Paedophile Protection - sex offender guilty but not named

I think the point Jakez was trying to make is that by labelling this bloke a ‘paedophile’, the instant reaction is to think of him as a ‘kiddy-fiddler’ (someone who gets off on very young – prepubescent – children) and the conversation is confined to that stereotype.

In this instance, the act was completely dodgy/loathsome/blah-blah-blah [insert-mandatory-‘won’t-someone think-of-the-children’-statement here], but no matter how you look at it, it’s not an instance of the stereotypical predatory kiddy fiddler, it’s probably some dumb bogan who has sex with young teens because he can’t make it with a lady and/or he’s a bit touched in the head. Applying the ‘paedophile’ label is counterproductive when discussing the case.

But if you could find out his religion, that would be cool. At very least it would give all of us an opportunity to do some religious scapegoating.

Sorry. I should have been much clearer when describing this man and how his actions should be classified. I’ll try to find out his race, religion, hair colour and the type of car he drives so I can be clearer about what and who he is.

Special G said :

Still people attempting to justify how a 20yr man old grooms and has sex with a 14yr old girl. Then saying letting him off as it’s the first time is a load of bollocks. Throw the book at them.

1st offence on minor crime sure cautions and community service.
Any serious crime or repeat offenders don’t get that luxury.

Are you saying that you would want sentences raised across the board or are you saying that if you commit any serious crime you go straight to jail for a long time?

I would happily see all sentences raised and people sent away for crimes like this, but the judge still has to have leeway to be differentiate between levels of crime.
You can’t possibly be saying that this crime should be treated the same as say the Marist ones.

Tooks said :

jakez said :

The morality of this persons actions and the justice of the decision aside (I have not read the article or judgment), I don’t think paedophile is the correct descriptive term. 14 would make him an ephebophile would it not?

Definition of a paedophile: an adult who is sexually attracted to children.

Sorry, a paedophile is someone who is attracted to prepubescent children which was Jakez’s point. Not that it really matters.

jakez said :

The morality of this persons actions and the justice of the decision aside (I have not read the article or judgment), I don’t think paedophile is the correct descriptive term. 14 would make him an ephebophile would it not?

Definition of a paedophile: an adult who is sexually attracted to children.

Mandatory reporting.

that’s it. Very simple in the end.

Yup. It’s taken very seriously in my job (we are “mandated persons”) and if you fail to make a notification, not only are you liable for prosecution, you are liable to lose your job. You can’t simply “tell the parents” and then hope they deal with it, ant. Not with something this serious. Not when a young child’s life is on the line.

ahappychappy said :

Hmmmm, Ozi I don’t know whether you’re entirely correct. I agree with your point(s), but figured I’d state a few things.

I know of a situation very similar to this, however the school was not legally obliged to notify the AFP. I think their obligation is to notify the legal parents/guardians, and if it then goes to the AFP from the parents so-be-it. Anyone know definintely? I’d like to know to tell you the truth.

As to the offender knowing the girl was underage, he may not have. Admittedly, there is not much one can take from that defence, as it is still a rather large and disturbing age gap. If the offender admits that he knew she was underage, I agree whole heartedly that he should be dragged through the mud on his face. However, I also remember growing up a lot of girls who lied about their ages to “attract” older guys.

I’m not trying to upset anyone or to defend the bloke, however we don’t know the full details. There are definitely a few grey-patches.

ahappychappy,

The Children and Young Peoples Act prescribes a range of people to be Mandated Reporters, including among others, teachers. Mandated Reporters are obliged under law (with penalties applying if a report is not made) to report to Care and Protection if they know, or even suspect, that a child is/has been neglected or abused. Care and Protection then have a range of obligations to meet from that point on.

Mandated Reporters include teachers, police officers, doctors, nurses, other health professionals, ambulance drivers, childcare workers, sporting coaches, scout leaders and others.

Hope that clarifies things.

BerraBoy68 said :

Sounds good to me.

I hate these “I only raped her a little bit, and she looks older than she is” type of excuses.

Call me old fashioned but I prefer the “Crucifiction?!”

+1

Special G said :

Still people attempting to justify how a 20yr man old grooms and has sex with a 14yr old girl. Then saying letting him off as it’s the first time is a load of bollocks. Throw the book at them.

