Two boys aged 10 and 11 have been convicted of attempted rape based solely on the accusations of an 8-year-old girl, despite the girl withdrawing her claims in court, and there being no physical evidence of any assault. Both children are to become registered sex offenders.
The boys, then both aged 10, were accused by an 8-year-old girl of taking to various locations in their London neighbourhood and raping her. The boys denied the accusations.
The incident came to light when the girl’s mother was told by another child that the boys were hurting the girl – she soon found her daughter with the boys in a nearby field.
When first questioning the girl, police had her tell them how the boys had pulled down her underwear and had their way with her. However, when questioned in court, the girl explicitly denied being raped and said she had lied to her mother about what had happened as she was worried about being a naughty girl and not getting any sweets.
The defence also pointed out that there was “no useful medical evidence, no DNA evidence and no forensic evidence; nothing” available to support the charges, save the girl’s accusations.
The court even made a crude show of attempting to make the proceedings intelligible to the children, with the judge and lawyers abandoning their ludicrous wigs and gowns for the occasion, and the court timetable being rearranged to resemble that of a primary school.
The defence appealed the common sense of the jury, suggesting the incident was nothing more than an innocent childhood game gone awry:
“What this case is about is not a serious crime. It is about children. There is a game called ‘You show me yours and I will show you mine’.
Maybe it went too far, maybe it went to touching, maybe they were doing something they had seen on television, maybe they were playing that age-old game, doctors and nurses.”
Unfortunately, the jury had none, voting 10 to 2 in favour of convicting both boys of two counts each of attempted rape. Sentencing is due in two months, during which time the boys have been released on bail.
They will also become registered sex offenders, although the judge lamely admitted he was “not quite sure” how that would work.
Top 10 Most Followed Seiyuu
Wonder Festival 2012 Winter Wondrous As Ever
Ciel nosurge: “Your Date With Ion = $170″
Nisemonogatari – “Where Did All The Ero Go!?”
Police Hunt Ushijima for “Public Indecency”
Cops Bust Cop in Nude BDSM Club Raid
K-ON! “Causes Keionbu Girl Band Boom”
Vippers vs Vankers: 2ch Targets “Korean Propaganda”
Overflow Delays “Final” Game: “We Are Not Going Bankrupt!”
Ritsu Topless Manga Time – “She Has Boobs After All!”
Top 10 Most Boring Anime of Winter 2012
Behold: The ONACOUNTER
Future Diary Unveils Eye-Popping Scenes of Sex & Guro
K-ON! Pilgrims Invade London
Top 10 Essential Anime Elements
Lolicon Teacher Rapes Pupils 37 Times, Faces 30 Years
Strike Witches Movie Trailer Unveiled
China Menaced by Exploding Coins
TMA Makes “BL” Tiger & Bunny Cosplay AV
Hatsune Miku Takes Over New Chitose Airport
“Post The Highest Level Cosplay Ever!”
“Share The Cutest Cosplay Ever”
“Dolls vs Figures – Which is Best?”
“Why Do Girls Always Have Such Cute Rooms!?”
Ranka Lee Wedding Dress Cosplay by Tomia
Shoko-tan’s Madoka & Ika-chan Cosplay “Excessively Cute”
Guilty Crown Yuzuriha Inori Cosplay by Sasa
IdolMaster G4U: “Who Needs 3D Idols Now?”
Anegasaki Nene Cosplay by Rinami
“I Want To See What The Vipper Girls Wear To Bed!”
British fail...
Stupidity knows no bounds.
Not surprising from the UK.
A country that banned lolicon last month 'cause "Drawings are people too!!"
It always pisses me off how women can fuck up a guys life by lying, and get away with it or receive some kind of lenient sentence. (Lying to a court is a felony, is it not?)
Like that pedo teacher from Florida, Debra Lafave, she got ten years house arrest, had it been a guy, he'd be doing ten to twenty in _prison_.
I doubt that anyone in the U.K. is really worrying about that. Seriously, most police in the U.K. have said that they have OTHER, more important things to worry about than lolicon.
blame is the name of the game, learn the rules and play safe kids...
oh yeah, that shit only works if you're a pedo priest, my bad, what the fuck was I thinking?
no matter where you live, the world's going to hell in a hand-basket...
From what I understand, the boys showed the girl their penises and asked to see her genitals. That is considered a sexual offense and I guess ten can be tried as an adult. Whether it did happen or not is hard to say, as she is eight and they are ten, but I do know children experiment with themselves and others much younger these days.
