Judge rule ''Technical rape more an adolescent erro''.Release
16yo boy.
"Defendant discharged. Other reasons: A technical rape more an
adolescent error . . ."
Our frens in this forum are very smart.they know wat is right or
wrong.
I got plenty of of interest in thread like
Oz girl gang raped
twice.Rapists jailed/probatin aft AG appeal--
9 men released aft
plead guilty gang raped aged 10
each of the above got over 6000 hits,not bad for the low traffic
forums
like SC!!
Now,i invite u guys to discuss if the judge is right to
discharge a
teenager on the reasons of ''TECHNICAL RAPE MORE ON AN
ADOLESCENT ERROR..."
The victim girl told boy ''NO''.But the boy pressed on....
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25691411-661,00.html
Fiona Hudson
June 26, 2009 12:00am
EXCLUSIVE: A MAGISTRATE is under fire
for letting a teenage rapist go free and declaring the boy's crime
"an adolescent
error".
Experienced judge Rowan
McIndoe found the 16-year-old had sex with a girl without her
consent, but labelled it "a technical
rape".
Victims' groups said the decision was offensive, and warned it
sent a confusing message to young men.
A Supreme Court judge who reviewed the ruling on appeal last
week said the magistrate's words were "at the very least
unfortunate".
"There is no such thing as a technical rape. Rape is a serious
criminal offence," Justice Beach said.
He dismissed an appeal by the boy's lawyers and ruled a rape
conviction should stand.
The sex assault occurred in 2007 when the girl - then 17 -
visited the boy, whom she once went out with for about two
months.
After watching TV, she got into bed with him and they kissed and
performed other consensual acts until he forced himself on her.
She gave evidence she told him to stop and get off and said "he
kept having sex with me after I'd said I didn't want to".
In a police interview tendered to the magistrate, the boy
admitted hearing the girl object. "She said - she did say, 'No',
but like very quietly," he told police.
Later in the interview, he added: "But like, she didn't push me
off or anything."
He changed his evidence in court, but Magistrate McIndoe said
the victim was "a most persuasive witness" and accepted her account
of events.
"And I think there is no doubt the evidence . . . by the
prosecution establishes as fact that there was absence of consent,"
he said.
Having found the charge proved in March last year, Mr McIndoe
discharged the matter the following day. The court register records
the order as: "Defendant discharged. Other reasons: A technical
rape more an adolescent error . . ."
The order would likely have stayed hidden behind secrecy laws
shielding Children's Court cases if not for last week's Supreme
Court appeal judgment.
Victorian Centres Against Sexual Assault convener Karen Hogan
said the magistrate's comments were disappointing.
"If someone says no, it means no. Rape is rape," she said. "(The
boy) has committed an offence and the judge has said, 'yes, you
have, but we'll ignore it'. What does that say to the victim?"
National Association of Services Against Sexual Violence chair
Karen Willis said there was no such thing as "a technical
rape".
"I think the average 16-year-old understands no. It's not an
error," she said.
"If he got drunk and drove his car into people, would that be a
mistake too?"
Mr McIndoe was appointed a magistrate in the 1980s.
GGGG