Girl Attacked in Calgary Schoolyard or Kids will be Kids?

[Red Potato Standing By]

So if she was to lie to him and say she was 14 and he believed her(i know i have never I.D.'d any females i have known)Wouldn't that be more on her then him?(not saying she did or anything)

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by FireFly

Not sure what world you live in, but MANY women go through puberty at or before 12. In a lot of cases they are children only mentally and have the 'urges' that go along with having a woman's body.

Nice.

Well, if that's how we're playing, I'll say this: I'm not sure what world you live in, but a 12 year old girl is still a child, regardless of whether or not she has begun puberty.

It's frankly a bit laughable that you think puberty is the issue here. We're talking about the rape of a child. Whether or not she wears a training bra or thinks about boys changes nothing.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Zethrynn

So if she was to lie to him and say she was 14 and he believed her(i know i have never I.D.'d any females i have known)Wouldn't that be more on her then him?(not saying she did or anything)

I think sexual interference/sex with a minor is one crime where even if she says she is of legal age, you need to prove that you went to extraordinary measures to be certain of her age and that she was able to provide reasonable proof of that. Even picking up a girl in a bar, or any other location where age of the people present is assumed, does not allow you to make an assumption about her age.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Rathji

I think sexual interference/sex with a minor is one crime where even if she says she is of legal age, you need to prove that you went to extraordinary measures to be certain of her age and that she was able to provide reasonable proof of that. Even picking up a girl in a bar, or any other location where age of the people present is assumed, does not allow you to make an assumption about her age.

I think you also have to look at it in the grand scheme of things too...finding a girl under 16 years old in a bar is highly unlikely...though...if you were 19, a 15 year old can still consent to have sex with you.

There seems to be a lot of misconeptions about age of consent and the legality of it (though obviously morally will differ)...

• Basically, the legal age of consent is 16 years.
  
  
• On May 1, 2008, the federal government amended the Criminal Code of Canada to raise the age of consent to sexual activity from 14 to 16 years of age.
  
  
• If you are 12 or 13 years old, and you have sex with somebody more than two years older than you are, the other person can be charged with Sexual Assault.
  
  
• If you're 14 or 15 years old, you can consent to have sex with someone who is less than five years older than you.
  
  
• You can't legally consent to have sex with someone who is in a position of trust, power or authority over you, for example, a minister, coach, employer, teacher, police officer.

http://www.sacc.to/sya/crime/law.htm

[photon]

I used to work with a youth group where there were two sisters, one was 12 and the other 14, and they neither acted nor looked 12 and 14, at least when the parents weren't watching.

There were many times where the group would be out at a public place and guys not from our group would be leering or even chatting them up.. A few times I nearly shouted (and I probably should have) "SHE'S 12 YOU PERVERT!" One time I did actually ask a guy that had talked with her later how old he thought she was, and he thought 15 or maybe 14.

Both of these girls were raised in a strict fundamentalist Christian home too, so there was no lack of parental supervision or interaction, but these two still were extremely flirty and forward with boys, not fully understanding the effect they had but knowing they liked the attention they got. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if I found out that either of them got themselves into a situation where things didn't go how they expected.

No matter what you do you can't watch kids 24/7.

Not saying that if anything did happen with those girls (even if consenting) that it's not a bad thing, I'm just saying I could understand how it's possible, both those girls looked and acted at least 2-3 years older than they were.

[Red Potato Standing By]

Originally Posted by Rathji

I think sexual interference/sex with a minor is one crime where even if she says she is of legal age, you need to prove that you went to extraordinary measures to be certain of her age and that she was able to provide reasonable proof of that. Even picking up a girl in a bar, or any other location where age of the people present is assumed, does not allow you to make an assumption about her age.

While i see your point,and yes if you assume she is of age then yeah i can see it, but really what do you mean by extrodinary measures?

Now if the male in this instance was in his twenties then yeah, i'm sorry there is no way that someone in that age group can make that mistake with a 12 year old.But i can see how a 16 year old could make the mistake and believe what she said to be the truth If she lied about her age

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Nice.

Well, if that's how we're playing, I'll say this: I'm not sure what world you live in, but a 12 year old girl is still a child, regardless of whether or not she has begun puberty.

It's frankly a bit laughable that you think puberty is the issue here. We're talking about the rape of a child. Whether or not she wears a training bra or thinks about boys changes nothing.

I never said puberty was the issue, YOU are the one who said a 12 year old is a child in a child's body. WRONG. a 12 year old is often a child in a young adult's body.

I think it's laughable that you all seem to think there is a magical age where young women are no longer children. Do you think at 14 it's okay? I have known 14 year olds who are less mature than some 12 year olds. Puberty isn't the issue at all, it's the person's mental maturity that matters IMO.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Nice.

Well, if that's how we're playing, I'll say this: I'm not sure what world you live in, but a 12 year old girl is still a child, regardless of whether or not she has begun puberty.

It's frankly a bit laughable that you think puberty is the issue here. We're talking about the rape of a child. Whether or not she wears a training bra or thinks about boys changes nothing.

You are aware children (including a 12 year old) can consent to sex with someone up to two years older than her right? So a 14 year old can still have sexual intercourse with a girl on her 12th birthday.

I think a lot of people in this thread (not necessarily you IFF) are becoming foggy on their own moral views and not necessarily seeing it from a legal standpoint.

[Mad Mel]

Originally Posted by Nehkara

If he had actually raped the girl I might feel the same way you do but, 12 years old or not, it sounds like she was a willing participant.

