Sex cases in the news

BlueBelle I agree with all you say until the last para. Consenting sex between two underage children of that age group will not be prosecuted, and if the parents coerce either of them into complaining out of fear of consequences of saying otherwise, or one has regrets the next day, it is very unlikely to go prosecution. Depending upon such circumstances, it would go before a youth offending diversion panel and maybe some educative intervention would be offered, if assessed as being needed, but definitely not sex offender registration - that only comes of clear intention to assault or rape by one of the couple, and would have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Many of you are taken up with 15-16 year olds but most of these cases also include much younger children as young as 7 Groping a fellow presenter was only ONE case against DLT there were many others

I totally agree times have changed but I wasn't groped at 15 and went to lots of concerts and gigs these people are not only complaining about groping but about actual sexual abuse and rape, the reports I have read about DLT and the others one of the young girls freely admits she was overpowered by the thrill of him taking notice of her but was terrified wen it went further than interest. These hedonistic blokes didn't have a care in the world as long as they got what they wanted They even found a tick off list on a dressing room wall of JS

Thank God JS did come out because it has given many damaged women and some men the courage to at last speak out about something that can have done life long damage

However one thing has changed that I can't agree with if e g my grandson and girlfriend have consenting sex under the age of 16 and say her parents complain the lad would go on the sex offenders list even if the girl is saying 'no no I initiated it' now that is wrong.

I don't think any of them do - there was talk of the party leaders getting together on this. Trouble is it is relatively easy to have a policy in a workplace - report problem to your boss or if boss is problem to HR etc. use the disciplinary procedures etc. In a party there is no obvious reporting route is there?

Staggering that the LibDems don't have procedures to deal with harassment. Mind you, this is the party in which David Steele referred to Cyril Smith's abuse of boys as, only a bit of bottom smacking.

If the outcome of this enquiry as that Rennard should apologise to the women who complained about him, surely that indicates their complaints have been upheld. The fact he believes it exonerated him, because it didn't find enough evidence for a criminal prosecution suggests his behaviour won't change in the future.

Why should women have to put up with this type of offensive, upsetting and threatening behaviour. Clegg has to find a way of getting Rennard out. An apology he clearly wouldn't mean is worthless. His behaviour is enough to have him disciplined, or sacked in the real world of work.

It's shaping up to be a really party-dividing row for the Libdems. Clegg has not got the authority to stop Rennard sitting with the other Libdems in the Lords. The only enquiry the party could have was "did he bring the party into disrepute" - because they don't have the procedures to to deal with harassment. Because it is Rennard's word against that of half a dozen female party activists the conclusion was that there was not enough evidence that he had brought the party into disrepute.
Why on earth all these women should risk their own political ambitions to make these allegations against one of the most powerful men in the party if it was not true?

He's not the only one unfortunately.

Lord Rennard obviously determined not to apologise and wants to be re-admitted to the LibDem whip (according to the BBC news)
Still not getting it Lord R.

But are you wiggling when you walk and giggling when you talk?

My hair is in a ponytail at the moment. CBA to put it up properly

The young couple are from the roma gypsy community. Given they are close in age, and in a long term relationship, in which both say they are happy and which is supported by their extended families, why would the police get involved. The police view on under age sex, when one of the couple is almost 16, there isn't a huge age or power difference (as there was with the school teacher and youngster recently) is that it is not in the public interest, nor is it likely to result in a conviction.

Guess the police have other things to worry about. There must be a few 16 year old boyfriends that have 15 and three-quarter aged girlfriends as well that are unlikely to become the subject of police attention unless a parent complains.
I don't understand why it was disappearing off the radar (the thread) as it was active yesterday?
The UN are interviewing a senior Vatican official about what the church has done and not done about abuse. This is another huge area in which sexual abuse by powerful men has been ignored, minimised and swept under the carpet.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25742217
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25788864

Sorry everyone, I know I've stopped this thread from becoming dormant,

It's just that I had a thought. In the second episode of Benefit Street there was a family who had come over from Romania.

One of the men explained that he knew in this country we did not approve but his wife was 15 years old.

So by our law that young woman is being raped on a regular basis surely.

What, if anything, should be done about the situation?

Well said Jess.

Exactly Mollie

I don't think the only cases are the ones we hear about mollie but to refer to the ones in court:
one of the crimes is current - possession of child pornography
one is serious - rape
the other one may or may not be still offending - but the police and DPP would not be bringing it without due cause.
There are cases of abuse in children's homes in the past that are less high profile but no less serious and there have been and will continue to be prosecutions.
Some people may have got over incidents but others may have had their lives spoiled. People don't always have the resources to get over things.

Agree mollie65

am about to re-sit on my hands and bow out of this thread that seems to have gone off-topic a little.
I do sympathise and understand those 'victims' who were consistently and horribly sexually abused by those they trusted be they family or friends but I have to question why the current trials are only of high profile individuals about events 40 or 50 years ago.
should I seek out my driving instructor, supervisor or manager from 50 years ago to take them to court for inappropriate abuse of their position towards a teenager?
I think the best thing to do is to move on and understand that if this is the worst thing that has happened in their lives they have been quite fortunate.
just to be clear I am not suggesting serious abuse should ever be tolerated.

Well, the fact that we're still here seems to prove the point that we all got through it somehow, Gadabout - I do realise my experience of growing up may not be the same as everyone else's...

You may have done Ana but sadly not everyone did.

Re the issue raised earlier of applying the term victim before an alleged perpetrator is found guilty: Surely, if a person has experienced something illegal or an act they did not want, then they are a victim. But technically they cannot be a victim of.... (whoever).. until someone (& it may not be the person charged) is found guilty, though that result may arise because there is insufficient evidence or because the 'victim' cannot take the legal process anymore. I'm sure a real victim of a known person will not be making that distinction however. There appears to be no problem with calling JS's victims victims/survivors without him being convicted. And courts have Victim support workers to help people before anyone has been convicted.

Speldnan

(I don't think that apostrophe was necessary, was it?

I went to an all-girls' school and had no brothers - I didn't even go out with a boy until I was 16. That's probably why I had such a romanticised idea of male/female relationships! Still, we all muddled through somehow...

That's alright when.

Sometimes real life has to take precedence over GN.

Well Ana when I was a young teenager my heart belonged only to Elvis (apart from boyfriend) and he was too far away for me to get at him!

And roadies or, quite often so far as I understand, just roadies not the stars themselves.