Letters to the Editor
-
Agree with my namesake
Anonymous, you and I have the same name and we think alike.
Here are some possibilities.
1. The guy took the girl at her word that she was 16 (= legal).
2. The guy took her at her word, but suspected she was underage and did not inquire too closely.
3. The guy accepted her claim that she was 16 with a wink, knowing darn well that she was not 16 or even close.
4. The guy knew her, her age, and her reputation, and didn't care anyway. After all, we can assume they lived in the same neighborhood. The defense story is just a story.
5. Maybe the guy is a career criminal, or maybe he is a delinquent. Or maybe he is a bit simple and himself a vulnerable person. Or maybe he is just an average guy who lacks impulse control and took advantage of an opportunity which he now bitterly regrets.
We just don't know. We weren't in the court and we are not judges. The judge in this case IS a judge. Maybe he is a bad judge, but he presumably deals with such cases all the time and uses his judgement, so it is absurd to call him a pedophile because he accepted as a mitigating factor the defense's argument that the girl looked older, was provocatively dressed, and may have been soliciting men for sex.
This may come as a suprise to some people, but when a sexily dressed female comes on to men, they often become sexually aroused, which impairs their judgement.
The guy was not found innocent. He has served several months in jail and will no doubt be subject to parole, probation etc. for some time to come.
The question is really whether this was an aggravated offense of pedophilia or a very stupid mistake.