• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Girl, 11, ‘consented’ to sex with man, 28, French prosecutors declare

hidys

Member
Jan 30, 2013
3,690
0
365
Does this happen often in France or is this just a one off?

Because how the fuck does this happen????
 

Mael

Member
Oct 23, 2009
23,428
0
0
France
Found the actual law.
It did many things right such as recognize Crime against humanity and other stuff.
Rape, on the other hand, is really clearly defined and as such the case in question doesn't fall under it.
It's a massive oversight and should have been fixed when the text was written.
 

Aske

Member
Jul 25, 2006
5,801
0
0
Canada
Why?

Sex with sub-15 is illegal, easy to prove. Rape in legal terms can lay to discussions.

Noone said if was a lesser crime than a rape, and everyone will consider it that way. It just legal wording...

The legal wording literally says it was a lesser crime than rape; that's the problem.

France (and India) fail to recognise the psychological realities of sexual assault, and place the onus on the victim to physically resist. This is absurd and disgusting.
 

kmax

Member
Feb 25, 2013
6,388
2
0
Do people even bother to read the article?



That's exactly what he is being charged with, sex with someone who is unable to consent, ie. under the age of 15. It's the definition of statutory rape, they just don't call it statutory rape.

The problem is that the girl says she was raped, but the prosecution isn't chasing additional rape charges against the offender because 'she didn't struggle enough' seems to be some sort of unusual reason. That's the problem.

The guy isn't walking free, unlike another case that just passed through India where a Bollywood director who was initially charged with the rape of a US post grad student but won on appeal because the judge deemed her merely saying 'no' and not forcibly struggling enough suggested consent.

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world...nviction/ar-AAsvKIz?li=AA5249&ocid=spartanntp
The guy got the lesser charge because they decided to go with the fact that the child "consented to sex". It's utterly ridiculous. This is a child sex abuse, and should be treated as such. If the law doesn't reflect that, it needs to be revised as soon as possible.

The problem here is that usually, statutory rape is punished much less severly in comparison to rape since the law sees that statutory rape usually involves willingness by the victim. Unlike rape, statutory rape can be charged as misdemeanor or a felony.

Rape however, is punished more harshly since it is always committed against the will of the victim.

They're ultimately arguing that a 11 year old child consented to sex which is utterly preposterous. She's 11 years old.
 

Prost

Member
Jul 2, 2005
5,568
1
1,275
How didn't they even think of going with kidnapping or sequestration that carries 20 years though?

You could argue anything by just victim blaming. The 11 year old "consented" to walk away with the stranger with candy, your honor!
 

Audioboxer

Member
May 11, 2010
21,939
11
1,030
UK
The legal wording literally says it was a lesser crime than rape; that's the problem.

France (and India) fail to recognise the psychological realities of sexual assault, and place the onus on the victim to physically resist. This is absurd and disgusting.

Precisely.

It's entirely reasonable that while many will struggle physically and fear for their lives, others may well be submissive as an extension of fear/being paralyzed. They're basically saying you better fight back and be prepared to get the shit kicked out of you AND be raped, or else the law says it's not rape. Totally fucked up.

Not to mention an 11-year-old girl is totally going to attempt to fight off a 28-year-old man. Sure thing.
 

Mohonky

Member
Jan 19, 2007
12,051
1,938
1,585
The guy got the lesser charge because they decided to go with the fact that the child "consented to sex". It's utterly ridiculous. This is a child sex abuse, and should be treated as such. If the law doesn't reflect that, it needs to be revised as soon as possible.

The problem here is that usually, statutory rape is punished much less severly in comparison to rape since the law sees that statutory rape usually involves willingness by the victim. Unlike rape, statutory rape can be charged as misdemeanor or a felony.

Rape however, is punished more harshly since it is always committed against the will of the victim.

They're ultimately arguing that a 11 year old child consented to sex which is utterly preptosterous. She's 11 years old.

Exactly, which is statutory rape and thats what they are charging him with, but why they havent also gone in on rape charges isnt clear. There are obviously details not being published as to why, otherwise the prosecution wouldnt even hessitate.

