Two boys aged 10, 11 found guilty of attempted rape of girl, 8.

rovert

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Truth is, had I been around at the time this thread started, I don't know what I would I have said. I would like to say after reading such a disturbing story that I wouldn't have made a snap judgement, but I can't. Furthermore, you have to understand that we live in an age where disturbing stories like this can be regularly reported on in the media. You can become desensitized to these kind of stories and just assume that something horrific has happened.

It doesn't help when the media give such one-sided reports on such occurences where they talk as if what has been alleged is actually fact.

Thats is why people need to engage their critical thinking skills, learn from past events as it relates to rape cases, cases involving children etc not just blurt out their first reaction.

koth wrote: »

I can only react to the text on screen, not to what you intended it to mean.

Do you lack the ability to critically think or reflect or question the source of information then?

prinz

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

As far as I can see, the point you raised was that just because the two boys may be found not guilty, this does not mean that they did not do the act.

No. My original point if you go back far enough was that the trial is not over. More evidence could be found. That the girl changed her evidence does not automatically mean that the boys are "innocent" as had been claimed. Even if found not-guilty in the future they still may not be innocent.

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

This is correct, but, if they are found not guilty, it would mean that the act that they may have committed was not deemed to be a criminal act..

Er no, there could be any number of reasons why a finding of not guilty may be arrived at.

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

This naturally means that they should not be subject to criminal sanction, nor judged as if they were criminals...

Of course.

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

If you are suggesting that regardless of the findings of the court, they are fair game to be judged as criminals, then we may as well just abolish the courts system and finish this discussion on the superhero thread.

Really where did I suggest any such thing? I was pointing out that it was very premature to start pronouncing the boys as innocent as above, ironically enough in the course of calling others out on pronouncing them guilty just as prematurely.

Handsome Bob

rovert wrote: »

Thats is why people need to engage their critical thinking skills, learn from past events as it relates to rape cases, cases involving children etc not just blurt out their first reaction.

True indeed, for the most part I do disengage myself from the emotional aspects of a story and try to hold fire on judgement. It doesn't make you a popular person at times, because if you're not instantly baying for the alleged rapist/pedophile/murderer's blood then you're some sort of heartless bastard apparently. :pac:

cynder

Sykk wrote: »

Just a question.. How does a fúcking 8 year old know about sex and rape? I wasn't, and my kids won't be told about that kinda of stuff until they are much older.. She should be thinking of Unicorns and Dolls.. Not rape.. Sheesh

I remember watching neighbours when i was 7/8 and there was a boy and girl planning on having sex in the garage (1988). My dad asked us if we knew what they were talking about and we said yes, that to this day i have never watched neighbours again.

Take a look at Home and Away, Eastenders, Coronation st, Emmerdale and Holly Oaks, all of these soaps have covered sex, rape , gays etc. Parents are very naive to think their 8 year olds don't have a clue. I bet any 6th class child you tell you a few things that they have learnt from tv, magazines and older kids.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

LZ5by5 wrote: »

True indeed, for the most part I do disengage myself from the emotional aspects of a story and try to hold fire on judgement. It doesn't make you a popular person at times, because if you're not instantly baying for the alleged rapist/pedophile/murderer's blood then you're some sort of heartless bastard apparently. :pac:

Yep - us damn liberals again.

Cypher_sounds

Wow thats some headline, what is the world coming to i wonder with stories like this its not good

syklops

grindelwald wrote: »

I remember watching neighbours when i was 7/8 and there was a boy and girl planning on having sex in the garage (1988). My dad asked us if we knew what they were talking about and we said yes, that to this day i have never watched neighbours again.

Take a look at Home and Away, Eastenders, Coronation st, Emmerdale and Holly Oaks, all of these soaps have covered sex, rape , gays etc. Parents are very naive to think their 8 year olds don't have a clue. I bet any 6th class child you tell you a few things that they have learnt from tv, magazines and older kids.

That was Jason Donovan and Kylie minogue. I remember that episode. God I was only 4 when I watched that. It was just after my eighth birthday that I went on a cub camp and heard all about sex from other scouts. Many of whom said they had done it loads of times with different girls. Should point out that the oldest was 11, because thats when you leave cubs to go to scouts. Obviously it was all just talk, but I came back from camp fully briefed on the whole thing.

cynder

How weird is that, i was in the uk then, it was just before we moved back to ireland... lol, i was sure it was jason donovan and kylie but wasnt 100%....

What an episode to remember......

It was aired in november 1987 which would make me under 7 1/2........

G-Money

I was fairly disgusted when I heard that story in it's original version. Although now I see that she's admitted lying about it. It was disgusting to think that could be done by anyone but at the same time I could only think back to when I was 10 years old. I'd no idea how to have sex, I knew nothing about it. I didn't know where anything went. It made me wonder how the two boys would know what to do. But I guess it's not beyond the realms of possibility.

Noreen1

It seems to me that some people are very, very naive about just how much children know about sex nowadays - and are incredibly quick to jump to conclusions about bad parenting, child abuse etc.

I'm waiting to see the outcome of the case before forming an opinion - but I cannot understand why incidents like this, whether it was rape, or some form of experimentation, automatically lead people to assume parental fault, or abuse by someone older of the alleged perpetrator/s.

Granted, there appears to have been some lack of parental supervision in this case - but:

Parental influence is no longer the sole factor (or even, possibly, the primary factor?) - governing the development of a child.
We have very young children attending preschool - and a limited amount of control over what children they mix with/ what they are being told.
Add the influence of television, neighbouring children, older children who may be relatives, or the children of the parents friends - and we have nowhere near the level of control over "The development of the Child" as we fondly imagine we do!

I remember being shocked at witnessing a child perform a very raunchy dance at the age of 7. When I questioned her about where she learned to dance like that, she said she was dancing like "Rihanna", because her big brother was a fan......... Her big brother was 12!
I tried explaining that dancing like that wasn't really a great idea, to which she very innocently responded "Oh I want to learn to dance like this, so the boys will like me!":eek::eek:

That was the point where I bowed out, and told her mother what had happened. Needless to say, she was horrified!

OutlawPete

Noreen1 wrote: »

I'm waiting to see the outcome of the case before forming an opinion - but I cannot understand why incidents like this, whether it was rape, or some form of experimentation, automatically lead people to assume parental fault, or abuse by someone older of the alleged perpetrator/s.

Because, if they had of been guilty of the rape of this young girl at their age, then somebody would have had to of failed these kids.

However, I think that the real people at fault here are the "professionals" that interviewed this girl. Presumably they were trained in conversing with abused kids and so should have some form of age appropriate questioning skills in order to determine if abuse took place or if it was just an child's active imagination at play.

As far as I am concerned, whoever was responsible for deciding that this girl was telling the truth, should never be involved in another case (if any) where a child is involved as they are clearly not up to the job.

More and more of these so called professionals that determine that crimes have been committed are now being brought into question.

Shaken Baby Syndrome for instance has had women being released from prison because evidence given by career prosecution witnesses have become unsound.

Courts have been far to eager to prosecute on the flimsiest of evidence but because it is given by someone with a degree, it is excepted as indisputable facts, when they are anything but.

The most famous false child abuse case was the McMartin case, where they basically brainwashed kids and fed their imagination as they were questioning them.

Here's a clip from a movie that was based on the McMartin trial:

http://arkdog.posterous.com/scene-from-indictment-the-mcmartin-trial

Jay D

Oh god so op falls under the hypodermic needle theory. :rolleyes:

People will say something like, well how would a girl that age know anything about the likes of what she accused. Bullshít. It's certainly not the first time.

I always hate how quick people are to jump on the bandwagon in rape cases. You know the sort, standing around a pub or whatever throwing what they would do to the accused etc. Gullable, stupid, braindead individuals.

bazmaiden wrote: »

Just seen this on Sky News, sounds horrible

Here's a snippet







Here's the full Link

I can't believe that two 10 year olds would do this to someone



MOD EDIT
Later today it arose that the girl was in fact not telling the truth.
Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/8680370.stm

AskMyChocolate

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Nobody is born evil. If either of their parents has membership to a golf club or changes out of their pyjamas/boxers at least for some of the day I will eat my non-existent hat.

Cheers for that Jimmy but I'd rather call you elitist. Sorry to hear about your hat though man.Bummer.

Girls should be taught at the youngest age possible that if they lie about rape, they're cunts.
I don't care that she's 8.. She could have ruined those 2 lads with her lies. Her own life should be ruined by them instead.

If she was my daughter, I'd never trust her ever again and I'd let her know it every single day of her life.

Handsome Bob

Deleted User wrote: »

Girls should be taught at the youngest age possible that if they lie about rape, they're cunts.
I don't care that she's 8.. She could have ruined those 2 lads with her lies. Her own life should be ruined by them instead.

If she was my daughter, I'd never trust her ever again and I'd let her know it every single day of her life.

