Friday, May 09, 2008

Judge: What's This 'Age of Consent' Thing I Keep Hearing About ?

Actually, I can see a certain logic in this story. After all, judges spend so long making up new laws, it stands to reason they have to make room by throwing out some of the old ones. Still - as ever - you have to note the sheer weirdness of liberals electing child molesters as their latest baby seals. Apparently, they'll do anything for 'for the children' except jail perverts who prey on kids.
A paedophile who molested an 11-year-old girl escaped jail yesterday when a judge ruled the victim had "welcomed" his advances.

Judge Robert Atherton triggered outrage when he told Manchester Crown Court the child had invited Jon Dixon's attack as she had a "sexual awareness" that would make someone twice her age blush.
Yes, I know what you're thinking, but that isn't a misattribution - that really is the judge speaking and not the defendant.

Not to hammer the point home, but the whole point of the age of consent is that below that age, the victim can't consent (the law isn't as complex as libs would have you believe). Judge Atherton hasn't conjured up a wacky interpretation of the law, he's completely ignored it.

Forget the specifics of this case - horrific though they may be - if this judge had downloaded the relevant statute, printed it off and wiped his backside with it on Parliament Square, it wouldn't have been as blatant a constitutional outrage as this. Just where is the MP prepared to grow a spine and start providing their end of the 'checks and balances' bargain ?

(H/T to JulieM in the comments)

No comments: