  |
 I AM SO ANGRY ABOUT THIS. |
| Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum |
 30th November 2009, 04:57 PM
Post
#1
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 22,001 User: 53 
   |
Teen who raped 7 year-old girl fined just £85.
From The Mirror. Family fury as teen who raped girl, 7, ordered to pay just £85 She suffered a horrific rape at the hands of a teenage brute that left her so traumatised she wakes up screaming almost every night. But the seven-year-old victim's attacker walked free from court and was ordered to pay a paltry £85 in costs - before she was offered theme park tickets as compensation. And the thug was not even placed on the sex offenders' register for his sickening attack, leaving him free to work with kids. The girl's parents last night spoke of their disgust at the soft sentence and said the 15-year-old has robbed their daughter, known as Laura, of her childhood. Dad Robert, 34, added: "Our lives have been left shattered by what he did to her. "He has stolen Laura's childhood, her innocence. It breaks my heart. Sometimes, she sits on my knee and asks, 'Daddy, do you still love me even though I'm dirty now?' "She never used to have nightmares but she wakes up almost every night screaming, thinking he's there and he's going to hurt her. She's so frightened it's heartbreaking." Laura's ordeal began when the boy, a family friend, got into her bedroom, locked the door and told her they were going to play mummies and daddies "the grown-up way" "Tears were streaming down her little face, she looked so afraid as she said how he had pinned her arms down and taken off her clothes." Since Laura's attack her parents have redecorated her bedroom and bought her a new bed. A dream-catcher hangs near her window to help see off the nightmares. Her attacker, now 16, was sentenced at South East Suffolk youth court. Laura, Robert and Helen's names have been changed to protect their IDs. REFERRAL ORDERS The referral order given to the 15-year-old will mean that he is required to attend youth offender meetings with social services to agree a "contract" to repair the harm caused by his crime and address the causes of his criminal behaviour. Laura's parents were told by police that the boy could not be put on the sex offenders' register as he was given a referral order, instead of a suspended or custodial sentence. Referral orders are part of the Government's strategy to reduce offending in young people. They are given to first-time young offenders who plead guilty, and mean teenagers are "punished" by reporting to a panel of local volunteers to address their offending behaviour. This post has been edited by Crazy Chris: 2nd December 2009, 03:56 PM |
 |
 
|
|
30th November 2009, 05:17 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
She's only seventeen so she's probably not ready
Joined: 1 November 2009
Posts: 1,139 User: 9,863 
 |
That's absolutely outrageous
 x1000000000000000
This post has been edited by Charli: 30th November 2009, 05:17 PM |
|
|
|
|
30th November 2009, 05:39 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
on a bench in coney island
Joined: 9 August 2007
Posts: 17,594 User: 4,089
    |
This is actually SICKENING
|
|
|
|
|
30th November 2009, 06:07 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 22,001 User: 53
|
From what I'm reading around the Net it was a plea bargain between lawyers to prevent the girl going through the ordeal of having to recall it in court, even behind a screen or on video. He pled guilty and in return got a non-custodial sentence.
 Disgusting.
This post has been edited by Crazy Chris: 30th November 2009, 06:12 PM |
|
|
|
|
30th November 2009, 06:21 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
BuzzJack Gold Member
Joined: 27 July 2009
Posts: 4,051 User: 9,335
|
That's just sick. An £85 fine is pretty much letting them get away with it.
|
|
|
|
|
30th November 2009, 06:21 PM
Post
#6
|
|
 baddest of them all
Joined: 2 August 2008
Posts: 21,762 User: 6,764           |
What a sick bast*rd. Is there even such a thing such as ethical law left in this world, any decent human being would be able to tell how f***ed up this. People can just about get away with anything these days, from rape-convicted presidents to this 'boy.' They might as well remove justice from the dictionary because it's as if the law just promotes injustice .
|
|
|
|
|
1st December 2009, 08:48 AM
Post
#7
|
|
|
im all clares!
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 16,421 User: 5
 |
an adult crime should be met with adult punishment.
but was this boy of sound mind? did he know what he was doing? was he mentaly subnormal?... if he was it might explain his actions although he still must face the condequences. |
|
|
|
|
1st December 2009, 10:53 AM
Post
#8
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 22,001 User: 53
|
He hasn't been named but the girl's family know who he is and others probably if he was a friend of the family. Hope someone gets him down a dark alley one night.
This post has been edited by Crazy Chris: 1st December 2009, 10:53 AM |
|
|
|
|
1st December 2009, 11:05 AM
Post
#9
|
|
 BuzzJack Platinum Member
Joined: 28 August 2008
Posts: 6,223 User: 6,934
  |
While I agree with your sentiments on this one Chris I still find it ironic that you are so up in arms about this but are prepared to give Gary Glitter money by buying his music which given his history could well be spent towards doing the same as this boy did
|
|
|
|
|
1st December 2009, 05:22 PM
Post
#10
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,675 User: 3,272
       |
There are so many things missing from the report that it's worse than useless.
As has already been said, it may be that the boy has a mental age well below his 15 years. We just don't know. It doesn't say what he actually pleaded guilty to. It sort of implies he pleaded guilty to rape but doesn't actually say so. That - and the sentence - leads me to believe he pleaded guilty to a much less serious offence. Sometimes the court authorities have to make difficult choices. Do you accept a guilty plea to a lesser offence or do you go to a full trial? A trial where the victim will have to give evidence and which might result in a not guilty verdict. If the boy did have a low mental age, the chances of an acquittal would be that much higher. The court may well have decided that the girl was not a reliable witness. All we have to go on is what the girls parents have said. The journalist won't have been in the courtroom and neither were any of us. So, yes, the sentence appears excessively leneint but, without knowing ALL the facts, it's impossible to be certain. |
|
|
|
|
2nd December 2009, 08:19 AM
Post
#11
|
|
|
im all clares!