1st offence on minor crime sure cautions and community service.
Any serious crime or repeat offenders don’t get that luxury.

+1

I didn’t say it was the substantive issue. There are dozens of posts on the substantive issue and I’m not well versed enough in the case to make a meaningful contribution on the substantive issue.

I think words matter though and the misuse of words cause many problems. Was my point incorrect?

Special G said :

Still people attempting to justify how a 20yr man old grooms and has sex with a 14yr old girl. Then saying letting him off as it’s the first time is a load of bollocks. Throw the book at them.

1st offence on minor crime sure cautions and community service.
Any serious crime or repeat offenders don’t get that luxury.

Sounds good to me. I hate these “I only raped her a little bit, and she looks older than she is” type of excuses.

Call me old fashioned but I prefer the “Crucifiction?!” “Yea, first offence” mentality to serious crime.

Still people attempting to justify how a 20yr man old grooms and has sex with a 14yr old girl. Then saying letting him off as it’s the first time is a load of bollocks. Throw the book at them.

1st offence on minor crime sure cautions and community service.
Any serious crime or repeat offenders don’t get that luxury.

weeziepops said :

You’re right,jakez. That IS the big issue here. Perhaps I should have posted “Kiddy Fiddler Gets Off” or “Pervert Not Pinched – Get Your Teen Tastes Satisfied In Canberra!”

+1

You’re right,jakez. That IS the big issue here. Perhaps I should have posted “Kiddy Fiddler Gets Off” or “Pervert Not Pinched – Get Your Teen Tastes Satisfied In Canberra!”

The morality of this persons actions and the justice of the decision aside (I have not read the article or judgment), I don’t think paedophile is the correct descriptive term. 14 would make him an ephebophile would it not?

peterh said :

chewy14 said :

On another point,
since when have schools been monitoring student’s email conversations?

as i pointed out, if she used school property, she was telling the school all about it. it wasn’t her computer, it was the school’s. Most schools have keyword capture rules on outbound and inbound email. stops the whole thing blowing up in their faces later on, when the subject comes to light via the media or the parents.

I will add to this that as a parent, I would be glad in the fact that schools have an added level of protection and proactive in protecting our children from predators. It appears that they don’t read e-mails unless they are captured in software seeking particular high risk keywords.

Ozi is correct in that mandatory reporting is a legislative requirement where particular professions (including Police) must report to child protection services.

ahappychappy said :

Hmmmm, Ozi I don’t know whether you’re entirely correct. I agree with your point(s), but figured I’d state a few things.

I know of a situation very similar to this, however the school was not legally obliged to notify the AFP. I think their obligation is to notify the legal parents/guardians, and if it then goes to the AFP from the parents so-be-it. Anyone know definintely? I’d like to know to tell you the truth.

If the situation which was “very similar to this” involved an adult having sex with a young person, then MANDATORY REPORTING MUST BE DONE. I was slightly wrong, however: the mandatory report must be made to Care and Protection Services, as per this link.

http://www.ceo.cg.catholic.edu.au/policies/mandatory_report_act.htm

From there, CPS will notify Police directly if any offenses have been committed, and they will become involved. Either way, Police are informed through the Mandatory Reporting system of any offenses. And the school, under legislation, does not have a choice.

It’s a bit hard to miss if you’ve been hanging out reading Total Girl and grooving along to High School Musical with a bunch of Year 8s, I should think.

chewy14 said :

On another point,
since when have schools been monitoring student’s email conversations?

as i pointed out, if she used school property, she was telling the school all about it. it wasn’t her computer, it was the school’s. Most schools have keyword capture rules on outbound and inbound email. stops the whole thing blowing up in their faces later on, when the subject comes to light via the media or the parents.

ahappychappy said :

As to the offender knowing the girl was underage, he may not have. Admittedly, there is not much one can take from that defence, as it is still a rather large and disturbing age gap. If the offender admits that he knew she was underage, I agree whole heartedly that he should be dragged through the mud on his face. However, I also remember growing up a lot of girls who lied about their ages to “attract” older guys.

“The court heard Carcach, who has a child of his own, had admitted he was aware of the girl’s age when he had sex with her, but that the offence had not been planned.”

For goodness’ sake, read the story ….

You had the link!

