Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Supreme Court acquitting woman who had sex with 14-year-old boy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Supreme Court acquitting woman who had sex with 14-year-old boy

    Supreme Court says trial judge made no legal error in acquitting woman who had sex with 14-year-old boy

    Same old, same old. Woman gets off because of the pussy pass. We all know how things would have gone had the sexes been reversed.
    Stay single and prosper!

  • #2
    It was an honest mistake! He had pubic er facial hair!

    Comment


    • #3
      Actually, something really smells here. She asked her son (was at the same party) how old her sex object had been two months after the fact. So she obviously wondered. The trial judge wanted to find in her favor regardless of the facts. The supreme court said it could not rule on the facts, only on the interpretation of the law. This sets a precedent.

      Comment


      • #4
        Hi,

        reading the articles and the quotes on the legal reasoning, I can't help but to be struck by the difference - the _gendered_ difference - btween a case like this and e.g. victims of the legal fallout under the present rape hysteria. "We can't really prove that he set out to intentionally break the law" my ass - his elbow brushed a woman's arm in the hallway - off with this head.

        M

        Comment


        • #5
          Well, I guess this is what you get when you mess up IDs...

          Back in my days, you used to ask for an ID, if you wa not sure the age of the other person... but I guess this days, where everything in the ID is going blank... all you have to do is to have some facial hair and they will sell you cigars and let you into adult clubs too...

          Are we really this naive now???

          Put a man with a 14 YO girl and it will go like this:

          "But your honor, she have big boobs"

          "It never occurs to you to ask her for an ID to find out her age???"

          Just look at this quote:

          George was acquitted of the charges because the trial judge found the sexual activity was "factually consensual" — that she honestly believed the boy was at least 16, and there was reasonable doubt she had not taken all reasonable steps to determine the age of the boy, called "C.D." His full name is protected by a publication ban.
          First of all... what the hell is "Factual consent"???

          We already establish that a child can't possibly consent to sex. They say a child have not the capacity to understand and make the decision... the whole argument behind the claim that even if the minor says "yes", it is still a no, because a minor does not have the maturity to make such decision...

          "there was reasonable doubt she had not taken all reasonable steps to determine the age of the boy"

          This should be the argument of the prosecutor, not the argument of the defense... she should have take all the reasonable steps...

          Comment


          • #6
            IMO, the judge has already established a NEW precedent here. And in the future, courts who rule a different way for MEN will be guilty of sexism.
            FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
            It's time to call it out for what it is.
            == REJECT FEMINISM. EMBRACE HUMANITY ==


            The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men
            http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by mr_e View Post
              IMO, the judge has already established a NEW precedent here. And in the future, courts who rule a different way for MEN will be guilty of sexism.
              I think they are already guilty of sexims in the past... so basically it will just stay the same?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by simpleman View Post
                I think they are already guilty of sexims in the past... so basically it will just stay the same?
                Yes, of course, however I was just pointing out that they have just established a new precedent.
                FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
                It's time to call it out for what it is.
                == REJECT FEMINISM. EMBRACE HUMANITY ==


                The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men
                http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by simpleman View Post
                  I think they are already guilty of sexims in the past... so basically it will just stay the same?
                  Not quite. In the good old days cases like these never even went to court.
                  Now they do, but luckily the officers of the law know exactly how to twist it to secure the proper outcome.

                  M

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X