Rapist Of 10-Year-Old Girl Gets Only Four Month Sentence, Because Judge Finds Her "Sexually Precocious" And "Looks 16"

This article is from Britain, and the use of the word "rape" may be customary over there to describe what we usually call statutory rape. Or it may just be the Sun being a little sensationalist. I have trouble believing that any judge would sentence any rapist to just four months for involuntarily raping anyone, 16 or 10 or 30.

But who knows. This is England, after all. This judge made some headlines recently, too.

A JUDGE spared a man who raped a girl of ten in a park — because she wore a “provocative” frilly bra and thong.

Window cleaner Keith Fenn, 25 — who could have got life in jail — will be free in just FOUR MONTHS after admitting twice having sex with the child.

Judge Julian Hall decided to be lenient because the girl “didn’t look 10”.

He caused fury earlier this year by freeing another paedophile, telling him to buy his six-year-old victim a new bicycle.

The judge referred to the 10-year-old as a “young woman”, and called her “very disturbed, very needy and sexually precocious”.

He told Oxford Crown Court: “She liked to dress provocatively. She was 10. She’d been in care since she was four.

“Did she look 10? Certainly not. She looked 16."

Um, assuming the age of consent is 16 in England, even if a girl "looks 16," she also looks as if she could very well be underage -- a girl who "looks 16" is also a girl who "looks like a mature 10 year old" or an "immature 18 year old." So apparently it's this judge rule that if she looks like she might be of age, have a fucking party.

posted by Ace at 07:21 PM

| Access Comments