FFS, one thing I've learned about people over the years is that shouldn't hold grudges with someone over something they did when they were a kid. Jesus, I'm vastly different from what I was just 5 years ago, never mind what I was like when I was a child.

This girl made horrific accusations and I absolutely believe that false rape accusations should be strictly punished by the law. But, only when they are old enough to recognise the consequences of their actions. Wasn't there a story a while back of some girl who was put up to make false abuse accusations by her parents? All because of a dumb hick property dispute between the parents and their neighbour (the accused). This could be a similar situation, we don't know the facts. So maybe wait until the proper authorities interview the girl to see why she made these accusations before you start condemning her for life.

Auldloon

Bazzy wrote: »

kill them straight away. You'd never be able to change them get rid there vile!

No wait!! don't kill them!!! :mad::rolleyes:

LZ5by5

LZ5by5 wrote: »

So maybe wait until the proper authorities interview the girl to see why she made these accusations before you start condemning her for life.

Fuk that. If she has the power to condemn someone else for life, she can suffer the consequences of it.
8 year olds aren't idiots.. They know if they're lying and so should be taught how serious that particular lie can be.

El Siglo

It's cases like this that lead to real rape cases and child abuse going unreported.

genericguy

dr.bollocko wrote: »

In the event that the girl didnt admit she was lying and these two young kids got sent down do you still stand by your claim that "liberal PC brigade" attempts at rehabilitation would not work on these two now innocent young fellas?

if you were innocent you wouldn't need rehabilitation.

genericguy

Deleted User wrote: »

Fuk that. If she has the power to condemn someone else for life, she can suffer the consequences of it.
8 year olds aren't idiots.. They know if they're lying and so should be taught how serious that particular lie can be.

a fifteen year stretch should just about do it i'd say. and yes, i'm fcuking serious.

jimi_t2

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Wasn't there a story a while back of some girl who was put up to make false abuse accusations by her parents? All because of a dumb hick property dispute between the parents and their neighbour (the accused).

This was the one in the west of Ireland somewhere wasn't it? The ''victims'' moved to america for about 7 years and then the accuser grew some bit of a conscience and admitted she had been completely lying. After your man had been accused

Don't believe anything happened to her.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

genericguy wrote: »

if you were innocent you wouldn't need rehabilitation.

if you were found guilty, you were not, in the eys of the law, innocent. Even though you might not have done anything.

Sheeps

Bazzy wrote: »

kill them straight away. You'd never be able to change them get rid there vile!

quoting this post for the laugh

goat2

Deleted User wrote: »

Girls should be taught at the youngest age possible that if they lie about rape, they're cunts.
I don't care that she's 8.. She could have ruined those 2 lads with her lies. Her own life should be ruined by them instead.

If she was my daughter, I'd never trust her ever again and I'd let her know it every single day of her life.

was she put up by adults to do this
she could not have thought this up
i know 8 yr olds, there is no way
for sweets

Sheeps

thats a nice coclusion youve jumped too since you know literally nothing about the facts of the case

epgc3fyqirnbsx

This thread should be stickied for future reference when people here jump to conclusions demanding swift excecutions and vigilantiasm (a daily occurence in AH)

goat2

At the time, the girl was taken to the hospital with stomach pain and various scratches, but no sign of genital trauma was observed. Both boys, now 10 and 11, have steadfastly denied the charges of rape and attempted rape. They listened, with their mothers at their sides, as the girl's testimony was broadcast in Old Bailey

i am glad for the boys and their families that this was the outcome
that little one has put a blight on their life
i hope these 2 families can get over it
they will never forget this
when the rest of us will see in distant past

goat2

goat2 wrote: »

They listened, with their mothers at their sides, as the girl's testimony was broadcast in Old Bailey

If they're old enough to rape, is she old enough for perjury?

Gunsfortoys

Muhammad Cuddly Soap wrote: »

This thread should be stickied for future reference when people here jump to conclusions demanding swift excecutions and vigilantiasm (a daily occurence in AH)

I wonder will all of those women on AH who argued for the girl own up and say they were wrong? Not bloody likely.

billybigunz

Deleted User wrote: »

If they're old enough to rape, is she old enough for perjury?

If you accuse somebody of rape and then are found to be lying then I think you should be raped as punishment.

billybigunz

billybigunz wrote: »

If you accuse somebody of rape and then are found to be lying then I think you should be raped as punishment.

