. He knew her age. And he even researched the age of consent. His texts were predatory and showed that he was set on meeting her for sex. I think it's great it sends a very clear message out that taking advantage of a schoolgirl's infatuation and arguably their niavity is in no way acceptable what your saying is right, he was in the wrong and deserves jail time but let's be honest 15 years old isn't a child, they aren't niave at that age & certainly can't be taken advantage of. Maybe as people get older they forget what it's like being that age & you actually believe that they are innocent children but they're not. Most teens especially nowadays have more sex than adults do. Basically yes he was in the wrong but so was she becuase she knew what she was doing as well I haven't forgotten what it was like to be 15 and if I had I've recently had experience of our daughter being 15. Quite simply at 15 most people do not have the life experience to know how a situation is likely to pan out and when something does happen they don't have the experience to deal with it. People often don't realise this until they're older
Some of the young girls round my way are at it like rabbits jeeeezus!
Yep I know that 15 year olds are sexually active quite often boys too . I don't see how some 15 year olds being sexually active means this girl has to share the blame for a man ten years older than her grooming her.
Ps how do you know about all these rabbit-like girls?
They drink in the pubs i go in and are all pissed aswell and some of their parents are there it beggers belief"I still don't see what that's got to do with this particular case | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. " exactly | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's a strange case - she actively pursued and knew exactly what she was getting herself into but at the same time he should have had more control and walked away. One of the pitfalls of being a footballer is that this kind of trouble will find you. Given that he got so long without actually having sex with her it would be interesting to find out if anything ever happens to the men responsible for all of the pregnant 15 year olds out there. The trouble didn't "find him" he actively pursued it. I'm not saying he didn't do wrong - but she messaged him first, continued to meet him knowing where he wanted it to lead. Yes, he took advantage of the fact he was a footballer but then she was only there because he was a footballer. Again, I'm not condoning his actions but there was the female teacher who has sex with a 15 year old pupil on many occasions and she was spared jail - the law needs to have consistency and in my opinion she abused trust more that him I agree that the law needs to be consistent but that again isn't the fault of a 15 year old girl.why not? Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. You are dangerously close to blaming the victim in this. " she's not a victim, she's 15, she went after him as much as he went after her, they are both to blame but unfortunately only one broke the law. If it were up to me girls who do these things "and they're are underage girls who go for adults" they would get locked up as well. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it." just out of interest what would you call a lot of compensation.. just interested to know if you actually know the figure that was announced (i do... thats why i am asking) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's a strange case - she actively pursued and knew exactly what she was getting herself into but at the same time he should have had more control and walked away. One of the pitfalls of being a footballer is that this kind of trouble will find you. Given that he got so long without actually having sex with her it would be interesting to find out if anything ever happens to the men responsible for all of the pregnant 15 year olds out there. The trouble didn't "find him" he actively pursued it. I'm not saying he didn't do wrong - but she messaged him first, continued to meet him knowing where he wanted it to lead. Yes, he took advantage of the fact he was a footballer but then she was only there because he was a footballer. Again, I'm not condoning his actions but there was the female teacher who has sex with a 15 year old pupil on many occasions and she was spared jail - the law needs to have consistency and in my opinion she abused trust more that him I agree that the law needs to be consistent but that again isn't the fault of a 15 year old girl.why not? Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. You are dangerously close to blaming the victim in this. she's not a victim, she's 15, she went after him as much as he went after her, they are both to blame but unfortunately only one broke the law. If it were up to me girls who do these things "and they're are underage girls who go for adults" they would get locked up as well." It's a good job it's not up to you then | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it." She's a child. The age of consent exists because children are not able to understand the potential ramifications of actions and make informed decisions. They can be easily manipulated and controlled by adults. They can be star-struck and worship their "heroes". Their judgement is not always good. She may have consented and encouraged it but adults should know, and the law exists to highlight, that children are unable to give informed consent. I'd be astounded if most 15 year olds in this situation are thinking about compensation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's a strange case - she actively pursued and knew exactly what she was getting herself into but at the same time he should have had more control and walked away. One of the pitfalls of being a footballer is that this kind of trouble will find you. Given that he got so long without actually having sex with her it would be interesting to find out if anything ever happens to the men responsible for all of the pregnant 15 year olds out there. The trouble didn't "find him" he actively pursued it. I'm not saying he didn't do wrong - but she messaged him first, continued to meet him knowing where he wanted it to lead. Yes, he took advantage of the fact he was a footballer but then she was only there because he was a footballer. Again, I'm not condoning his actions but there was the female teacher who has sex with a 15 year old pupil on many occasions and she was spared jail - the law needs to have consistency and in my opinion she abused trust more that him I agree that the law needs to be consistent but that again isn't the fault of a 15 year old girl.why not? Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. You are dangerously close to blaming the victim in this. she's not a victim, she's 15, she went after him as much as he went after her, they are both to blame but unfortunately only one broke the law. If it were up to me girls who do these things "and they're are underage girls who go for adults" they would get locked up as well." Oh lawd.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. She's a child. The age of consent exists because children are not able to understand the potential ramifications of actions and make informed decisions. They can be easily manipulated and controlled by adults. They can be star-struck and worship their "heroes". Their judgement is not always good. She may have consented and encouraged it but adults should know, and the law exists to highlight, that children are unable to give informed consent. I'd be astounded if most 15 year olds in this situation are thinking about compensation." I think one's opinion on these matters is very much informed by ones opinion of women in general. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's a strange case - she actively pursued and knew exactly what she was getting herself into but at the same time he should have had more control and walked away. One of the pitfalls of being a footballer is that this kind of trouble will find you. Given that he got so long without actually having sex with her it would be interesting to find out if anything ever happens to the men responsible for all of the pregnant 15 year olds out there. The trouble didn't "find him" he actively pursued it. I'm not saying he didn't do wrong - but she messaged him first, continued to meet him knowing where he wanted it to lead. Yes, he took advantage of the fact he was a footballer but then she was only there because he was a footballer. Again, I'm not condoning his actions but there was the female teacher who has sex with a 15 year old pupil on many occasions and she was spared jail - the law needs to have consistency and in my opinion she abused trust more that him I agree that the law needs to be consistent but that again isn't the fault of a 15 year old girl.why not? Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. You are dangerously close to blaming the victim in this. she's not a victim, she's 15, she went after him as much as he went after her, they are both to blame but unfortunately only one broke the law. If it were up to me girls who do these things "and they're are underage girls who go for adults" they would get locked up as well." She is a child! The age of consent and age of criminal responsibility exist for a reason. We cannot judge children the same way we judge adults. Dear deity! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"They tried to say that he developed a disorder when he became famous and a footballer. I know someone who has played football for years in a premiership standing as well and he isn't bad looking and never delevolped no disorders from being famous. He knew what he was doing, the 15 year somewhat knew what she was doing but at the end of the day he took advantage of a child...The sentence was fair and he will serve 3/4 of it and he will have to go through intensive CBT for sex offenders. " I am not excusing him or his behaviour. What I can see however is how footballers loose sense of reality. Not many jobs take you from £0 to £thousands per week. Bankers lawyers etc get their gradually. Footballers don't. Its immediate and they end up thinking they are untouchable. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. just out of interest what would you call a lot of compensation.. just interested to know if you actually know the figure that was announced (i do... thats why i am asking)" depends what money he has, she more than likely got over 10k for it, I know rape victims who have gotten more | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. She's a child. The age of consent exists because children are not able to understand the potential ramifications of actions and make informed decisions. They can be easily manipulated and controlled by adults. They can be star-struck and worship their "heroes". Their judgement is not always good. She may have consented and encouraged it but adults should know, and the law exists to highlight, that children are unable to give informed consent. I'd be astounded if most 15 year olds in this situation are thinking about compensation. I think one's opinion on these matters is very much informed by ones opinion of women in general. " It would certainly seem so. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. " Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The law states that a girl of 15 is a child. We are no talking about a horny teenager in her class at school. We are talking about a 28 year old adult who abused his position and her fan worship to groom her for sex. He will have had enough opportunities with women over the age of consent. He is a predatory paedophile and should be castrated. " . Two bricks ... Slacker, I wanted to nail him up | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The law states that a girl of 15 is a child. We are no talking about a horny teenager in her class at school. We are talking about a 28 year old adult who abused his position and her fan worship to groom her for sex. He will have had enough opportunities with women over the age of consent. He is a predatory paedophile and should be castrated. " Some would have us believe him to be an innocent victim of a predatory 15 year old and his own celebrity.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. just out of interest what would you call a lot of compensation.. just interested to know if you actually know the figure that was announced (i do... thats why i am asking)depends what money he has, she more than likely got over 10k for it, I know rape victims who have gotten more " I am sorry but you are just talking utter nonsense here. It has nothing to do with how much money he has. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. She's a child. The age of consent exists because children are not able to understand the potential ramifications of actions and make informed decisions. They can be easily manipulated and controlled by adults. They can be star-struck and worship their "heroes". Their judgement is not always good. She may have consented and encouraged it but adults should know, and the law exists to highlight, that children are unable to give informed consent. I'd be astounded if most 15 year olds in this situation are thinking about compensation. I think one's opinion on these matters is very much informed by ones opinion of women in general. It would certainly seem so." Or just that he sees all females as fair game regardless of age? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. just out of interest what would you call a lot of compensation.. just interested to know if you actually know the figure that was announced (i do... thats why i am asking)depends what money he has, she more than likely got over 10k for it, I know rape victims who have gotten more " durham police announced she got compensation of 1000 pounds from them... she could sue johnson... or johnson could now offer her a settlement but that is actually all she has received so far.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. " I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The law states that a girl of 15 is a child. We are no talking about a horny teenager in her class at school. We are talking about a 28 year old adult who abused his position and her fan worship to groom her for sex. He will have had enough opportunities with women over the age of consent. He is a predatory paedophile and should be castrated. Some would have us believe him to be an innocent victim of a predatory 15 year old and his own celebrity. "Apparently what is really needed is a law to protect men like him from rapacious children. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The law states that a girl of 15 is a child. We are no talking about a horny teenager in her class at school. We are talking about a 28 year old adult who abused his position and her fan worship to groom her for sex. He will have had enough opportunities with women over the age of consent. He is a predatory paedophile and should be castrated. Some would have us believe him to be an innocent victim of a predatory 15 year old and his own celebrity. "Victim blaming isn't unusual though. It's bad enough when it happens to an adult victim but such accusations against a child are shameful. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. just out of interest what would you call a lot of compensation.. just interested to know if you actually know the figure that was announced (i do... thats why i am asking)depends what money he has, she more than likely got over 10k for it, I know rape victims who have gotten more I am sorry but you are just talking utter nonsense here. It has nothing to do with how much money he has. " really? I think you'll find the richer someone is the more a court will award someone. Look at all the Jimmy saville victims they'll all get hundreds of thousands each, Michael Jackson's "accused victims" got millions | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"They tried to say that he developed a disorder when he became famous and a footballer. I know someone who has played football for years in a premiership standing as well and he isn't bad looking and never delevolped no disorders from being famous. He knew what he was doing, the 15 year somewhat knew what she was doing but at the end of the day he took advantage of a child...The sentence was fair and he will serve 3/4 of it and he will have to go through intensive CBT for sex offenders. I am not excusing him or his behaviour. What I can see however is how footballers loose sense of reality. Not many jobs take you from £0 to £thousands per week. Bankers lawyers etc get their gradually. Footballers don't. Its immediate and they end up thinking they are untouchable. " Most footballers seem to remain in touch with reality enough to realise that they still shouldn't be trying to fuck schoolkids | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"i just wonder is we said the girl was 14 the people here who are saying it is harsh would feel differently.... because as been said various times the girl had only just turned 15....... so was much close to 14 than she was 16 and legally been able to do stuff sexually in the eyes of the law....... " it's definitely not harsh, he broke the law especially that law he deserved longer becuase he knew what he was doing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim." And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. just out of interest what would you call a lot of compensation.. just interested to know if you actually know the figure that was announced (i do... thats why i am asking)depends what money he has, she more than likely got over 10k for it, I know rape victims who have gotten more I am sorry but you are just talking utter nonsense here. It has nothing to do with how much money he has. really? I think you'll find the richer someone is the more a court will award someone. Look at all the Jimmy saville victims they'll all get hundreds of thousands each, Michael Jackson's "accused victims" got millions" So the more compensation the victim receives, the more culpable they are in the crime and the less responsible the criminal is?
I'm sure Saville's victims totally targeted him for a big payout and that the money has completely made up for everything he did.
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. just out of interest what would you call a lot of compensation.. just interested to know if you actually know the figure that was announced (i do... thats why i am asking)depends what money he has, she more than likely got over 10k for it, I know rape victims who have gotten more I am sorry but you are just talking utter nonsense here. It has nothing to do with how much money he has. really? I think you'll find the richer someone is the more a court will award someone. Look at all the Jimmy saville victims they'll all get hundreds of thousands each, Michael Jackson's "accused victims" got millions" Yes, nonsense. You do understand that the laws of an America and England differ significantly don't you? English Civil Law does not base an award of damages on what the defendant has. It bases on the damage caused. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees." Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" He groomed a CHILD whether it's 2 years old or 15 years old it was a child. " Wow. You believe a 2 year old and and 15 year old is the same? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" He groomed a CHILD whether it's 2 years old or 15 years old it was a child. Wow. You believe a 2 year old and and 15 year old is the same? "pre puberty age would carry a different sentence eg pedophilia .. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"He actively groomed her. He knew her age. And he even researched the age of consent. His texts were predatory and showed that he was set on meeting her for sex. I think it's great it sends a very clear message out that taking advantage of a schoolgirl's infatuation and arguably their niavity is in no way acceptable " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think he got off light. If it were up to me i'd have his cock gnawed off by rats.. The bastard. " Ironic you should say that as just been reported a search of his computer showed he had looked at extreme porn with animals. Media only just been allowed to report this | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Old saying, it takes two to tango. She most definitely knew it was illegal, and I'd be willing to bet she knew she'd get alot of compensation for it. By law she wasn't to blame or in the wrong but she did go after it. just out of interest what would you call a lot of compensation.. just interested to know if you actually know the figure that was announced (i do... thats why i am asking)depends what money he has, she more than likely got over 10k for it, I know rape victims who have gotten more durham police announced she got compensation of 1000 pounds from them... she could sue johnson... or johnson could now offer her a settlement but that is actually all she has received so far.... " she has put with hate mail and school work has suffered. The unwanted attention is awful | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it." Sure, no one knows me better than you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. " Ha ha ha | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"i just wonder is we said the girl was 14 the people here who are saying it is harsh would feel differently.... because as been said various times the girl had only just turned 15....... so was much close to 14 than she was 16 and legally been able to do stuff sexually in the eyes of the law....... it's definitely not harsh, he broke the law especially that law he deserved longer becuase he knew what he was doing" plus when you look at the texts iv was him pushing her. He gave her a shirt and wanted something in return.. the shit! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. " I was 15 once and had 15 year old friends. Like I said, maybe you were very unusual but I doubt it. 15 year olds do not see things in the same way adults do. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"That's a pretty long Sentence compared to some other cases in the media.there is a general rule, 10 years between accused and victim means jail time. I expected 7 years " I had erm fun with a 23 yr old will I go to jail  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No reaction from Johnson in the dock as he's jailed for six years. No emotion either from his mother and father." I was going to say he should have done that multi million bank job, roughly same sentence, but hell, on £60k a week he don't need too wonder how much time he would have got for murder? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No reaction from Johnson in the dock as he's jailed for six years. No emotion either from his mother and father." Think they had most probably been told to prepare for the worst ... Be out long before then ... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. " Oh, and you don't know her. You have no idea how mature she is or isn't and to what extent she understood what she was doing. You're judging her by how you think you were at 15, even though you cannot possibly remember how you thought at the time. All 15 year olds are aware and responsible for their actions, just because you think you were? Yeah right. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. Oh, and you don't know her. You have no idea how mature she is or isn't and to what extent she understood what she was doing. You're judging her by how you think you were at 15, even though you cannot possibly remember how you thought at the time. All 15 year olds are aware and responsible for their actions, just because you think you were? Yeah right." I said I didn't think it necessarily made her a victim. But you keep on. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. Oh, and you don't know her. You have no idea how mature she is or isn't and to what extent she understood what she was doing. You're judging her by how you think you were at 15, even though you cannot possibly remember how you thought at the time. All 15 year olds are aware and responsible for their actions, just because you think you were? Yeah right. I said I didn't think it necessarily made her a victim. But you keep on. " Because I disagree with you and I'm disagreeing with your reasoning. You seem to think that because you believe yourself to have been sufficiently mature to consent at 15, she may have been. I think it's very rare that's the case and she was clearly a victim. He was obviously manipulative and groomed her over a long period of time. Victim blaming, which is what you are doing with the "she isn't completely innocent and may not be a victim" is not cool. Anyway, whatever you think, by law she's a victim. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"i just wonder is we said the girl was 14 the people here who are saying it is harsh would feel differently.... because as been said various times the girl had only just turned 15....... so was much close to 14 than she was 16 and legally been able to do stuff sexually in the eyes of the law....... it's definitely not harsh, he broke the law especially that law he deserved longer becuase he knew what he was doing" I understand what you're saying now, I thought earlier you meant that he wasn't to blame. I'm not in agreement with your other points but on this I am. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"i guess his now ex stacey flounders will be looking for a new cock, i don't mind putting my self forward for that" are u on 60k a week lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I would imagine she has had her fair share of shit as a result I saw a post on the devil's spawn also known as faceache and the comments towards her were vile...not just from youngsters but so called adults. " Exactly but she's not a victim, she should have known this could be the result at the highly mature, responsible age of only just 15. I can't believe anyone is trying to blame her for being some sort of temptress leading him astray! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. Oh, and you don't know her. You have no idea how mature she is or isn't and to what extent she understood what she was doing. You're judging her by how you think you were at 15, even though you cannot possibly remember how you thought at the time. All 15 year olds are aware and responsible for their actions, just because you think you were? Yeah right. I said I didn't think it necessarily made her a victim. But you keep on. Because I disagree with you and I'm disagreeing with your reasoning. You seem to think that because you believe yourself to have been sufficiently mature to consent at 15, she may have been. I think it's very rare that's the case and she was clearly a victim. He was obviously manipulative and groomed her over a long period of time. Victim blaming, which is what you are doing with the "she isn't completely innocent and may not be a victim" is not cool. Anyway, whatever you think, by law she's a victim." When I've said numerous times that he was in the wrong and deserves what happened to him I'm not victim blaming. Keep misinterpreting, I don't care. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. Oh, and you don't know her. You have no idea how mature she is or isn't and to what extent she understood what she was doing. You're judging her by how you think you were at 15, even though you cannot possibly remember how you thought at the time. All 15 year olds are aware and responsible for their actions, just because you think you were? Yeah right. I said I didn't think it necessarily made her a victim. But you keep on. Because I disagree with you and I'm disagreeing with your reasoning. You seem to think that because you believe yourself to have been sufficiently mature to consent at 15, she may have been. I think it's very rare that's the case and she was clearly a victim. He was obviously manipulative and groomed her over a long period of time. Victim blaming, which is what you are doing with the "she isn't completely innocent and may not be a victim" is not cool. Anyway, whatever you think, by law she's a victim. When I've said numerous times that he was in the wrong and deserves what happened to him I'm not victim blaming. Keep misinterpreting, I don't care. " You're saying he's in the wrong and ALSO saying she's not necessarily a victim, which is (potentially) placing some of the blame on her. You're saying he's in the wrong and then partially excusing it with the "it takes two to tango" argument. She wasn't in a position to agree to tango. He manipulated her. She is a victim. No question. There are no "buts" here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to" Gradually over a period of months, from someone she respected and looked up to? Adults can be manipulated without realising by predators, I don't think a 15 year old could have been expected to realise at all. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. Oh, and you don't know her. You have no idea how mature she is or isn't and to what extent she understood what she was doing. You're judging her by how you think you were at 15, even though you cannot possibly remember how you thought at the time. All 15 year olds are aware and responsible for their actions, just because you think you were? Yeah right. I said I didn't think it necessarily made her a victim. But you keep on. Because I disagree with you and I'm disagreeing with your reasoning. You seem to think that because you believe yourself to have been sufficiently mature to consent at 15, she may have been. I think it's very rare that's the case and she was clearly a victim. He was obviously manipulative and groomed her over a long period of time. Victim blaming, which is what you are doing with the "she isn't completely innocent and may not be a victim" is not cool. Anyway, whatever you think, by law she's a victim. When I've said numerous times that he was in the wrong and deserves what happened to him I'm not victim blaming. Keep misinterpreting, I don't care. You're saying he's in the wrong and ALSO saying she's not necessarily a victim, which is (potentially) placing some of the blame on her. You're saying he's in the wrong and then partially excusing it with the "it takes two to tango" argument. She wasn't in a position to agree to tango. He manipulated her. She is a victim. No question. There are no "buts" here." If you are not a victim of something there is no implication that you are to blame for it either. Clearly only one opinion on this thread is allowed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to" We aren't talking about most 15 year olds we're talking about one in particular from who a judge has heard evidence. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. Oh, and you don't know her. You have no idea how mature she is or isn't and to what extent she understood what she was doing. You're judging her by how you think you were at 15, even though you cannot possibly remember how you thought at the time. All 15 year olds are aware and responsible for their actions, just because you think you were? Yeah right. I said I didn't think it necessarily made her a victim. But you keep on. Because I disagree with you and I'm disagreeing with your reasoning. You seem to think that because you believe yourself to have been sufficiently mature to consent at 15, she may have been. I think it's very rare that's the case and she was clearly a victim. He was obviously manipulative and groomed her over a long period of time. Victim blaming, which is what you are doing with the "she isn't completely innocent and may not be a victim" is not cool. Anyway, whatever you think, by law she's a victim. ^^^ Why does this woman appear to be immune from a ban, just because she's a "regular" - aren't mods supposed to be impartial? All she does when on here is move from thread to thread, picking arguments with men." Oh so women on here aren't allowed to disagree with men now? Even those who appear to be 'slut shaming' a 15 year old girl who has had her life ruined by a hebephile? I'm disgusted by the comments saying the victim is also to blame...she is a child for God's sake! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is going well "Tell you it's like being in the playground | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to" It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. Oh, and you don't know her. You have no idea how mature she is or isn't and to what extent she understood what she was doing. You're judging her by how you think you were at 15, even though you cannot possibly remember how you thought at the time. All 15 year olds are aware and responsible for their actions, just because you think you were? Yeah right. I said I didn't think it necessarily made her a victim. But you keep on. Because I disagree with you and I'm disagreeing with your reasoning. You seem to think that because you believe yourself to have been sufficiently mature to consent at 15, she may have been. I think it's very rare that's the case and she was clearly a victim. He was obviously manipulative and groomed her over a long period of time. Victim blaming, which is what you are doing with the "she isn't completely innocent and may not be a victim" is not cool. Anyway, whatever you think, by law she's a victim. When I've said numerous times that he was in the wrong and deserves what happened to him I'm not victim blaming. Keep misinterpreting, I don't care. You're saying he's in the wrong and ALSO saying she's not necessarily a victim, which is (potentially) placing some of the blame on her. You're saying he's in the wrong and then partially excusing it with the "it takes two to tango" argument. She wasn't in a position to agree to tango. He manipulated her. She is a victim. No question. There are no "buts" here. If you are not a victim of something there is no implication that you are to blame for it either. Clearly only one opinion on this thread is allowed. " You're either a victim of something or at least partly culpable. I can't see how you think there is any other option. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. Oh, and you don't know her. You have no idea how mature she is or isn't and to what extent she understood what she was doing. You're judging her by how you think you were at 15, even though you cannot possibly remember how you thought at the time. All 15 year olds are aware and responsible for their actions, just because you think you were? Yeah right. I said I didn't think it necessarily made her a victim. But you keep on. Because I disagree with you and I'm disagreeing with your reasoning. You seem to think that because you believe yourself to have been sufficiently mature to consent at 15, she may have been. I think it's very rare that's the case and she was clearly a victim. He was obviously manipulative and groomed her over a long period of time. Victim blaming, which is what you are doing with the "she isn't completely innocent and may not be a victim" is not cool. Anyway, whatever you think, by law she's a victim. ^^^ Why does this woman appear to be immune from a ban, just because she's a "regular" - aren't mods supposed to be impartial? All she does when on here is move from thread to thread, picking arguments with men." If you think I've broken the rules, report my post. Otherwise Ruggers has asked that we ignore each other's posts. I'm doing that. I'd advise you to do the same. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. Oh, and you don't know her. You have no idea how mature she is or isn't and to what extent she understood what she was doing. You're judging her by how you think you were at 15, even though you cannot possibly remember how you thought at the time. All 15 year olds are aware and responsible for their actions, just because you think you were? Yeah right. I said I didn't think it necessarily made her a victim. But you keep on. Because I disagree with you and I'm disagreeing with your reasoning. You seem to think that because you believe yourself to have been sufficiently mature to consent at 15, she may have been. I think it's very rare that's the case and she was clearly a victim. He was obviously manipulative and groomed her over a long period of time. Victim blaming, which is what you are doing with the "she isn't completely innocent and may not be a victim" is not cool. Anyway, whatever you think, by law she's a victim. ^^^ Why does this woman appear to be immune from a ban, just because she's a "regular" - aren't mods supposed to be impartial? All she does when on here is move from thread to thread, picking arguments with men." And i thought i was the only one to notice this | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. "i just wonder is we said the girl was 14 the people here who are saying it is harsh would feel differently.... because as been said various times the girl had only just turned 15....... so was much close to 14 than she was 16 and legally been able to do stuff sexually in the eyes of the law....... it's definitely not harsh, he broke the law especially that law he deserved longer becuase he knew what he was doing" plus when you look at the texts iv was him pushing her. He gave her a shirt and wanted something in return.. the shit! I would imagine she has had her fair share of shit as a result I saw a post on the devil's spawn also known as faceache and the comments towards her were vile...not just from youngsters but so called adults "Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. Oh, and you don't know her. You have no idea how mature she is or isn't and to what extent she understood what she was doing. You're judging her by how you think you were at 15, even though you cannot possibly remember how you thought at the time. All 15 year olds are aware and responsible for their actions, just because you think you were? Yeah right. I said I didn't think it necessarily made her a victim. But you keep on. Because I disagree with you and I'm disagreeing with your reasoning. You seem to think that because you believe yourself to have been sufficiently mature to consent at 15, she may have been. I think it's very rare that's the case and she was clearly a victim. He was obviously manipulative and groomed her over a long period of time. Victim blaming, which is what you are doing with the "she isn't completely innocent and may not be a victim" is not cool. Anyway, whatever you think, by law she's a victim. When I've said numerous times that he was in the wrong and deserves what happened to him I'm not victim blaming. Keep misinterpreting, I don't care. You're saying he's in the wrong and ALSO saying she's not necessarily a victim, which is (potentially) placing some of the blame on her. You're saying he's in the wrong and then partially excusing it with the "it takes two to tango" argument. She wasn't in a position to agree to tango. He manipulated her. She is a victim. No question. There are no "buts" here. If you are not a victim of something there is no implication that you are to blame for it either. Clearly only one opinion on this thread is allowed. " You're either a victim of something or at least partly culpable. I can't see how you think there is any other option "No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to" Gradually over a period of months, from someone she respected and looked up to? Adults can be manipulated without realising by predators, I don't think a 15 year old could have been expected to realise at all. Sure, no one knows me better than you. Oh, and you don't know her. You have no idea how mature she is or isn't and to what extent she understood what she was doing. You're judging her by how you think you were at 15, even though you cannot possibly remember how you thought at the time. All 15 year olds are aware and responsible for their actions, just because you think you were? Yeah right. I said I didn't think it necessarily made her a victim. But you keep on. Because I disagree with you and I'm disagreeing with your reasoning. You seem to think that because you believe yourself to have been sufficiently mature to consent at 15, she may have been. I think it's very rare that's the case and she was clearly a victim. He was obviously manipulative and groomed her over a long period of time. Victim blaming, which is what you are doing with the "she isn't completely innocent and may not be a victim" is not cool. Anyway, whatever you think, by law she's a victim. ^^^ Why does this woman appear to be immune from a ban, just because she's a "regular" - aren't mods supposed to be impartial? All she does when on here is move from thread to thread, picking arguments with men. And i thought i was the only one to notice this" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. " I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course he should be locked up for what he did, he acted criminally. But in this case I don't see the girl as a victim. At 15 I was getting up to all sorts and knew I shouldn't be. If at 15 you don't know the difference between right and wrong then something's amiss. Possibly - but I'm not sure that I'd have been doing it with some one twice my age - or that someone twice my age should know considerably better. I was doing all sorts with some over twice my age. He should have known better, he's the adult, but him being guilty of a statutory offence does not in my eyes make her necessarily a victim. And you were able to fully understand the potential repercussions of your actions? And give fully informed consent? It's possible at 15 but very unlikely. He, however, as an adult, should be protecting children, not using their naivety to get his end away. It's not like he didn't have plenty of other options. He was firmly in the wrong. She was a victim. The law agrees. Of course I understood what I was doing. I don't know why you keep saying he was in the wrong, I've not seen anyone on this thread say that he was right in what he did. Ok, let me rephrase. He was solely in the wrong. She wasn't. You may think your judgement was sound at 15 but I doubt it, unless you were very unusual. You would have been far more open to the influence of adults than now and you'd be less likely to be aware of it. Sure, no one knows me better than you. Oh, and you don't know her. You have no idea how mature she is or isn't and to what extent she understood what she was doing. You're judging her by how you think you were at 15, even though you cannot possibly remember how you thought at the time. All 15 year olds are aware and responsible for their actions, just because you think you were? Yeah right. I said I didn't think it necessarily made her a victim. But you keep on. Because I disagree with you and I'm disagreeing with your reasoning. You seem to think that because you believe yourself to have been sufficiently mature to consent at 15, she may have been. I think it's very rare that's the case and she was clearly a victim. He was obviously manipulative and groomed her over a long period of time. Victim blaming, which is what you are doing with the "she isn't completely innocent and may not be a victim" is not cool. Anyway, whatever you think, by law she's a victim. ^^^ Why does this woman appear to be immune from a ban, just because she's a "regular" - aren't mods supposed to be impartial? All she does when on here is move from thread to thread, picking arguments with men. And i