'The girl had clearly been subjected to systematic sexual exploitation and you willingly used her for your own sexual gratification.Instead of getting the recommended 10 to 13 years they got 40 months. The advocates against rape are furious with the Judges decision. The two perpetrators video taped the rape and the Judge watched the tape and felt that the 11 year old girl was a willing partner. So he reduced the sentence to 40 months.
What pisses me off as an anti-ped as I am known among the pedophiles. Is that they will use this as a way to prove that a child can consent to being sexually abused. This Judge has just played into the normalization of pedophilia. He has just helped their argument. Meanwhile an 11 year old child is traumatized and will have to deal with this the rest of her life. The concern I have is that it is possible that this child has already been sexually abused and therefore it didn't look like she was resisting her rape. A child that is re-traumatized goes into dissociation mode. It is possible she didn't even realize she was being raped until afterward. I hope she is getting the mental health help that she needs. I hope this doesn't wreck her life and send her on a trajectory to have a bad life. Statistically child sexual abuse survivors deal with mental health issues and addictions as a way to cope with what was done to them. Shame on this Judge! Rosie
By Richard Hartley-parkinson
Last updated at 5:17 PM on 22nd February 2012
Judge David Farrell agreed that he thought the girl looked like she was 14
Roshane Channer and Ruben Monteiro admitted assaulting the child in a block of flats in Luton, Bedfordshire.
Despite describing their crime as 'abhorrent', Judge David Farrell QC jailed the defendants, who are both 21, for less than three and a half years.
He said this was because he accepted their claim that she was a willing participant and agreed that she looked like she was 14. The legal age for consent is 16.
Jo Wood, Rape Crisis spokesman, said: 'It is horrendous that any Judge can even begin to imagine that an 11 year old child is capable of consenting to being simultaneously raped by two men while being filmed.
'This youngster was not capable of consenting to the horrors of what was being done to her.
Guidelines in the Sexual Offences Act 2003 suggest sentencing for rape of a child under 13 should be between 10 and 13 years in prison.
The Crown Prosecution Service is now considering an appeal against the 'unduly lenient' sentences.
The rape took place in a block of flats in Luton in July last year
Channer and Monteiro had sex with the girl in July last year in a block of flats in Luton Bedfordshire.She was there with a group of teenagers and Channer had sex with her on a landing at the flats while Monteiro had oral sex with her.
Judge Farrell said: 'Despite her age it is accepted that she was a willing participant, but the law is there to protect young girls from this type of behaviour and to protect them from themselves.
'It is aggravated by the fact that the event was being videoed.'
He added that there was evidence the footage had been circulated as it was found on one of the defendant's phones.
Both Channer and Monteiro pleaded guilty to a single charge of rape and will have to sign the sex offenders' register for life.
Judge Farrell said there were exceptional features to the case which led him to reduce the sentences to 40 months.
The two men had maintained they believed the girl was at least 14, and, after viewing evidence, the judge agreed she appeared that age.
He said the prosecution accepted that the girl had not objected to what was happening, and the men had pleaded guilty at the earliest stage and did not have previous convictions for sexual offences.
Miss Wood continued: 'There are no excuses for these two young men who freely admit that they thought she was 14 years old. Fourteen is still below the age of consent and their actions would still have constituted rape, had she been 14.
'For a Judge to state that "Despite her age it is accepted she was a willing participant" is a damning reflection on how far the judiciary still has to go to even start to understand the whole issue of rape – consent and criminality. We are reliably advised that Judges have to obtain a "Rape ticket" to sit on rape cases but as yet we have no idea what constitutes such training – whatever it is – it isn’t working.
'This young girl has been raped by the two named perpetrators and has now been badly let down by the very system set up to protect her. What message does this send out to potential perpetrators when you can rape a child, plead guilty and get a sentence which is less than you might expect to get for a burglary or car crimes?
'Does this mean that destroying a child’s innocence has so little importance in today’s world – and does it mean that rape is such a trivial matter that it can so easily be brushed aside?
'The child will have received a life sentence for what has been done to her – and in less than two years her attackers will be free.
'Where is the deterrent and where is the incentive for anyone to report rape? We need to smarten up and Judges NEED to be accountable for their decisions.'
Peter Bradley, Deputy Director at Kidscape, said: 'Even though there were "exceptional features" the sentencing of these two men is far too lenient and gives out the wrong message to potential other offenders.
'The girl may have looked 14 but even so this would also have been a serious crime.
'It is unlikely the two men will have to serve their full sentence - hopefully the time they spend in prison will allow them to follow a suitable programme ensuring they are safe for release in the next few years.'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2104287/Child-rapists-jailed-just-40-months--judge-said-11-year-old-victim-willing.html#ixzz1nDOxx9H7
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2104287/Child-rapists-jailed-just-40-months--judge-said-11-year-old-victim-willing.html
No comments:
Post a Comment