"So what do you do for a living?"
"Oh me, I just rape."

epgc3fyqirnbsx

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

I wonder will all of those women on AH who argued for the girl own up and say they were wrong? Not bloody likely.

hardly ever, it's a lot harder to feel outraged at a little girl than it is at two boys

Gunsfortoys

Muhammad Cuddly Soap wrote: »

hardly ever, it's a lot harder to feel outraged at a little girl than it is at two boys

Its also easier for women to ignore that they were wrong, then sulk for a while.:D

goat2

billybigunz wrote: »

If you accuse somebody of rape and then are found to be lying then I think you should be (this is a child) as punishment.

sorry to do that
this is only a tot herself
beleiving in santa claus
i do not beleive that she did this all by herself
but there may be more to that story
i do feel sorry for those 2 boys

Charlie.

Noreen1 wrote: »

Parental influence is no longer the sole factor (or even, possibly, the primary factor?) - governing the development of a child.

Has it ever been the sole factor?

Noreen1 wrote: »

We have very young children attending preschool - and a limited amount of control over what children they mix with/ what they are being told.
Add the influence of television, neighbouring children, older children who may be relatives, or the children of the parents friends - and we have nowhere near the level of control over "The development of the Child" as we fondly imagine we do!

But who chooses the pre-school, the length of time the child spends there, who has control over what the child watches on television, who they hang around with, what time they stay out until, where they can go unsupervised?...... It should be the parents!

I realise there is no way you can "control" what your child does, how they behave or who they interact with in every minute of everyday (nor would it be healthy for either the parent or the child to do so) but I think a lot of people are too quick to blame "society" for every wrong an individual commits or suffers. At the end of the day who builds a "society" but the individuals in it. Individuals like parents who must take responsibility for the rearing of their children.

goat2

Charlie. wrote: »

Has it ever been the sole factor?




But who chooses the pre-school, the length of time the child spends there, who has control over what the child watches on television, who they hang around with, what time they stay out until, where they can go unsupervised?...... It should be the parents!

I realise there is no way you can "control" what your child does, how they behave or who they interact with in every minute of everyday (nor would it be healthy for either the parent or the child to do so) but I think a lot of people are too quick to blame "society" for every wrong an individual commits or suffers. At the end of the day who builds a "society" but the individuals in it. Individuals like parents who must take responsibility for the rearing of their children.

apoligies
the child should not have been on her own in a public park in the first place
it would not be healthy my backside
of course it is the safest healthiest way to go to know that your 8 year old is in a public park with a responsible adult

Charlie.

goat2 wrote: »

[/B]

these are 8 and 10
yes you are supposed to know their every move and as a parent it is your responsibility to be there 24 hours 7,
what have we come to at all
treating 8 yr olds as grown ups
the child should not have been on her own in a public park in the first place
it would not be healthy my backside
of course it is the safest healthiest way to go to know that your 8 year old is in a public park with a responsible adult

Eh I was agreeing parents needed to be responsibile.....maybe re-read the line above that of which you put in bold!

The point I was making about "control" is that it is impossible to have control over every little thing your child does, 24/7....other than to lock them up in a house which is not healthy!

Noreen1

Charlie. wrote: »

Has it ever been the sole factor?




But who chooses the pre-school, the length of time the child spends there, who has control over what the child watches on television, who they hang around with, what time they stay out until, where they can go unsupervised?...... It should be the parents!

I realise there is no way you can "control" what your child does, how they behave or who they interact with in every minute of everyday (nor would it be healthy for either the parent or the child to do so) but I think a lot of people are too quick to blame "society" for every wrong an individual commits or suffers. At the end of the day who builds a "society" but the individuals in it. Individuals like parents who must take responsibility for the rearing of their children.

You misunderstand me. I do not seek to blame "society" for every wrong - but I do believe that children are exposed to influences other than what their parents what their parents would choose for them. Therefore it is no more reasonable to always blame the parents than it is to always blame society.

Sadly, in this country at present, many parents have difficulty getting their children into any preschool, this situation probably becomes even more difficult for primary and post-primary schools. Are you suggesting that a parent has control over what happens in school? Particularly during breaks?
I don't think so!

Noreen

Aids By Google

Why can't people just say "OK. I was wrong"

Is it that hard?

