Quote:
Originally Posted by JustJess
A lynching? Really? At 15, were you so smart? I know I wasn't.
Clearly this is an example of stupid kids being stupid. You'd be amazed how small you think the difference is in age when you ARE that age. I know I did (but thankfully wasn't this stupid). In my mind... this is mostly on the parents of both kids.
|
I was smart enough not to go having unprotected sex with an 11yr old, and unless the situation has changed in the years since i was that young (which is not that many), then i stand by my statement. More importantly, what the hell is the girl doing have sex at that age?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hektore
I will deal with this first as a curiosity, how does this work if both parties are under 13, or if both parties are regularly engaging in sexual activity and one becomes 14 before the other? Is there any sort of precedent for this kind of thing?
|
Basically, under the age of 13, in the eyes of the law a girl is unable to give consent to sex, no matter what her opinions are. As such, since she can't give consent, that amounts to rape. It is a strict liability offence basically so they can punish anyone who has sex with a girl under 13 with relative ease, which is the right idea.
However, between 14-16 (the actual age of consent) then there is more leway e.g. if both parties are of a similar age (for instance if they were in a relationship, boy turned 16, girl was still 15 and they were engaged in sexual conduct) then there can be a bit of a defence.
I don't believe they should send the father to jail, but he should be forced to support the kid and given a myriad of other penalties to punish him for stupidity, and serve as a warning to others.