‘Immature’ woman, 40, who squeezed teenage boy’s bottom and kissed him on the cheek during string of ‘uncomfortable’ encounters avoids jail | Daily Mail Online
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14197783/Immature-woman-squeezed-teenage-boys-bottom-avoids-jail.html
Posted by CasualSmurf
13 Comments
[removed]
> An ‘immature’ mother who repeatedly groped a teenage boy has been spared jail after a woman judge ruled she was not sexually attracted to children.
If being ‘sexually attracted to children’ was a crime there would be lots more paedos in prison.
Surely it is the actual sexual assault of a child that should land her in prison
> ‘Numerous others were present. They did not object. They found it reasonably amusing. Nobody objected until your relationship with the victim’s family had deteriorated.
The kids family were ok with it when it was happening, all good then. I’m sure they would be ok with it if the genders were reversed.
[removed]
[removed]
> ‘Numerous others were present. They did not object. They found it reasonably amusing. Nobody objected until your relationship with the victim’s family had deteriorated.
Hmm. More to this one than is reported, one suspects.
[removed]
For as much as this sub hates the daily mail it sure loves to post and upvote its articles.
[removed]
I mean, we act like there isn’t a distinct element of misandry that society just handwaves exactly like we did with moustachio’d lotharios in the 80s. Would be weird if someone would address that.
Our justice system is totally and completely screwed.
[deleted]
Here we go again, another “avoids jail” article, when presumably they mean “got a sentence in line with the guidelines, the same as anyone would have got in the same circumstances”?
I’m also going to guess (before reading the article) she was actually given a prison sentence, just suspended (as is almost the default for anything under 2 years). Let’s check the article…
> …she was given a 12-month community order with 20 days of rehabilitation activity and a 12-month mental health requirement.
Ok, I was wrong! Even better, the Mail has actually referred to the sentencing guidelines!
> At Bolton Crown Court, the former hairdresser, now 44, faced six months in jail under sentencing guidelines after she admitted two of the charges…
Of course, they’ve still misrepresented the sentencing guidelines, but it is a start.
According to the article she was charged with sexual assault (which isn’t an age-related offence – applies the same to 15 year-olds as 40 year-olds). Looking [at the sentencing guidelines](https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/item/sexual-assault/), we are solidly in Category 3 Harm, and probably in Culpability B. What do the sentencing guidelines actually say about that?
> Starting point: High level community order, Category rage: Medium level community order – 26 weeks’ custody
So… yes, she did “face” six months in jail, but only if you look at just the maximum possible sentence for that combination (it could be worse – they could have said she faced 10 years’ custody, which is the maximum of sexual assault).
Her sentence – a high-level community order – is the starting point for this offence.
Had this happen to me when I was 13 – random woman groped my arse in a shop.
What did the policeman who saw it say?
“Enjoy the attention mate.”