It's stupid that it is considered a sexual offense, and just shows how DAMNED INSANE the laws are getting, now that they are being made by anti-sex jackasses.
that jury needs to die
i wonder if they can get their criminal records expunged when they become adults...
lol... great judicial system. Good thing I'm not from the UK.
Be glad you are not from Australia too, they are putting people in jain because of anime and comic books
Isn't there a tipping point on on this pedo hysteria? It's been going on for years now and keeps getting worse and worse.
There already has been a turning point, though it hasn't been publicized. More and more people are teaching their children (as I did) that pedosexuality is normal UNLESS the person in question forces or threatens a child into sex.
It's just not well publicized because it would go against the hysteria that the media wishes to whip us into.
we are at the tipping point and everyone here is beginning to balance the scale. Things have finally gotten to the point that regular news reading people have access to news that is not normally reported. I myself am registered. Won't bore you with the story as it is not worth it in light of these childrens plight. Be that as it may I have gone one t ohave a good life and made things work. The real question seems to be are they capable of "Rape" yes indeed they are. Would they in fact do it? Probably not even consider it at that age. If a girl let them play whatever game... doctor, mom and dad or what ever it would only seem to be that she too was interested and at first was just saying things that she thought would get her out of trouble... The real fact is we are and wre created as sexual beings from the beginning ie "go forth and multiply" Then the puritans came along puritans then = fanatics now. Sex is sex. If you force someone that is wrong and should be. The law is so damn ambiguous and uncaring that they? it? Has to set guidelines, ages and punishments. In the US it is basically illegal to have sex until ou are 18, in mexico 12, in the Phillipines 14 yet we all know that we at some point in our early lives were "turned on" by a magazine that we were told we should not look at yet wanted to to "find out" Not It ALL is criminalized and children are going to have their lives ruined just because they were curious and in actuality being just what they were born to be... Go figure and get off your ass and start to change things and bring some sense back into the entire world.
I agree with Anonymous. It reminds me of this:
(worth the read, but due to news like this and my lack of trust in the justice-system, I recommend a proxy)
http://mirror.wikileaks.info/wiki/An_insight_into_child_porn/
all the more evidence we need a law that you have to have actual fucking evidence to be convicted of a crime
12 idiot sheep making a dumbass verdict. Why am I not surprised?
The fact that it happened to be a British jury is only consequential. This could've happened in the United States of Absurdia or Canna-duh.
This should've been a hung jury..... all ten of those dumbfucks who voted guilty swinging from a noose.
The jury must have been paid off, because I can't see how in an adults mind would do this. These kids are smarter then the jury.
/facepalm
@Comment by Kitsune9Tails
@01:32 26/05/2010
It may take a unanimous decision to convict for rape, but this was attempted rape, all they needed was an attempted unanimous decision.
XKCD: Have you noticed we already reached "the future"?
And I think it's pathetic. To a hilarious degree, from my morbid view. Doesn't help that it's getting genuinely scary to be a male in more and more countries.
I consider this primarily a by product (as in toxic waste) of "Justice by Points".
That is when a society gets too huge and bureaucratic that officials, from petty to major, make or break their careers by how many "Points" they score. This turns justice into a perversion because they tend to go, by a twisted 'evolution', to the "Easy" scores regardless of wether or not it'll do true justice or even true "Guilt or Innocence" save by technicality.
It also makes them more likely to ignore the real, dangerous criminals until ordered by a superior to go after them. Though there are plenty of "Stupid" criminals there are lots who read up on rights, options, practice alibis and proper things to say (I want a lawyer!) when da fuzz grab 'em. Thus, the criminals that do the most damage tend to be ignored because they can "Fail" at prosecuting them easily and that's "Negative Points", especially if they drag a trial out a long, long time.
Thus, this is why we have teen girls who become both "CP producer" and "Victim" but tried as an "Adult" for crimes they commit against themselves.
In short the Prosecutors knew full well they were doing an injustice and it's almost totally unlikely the boys would have or were even trying to "RaeP the Loli", they just wanted "Points" to keep their jobs and cover for when, say (for absurdity's sake) they got ordered to prosecute someone smuggling in real "Child sex slaves" but that guy could buy and sell them, have them "Iced" and far worse had the "Pittman and Bullock" law firm at his side.
Another element is the "Moral Panic" one that can be used and abused, both for social control and for distraction of official corruption. A good article is found by Googling "Loompanics the Satan Sellers" about moral panic over "Devil Worship" in the 80s to the 90s and then makes a tie to a cover up of the S&L scandal.
