Posts by BenWilson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Ah, there it is. I knew we'd had this discussion already.
134A Defence to charge under section 134
(1) It is a defence to a charge under section 134 if the person charged proves that,—
(a) before the time of the act concerned, he or she had taken reasonable steps to find out whether the young person concerned was of or over the age of 16 years; and
(b) at the time of the act concerned, he or she believed on reasonable grounds that the young person was of or over the age of 16 years; and
(c) the young person consented.
(2) Except to the extent provided in subsection (1),—
(a) it is not a defence to a charge under section 134 that the young person concerned consented; and
(b) it is not a defence to a charge under section 134 that the person charged believed that the young person concerned was of or over the age of 16 years.
This defense means that in order for this charge to stick, there has to be some evidence that they made no efforts to establish the age of the victims. If the only evidence in the court is the guys standing up and telling their story, how they asked her how old she was and she said she was 18 and totally up for a gang-bang, then not only will her humiliation be furthered, but they will get off scot free.
-
Hard News: Narcissists and bullies, in reply to Russell Brown,
In the case of girls under 16, it’s not.
I'm trying to work out if that's correct from the Crimes Act. Graeme could probably clarify, but maybe that's true in a reading of the sexual violation definition which says:
128 Sexual violation defined
(1) Sexual violation is the act of a person who—
(a) rapes another person; or
(b) has unlawful sexual connection with another person.
So the question is whether underage sex is unlawful sexual connection. Presumably it is. I was given to understand, however, that our system doesn't have the "statutory rape" thing, though, that underage sex is a lesser offense than rape if there was consent. Certainly, to my intuition about it, it is a much less serious crime, one committed by a substantial fraction of teenagers, hence the police having the basic rule that someone has to lay a complaint.
-
Hard News: Narcissists and bullies, in reply to Russell Brown,
And is this enough for a warrant to seize phones and computers?” To which the answer is clearly yes.
I don't know if that's surely true. They want these guys for rape. Photos won't give evidence of consent, which is the crucial point. They could at most get some of them for underage sex. Even then, there is the argument of the underage part being unintentional to mitigate the sentences. I don't think Matthew is being disingenuous. It seems very unlikely to me that the Police are just turning a blind eye and not following up what they can. Its just unfortunate that our legal system is very much geared around witnesses.
-
Seems like consequences are already mounting. Of that news, though, the best part is that more of the guys involved have fronted up to the police. If even one of them tells on the others, then the need for the victims as witnesses drops considerably, and better still, you have a witness who was not totally inebriated.
-
Hard News: Narcissists and bullies, in reply to Tom Semmens,
If my Facebook feed is any guide, it is day two and we are already in a full Mazengarb event.
Great. Looking forward to a mob inspired murder coming to my neighborhood.
-
Hard News: Narcissists and bullies, in reply to Rageaholic,
I genuinely don’t understand why no charges can be laid unless a victim makes a complaint.
A lawyer could tell us if it's not possible at all to lay charges, but it's fairly obviously very impractical to use a witness upon which the whole case hinges, if they are unwilling. They could deny the whole thing even happened to avoid the shame of the proceedings.
-
Hard News: Narcissists and bullies, in reply to Robyn Gallagher,
Yeah and there was only 12 conspirators in that story, not 100, which even then stretched the boundaries of credibility.
-
Hard News: Narcissists and bullies, in reply to Tom Semmens,
Well, it is what I would do, and I could guarantee I could get 100 people to say i was with them the whole time.
You'd probably still go to jail, if both of these statements aren't bullshit, which I think is more likely. You'd hardly be the first father to have violent revenge fantasies, but why do you think no one acts on them? Because the kind of crime you are talking about is not easy to get away with, and probably wouldn't solve the problem, and would have a really good chance of creating new problems. Do you really want to get into a tit-for-tat revenge cycles against a bunch of young thugs who like raping girls? That's a fuxored idea on every level.
-
Hard News: Narcissists and bullies, in reply to Tom Semmens,
Problem solved at a community level.
I doubt that would work. More likely, the parents would go to jail. Fresh victims.
-
Hard News: Narcissists and bullies, in reply to Kumara Republic,
Fear of reprisal, much?
I'd guess it's more to do with slut-shaming, which most likely has more power over very young girls. But it's going to end in tears for these guys - it's only going to take one girl to put them in prison for a long time, and for some pretty hard time too.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 298 299 300 301 302 … 1066 Older→ First