On another point,
since when have schools been monitoring student’s email conversations?

I agree Berraboy,
All i am saying is I think in this instance the Judge probably got the sentence right.
However, if this guy gets into any similar trouble in the future, by all means throw the book at him.

ahappychappy said :

I know of a situation very similar to this, however the school was not legally obliged to notify the AFP. I think their obligation is to notify the legal parents/guardians, and if it then goes to the AFP from the parents so-be-it. Anyone know definintely? I’d like to know to tell you the truth.

I’m not trying to upset anyone or to defend the bloke, however we don’t know the full details. There are definitely a few grey-patches.

I can’t see how there is a grey area. 14 is 14 and if there’s any doubt keep you hands to yourself.

On the point of reporting, I don’t have the relevant legislation but I’ve been told by Headmasters that they are bound to report any instance suspected child abuse (physical or sexual) to the police, and rightly so.

chewy14 said :

Granny,
from the story it seems the guy was 20 when this happened. Your link also shows that the brain is not fully developed until well into the 20’s. Food for thought.

I think Granny’s point is that the 14 year old was not mature enough to make an informed decision on what she was doing. All 14 year old think they are mature enough to make ‘adult’ decisions, but I beleive they’re not.

Hmmmm, Ozi I don’t know whether you’re entirely correct. I agree with your point(s), but figured I’d state a few things.

I know of a situation very similar to this, however the school was not legally obliged to notify the AFP. I think their obligation is to notify the legal parents/guardians, and if it then goes to the AFP from the parents so-be-it. Anyone know definintely? I’d like to know to tell you the truth.

As to the offender knowing the girl was underage, he may not have. Admittedly, there is not much one can take from that defence, as it is still a rather large and disturbing age gap. If the offender admits that he knew she was underage, I agree whole heartedly that he should be dragged through the mud on his face. However, I also remember growing up a lot of girls who lied about their ages to “attract” older guys.

I’m not trying to upset anyone or to defend the bloke, however we don’t know the full details. There are definitely a few grey-patches.

Granny,
from the story it seems the guy was 20 when this happened. Your link also shows that the brain is not fully developed until well into the 20’s. Food for thought.

Ozi said :

Grail said :

She arranged to meet him. They went back home to her place and had sex in her bedroom. She later confessed that she’d had sex to a school friend using the school’s email system, at which point the school staff intercepted the message and reported the incident to the police.

The scary thing to me is not that people are labelling this guy a predator (fool is more fitting). Nor is it that this guy was dumb enough to think that a 14yo could be a safe sexual partner. The scary thing is that the girl’s life has been ruined by nosey school staff who brought down the wrath of the law on this girl and her buffoon.

Why couldn’t they have contacted her to ask if legal action was in order? Is this the way to treat sexual experimentation in our youth? I wonder what this girl has learned from this: would it be that adults cannot be trusted to keep secrets, and that having sex is bad?

I would argue firstly that yes, having sex at 14 is bad. It is too young to be sexually active. But much more importantly: have you NEVER heard of mandatory reporting?!

The school does not have a choice as to whether they report this or not. If a serious offense (in this case, statutory rape) has occurred, they are legally obliged to report the matter to Police. Even if they weren’t legally obliged, I would hope they would anyways due to the very serious nature of this offense. On top of this is the fact that the male deliberately sought out the girl knowing her age. He is a criminal, and the school was right to have the Police deal with it. In the end, the male adult received a very ‘Canberran’ sentence from the judge is not appreciably worse off after his rape of a 14 year old girl.

+1.

regardless of whether she was having this conversation by email at school, she was using school property. there is no privacy on a public device, she was in fact telling the school what she had done.

The evidence is that connections in the frontal lobes of children and teens are not as developed as adults and not always fully functioning in teenagers.

“In calm situations, teenagers can rationalize almost as well as adults. But stress can hijack what Ron Dahl, a pediatrician and child psychiatric researcher at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center calls “hot cognition” and decision-making. The frontal lobes help put the brakes on a desire for thrills and taking risk — a building block of adolescence; but, they’re also one of the last areas of the brain to develop fully.”

THE ADOLESCENT BRAIN — WHY TEENAGERS THINK AND ACT DIFFERENTLY

Leave them alone until they’re developmentally equipped to make such important decisions.