I just want you to know I want to print out your comment and hang it on my wall
Thanks!
Feel free!
And yet its the common people/the jury who give it a 10 to 2 in favour of conviction. The system is only doing their job. A bit of problem but still doing their job within the laws.
Note that the girl only chances her testimony in court.
Also you call this easy to convict? Base on the info given here, If the prosecutor is of any intelligent, the case wont have brought up. Any yet it have to be according to the law.
So in the end, it either is the defense really so bad or there is just something wrong about moral of the jury.
I vote for Insufficient information to take side. I'm trying not to think that human intelligent and common sense have gone so low so off.
Back when I was young, the girl's father/big brother would have just kicked the boys in the nuts and they would have said: Damn, we're sorry, asshole!
And that would have been it.
No, that wouldn't have happened either. The fathers/big brother would have realized that the girl probably instigated the sexual contact at first, then started whining when it 'made her uncomfortable'.
Yeah, the boys should have stopped them, but since most children in general are NOT taught that you are supposed to stop touching someone after they tell you to stop, I give them a little leeway.
I swear, Starscream has a higher success rate than the legal system. And I'm talking G1, screws up every episode Starscream.
this makes me so inconceivably angry
Fucked up. Those kids' lives are ruined forever, pretty much.
In Great Britain, can you appeal a verdict based on the fact that the jury were imbeciles?
If anything, this whole thing is gonna be worse for all involved. I hope that stupid, stupid girl and her mother never forget what they've done. Those boys are gonna have to carry it for the rest of their lives.
Unbelievable! We're thrown back into the Victorian Age again.
Kind of like the Salem Witch trials. There's an accusation and then everyone believes it's true. Back then, they were burned at the stake or crushed with boulders. They might as well have done the same to those boys, because when you're branded a "sex offender", your life is over. Nobody will employ you, neighbors will run you out of town, your life is constantly threatened. What a mess.
Wait for 2012 and the world will end.
And if nothing happens will you kill yourself? I hope so
Any person with the slighlest bit of common sense would know that for a kid to admit she was lying even though the mother (the one pressing the charges) surely instructed her to keep her tell, she must be fucking serious and acknowledged that keeping that tall tale would hurt others badly. Sad times when the person with most common sense in a court room is a 10 years old girl.
serves them right for being 10 years old!
2 words.
Minority Report.
DO IT NAO D:
I hate you, government.
They could still appeal their case.
And it's very rare for cases to be overturned, especially in Great Britain.
Sankaku changes the truth by far;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7720508/Girl-eight-lied-to-mother-about-rape-to-get-sweeties.html
How so?
I did it too back then!!!!
There are a hell load of misinterpretations being made by readers. First, the charge is ATTEMPTED RAPE, so therefore people who say that she's a virgin therefore the boys are innocent obviously don't read english. There WILL NOT be any evidence to show she has been raped, and NOBODY is saying that she was. Second, the fact that she admits she lied only implies that she lied about being raped, not that an attempt at rape was not made. Third, readers aren't giving credit to the courts in Britain being consistent and credible in judgement, which is more than I can say about readers' judgement.
Attempted rape or not, if the girl was TRULY assaulted, she would have some sort of physical injuries on her.
Secondly, in the case where THE VICTIM HERSELF says that she lied, attempted rape is pretty fucking much BUSTED as a charge!
The fact is that this is a GROSS miscarriage of justice here, and she didn't just lie about being raped.... she said she lied about ANYTHING HAPPENING AT ALL!
The jury should just brand their own children as sex offenders. Save us the trouble. They all should also stop feeding them sweets. Lying 8 year old woman. They grow up too fast.
Actually, most SANELY raised females wouldn't lie about something like this, because they would have been raised with the idea that if they lie about this, they are going to prison!
That is what I told my daughters, that if they LIED to me about being raped even once.... they weren't my daughters anymore, I was DONE with them for life!
If you visit that bbc site and read the comments - that's fucking scary. General impression is that significant majority are happy of that "verdict" ...
If i where them i'd just go join the yakuza or something since their pretty much fucked in public, so underground is the way to go
Voting _10-2_ to convict??? You don't have to have a freaking UNANIMOUS decision by a jury to convict someone of rape in the UK???
Wow. I don't wanna hear any more dumbasses bitch and moan about the US being all screwed up. The UK has done its part and more to show the world that it holds the trump card in WTF.
Actually, this is allowed even in the United States, though it is supposed to be ONLY THE DEFENSE that can opt for a 'non-unanimous judgment'.
That would get in the way to saving the country from male predators.
