Monday, May 24, 2010

I actually can't think of a title here...

Take a moment and read this over at TS's place.

What you have here is a case in London in which an 8 year old girl claimed that two 10 year old boys took her to the third floor of building in a secluded area and took turns raping her.

In an interview recorded the day after the alleged assault took place last year she told police about what had happened.

However during a cross examination last week during the trial of the two boys her telling of events didn't match up with the initial interview.

Now given that this is an 8 year old girl I can understand not throwing the book at here and trying to send her away for the maximum penalty possible (however considering how adult women pretty much have a free pass on false allegations I can't imagine "the maximum penalty possible" not being very much). However what the judge said really shocked me:
After she finished her evidence Mr Justice Saunders told her: 'No one is suggesting you have done anything wrong.

'I am the judge and I don't suggest you have done anything wrong. Remember that.'

Frankly that's some bullshit.

If it is indeed true that this young girl did fabricate a rape allegation in order to not in trouble with her parents then she did do something wrong. Its bad enough that people think false rape allegations don't do any harm to those caught up by them but its entirely something else that judges give them this sort of okay. Like I said I'm not saying she needs to go to hard prison or anything but that judge was in a position to at least tell her that what she did was wrong.

Had this been any other crime I'm finding it hard to believe that she would have been given a free pass like this.

Well go give a read over this update to the case from TS. The boys were found not guilty on one count of rape each but they were both found guilty on one count of attempted rape each.

According to Telegraph editor Philip Johnston the boys will be placed the sex offenders registry. Yes for basically playing a child's game of "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" or maybe doctor two 10 year old boys are going to be listed with people who have actually committed sexual crimes against innocent people.

This is precisely the thing that people are talking about when they talk about how things have gotten out of hand. Now I'm sure you may want to think that this is not out of hand because this is only one case of it happening. Well while you're patting yourself on the back over pointing out this is "not systematic" try to bear in mind that there are two young boys who lives have probably been wrecked before they really begin because a girl lied about being raped.

Here's to hoping that the appeals process goes in their favor.

5 comments:

Paul said...

It's ridiculously easy to get onto the sex offender registry, and almost damned impossible to get off of it. One wonders if they'll still be on it once they reach their majority. I hope not.

Danny said...

I'm sure you may not be serious about "damned impossible" Paul but in some places in the States it is literally impossible to get off of the registry, even if it is later proven you shouldn't be on the list. The problem is law makers are so hellbent on making up the requirements that could land you on a registry that they are not making any provisions whatsoever to get off.

Toysoldier said...

I do wonder whether the jury found the boys guilty just because they thought something did happen.

Apers said...

Yo, as justified as your fears may be about the system you slide too easily from 'If the girl lied' to 'because a girl lied about being raped' and that's not justified, particularly as the boy was convicted. As it happens I have my doubts about the case, but we don't really know and to assume that she lied is just as wrong as assuming she didn't.

Danny said...

Yo, as justified as your fears may be about the system you slide too easily from 'If the girl lied' to 'because a girl lied about being raped' and that's not justified, particularly as the boy was convicted.
Perhaps not justified but not for the reason of the boys being convicted. Conviction doesn't always equal guilt just as not guilty doesn't always equal innocent. So I can get with you there.

-->