Yeah, pedophiles have been using that excuse for years. Guess it makes it ok.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Mad Mel

Yeah, pedophiles have been using that excuse for years. Guess it makes it ok.

I don't think anyone could reasonably read what he wrote and think that's what he was saying. This kind of hyperbole is meaningless.

[Mad Mel]

Originally Posted by photon

I don't think anyone could reasonably read what he wrote and think that's what he was saying. This kind of hyperbole is meaningless.

There's no hyperbole. 12 years old is 12 years old. I don't care if that degenerate little piece of shyte is 16 or 60, he deserves to be strung up by the balls.

[jayswin]

Not to out anyone's proffession, but from reading this thread it's good to read posts from an officer and know that he does what he does for a living and that a bunch of other people in this thread don't do what he does.

[photon]

It is hyperbole, you said that Nehkara was saying it was ok, when he's clearly said it isn't.

So maybe it's not hyperbole then, but that seemed a little nicer to say than lying about what someone said to generate an emotional response rather than understand what the person is trying to say.

[Mad Mel]

Fair enough, man. I confess that this topic does make me emotional, and because I see absolutely zero excuse for what happened, it psses me off to see any kind of passing any of the blame beyond where I think think it belongs... on the rapist.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Nice.

Well, if that's how we're playing, I'll say this: I'm not sure what world you live in, but a 12 year old girl is still a child, regardless of whether or not she has begun puberty.

It's frankly a bit laughable that you think puberty is the issue here. We're talking about the rape of a child. Whether or not she wears a training bra or thinks about boys changes nothing.

Wrong, we are talking about statutory rape. It's an important distinction versus just "rape" because rape suggests a violent, forced event while statutory rape can be between two consenting people like in this case.

Yes the girl is young, but really both of them are kids. I think you are doing a disservice to the truth to make it out like he is some kind of monster (maybe he is but none of us know that) when in fact he was probably just some horny dude who met up with some horny girl.

Two kids had sex. Big whoop.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by FireFly

I never said puberty was the issue, YOU are the one who said a 12 year old is a child in a child's body. WRONG. a 12 year old is often a child in a young adult's body.

I think it's laughable that you all seem to think there is a magical age where young women are no longer children. Do you think at 14 it's okay? I have known 14 year olds who are less mature than some 12 year olds. Puberty isn't the issue at all, it's the person's mental maturity that matters IMO.

Huh? No, I don't think it's okay at 14. Or 15. And yes, someone who has started puberty is still inhabiting a child's body. What's the point of pretending otherwise? Puberty, like maturation, is a gradual process.

If your point is that there's no magic age, I agree. I taught University level English for 10 years; many of the young women (and men) in those classes were, in an emotional sense, still children--in spite of being 18 or 19 years old. But that doesn't erase the difference between a 16 year old child and a 12 year old child. It's significant, and it matters in this case. Again, what's the point of pretending otherwise?

Here's the thing: I don't inhabit some morally relativistic universe where we can judge the rape of a child according to some elastic moral standard where the question of whether she has begun puberty has any relevance whatsoever. A child who has begun puberty isn't suddenly an adult capable of consenting to sex with an older child or an adult. They are just that--a child who has begun puberty.

I really don't want to play the "parent" card here--but some posts in this thread are making it pretty hard not to.

[Red Potato Standing By]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Huh? No, I don't think it's okay at 14. Or 15. And yes, someone who has started puberty is still inhabiting a child's body. What's the point of pretending otherwise? Puberty, like maturation, is a gradual process.

If your point is that there's no magic age, I agree. I taught University level English for 10 years; many of the young women (and men) in those classes were, in an emotional sense, still children--in spite of being 18 or 19 years old. But that doesn't erase the difference between a 16 year old child and a 12 year old child. It's significant, and it matters in this case. Again, what's the point of pretending otherwise?

Here's the thing: I don't inhabit some morally relativistic universe where we can judge the rape of a child according to some elastic moral standard where the question of whether she has begun puberty has any relevance whatsoever. A child who has begun puberty isn't suddenly an adult capable of consenting to sex with an older child or an adult. They are just that--a child who has begun puberty.

I really don't want to play the "parent" card here--but some posts in this thread are making it pretty hard not to.

But without ever knowing the full details..how can you condemn said 16 year old child?

[AC]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Forget that. Remember when this went down at Scarlett?
http://www.canada.com/cityguides/cal...09612f&k=41942

I was in his psychology class (the same one the girl was in).

I saw them coming back from lunch once in his car and got yelled at when I suggested something was up...

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Wrong, we are talking about statutory rape. It's an important distinction versus just "rape" because rape suggests a violent, forced event while statutory rape can be between two consenting people like in this case.

Yes the girl is young, but really both of them are kids. I think you are doing a disservice to the truth to make it out like he is some kind of monster (maybe he is but none of us know that) when in fact he was probably just some horny dude who met up with some horny girl.

Two kids had sex. Big whoop.

I never said he was a monster. In fact, I said he was a child--though, in my view, a child with some problems.

Hanging your hat on the word "statutory" in this case to me does a much greater disservice to the truth. It might well be true, but consider this: a 12 year old girl might still be in elementary school. A 16-year old boy will be in high school. Think back to the summer before grade 11. Would you have sex with a girl in the sixth grade (or, in the best case scenario, about to go to grade 7) and not call it rape?

If the answer is no--then fine, I guess. But I live in a different moral universe.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by AC

I was in his psychology class (the same one the girl was in).

I saw them coming back from lunch once in his car and got yelled at when I suggested something was up...

Hmm, I went there, too. Do you happen to be the brother of a Cook that graduated in '03?