This is just fricken ridiculous. Come the feth on, Britain. You're more intelligent than this...
I was wondering when this story would appear on sancom
HOW could that anal jury give these kids a guilty verdict when the case was so bogus?
And the above story did state if the boys gave any defending statements.
Now think how fucked up these boys' lives are gonna be because some bitch was mad at them for bullying her daughter.
KIDS WILL BE KIDS!!!!
Next thing you know babies will be convicted of rape and incest because of birth. Soon they will have to hire people to take care of all of the babies in prison.
Yes, this has already been done. It's called the public school system.
loli gang..
although the judge lamely admitted he was “not quite sure” how that would work.
THATS NOT LAME
THATS STUPIDITY
lol. i see one of the kids is black. im sure he did it.
Thanks for posting my news.. ;D
So the girl said she was raped, then the boys said they didn't do such a thing, then the girl was lying and told them that she was not raped at all.
And all that just because of some goddamn sweets?!
Sweets are serious business. Now excuse me, I have to drive around playgrounds with my candy van. ^_^
Didn't you used to drive an icecream truck before Schrobby?
Sounds like she was parroting the molestation crap on the news, and ya kids don't equate things well she seriously could have seen sweets after dinner as worthy of saying these things.
True. This isn't the first time that I have personally heard of something like this happening.... it isn't even the 50th time!
Children making accusations like this is SO FREAKING COMMON that it is horrendous.... and people wonder why I am SKEPTICAL of allegations like this?
I think I've just explained why well enough.
Good job, justice system. You have now successfully screwed up the future of two young boys who haven't done anything wrong.
Next thing you know, you have babies charged with sexual harassment for staring at other women's breasts when they're hungry.
Sometimes, the outcomes of trials just makes you wonder what the jurymen are smoking...
We don't know if they haven't done anything wrong, or at least not any better than the jurymen. The lack of evidence does not presume the lack of guilt.
Not that the jury should go ahead and prosecute people just because they think they are wrong. But that's the "will of the people" for you - there is no such thing as "impartial".
"The lack of evidence does not presume the lack of guilt."
Actually, it does.
well... in criminal law, it's supposed to be "guilty beyond reasonable doubt". thus the hoo-ha.
Not in the world of femnazis and manginas.
@basilio
Give the case to a good enough lawyer, and sadly they'd be able to pull it off. The justice system these days isn't about "proof", it's about whether one lawyer can come up with a believable story, and then sell it to the majority of, or entirety of , 12 idiots.
And that is why I loathe lawyers.
You mean the amount of money paid.
Yeah, the world is becoming too "good". It should all be on balance. If there is no crimes, smaller and smaller crimes will be more "horrible". Soon, if someone would steal candy from a shop. 10 years of prison and registered as "Candy thief" and ones life is doomed for eternity.
Been Following this story on the normal news. when I heard the "she was worried about being a naughty girl and not getting any sweets." part I thought this whole thing was over...damn stupid Courts.
The moral of the story is not to hire those useless defense lawyers, if ever someone accuse you of a crime. It shouldn't be difficult to secure an acquittal based on a lack of evidence.
I really wonder how the defense team screwed up so badly. Did the boys' parents hire some newbie fresh out of college?
Accusing the jury of not having common sense is just stupid. A 10 - 2 ruling means just about the entire jury is not convinced of the boys' innocence. If you can only convince 2 people out of 12 random people of your innocence in a your-word-vs-his-word case, the problem is not with those 12 random people.
They should have hired Phoenix Wright. Nuff said.
This is why I would like to see professional jurors, with legal training. This should never have made it to the jury decision any way the judge should have tossed it for "lack of evidence", someone's say-so is not "evidence"
Professional jurors would be MORE likely to do things like this, not less.
Professional jurors would be super bias, paid off, and a plethora of other things.
Unlike normal jurors who are super biased, uninformed, often paid off and a plethora of other things? Also the professional Jurors would clearly be setting themselves into a pretty hard job, one which requires complete social seclusion for prolonged periods, this is something required for any good jury, and something that just isn't found in a none professional system.
I hate to be honest but '12 random people' means 12 people from the same country on the voting register, the general views of the country, and the media will sway, and more than that those who have no faith in the justice system are likely to not vote because they'll have no faith in the democratic system either. Choosing '12 random people' is not a random process and creates a group of like minded people no matter what system you use to choose them. The problem of course may lie in the barrister, but I pin more blame on the socially accepted, and media fed, hysteria particularly towards the sexuality of children. Our judicial system is only fucked because our society is. Ie. welcome to the UK, have a nice conviction.