thought i was the only one to notice this" You don't like my opinions. Tough. I disagree with plenty of women too. And I agree with some. Feel free to report any posts where I've broken the rules but sorry, disagreeing with men is allowed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Fucking hell just ignore each other stop trying to get the last word in and winding each other up...agree to disagree. It's an emotive subject and people are going to have different opioions but it's like tit for tat..." And unless some sort of meaningful additional argument is being made, it very much distracts from the thread content which is an interesting debate | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know" The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Fucking hell just ignore each other stop trying to get the last word in and winding each other up...agree to disagree. It's an emotive subject and people are going to have different opioions but it's like tit for tat..." Er that's how a discussion goes. One side responds to the other's response. The current suggestion is that somebody can be neither a victim of nor responsible for something bad that happens to them. I can't see how. Can you? I'd say simply based on the vile things being said about this girl that she's a victim. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. " And I hope the judge wouldn't do that, I never said she's like every other 15 year old | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Fucking hell just ignore each other stop trying to get the last word in and winding each other up...agree to disagree. It's an emotive subject and people are going to have different opioions but it's like tit for tat... And unless some sort of meaningful additional argument is being made, it very much distracts from the thread content which is an interesting debate" Personally I'd still like to know how it's possible when something bad happens to someone for them to be something other than a victim or (at least) partially responsible. They were involved so they have to be one or the other. What else can they be? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. And I hope the judge wouldn't do that, I never said she's like every other 15 year old" I don't want to get into a circular argument but you said it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what was happening | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. And I hope the judge wouldn't do that, I never said she's like every other 15 year old" You said 15 year olds would know what is happening | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. And I hope the judge wouldn't do that, I never said she's like every other 15 year old I don't want to get into a circular argument but you said it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what was happening " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wow. Some of these attitudes are exactly the reasons why the abuses in places like Rotherham were allowed to happen." Yes, I was thinking that. We still have an awfully long way to go don't we. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. And I hope the judge wouldn't do that, I never said she's like every other 15 year old I don't want to get into a circular argument but you said it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what was happening "Exactly, I never said anything about her. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Fucking hell just ignore each other stop trying to get the last word in and winding each other up...agree to disagree. It's an emotive subject and people are going to have different opioions but it's like tit for tat... Er that's how a discussion goes. One side responds to the other's response. The current suggestion is that somebody can be neither a victim of nor responsible for something bad that happens to them. I can't see how. Can you? I'd say simply based on the vile things being said about this girl that she's a victim." You know what I'm not going to get into an argument with you...because I simply can't be arsed... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. And I hope the judge wouldn't do that, I never said she's like every other 15 year old I don't want to get into a circular argument but you said it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what was happening Exactly, I never said anything about her. "What is your point then? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wow. Some of these attitudes are exactly the reasons why the abuses in places like Rotherham were allowed to happen." Not really, there's another, quite obvious reason why that happened ... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. And I hope the judge wouldn't do that, I never said she's like every other 15 year old I don't want to get into a circular argument but you said it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what was happening Exactly, I never said anything about her.
What is your point then?"Someone said earlier that 15 year olds don't understand their actions have consequences, or something along those lines. I just thought that's a bit of a stupid thing to say | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Group hug "Sure. I've nothing against anyone on here personally. I don't know most of you. I disagree with people when I disagree with them. I just disagree with some people more than others because they say more things I disagree with. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Fucking hell just ignore each other stop trying to get the last word in and winding each other up...agree to disagree. It's an emotive subject and people are going to have different opioions but it's like tit for tat... Er that's how a discussion goes. One side responds to the other's response. The current suggestion is that somebody can be neither a victim of nor responsible for something bad that happens to them. I can't see how. Can you? I'd say simply based on the vile things being said about this girl that she's a victim. You know what I'm not going to get into an argument with you...because I simply can't be arsed..." I'm not asking for an argument. I'm asking someone to back up a claim that makes no sense to me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Fucking hell just ignore each other stop trying to get the last word in and winding each other up...agree to disagree. It's an emotive subject and people are going to have different opioions but it's like tit for tat... And unless some sort of meaningful additional argument is being made, it very much distracts from the thread content which is an interesting debate Personally I'd still like to know how it's possible when something bad happens to someone for them to be something other than a victim or (at least) partially responsible. They were involved so they have to be one or the other. What else can they be?" Are the two mutually exclusive? Being a victim bears no relation to responsibility for the crime? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. And I hope the judge wouldn't do that, I never said she's like every other 15 year old I don't want to get into a circular argument but you said it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what was happening Exactly, I never said anything about her.
What is your point then? Someone said earlier that 15 year olds don't understand their actions have consequences, or something along those lines. I just thought that's a bit of a stupid thing to say"No, they said that 15 year olds are unlikely to understand what those consequences may be. That's why the law says they can't consent, can't enter into contracts and are not (with a few exceptions) criminally responsible. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's why the law says they can't consent, can't enter into contracts and are not (with a few exceptions) criminally responsible." as per an earlier post I think the law is that there is a rebuttable presumption that there is a lack of consent if over 13/14. This means consent can be proven. Anything under that age(can't remember which specifically) and you cannot consent regardless of circs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. And I hope the judge wouldn't do that, I never said she's like every other 15 year old I don't want to get into a circular argument but you said it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what was happening Exactly, I never said anything about her.