Many posters in this thread however seem to think the guy isnt being charged, at all. Which isnt the case.
 

Mael

Member
Oct 23, 2009
23,428
0
0
France
You could argue anything by just victim blaming. The 11 year old "consented" to walk away with the stranger with candy, your honor!

Well it's the role of the lawyer to do just that, the judge can then ask the lawyer to go fuck herself/himself.

Found the actual part of the law from way back then :
Law #92-684 of July 22 1992 said:


NOT googletranslate because I'm a lazy bum but it's so bad I'm doing it myself said:
Art. 227-25. - The fact that an adult, without using violence, contrainst, treat or surprise assault sexually a person under 15 is punished by 2years in prison and a fine of 200 000 francs

WTF is this shit law!

Exactly, which is statutory rape and thats what they are charging him with, but why they havent also gone in on rape charges isnt clear. There are obviously details not being published as to why, otherwise the prosecution wouldnt even hessitate.

Many posters in this thread however seem to think the guy isnt being charged, at all. Which isnt the case.
They're following the law written in 1994, that apparently hasn't been changed since then.
And nope, it ain't statutory rape, it's sexual assault on a minor. see this current post you're reading.
 

Koren

Member
Mar 11, 2005
9,345
1
0
It's almost certainly a lesser crime than if they were able to prove one of the required elements under the law for rape. I'd be stunned if it wasn't and would wonder why the law even makes the distinction it does if so.
That's indeed the case, after checking, and it's indeed fucked-up. They should update it, there's no reason to be considered a lesser crime, I'd say.
 

Golden_Pigeon

Banned
Feb 5, 2016
3,150
1
0
This is really spooky. I admit i didn't knew about this law.

I mean, kids by definition just follow what adults tell them to do. They trust adults. This is just so disgusting and wrong on so many levels. It's like removing a special layer of protection to the category of people who need it the most.

2 years in jail is nothing in the french law. It's not a lot much that what you can get for smoking marihuana (1 year). If you grow cannabis and give it some to your relatives, you can get up to 5 years of jail.

So yeah, you can rape little girls but you better don't advertise cannabis or have some pot ! I'm glad i left this crazy country.
 

Koren

Member
Mar 11, 2005
9,345
1
0
Well it's the role of the lawyer to do just that, the judge can then ask the lawyer to go fuck herself/himself.

Found the actual part of the law from way back then :




WTF is this shit law!


They're following the law written in 1994, that apparently hasn't been changed since then.
And nope, it ain't statutory rape, it's sexual assault on a minor. see this current post you're reading.
It's more jail time than what you quote, but still most probably not enough in this case.
 

Mohonky

Member
Jan 19, 2007
12,051
1,938
1,585
They're following the law written in 1994, that apparently hasn't been changed since then.
And nope, it ain't statutory rape, it's sexual assault on a minor. see this current post you're reading.

I should say while it's not statutory rape, it's along the same lines in that they are prosecuting the guy for sex with a minor.

The 'rape' part is the more serious offense, but as you pointed out, as the law is written can't necessarily be applied, so the prosecution can only apply the law as it's written.

They clearly need to reword the law and the sentence updated to be applicable, but at this time it simply doesn't exist; but again I'm not pointing out that, merely that some people seem to think France doesn't have any form of laws protecting minors from sexual misconduct as they clearly do, it's just not integrated in the same way as what many of us would recognise it to be.
 

afroguy10

Member
Jun 24, 2013
395
0
0
I remember when a UK teacher ran off to France with his 15 student lover and the French police wouldn't do shit. They couldn't see where the problem was.

I might actually remember that case, wasn't it in the news around 10 years ago, crazy stuff.

It seem's odd but it's only a year younger than us to be fair. Spains is pretty weird though, I'm sure theirs is 13.
 

Kain-Nosgoth

Member
Jun 10, 2016
2,419
1
0
Wow... i'm pretty open about the age of consent, but this??? WTF! Beside in france the age of consent is 15, how is this still considered consent?

I don't understand, that's fucked up!
 

