You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

1
4

[–] PewterKey 1 point 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

I'm just curious how they could possibly justify this without pointing out the insanity of the situation. Officially "the girl wasn’t forced into the sexual act or overcome by fear" is basically proof of grooming. It's literally saying that migrants are legally allowed to groom children for sex and it will never be rape. How is it reasonable to say a 10 year old is a rational actor?

0
2

[–] Mathurin1911 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

It would be saying that if they didn't convict him of anything. But they did convict him of sexual abuse. I can't fault them for saying 'no force, no fear, no rape' Indeed I wish they would admit that more often. Though I agree the sentence is very low for the crime.