What is your point then? Someone said earlier that 15 year olds don't understand their actions have consequences, or something along those lines. I just thought that's a bit of a stupid thing to say
No, they said that 15 year olds are unlikely to understand what those consequences may be.
That's why the law says they can't consent, can't enter into contracts and are not (with a few exceptions) criminally responsible."Most 15 year olds are very likely to understand those things, but everyone matures at different speeds I suppose | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Fucking hell just ignore each other stop trying to get the last word in and winding each other up...agree to disagree. It's an emotive subject and people are going to have different opioions but it's like tit for tat... And unless some sort of meaningful additional argument is being made, it very much distracts from the thread content which is an interesting debate Personally I'd still like to know how it's possible when something bad happens to someone for them to be something other than a victim or (at least) partially responsible. They were involved so they have to be one or the other. What else can they be? Are the two mutually exclusive? Being a victim bears no relation to responsibility for the crime? " I agree. My question is, is there a third option? The posts I am being criticised for querying seem to say she wasn't in the wrong but she isn't necessarily a victim. What is she then? I believe she's a victim even if she wasn't entirely innocent, (which seems to be the reasoning for saying she isn't necessarily a victim). I don't understand the claim she's not necessarily a victim. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. And I hope the judge wouldn't do that, I never said she's like every other 15 year old I don't want to get into a circular argument but you said it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what was happening Exactly, I never said anything about her.
What is your point then? Someone said earlier that 15 year olds don't understand their actions have consequences, or something along those lines. I just thought that's a bit of a stupid thing to say
No, they said that 15 year olds are unlikely to understand what those consequences may be.
That's why the law says they can't consent, can't enter into contracts and are not (with a few exceptions) criminally responsible.
Most 15 year olds are very likely to understand those things, but everyone matures at different speeds I suppose "I disagree with you. They may realise they are doing the wrong thing and know there are consequences. I don't think most 15 year olds have much concept of the realities of life or the full, potential long-term effects of their actions. Does a 15 year old who wants a tattoo consider whether they'll like it at 20, 30, 50? Do they think about how it might affect their chances of getting a job? Their idea of consequences is more likely to be their parents will flip and they'll be grounded. They won't fully understand why. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's why the law says they can't consent, can't enter into contracts and are not (with a few exceptions) criminally responsible. as per an earlier post I think the law is that there is a rebuttable presumption that there is a lack of consent if over 13/14. This means consent can be proven. Anything under that age(can't remember which specifically) and you cannot consent regardless of circs. " Yes, there are exceptions, I believe. Clearly in this case the judge decided she couldn't consent though. I acknowledge I made a blanket statement that isn't entirely accurate though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. And I hope the judge wouldn't do that, I never said she's like every other 15 year old I don't want to get into a circular argument but you said it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what was happening Exactly, I never said anything about her.
What is your point then? Someone said earlier that 15 year olds don't understand their actions have consequences, or something along those lines. I just thought that's a bit of a stupid thing to say
No, they said that 15 year olds are unlikely to understand what those consequences may be.
That's why the law says they can't consent, can't enter into contracts and are not (with a few exceptions) criminally responsible.
Most 15 year olds are very likely to understand those things, but everyone matures at different speeds I suppose
I disagree with you. They may realise they are doing the wrong thing and know there are consequences. I don't think most 15 year olds have much concept of the realities of life or the full, potential long-term effects of their actions.
Does a 15 year old who wants a tattoo consider whether they'll like it at 20, 30, 50? Do they think about how it might affect their chances of getting a job? Their idea of consequences is more likely to be their parents will flip and they'll be grounded. They won't fully understand why."They do, they just don't care. The ones who do care are the ones that call him or her an idiot for doing that. Just like at school, some kids do , knowing it's bad but they care more about it making them look cool. Some teenagers are smart, some are too rebellious for their own good | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What were you wanting, sobbing and wailing, or dancing in the islesHe should of got an extra 5 years for wearing a sunderland shirt Can't argue with that
But in a serious note , he did appear to be very naive .
He had to check whether what he did was illegal , and although he didn't actually have sex with her , he must have known it was wrong .
She was certainly not innocent , and encouraged him . But even so he shouldn't have done it .
With all the press attention and his status they had to be harsh with him .
And they were ."End of the day he was the adult, she was a minor. No matter how flattering she was towards him, there are lines that should not be crossed. I think it was too lenient myself, considering his position as a professional footballer he should have been sent down for a lot longer or no parole (not fully up to speed on his sentencing). That would send a very clear message to everyone this is not to be tolerated. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What were you wanting, sobbing and wailing, or dancing in the islesHe should of got an extra 5 years for wearing a sunderland shirt Can't argue with that
But in a serious note , he did appear to be very naive .
He had to check whether what he did was illegal , and although he didn't actually have sex with her , he must have known it was wrong .
She was certainly not innocent , and encouraged him . But even so he shouldn't have done it .
With all the press attention and his status they had to be harsh with him .
And they were .
End of the day he was the adult, she was a minor. No matter how flattering she was towards him, there are lines that should not be crossed. I think it was too lenient myself, considering his position as a professional footballer he should have been sent down for a lot longer or no parole (not fully up to speed on his sentencing). That would send a very clear message to everyone this is not to be tolerated." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I agree. My question is, is there a third option? The posts I am being criticised for querying seem to say she wasn't in the wrong but she isn't necessarily a victim. What is she then? I believe she's a victim even if she wasn't entirely innocent, (which seems to be the reasoning for saying she isn't necessarily a victim). I don't understand the claim she's not necessarily a victim." I think you can be a victim with some responsibility yes. But that responsibility does not negate the crime. It can be argued that she knew what she was doing in so far as consenting to the acts that happened. But with that said, she was besotted by Johnson. She was the impressionable teenager, meeting her idol. He was the adult, and superior in terms of age by many years. He should have known better. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No one is saying she isn't the victim, but most 15 year olds would have known what he was up to It doesn't matter if she knew what she was doing or not. Sex with an under 16 is illegal. Doesn't matter if she instigated it, bribed, begged or paid him. He was in the wrong. I said that earlier, the only person who will know on that is her. I just think it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what is happening. Even if you reversed the genders they'd know The point is that a judge has heard and considered evidence from both sides and decided that the man is guilty. He or she hasn't based their decision on what they know of other 15 year olds but on what he has seen and heard from this particular one. And I hope the judge wouldn't do that, I never said she's like every other 15 year old I don't want to get into a circular argument but you said it's stupid to act like 15 year olds wouldn't know what was happening Exactly, I never said anything about her.
What is your point then? Someone said earlier that 15 year olds don't understand their actions have consequences, or something along those lines. I just thought that's a bit of a stupid thing to say
No, they said that 15 year olds are unlikely to understand what those consequences may be.
That's why the law says they can't consent, can't enter into contracts and are not (with a few exceptions) criminally responsible.
Most 15 year olds are very likely to understand those things, but everyone matures at different speeds I suppose
I disagree with you. They may realise they are doing the wrong thing and know there are consequences. I don't think most 15 year olds have much concept of the realities of life or the full, potential long-term effects of their actions.
Does a 15 year old who wants a tattoo consider whether they'll like it at 20, 30, 50? Do they think about how it might affect their chances of getting a job? Their idea of consequences is more likely to be their parents will flip and they'll be grounded. They won't fully understand why.
They do, they just don't care. The ones who do care are the ones that call him or her an idiot for doing that. Just like at school, some kids do , knowing it's bad but they care more about it making them look cool. Some teenagers are smart, some are too rebellious for their own good "Fair enough if that's your opinion but I disagree. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I agree. My question is, is there a third option? The posts I am being criticised for querying seem to say she wasn't in the wrong but she isn't necessarily a victim. What is she then? I believe she's a victim even if she wasn't entirely innocent, (which seems to be the reasoning for saying she isn't necessarily a victim). I don't understand the claim she's not necessarily a victim. I think you can be a victim with some responsibility yes. But that responsibility does not negate the crime. It can be argued that she knew what she was doing in so far as consenting to the acts that happened. But with that said, she was besotted by Johnson. She was the impressionable teenager, meeting her idol. He was the adult, and superior in terms of age by many years. He should have known better. " Could she not be a victim though? How? That's the claim I don't understand, that she's not necessarily a victim. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I agree. My question is, is there a third option? The posts I am being criticised for querying seem to say she wasn't in the wrong but she isn't necessarily a victim. What is she then? I believe she's a victim even if she wasn't entirely innocent, (which seems to be the reasoning for saying she isn't necessarily a victim). I don't understand the claim she's not necessarily a victim. I think you can be a victim with some responsibility yes. But that responsibility does not negate the crime. It can be argued that she knew what she was doing in so far as consenting to the acts that happened. But with that said, she was besotted by Johnson. She was the impressionable teenager, meeting her idol. He was the adult, and superior in terms of age by many years. He should have known better. Could she not be a victim though? How? That's the claim I don't understand, that she's not necessarily a victim." No one is saying she's not the victim, just she might not be completely innocent. Again, only she will know that. And that definitely doesn't make him less of a criminal | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I agree. My question is, is there a third option? The posts I am being criticised for querying seem to say she wasn't in the wrong but she isn't necessarily a victim. What is she then? I believe she's a victim even if she wasn't entirely innocent, (which seems to be the reasoning for saying she isn't necessarily a victim). I don't understand the claim she's not necessarily a victim. I think you can be a victim with some responsibility yes. But that responsibility does not negate the crime. It can be argued that she knew what she was doing in so far as consenting to the acts that happened. But with that said, she was besotted by Johnson. She was the impressionable teenager, meeting her idol. He was the adult, and superior in terms of age by many years. He should have known better. Could she not be a victim though? How? That's the claim I don't understand, that she's not necessarily a victim. No one is saying she's not the victim, just she might not be completely innocent. Again, only she will know that. And that definitely doesn't make him less of a criminal " Actually someone has said exactly that she is "not necessarily a victim". I'm asking how? And what is she if she's not a victim. As for only the girl knowing if she's "innocent", the court heard the facts and a determination was made. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I agree. My question is, is there a third option? The posts I am being criticised for querying seem to say she wasn't in the wrong but she isn't necessarily a victim. What is she then? I believe she's a victim even if she wasn't entirely innocent, (which seems to be the reasoning for saying she isn't necessarily a victim). I don't understand the claim she's not necessarily a victim. I think you can be a victim with some responsibility yes. But that responsibility does not negate the crime. It can be argued that she knew what she was doing in so far as consenting to the acts that happened. But with that said, she was besotted by Johnson. She was the impressionable teenager, meeting her idol. He was the adult, and superior in terms of age by many years. He should have known better. Could she not be a victim though? How? That's the claim I don't understand, that she's not necessarily a victim. No one is saying she's not the victim, just she might not be completely innocent. Again, only she will know that. And that definitely doesn't make him less of a criminal Actually someone has said exactly that she is "not necessarily a victim". I'm asking how? And what is she if she's not a victim. As for only the girl knowing if she's "innocent", the court heard the facts and a determination was made." anyone saying she's not a victim is an idiot. And the court has never been wrong before? That's another debate lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It can be argued that she knew what she was doing in so far as consenting to the acts that happened. But with that said, she was besotted by Johnson. She was the impressionable teenager, meeting her idol. He was the adult, and superior in terms of age by many years. He should have known better. " The behaviour is not dissimilar to many cases relating to historic offences that have made headlines. Using their position to take advantage of kids. It's abhorrent and I must admit I though it was indefensible but apparently not | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It can be argued that she knew what she was doing in so far as consenting to the acts that happened. But with that said, she was besotted by Johnson. She was the impressionable teenager, meeting her idol. He was the adult, and superior in terms of age by many years. He should have known better. The behaviour is not dissimilar to many cases relating to historic offences that have made headlines. Using their position to take advantage of kids. It's abhorrent and I must admit I though it was indefensible but apparently not" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And according to reports coming out he was arrested last year for having extreme pornography including bestiality. " this....... and they have only dropped these charges because he was found guilty of this.... and to think sunderland still decided to play him and they must have been aware of ALL the charges he was potentially facing....... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
