News: Teen loses rape case because of her 'well-developed body' - Page 2

Su-Barbie-A

Quote:

because the legislation also states that a defendant must “know” or have “reasonable grounds to believe” that the child is under age.

So basically, it's not child rape unless you know their age or they look like legit kids.

J a y

There is an obvious violation. I'd suggest another lawyer.

Quote:

There is also a close in age exception (Chapter 6, Section 14) "...not sentenced if it is obvious that the act is no violation of the child considered the small difference in age between the person who carries out the act and the child and other circumstances." In a verdict of 30 March 2007, the Supreme Court found that a 17 year old boy had not committed a criminal act by having sexual intercourse with a girl 14 years and 7 months old. (Case B 415-07)

http://www.government.se/content/1/c...7/cb79a8a3.pdf

Quote:

The age of fifteen is referred to several times, for example in Section 4, which reads: "A person who has sexual intercourse with a child under fifteen years of age or who with such a child carries out another sexual act that, having regard to the nature of the violation and the circumstances in general, is comparable to sexual intercourse, shall be sentenced for rape of a child to imprisonment for at least two and at most six years

Is this the part they're referring to?

Bey_Rihstan

Quote:

Originally posted by RatedG²

Does the link provide the full story? I need to read it all before I pass judgement

What do you need to read? Nothing could possibly justify a man raping someone half his age, or any age.

MissAmericanDream

Quote:

Originally posted by Kkamjong

No he should not. So if an underage goes to a grown adult, lies about their age on purpose, and then reports them for rape when the adult had no idea what their real age was, are you really saying the adult was at fault?

This logic is baffling, and quite frankly stupid. If she lied about her age and consented then it is NOT his fault. No one is going to be checking the ID of everyone who talks to them.

No, I meant that if he raped her he should be charged with rape whether she was 13 or 33. I agree with the decision that she looked older than she was and if she said she was over 15 then that should be thrown out but if he did rape her he should still be charged with rape not rape of a minor.

rac7d

Quote:

Originally posted by Kkamjong

Did she consent? Because if she lied about her age, and consented then I agree he should not be charged. However, if he gave her drinks and knew her real age then he needs to go to prison

I dont want to defend a rapist
But lets say this 13 year old girsl has the developed body of 18 year old (it happens somtimes)

If she used sex to be invited into his home for a meal and a warm bed thats not right. But this is most likly not the case

BGKC

I understand that it's child molestation no matter how you flip it, and also that the reasoning of dropping the case is illogical, but it seems more like an illegal hookup with no questions asked. The girl is obviously damaged. Sad.

Igrt

So we're not going to charge him because the victim looks 15.OK.....

Temporal

Quote:

Originally posted by Callum

Agree. This article is vague on the details but if she presented herself as someone of legal age and consented to the whole thing at the time then the man involved had no way of knowing any different and shouldn't be held accountable.

+1

Timber

So much missing, idk, hope she's okay.

Miichael

Quote:

Originally posted by Soeplepel

So it's perfectly normal to rape adults because they have a well-developed body??

The point is that it was consensual sex, but is now classed as rape since she was underage. But the man is denying that he knew she was underage, and the court believes him because she looks so much older.

Timber

Quote:

Originally posted by Bey_Rihstan

What do you need to read? Nothing could possibly justify a man raping someone half his age, or any age.

They didn't say it was rape:

Quote:

Under Swedish law, having intercourse with someone under the age of 15 is classified as ‘child rape’

It's just classified as such.

Can't_M!ss_This

Statutory rape is an adult having consensual sex with a minor. Both parties agreed to the act but it is still illegal because one is over and the other is under 18.

I've met a couple guys who have been charged with rape and thus are now registered sex offenders because the girl lied about her age during a hook up. That kind of rape is crap in my eyes. A guy's life can be ruined because some little hussy wanted sex with an adult and lied to get it.

Now if a man or woman forces themselves on another person, that's bad. No matter the age or gender.

Hopefully this girl didn't lie to get a meal. Illegal or not this man doesn't deserve to go to prison because she left a foster home without anywhere to go

Mezter

That's sick

Tylerbv

um what the ****

A Little Unruly

A reverse Ariana Grande-ian experience.

Cheers

Ummm what kinda logic? So it's okay to rape grown women then?

TasteOfYourLips

Quote:

Originally posted by Cheers

Ummm what kinda logic? So it's okay to rape grown women then?

The article doesn't state it clearly, but it seems like the girl gave consent. However, it was still illegal for him to have sex with her because she was underage. The girl sued the man for statutory rape and lost because the jugde decided that the man could have thought that she was an adult due to her looking mature.

And I agree with that decision. We can't check documents of others to see if they are really as old as they look.

Big Smoke

oh statutory rape.
Thought it was the other one.
Where was this girl's parents???

Minajesty

But... it's rape? What does that have to do with it?

Sasha.

we claim to be for gender equality and working to prevent **** like this but at the end of the day, no one's looking out for the women