Haven't claimed anything else.
Adam Johnson found guilty of one count of sexual activity with a child | Sentenced to six years
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
- Status
well there was definitely coercion. he was the one angling for this to become sexual in the first instance.
and a 15 year old is not emotionally mature. it's abuse to take advantage of that immaturity for your own gain, particularly in a position of power. is it as bad as raping a 6 year old? of course not. but it's still morally and, in this country, legally wrong.
Her knowing what she is doing is irrelevant in the situation.
It's not relevant to the question of Johnson's admitted guilt.
But is it relevant to the situation, yes.
I'd hate to see the state of this thread if Johnson had struck to his plea of not guilty of all charges...
Bradford Crown Court? This in the town that brought you Rita, Sue and Bob Too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rita,_Sue_and_Bob_Too
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rita,_Sue_and_Bob_Too
Is it? Because the situation is, Adam Johnson is getting convicted for breaking the law by having sex with a girl who is under age. Doesn't matter if the girl knew what she was doing, he knew she was under age and still did it. That's breaking the law regardless of her intentions.
I think you'll find if you look into those ages of consent, it's not as cut and dry. in Germany it's 14 but if you're a 28 year old male and the girl is 14 it will be treated differently.
except when you make statements like yours, it sounds like you're equating them both.
Johnson knowing what he was doing is 1000000x worse than her knowing what she was doing (assuming that is even the case).
What does "she know what she's doing" even mean?
Did she physically know what she was doing? Yes. No one is arguing that.
She's not at a stage in her life where this is acceptable though.
Did she physically know what she was doing? Yes. No one is arguing that.
She's not at a stage in her life where this is acceptable though.
there's an underlying implication that she is in some way responsible for what she got. which is a little sickening.
Why/how so? Just asking.
Why do people keep listing the mitigating factors as if the courts aren't going to take everything into account?
"X number of years is harsh because it's not as if... blah blah blah"
Well no it's not, because if he did do something worse he'd be getting a longer sentence. Seriously it's not that difficult.
"X number of years is harsh because it's not as if... blah blah blah"
Well no it's not, because if he did do something worse he'd be getting a longer sentence. Seriously it's not that difficult.
It's more than an underlying implication, some have come straight out and said it.
Found this online - basically there is far more ambiguity between 14-16. It's more than simply, 'hop on a plane to Germany and it'd be fine'. it's clearly not.
There are effectively three AOC laws in Germany:
1) Any sexual act with a person below the age of 14 is strictly prohibited (Sexual
abuse of children, Art. 176, 176a, 176b). The German police actively cooperate with
foreign police forces to seek out German nationals who have (allegedly) been sexually
involved with children abroad. However, there is a statute of limitations and a
prosecution must be started before the young 'victim' reaches their 28th birthday.
2) Where sex occurs between an adult (over 18 or 21) and young persons between
14 and 16, prosecution depends on the following circumstances (Sexual abuse of
young persons Art.182):
For a person over 18 years (young adult and adult) sex with young persons between
14 and 16 is forbidden if accompanied by money or gifts of value, or if the adult takes
advantage of the distressed situation of the young person (eg. homelessness) in order
to procure sex. (An exception *may* be granted if the young person is a prostitute
(see below)).
In addition to this, it is forbidden for a person over 21 years (adult) to perform any
sexual act with a person under 16, if the young person is not capable of sexual
self-determination; (This determination can only be made after the 'victim' has been
given a psychological examination). This last regulation is pursued only on complaint of
the victim's parents or foster-parents, except for cases of public interest.
In all cases of Art. 182, prosecution must be started within 5 years of the commission
of the (alleged) offence.
It follows that for an adult it is *safer* to assume that the AOC for all non-dependent
relationships is 16 (and not 14), and this applies to both homo- and hetero-sexual acts.
3) The legal age of consent for dependent relationships, (e.g., teacher/student etc) is
18 (Sexual abuse of dependants Art. 174).
Incest (Art. 173) and sexual coercion/rape (Art. 177) are completely forbidden.
Aye, it's really, really weird, and kind of borders on victim blaming. The whole reason for such a law is that we adjudge that people under the age of 16 are not of a mature enough age to be fully aware of what they're doing, or what they're entering into...especially when it's with someone who's nearly double their age.
Anyone who's taken a glimpse of some of the messages can quite clearly see Johnson trying to manipulate her, and trying to cover up for actions that he knows are quite clearly wrong. He's the adult, and he's knowingly broken the law and only appeared sorry for doing so once caught.
That's another thing that annoys me, actually. The idea that he's "sorry" or that he just made a "mistake". From what I've gathered, Johnson was fully aware of what he was doing and only began to regret it once he was caught and was going to receive punishment. Which isn't really feeling sorry for what he's done at all...he just strikes me as feeling sorry for himself.
Just good ol' fashioned female sexual objectification, it's nothing new.
Is it just me that thinks the punishment is a lot of the harsh side. If aged 15 and 364 days it's 5 years in prison, but switch to 16 and game on! Surely there has to be a sliding scale. Some 15 year olds look 18.
Not excusing it as he shouldn't be playing with fire and knew there was a risk he was taking and is arguably abusing a position of power which all makes this worse, but still sounds a lot.
Just for context Spain had the age of consent at 14 until a couple of years ago. What we are talking about here is not an under developed child. It's a young adult that has been protected under law under the presumption that mentally they are not old enough to make this decision.
This all being said if no means no it's a strong message to send out to the public, hence the making an example. But look at this case in isolation and it feels harsh.