Mael

Member
Oct 23, 2009
23,428
0
0
France
I should say while it's not statutory rape, it's along the same lines in that they are prosecuting the guy for sex with a minor.

The 'rape' part is the more serious offense, but as you pointed out, as the law is written can't necessarily be applied, so the prosecution can only apply the law as it's written.

They clearly need to reword the law and the sentence updated to be applicable, but at this time it simply doesn't exist; but again I'm not pointing out that, merely that some people seem to think France doesn't have any form of laws protecting minors from sexual misconduct as they clearly do, it's just not integrated in the same way as what many of us would recognise it to be.

Actually the way the law is worded, the consentment is implied and used in the argument of the defense.
There is no law that explicitly punish the act as a rape, it's pretty clear.
If there was it would be classified under rape and we wouldn't have this thread.
As it is written, threatening to commit a crime with an order to fulfill a condition is more harshly punished.
Rape as it's codified was incurring a punishment between 15 years and up.
That they're going to throw the guy for less than 10 years is telling in the priorities and the seriousness of the offense.

It's more jail time than what you quote, but still most probably not enough in this case.
I'm actually reading from the law as it was established.
Basically I went from Code Civil => law as it was signed by the president then.
It might have had adjustments since then.
 

ShemhazaiX

Member
Aug 16, 2014
2,735
0
0
I mean, the dude is still getting charged with child abuse. They just don't conflate rape and pedophilia in France. It's literally a matter of semantics, no?

edit:

Also worth noting that "Age of Consent" is the legal phrase in English, and not necessarily what they call it in France.
 

Mael

Member
Oct 23, 2009
23,428
0
0
France
I mean, the dude is still getting charged with child abuse. They just don't conflate rape and pedophilia in France. It's literally a matter of semantics, no?

Also the difference between more than 15 years and up to 5 years...
Yep, semantics.
 

Sunster

Member
Aug 28, 2015
4,219
5
0
The legal wording literally says it was a lesser crime than rape; that's the problem.

France (and India) fail to recognise the psychological realities of sexual assault, and place the onus on the victim to physically resist. This is absurd and disgusting.

it doesn't take someone with a law degree to know that children may not do a lot of physical resisting to an adult. like, anyone who has ever interacted with a kid should know that.
 

ShemhazaiX

Member
Aug 16, 2014
2,735
0
0
Also the difference between more than 15 years and up to 5 years...
Yep, semantics.

So you're saying that someone who uses violence to sexually abuse a child deserves the same jail time as someone who doesn't? Should he have more than five years? Yes. But should he get as much jail time as someone who threatened / used violence to get their way? Of course not.
 

Kickz

Member
Jul 24, 2010
7,250
1
595
:-(


Plenty of Hollywood elite buying new penthouses in France for sure..😕
 

Mael

Member
Oct 23, 2009
23,428
0
0
France
So you're saying that someone who uses violence to sexually abuse a child deserves the same jail time as someone who doesn't? Should he have more than five years? Yes. But should he get as much jail time as someone who threatened / used violence to get their way? Of course not.

This case is barely sexual abuse already, it's being tried as sexual contact with children with consent.
If we're talking about how it should be, rape on minors should carry a heavy sentence and any use of violence or coertion should be used as aggravating circumstances which would make the sentence even longer.
That this case could end up with the guy being in the street in something like 2020 is all kinds of fucked up (let alone the fact that he probably won't have to get any therapy to make him a functioning part of society).
 

SENPAIatLARGE

Banned
Nov 8, 2015
2,422
1
0
So you're saying that someone who uses violence to sexually abuse a child deserves the same jail time as someone who doesn't? Should he have more than five years? Yes. But should he get as much jail time as someone who threatened / used violence to get their way? Of course not.
Yes. 100% Yes. Pedophiles that prey on the young all deserve 15 or more years.
 

Ketkat

Member
Jun 1, 2014
734
0
280
So you're saying that someone who uses violence to sexually abuse a child deserves the same jail time as someone who doesn't? Should he have more than five years? Yes. But should he get as much jail time as someone who threatened / used violence to get their way? Of course not.