There are also various nasty things said about the kind of people stupid enough not to be able to get out of jury duty, or heaven forfend, actually eager to participate in rendering a verdict.
"based solely on the accusations of an 8-year-old girl, despite the girl withdrawing her claims in court, and there being no physical evidence of any assault."
You seem to be disregarding the fact that the girl's mother was told by another little girl that the boys were "hurting" her, which was how she came upon the scene. Also, I don't know if it was in another article, but nothing in your link suggested that there was no physical evidence, and while I don't have the patience to rummage through British news, that article suggests that there was medical evidence of attempted rape. And while the girl did say she lied in court, everything she said before being brought into the big show was consistent, and anyone can tell you that little kids can crack under pressure in that kind of setting and do unusual things. I don't know what she said in court, but I do know attorneys can confuse even adults into saying some dumb things.
I really wish your readers would read your source material before they come to your conclusions, this reminds me of your commentary on those British guys that beat a thief until he was brain damaged as he tried to escape.
Oh, you know the joke.
Child walks in on daddy banging mommy and child asks, "Daddy, are you hurting mommy?"
You can't expect a kid to be able to instantly identify sex.
These articles are usually based on a number of sources with a single primary source. The defence explicitly claimed there was no medical evidence of rape - you'll have to look it up or take our word for it, like the rest of everything you read.
@19:50 I read it and the article said no evidence just her say so and what seemed to be possible bullying.
Saying she lied in court should be "reasonable doubt"
My god, what is this world coming to? 10 Year old sex offenders? Damn anal jury probably have sticks shoved up their asses daily. What's next? Toddler rapists?
(That is rapists that are toddlers, not rapists who rape toddlers)
Ugh. This type of thing doesn't get better. Only worse. The fact that they can convict little kids on circumstantial evidence means I have no chance at all if I'm ever accused. Suddenly sticking with 2D seems like a smart idea...
No one should be convicted on solely circumstantial evidence like this. The problem is that too many people feel that circumstantial evidence is enough evidence to declare that a crime has taken place, when it is not.
Given how fucked up this sort of thing is getting, even 2D will be off-limits O_O
I agree. If we are living in a age now where people can get convicted of Sex crimes just by pointing fingers. Without a rape kit even coming up positive we are all gonna be one sex depraved culture. Stock up on lube gentlemen it's gonna be a miserable world in the near future.
At least until we start fighting back against this crap, like some people are around the world.
Yes! We must unite to change the social climate!
You have no idea how true I think it is. It should take time to trust a girl won't accuse you of rape even when severely pissed off.
Note however, that you still risk criminal charge if you possess any material featuring anime characters that look like children in suggestive-or-more situations.
The police doesn't have enough resources to go after loli enthusiasts. I've only heard of one case so far.
If loli material becomes a big enough scapegoat for the politicions, they will push for more taxes to push towards hunting loli related effects. Because the brainwashed "moms" of the world are nothing but retarded sheep. So in the end the taxes will pass because society found new witches to burn.
We should stand up and start burning politicions and feminists. See how they like it.
MOST moms you've met? Are you kidding me?! Where do you live?!
I'm assuming you're trying to say those moms didn't know what those relationships they had were at the time they had them and not that they didn't know that those adults with whom they had said relationships were adults. Is this correct?
That said, I have to ask exactly what age would they say warrants application of the term "children"? Better yet, at exactly what age did they have their relationships? How can you have that kind of relationship at an age when you don't even know what that sort of thing is without sustaining psychological repercussions of some sort?
Actually, most moms that I met have said that they had sexual relationships with adults as children (thought they didn't know that was what they were at the time) and it didn't harm them, therefore they are getting pissed off at this anti-pedosexual bullhockey.
Actually, not that smart. Sure, 2D can't testify in court, but they'll put you to jail anyway. Even if they don't find your 2d girls at all. Just because you don't look trustworthy.
Better stock up on weapons and safe-houses.
My mother made me fondle and suckle on her breasts when I was an infant. Can I sue her?
Signs point to yes!
go get your money
Your mom made you fondle and suck on her breasts when you were a toddler? That is some disturbing shit! Throw her into the dungeons!
But did the incident happen within 5 years of this report? If not, then we'll be forced to drop it. But that doesn't matter, we'll watch you every second of your life so we can put you in jail for something stupid cause we're bored.
This is clearly not the mothers fault! The infant clearly forced himself onto her. The infant should be thrown into prison, or at least registered as a sex offender. It was rape, without a doubt.