On the 19th of April, 2011 in a Brisbane District Court Judge David Reid made a landmark ruling that will make paedophiles very happy and confirm what they have been trying to tell us all along.
That children as young as eleven can, in fact, be blamed if a convicted child sex offender has sex with them!
Judge Reid accepted the sex offenders claim that his 11 year old step-daughter was the “sexual aggressor” in the relationship, that their sex “was a one off event”, and that there was no evidence the man had “groomed” the girl for sex. The judge ruled sex between the two “was not predatory” and seemed heavily influenced by the fact that the two still have a good relationship almost 15 years later.
This man currently has custody of the 14 year old daughter he fathered on the girl. Judge Reid was impressed because this mans current potential victim describes him as “an awesome dad” and says she “is lucky” to have him.
This convicted child sex offender claims he was naked in bed when the child walked in, took off all her clothes, climbed into bed with him and had sex with him. He says it was all her idea and, afterward, he told her it was wrong and could never happen again.
It did, of course, happen again.
The only difference between this mans claim and the claim every paedophile makes about the victim “wanting it” is this man managed to convince everyone, including his victim, the lie was truth. Now even the legal system has accepted the lie! He must be laughing his head off and his current victim will probably never tell on him as long as she lives because he has worked out a way to have his cake and eat it too!
Did anyone think to ask the relevant questions in this case?
1. Why didn’t he tell the girl sex between them was wrong BEFORE he had sex with her?
2. Why wasn’t she afraid of being rejected (as an insecure virginal prepubescent would surely be when making their first sexual advance to someone)?
3. Were, how, when and from whom did this child learn about sex? (She had to know about it to be able to think of offering it to him)
4. Was she a virgin when this incident happened and, if not, who took her virginity?
5. Why wasn’t she afraid he would tell on her to her Mum and get her into trouble?
SOMEONE GROOMED THIS CHILD!
Children do not suddenly think “Gee, wouldn’t it be fun to go seduce my step-father, I know he won’t be mad at me if I try and I know Mum won’t be mad at me for messing with her man, so why not have a go.”
Every paedophile in the world will tell you different but the fact is, children don’t experience lust, not before puberty unless someone sexualises them. If this child WAS sexually active of her own accord she would be approaching males of her own age not males who could, and should, get her into trouble by telling her Mum if she tries to seduce them!
Judge Reid said: “The facts of this case are most unusual and unlikely to ever be repeated.”
He is very, very, VERY wrong! This man has worked out how to seduce a child without doing any of the things the legal system currently looks for as evidence of grooming. He has been convicted, he knows what got him convicted in the past, he knows what to avoid.
The Judge also said “as appalling as the facts in the case were there was no evidence the man “groomed” the girl for sex and that the child had been the sexual aggressor during the one-off encounter”.
The ONLY way you can be positive an offender has NOT groomed a child for sex is if the offender has NEVER spent any time at all with the child prior to them having sex with them!
If that was the case I would be surprised to hear she walked into the bedroom of a man she had never met before to have sex with him. The only way THAT would happen is if she was used to giving sex to strangers. Did this man marry a woman who had already groomed her child to do this kind of thing? People, regardless of their age, don’t take off all their clothes to seduce someone unless they are pretty sure it won’t result in the humiliation of rejection!!!
This child KNEW before she walked into his bedroom that he would have sex with her if she offered it. How could she have known that if he did not groom her?
A convicted child sex offender had sex with this 11 year old in 1995 and he carefully eluded police for almost 16 years because he knew he would go to jail if he was caught. He knew his only hope of escaping punishment was to convince everyone he had not harmed her. To achieve that he had to convince her she had not been harmed.
What would she have said if the courts had heard her testimony 15 years ago? Not what he would have wanted her to say I bet.
So he went on the run and continued his relationship with her. He bound her to him so well over the years that she married him as soon as she was of legal age. He fathered a child on her and treated her so well she still loves and protects him to this day. She even surrendered her own daughter to his care!
That daughter now calls him “an awesome dad” and believes she is “lucky to have” him so she is obviously as enamored of him as her mother and will probably never tell a soul about just how “special” she is to him.
Judge Reid said impressionable young girls rightly need to be protected from predatory older men and that deterrence was an important consideration in cases of this nature and then he gave this convicted child sex offender an 18-month, wholly suspended, jail sentence for the crime of having, AGAIN, had sex with a child.
Sounds more like a massive reward for all his hard work in managing to convince the child, her Mother, his daughter, his lawyer and everyone right up to the judge that children really are to blame for him having sex with them!
Even the media has bought his story.
They refer to this girl as the “so-called” victim.