The world might be a better place if more people did it.

indough

thread turnaround highlights what a bunch of nincompoops the burn-them-at-the-stake-immediately types can be, shame though that some others didnt learn the lesson and are now practically calling for the head of an 8 year old girl

indough

indough wrote: »

thread turnaround highlights what a bunch of nincompoops the burn-them-at-the-stake-immediately types can be, shame though that some others didnt learn the lesson and are now practically calling for the head of an 8 year old girl

I'm glad I came into the thread after the truth came out.. I could have looked like a tit otherwise.

goat2

indough wrote: »

thread turnaround highlights what a bunch of nincompoops the burn-them-at-the-stake-immediately types can be, shame though that some others didnt learn the lesson and are now practically calling for the head of an 8 year old girl

this is the part that is shocking me also
8 yr old are just too young
there is something just not right
she had been in apark with adult supervision

Darksaga87

Both sides of this story are quite disturbing.

prinz

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

I wonder will all of those women on AH who argued for the girl own up and say they were wrong? Not bloody likely.

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

Its also easier for women to ignore that they were wrong, then sulk for a while.:D

OutlawPete wrote: »

As far as I am concerned, whoever was responsible for deciding that this girl was telling the truth, should never be involved in another case (if any) where a child is involved as they are clearly not up to the job.
More and more of these so called professionals that determine that crimes have been committed are now being brought into question.

Deleted User wrote: »

Girls should be taught at the youngest age possible that if they lie about rape, they're cunts.
I don't care that she's 8.. She could have ruined those 2 lads with her lies. Her own life should be ruined by them instead.If she was my daughter, I'd never trust her ever again and I'd let her know it every single day of her life.

PK2008 wrote: »

This thread has so much burn in it for the knee jerk posters!!!WIN

rovert wrote: »

I know this forum and your explaination of it only goes so far. Pretty sad reflection of this forum where the lynch mob came out soley based on the word of 8 year old girl.

rovert wrote: »

Can everyone on the first page or so apologise?

rovert wrote: »

Bit revisionist this, they presumed the two boys were guilty.

dotsman wrote: »

Congratulations.
You just murdered/tortured/castrated etc 2 innocent young boys.
I can only hope that none of you are ever given any authority whatsoever over other peoples lives.

dr.bollocko wrote: »

In the event that the girl didnt admit she was lying and these two young kids got sent down do you still stand by your claim that "liberal PC brigade" attempts at rehabilitation would not work on these two now innocent young fellas?

Well I for one feel fully vindicated with everything I said on this thread. What about you lads? Still calling for others to apologise are we? :rolleyes:

Two boys aged 10 and 11 have been found guilty of attempted rape of an eight-year-old girl in London...........Mr Justice Saunders previously refused pleas from the boys' barristers to throw out the case after the girl admitted she had not been truthful about some of her evidence.
He said that the girl had been consistent in what she told adults, including police and doctors, soon after the incident and said she had looked exhausted at the end of her evidence.
After the trial, Alison Saunders, chief Crown prosecutor at the Crown Prosecution Service London, said the allegations made by the young girl were "very serious" and the decision to prosecute "was not taken lightly".
She said: "She had given a clear and compelling account to the police and her account was consistent with the medical evidence and with the accounts given by other witnesses to the police."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/8692223.stm

epgc3fyqirnbsx

Still believe they should be treated as guilty before being proven as such?

OutlawPete

prinz wrote: »

Well I for one feel fully vindicated with everything I said on this thread. What about you lads? Still calling for others to apologise are we? :rolleyes:

The boys were found "NOT GUILTY" of Rape.

In other words, the girl was NOT raped.

You still stand by this comment?

prinz wrote: »

They were two cold and calculating little animals who immediately tried to pin it on the other.

prinz

OutlawPete wrote: »

You still stand by this comment?

Why not, there's nothing in that comment that says they raped anyone. They were found guilty of attempted rape. I'm not the one who questioned the professionalism of the people who conducted the investigation and prosecution. Looks like they too, were vindicated.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

prinz wrote: »

Why not, there's nothing in that comment that says they raped anyone. They were found guilty of attempted rape. I'm not the one who questioned the professionalism of the people who conducted the investigation and prosecution. Looks like they too, were vindicated.

Not sure I agree with that: the girl admitted to lying: this should have been cleared up by said "professionals" before the case even got to court.

A witness box is not a place to find out that the person you are responsible for all along, and who's words you have based your actions on, lied to you all along.

Erica<3

Jesus thats something else to come out of an 8 year old's mouth :eek:

prinz

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

A witness box is not a place to find out that the person you are responsible for all along, and who's words you have based your actions on, lied to you all along.

Like I said pages back, her testimony might not have been central to the prosecution at all. Seems like I was right. People change their evidence on the stand all the time. It's fairly obvious if you read the article that they didn't base their actions on the word of this girl alone.

It was pretty simple if you read her original story, and the one she told in court that they didn't match up with the evidence of other witnesses. The truth was somewhere in the middle.