I dont really know what to say about this one. I THINK (though bells may correct me) that charge means he is charged with stat rape not Rape. Working under that assumption i belive under victorian laws this wouldnt even be a crime. When will this country have universal sex laws?
but asgaurd they do have laws and the law states CLEARLY that you cannot have sex until you are a certain age, the laws are there to prtect girls and boys.
LA, this isnt really a problem in this paticular case (because i cant really see a 14 year old driving across borders) but if we take a hypothetical for a min a 16 year old and a 20 year old have a relationship in bordertown (on the border between SA and vic). if they have sex right on the border and in the process there car rolls out of SA slightly across into SA the 20 year old has comited a crime. Thats how silly it is to have non nationally consitant conent laws Now oviously this is a rare situation but in australia the population is quite mobile and you can assume your safe by one state and a sex criminal in another
In my world "sexually attacking" means rape. The story didn't meantion consensual sex at all...Looks clear rape to me...
IF it was consensual how come it's the guy that's being charged? They are both underage so they have both committed the same crime.:shrug:
anti-flag as i said ever herd of statitory rape? its not called statitory rape in australia (i cant belive you dont know this), its called "unlawful penitration of a child under ..." Of course so are the pediophilia laws but thats beside the point . I dont KNOW what the laws are in WA (that is where kathrin is isnt it?) but just from reading the charges no they cant have both commited the same crime. He was charged with sexual penitration of a child under 13, he WAS 13 so she didnt comit the same crime. As i said in victoria the law says from 10 to 16 if your within 2 years of eachother then you are not comiting a crime. In SA however the law says that ANY sexual penitration before 18 is against the law so both the older and younger would have been charged. I honestly dont see how the ability to concent to sexual activity can possably change from one state to another
"One Size Fits All!" The motto of the authoritarian. It doesn't work with clothes and it doesn't work with laws. That, in a nutshell, is what's wrong with todays' too-big-for-their-britches governments. If prepubescent children are out there having consensual sex (in significant numbers, not merely lurid tabloid tales) then someone needs to have a heart-to-heart talk with their stupid bloody PARENTS!
