Our thanks to Francis for this. The woman didn’t go to jail, although the boy she sexually abused was 13. Wow, how lucky was she? No, hold on. Female sex offenders rarely serve prison sentences, while male sex offenders invariably do. It’s almost as if there’s a gender bias here somewhere…
From the article:
Judge Karen Holt, sitting at Amersham Crown Court, said: ‘You were trusted to be the babysitter. You clearly knew what you were doing was wrong. [Don’t worry sweetie, I’m going to give it some blah, blah, blah, pretend I give a flying f***, then you’ll walk free as if you’d never sexually abused a 13-year-old boy.]
‘I don’t have a victim impact statement [Note to judge: Why not? Don’t you care, because the victim was a 13-year-old boy, not a 13-year-old girl? Surely you should have insisted on a victim impact statement before sentencing the woman whom sexually abused him?] but there is reference in the papers I have read to [the boy] becoming withdrawn after this happening.
‘I have listened very carefully to everything said on your behalf – I don’t find this an easy case.
‘The law reflects the seriousness of this abuse of trust on a child so young. As far as you are concerned, it is right I take into account the background – you have a sad background. You have not got into trouble despite your poor parenting.
‘Bearing in mind your age and lack of previous convictions, your case doesn’t meet the criteria for any form of imprisonment for public protection.
‘A custodial sentence is appropriate. I have spent some time, bearing in mind all the circumstances, on whether that has to be an immediate custodial sentence. I am just about persuaded I don’t need to send you to prison today.’
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
Mark,you’ve got a point. But it is important to understand that the judges,like the rest of our western society, still have not re-adjusted to the new situation on the ground. We still treat women as if they were the innocent housewives, who happily and loyally stayed at home raising kids,cooking and taking care of their husbands and households. Who did not participate in the professional world and were thus accorded an ‘above the game’ status and treatment. But it is important to emphasize that they now are very much a part of the game and as such,do no longer deserve the kind of privileged treatment they were accorded in the old days. This is the main reason today’s society is totally biased against men and accoreded the old Victorian,privileged treatment to women.
Today’s women simply and clearly do not deserve to be treated in that type of fashion. The rules of the game had completely changed. today’s women are totally different ‘species’ from the old Victorian housewives. They now compete against men to the best of their ability,and if that does not do it,with help of unfair laws,quotas and clauses. Criminalizing the natural behavior of men is a by-product of that. Therefore,if we want a fair treatment and a just society today,we must stop according women the privileged treatment of yesteryears,at least in the professional world.
It is imperative for men to realize this !
Someone needs to start arresting judges for Treason.
I said this before,I’ll say it again.
It is not surprising at all. Women realize that they can get away with all sorts of criminal activities,because the current society is skewed towards them. A product of men’s chivalry
-a leftover from Victorian times transplanted into a different,unfitting era-
A little advice to men: please do not apply chivalrous behaviour towards women in the professional world. It does not belong there. If you are unable to separate The Vicrtorian era from the realities of today’s world,do it in your private life only.It no longer belongs there either,but will do much less damage to men’s standing in today’s society that way.