How many of the public would have expected fooling around with a 15 year old as having a 5 year sentence? I'm sure many know there's a risk, maybe a slap on the wrist and criminal record. I doubt many would expect this much. Although as they say ignorance of the law is no defence.
And actually flipping the whole law on its head, there are 18 year olds who look 15 and 18 year olds who are not ready for sex mentally, physically and general readiness. But on the flipside there are stories out there of 13 years old having sex and arguably based on their experiences there is a case for saying they are more ready than the 18 year olds.
I just wonder if 16 is the wrong place to draw the line. Maybe it should be 18 or 15/16 only where it's with another person within 1-2 years of the other. This might help to protect younger people for longer and as part of this it could be a good way to reiterate the law and punishments involved for breaching those laws.
Not excusing it as he shouldn't be playing with fire and knew there was a risk he was taking and is arguably abusing a position of power which all makes this worse, but still sounds a lot.
Just for context Spain had the age of consent at 14 until a couple of years ago. What we are talking about here is not an under developed child. It's a young adult that has been protected under law under the presumption that mentally they are not old enough to make this decision.
This all being said if no means no it's a strong message to send out to the public, hence the making an example. But look at this case in isolation and it feels harsh.
How many of the public would have expected fooling around with a 15 year old as having a 5 year sentence? I'm sure many know there's a risk, maybe a slap on the wrist and criminal record. I doubt many would expect this much. Although as they say ignorance of the law is no defence.
And actually flipping the whole law on its head, there are 18 year olds who look 15 and 18 year olds who are not ready for sex mentally, physically and general readiness. But on the flipside there are stories out there of 13 years old having sex and arguably based on their experiences there is a case for saying they are more ready than the 18 year olds.
I just wonder if 16 is the wrong place to draw the line. Maybe it should be 18 or 15/16 only where it's with another person within 1-2 years of the other. This might help to protect younger people for longer and as part of this it could be a good way to reiterate the law and punishments involved for breaching those laws.
Did she make the initial allegations?
If it's coming from a murderer, the worst kind of crime, and one from which there isn't coming back, that sounds more like a (high) standard of hypocrisy. Not sure the children of their victims are better off than the victims of sexual abuse.
have you read any of the thread up until now?
Reasons to Have Sympathy with Adam Johnson
1) The age of consent is too high - (seems about right to me) in line with leaving school, getting a job so on. Also it's the Law.
2) 15 year old girls are known to be keen on 28 year old men & knowingly etc etc
I can politely dismiss (1) cos that's the way it is, so tough shit, ''if you can't do the time don't do the crime''. I could not so politely dismiss this as well but possibly best not to go there (as they say). With the qualification that if AJ was 17/18 then he wouldn't be in quite as much trouble, would he?
And (2), well... even if it were Legal (and where it is) we don't really believe this do we?
A 'harsh' sentence is being considered because he's 28, he knew but blindly carried on with the manipulation, he used his role model status & was bang out of order.
1) The age of consent is too high - (seems about right to me) in line with leaving school, getting a job so on. Also it's the Law.
2) 15 year old girls are known to be keen on 28 year old men & knowingly etc etc
I can politely dismiss (1) cos that's the way it is, so tough shit, ''if you can't do the time don't do the crime''. I could not so politely dismiss this as well but possibly best not to go there (as they say). With the qualification that if AJ was 17/18 then he wouldn't be in quite as much trouble, would he?
And (2), well... even if it were Legal (and where it is) we don't really believe this do we?
A 'harsh' sentence is being considered because he's 28, he knew but blindly carried on with the manipulation, he used his role model status & was bang out of order.
From my experience as an 18/19 year old, there aren't many if any 18 year olds that I know of who are not ready to be sexually active. On the flip side, 14/15 year olds levels if maturity are at the opposite end if the scale. Even if they are sexually active within their age group, their mental maturity is very low compared to 16/18 year olds.
Blatantly not.
It's only really Germany where that's the case, other countries have different laws for prostitution where you have to be 18 but the general age of consent in a lot of Western European countries is 14 or 15, the age of the person involved doesn't matter.
To be fair I read the first few comments and got the feeling everyone just wanted to stain the boot in. I've read more since and the views are slightly more balanced.
Yeah I would say people who are having sex at 14/15 aren't very mature despite what they tell themselves. I think a greater sign of maturity is knowing when you are ready to have sex and who is a suitable person to have sex with. Unfortunately, teenagers think having sex is a thing which makes initiates you as an adult. Some people do develop much earlier than others, but I would argue that even if you were truly ready to have sex at 14/15 you would be wise enough to know that you should do it with someone in your age range.
You can't use the "looks 18" excuse when the person has told you that they are 15.
I find it crazy that countries allow adults to have sex with 14 year olds. I wonder how prevalent/frowned upon something like that is in these countries, despite it being legal. in any case, I think the UK has it right and we shouldn't be using other countries as a barometer, given the variances in culture/history/whatever, and the fact that, well, maybe they just have it wrong.
Best Freudian slip of the day.
WTF The Sun??
Disgusting "newspaper".WTF The Sun??
Do people still buy their papers?
Best selling paper in the UK
Have you not heard of Gavin Henson ?
If Johnson serves, say, 3 years how would people feel about him seeking re-employment on his release at 31?
The level of club who would take him is irrelevant - I'd just be interested in knowing people's views on Johnson being able to sign and play for clubs in the future.
The level of club who would take him is irrelevant - I'd just be interested in knowing people's views on Johnson being able to sign and play for clubs in the future.
Not even slightly.
No wonder they call it a rag
He'll have served his sentence and should be allowed to continue with his life.
Regardless of what I think/feel about him.
- Status