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 16,421 User: 5
|
QUOTE(B.A Baracus @ Dec 1 2009, 11:05 AM)  While I agree with your sentiments on this one Chris I still find it ironic that you are so up in arms about this but are prepared to give Gary Glitter money by buying his music which given his history could well be spent towards doing the same as this boy did  .....god im slow, i should have thought of that as soon as i read it!
|
|
|
|
|
2nd December 2009, 10:18 AM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Always wear a clean pair of knickers, cos you never know when th
Joined: 12 March 2006
Posts: 18,586 User: 190
  |
QUOTE(B.A Baracus @ Dec 1 2009, 11:05 AM) While I agree with your sentiments on this one Chris I still find it ironic that you are so up in arms about this but are prepared to give Gary Glitter money by buying his music which given his history could well be spent towards doing the same as this boy did I totally echo that sentiment.... So, Chris, what about it mate...? Are you just a big, fat hypocrite, or one of these people who seems to be able to forgive his "idols" just about any kind of idiotic or fukked-up, deviant behaviour......  I be if you were a black American, you'd've defended OJ and Mike Tyson eh.....?  Suedehead is totally right by the way, we dont know the facts of the particular case going by this report... If the kid IS educationally or emotionally sub-normal, then he should be in a mental unit being treated, not merely being let off with a fine, that's not going to help him, or society at large really... The kid, unlike Glitter, might not actually have been aware he was doing anything "evil".... |
|
|
|
|
2nd December 2009, 03:45 PM
Post
#13
|
|
|
BuzzJack Gold Member
Joined: 11 April 2006
Posts: 4,259 User: 457
|
I don't get this... if the kid was let off due to a plea bargain, doesn't that mean that the parents would've had to agree to it? In which case why are they complaining about the sentence being too light? The whole thing seems odd to me.
|
|
|
|
|
2nd December 2009, 03:49 PM
Post
#14
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 22,001 User: 53
|
Yep it all seems strange to me. Obviously lots we're not being told.
|
|
|
|
|
2nd December 2009, 03:53 PM
Post
#15
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,675 User: 3,272
|
QUOTE(Danny @ Dec 2 2009, 03:45 PM) I don't get this... if the kid was let off due to a plea bargain, doesn't that mean that the parents would've had to agree to it? In which case why are they complaining about the sentence being too light? The whole thing seems odd to me. Ultimately it would be for the prosecution team to decide whether to accept it, presumably in consultation with the girl's parents. They may have agreed after being advised that a prosecution for rape was unlikely to succeed. If so, that again raises the suspicion that the boy has a mental age well below 15 and/or that the girl's evidence was not considered to be reliable enough to stand up in court. With so many questions unanswered it makes the original report totally unreliable if not downright irresponsible. |
|
|
|
|
2nd December 2009, 03:54 PM
Post
#16
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 22,001 User: 53
|
Was from The Mirror. Amended original post now as I think I omitted that.
This post has been edited by Crazy Chris: 2nd December 2009, 03:55 PM |
|
|
|
|
2nd December 2009, 04:36 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Always wear a clean pair of knickers, cos you never know when th
Joined: 12 March 2006
Posts: 18,586 User: 190
|
QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Dec 2 2009, 03:53 PM) Ultimately it would be for the prosecution team to decide whether to accept it, presumably in consultation with the girl's parents. They may have agreed after being advised that a prosecution for rape was unlikely to succeed. If so, that again raises the suspicion that the boy has a mental age well below 15 and/or that the girl's evidence was not considered to be reliable enough to stand up in court. With so many questions unanswered it makes the original report totally unreliable if not downright irresponsible. I totally agree... It seems like this "story" to me is just another one to get people all "outraged" and precipitate a hysterical "Brass-Eye" style "Pedogeddon" type of vibe.... Of course the fact that the boy concerned is also a minor and not at the age of consent seems to be neither here nor there to the Mirror..... Yeah, why let the facts get in the way of a sensationalist headline eh....? |
|
|
|
|
2nd December 2009, 07:18 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 22,001 User: 53
|
Whether he's mentally unfit or not, he shouldn't be walking the streets like decent human beings. He should either be in jail or a mental ward for life.
|
|
|
|
|
2nd December 2009, 07:30 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
BuzzJack Platinum Member
Joined: 28 August 2008
Posts: 6,223 User: 6,934
|
QUOTE(Crazy Chris @ Dec 2 2009, 07:18 PM) Whether he's mentally unfit or not, he shouldn't be walking the streets like decent human beings. He should either be in jail or a mental ward for life. Presumably you feel the same way about Glitter then ? But no instead you give him money I guess in your eyes its ok to rape 7 year old girls so long as they live thousands of miles away
This post has been edited by B.A Baracus: 3rd December 2009, 09:03 AM |
|
|
|
|
2nd December 2009, 08:11 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
BuzzJack Platinum Member
Joined: 14 March 2006
Posts: 7,830 User: 213
   |
I'm equally as incensed about the scummy chavs impregnating 13, 14 and 15 year old girls day after day all across this broken country.... yet I never ever hear of them being led to court.....
|
|
|
|
|
| Time is now: 26th April 2024, 09:55 AM |
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 BuzzJack.com
About | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