Sexual abuse IS violence whether they hit the child during it or not.
 

shadowkat

Unconfirmed Member
Mar 28, 2013
11,060
0
0
So you're saying that someone who uses violence to sexually abuse a child deserves the same jail time as someone who doesn't? Should he have more than five years? Yes. But should he get as much jail time as someone who threatened / used violence to get their way? Of course not.
Yes, absolutely yes.
 

Mael

Member
Oct 23, 2009
23,428
0
0
France
This.

If they also physically hit the child, charge them with aggravated assault in addition to rape, if you must insist on making a distinction. But there's no such thing as a "non-violent" rape, FFS

Ironically enough, French laws agree with you.
That this definition hasn't been changed in 20 years is all kinds of fucked up.
 

tonysidaway

Member
Sep 4, 2014
2,503
0
425
Sunderland
plus.google.com
I'm all in favor of a more nuanced view on statutory laws, but this is so obviously fucking egregious that I cannot fathom how anyone defended it with a straight face.

It's shocking, but it won't surprise anybody who understands how statute law works.

First, you have to understand that it's not the court, not the defence counsel, but the prosecution making the decision. They have to find the most serious crime with which the defendant is likely to be convicted in a French criminal court. The French court system, on its part, is bound by the letter of statute law. Where no statute exists to apply even in the most egregious case, they cannot make up law on their own initiative.This was therefore a failure of draughting by the French legislative process.

Similar failures have occurred in common law systems, as for instance in the many UK cases where husbands could not be reliably convicted of raping their unconsenting wives until in the case R v R (1991) the House of Lords in its then role as ultimate court of appeal essentially altered common law and determined that (after centuries of the contrary understanding) there was no presumption of conjugal rights.
 

DiipuSurotu

Banned
May 31, 2010
23,399
7
0
www.youtube.com
Looks like the rapist's attorney is using typical rape culture arguments

Si le prévenu reconnaît les faits, il affirme qu'il tenait la jeune fille, déjà pubère, pour plus âgée qu'elle n'en avait l'air. Du côté de la partie civile, on soutient que lors de leur deuxième rencontre, quelques jours avant les faits, elle lui avait montré un carnet scolaire où figurait son âge.

Pour se défendre, l'accusé s'est justifié, par la voix de son avocat qui a avancé que la plaignante n'avait « pas froid aux yeux » puisqu'elle avait envoyé des photos d'elle « dénudée » à des inconnus via un tchat.

Translation said:
Although the accused acknowledges the facts, he claims that he thought the already-pubescent girl was older than she looked. The plaintiff, however, claims that during their second encounter, a few days before the facts, she had showed him a parent-teacher communication log which mentioned her age.

For his defense, the accused stated, via his attorney, that the plaintiff is not "demure" since he had sent pictures of herself "undressed" to strangers on a chat.
 

vordhosbn

Banned
Nov 22, 2009
1,507
0
0
How can the same country that doesn't allow paternity testing do this? I thought they were extreme progressives.
 

tonysidaway

Member
Sep 4, 2014
2,503
0
425
Sunderland
plus.google.com
First of all what the fuck.



Second of all come on France. I get it that the culture is different and all but 15 year olds are not even close to being adults.

I know a year may make a big difference, but in my European country (UK) the age of consent is 16. In Germany the age of consent is 14, and it is far from being the only European country with that age of consent.
 

BajiBoxer

Banned
Dec 5, 2007
4,612
0
0
Columbus, Ohio
I know a year may make a big difference, but in my European country (UK) the age of consent is 16. In Germany the age of consent is 14, and it is far from being the only European country with that age of consent.

I'm pretty sute it varies between 14 and 17 from state to state here in the U.S. too, but I'm not sure if there's a federal law that overrides that, or if every state has a range (like 16, but only consent if the other person is 3 years older or less, for example). Never was something I had to take into account, lol.
 

THE GUY

Banned
Jun 10, 2017
243
0
0
France has always been glamorized way too much in media. Place is kind of a crapheap. Frankly, we still have a long way to go in general in the West. We're just too busy punching down on others and ignoring our own problems a lot of the time.