You are proceeding to a page containing mature content. Is this OK?

check Yes, show me everything
close No, hide anything sensitive

Lolita Sex Soldier Spared: “She Was Dangerous”

condom-in-mouth-shimapan-schoolgirl-by-raskaru

A 41-year-old soldier who had a sexual relationship with a 13-year-old girl has been spared jail, with the judge blaming the girl for being “precocious,” saying “she made most of the running.”

The 41-year-old veteran, stationed at Sandhurst Military Academy and said to have remained a private for 22 years due to a lack of competence, became acquainted with a 13-year-old girl at the stables where he worked.

The “troubled” girl confided in the man over a period of several weeks, and the pair became friends.

After getting caught drinking alcohol at school, the girl was sent home and subsequently paid a tearful visit to the stables, where she sought comfort with the private, and then accompanied him back to his room at the academy.

She provided a condom and the pair had sex.

The private was subsequently arrested after the girl produced the condom she had kept from the encounter, apparently as a trophy.

The defence claimed the girl was a “sexual time-bomb”:

“She confided in [the defendant]. He would talk to her about her problems and over a two week period they got to know one another.

She was crying and he invited her back to his room to comfort her and one thing led to another. She was a time-bomb waiting to go off. Unfortunately it was the defendant she went off on.”

The soldier pleaded guilty to one count of sexual activity with a child; the judge gave him a suspended one-year prison sentence, along with a ban on teaching any girls under 16.

The judge was uncharacteristically reasonable in her verdict:

“It was clear from the evidence that she was a disturbed girl, that her behaviour was precocious in several respects, that she looked and acted older than her age and she made most of the running.

Whether you knew her age or not, you had the duty as a man in his 40s to make sure she was the legal age.”

The judge went on to concede that being stupid was a good defence for having sex with children:

“She was just short of 14. There are many girls of 14 in this country who are sexually active – this may not be a good thing but it is a fact that has to be recognised.

This was not a breach of trust situation. Although she was vulnerable, you too in a sense, are vulnerable as you are a simple man. What occurred was stupidity rather than malice.”

Via the Daily Mail.

Leave a Reply to viewtifu1 X

All comments must abide by the commenting rules.

148 Comments