Grail said :

She arranged to meet him. They went back home to her place and had sex in her bedroom. She later confessed that she’d had sex to a school friend using the school’s email system, at which point the school staff intercepted the message and reported the incident to the police.

The scary thing to me is not that people are labelling this guy a predator (fool is more fitting). Nor is it that this guy was dumb enough to think that a 14yo could be a safe sexual partner. The scary thing is that the girl’s life has been ruined by nosey school staff who brought down the wrath of the law on this girl and her buffoon.

Why couldn’t they have contacted her to ask if legal action was in order? Is this the way to treat sexual experimentation in our youth? I wonder what this girl has learned from this: would it be that adults cannot be trusted to keep secrets, and that having sex is bad?

I would argue firstly that yes, having sex at 14 is bad. It is too young to be sexually active. But much more importantly: have you NEVER heard of mandatory reporting?!

The school does not have a choice as to whether they report this or not. If a serious offense (in this case, statutory rape) has occurred, they are legally obliged to report the matter to Police. Even if they weren’t legally obliged, I would hope they would anyways due to the very serious nature of this offense. On top of this is the fact that the male deliberately sought out the girl knowing her age. He is a criminal, and the school was right to have the Police deal with it. In the end, the male adult received a very ‘Canberran’ sentence from the judge is not appreciably worse off after his rape of a 14 year old girl.

#42. Your concern is that he thought a 14 year old was a safe sexual partner? He shouldn’t have been thinking about a 14 year old in that way at all. You also assume a 14 year old would be well placed to advise whether legal action should be taken but the whole point here is that 14 year olds are under the age of consent and not in a position to judge. I’m not saying some people aren’t very mature at 14, but FFS – an adult male has sought out a 14 year old and had sex with her. He is the criminal.

Why can’t they just leave kids alone? Can’t he get a grown-up? What a loser!

It has affected someone I love to this day.

: (

Granny,
what this guy did was wrong. But i think the girl’s statement that it “would affect her for the rest of her life” also had a lot to do with the way her family has reacted about this and treated her afterwards.

He knew she was 14, and he went ahead and knowingly committed statutory rape anyway.

The victim has stated that his actions ‘would affect her for the rest of her life’, yet he still doesn’t get that what he did was harmful.

Speaking as someone who has witnessed the devasting effects of this in a young girl’s life firsthand, I can only say that indulging in adult behaviour with children is illegal for the reason that it is harmful. Yes, it actually does rob them of their innocence, but more importantly their childhood.

I am sickened.

She arranged to meet him. They went back home to her place and had sex in her bedroom. She later confessed that she’d had sex to a school friend using the school’s email system, at which point the school staff intercepted the message and reported the incident to the police.

The scary thing to me is not that people are labelling this guy a predator (fool is more fitting). Nor is it that this guy was dumb enough to think that a 14yo could be a safe sexual partner. The scary thing is that the girl’s life has been ruined by nosey school staff who brought down the wrath of the law on this girl and her buffoon.

Why couldn’t they have contacted her to ask if legal action was in order? Is this the way to treat sexual experimentation in our youth? I wonder what this girl has learned from this: would it be that adults cannot be trusted to keep secrets, and that having sex is bad?

Have CT now broken the law by naming this guy?

Now that the person has been named by the CT, what will his child suffer at the hands of their peers? Kids take a dim view about criminals, even when they have a suspended sentence. Was the reason for his name being suppressed to protect the victim, or his family as well? no chance of that now.

In this case, if the court didn’t release his name, who allowed the CT to publish it?

Well said MellyG.

“I wish I knew you when I was 22!”

…can we remove that duplicate post JB? Sorry about that…

Wow. Poor girl.

First I should note that I support the age of consent. I am glad it is not the 17th Century any more, where the age of consent was 10, and you had to be raped in public and crippled before the perpetrator was prosecuted.

However, at 14 I had been living independently and supporting myself for a very long time. My peer group were university students, and my lovers were between the age of 23-30 (and would have been mortified if they knew how old I was). I was very emotionally and sexually mature and could make my own decisions.
It is a biological fact that girls these days physically mature earlier due to our exceptional modern health. We also grow up in a highly sexualised culture – e.g four year olds consuming ‘brats’ products that idolise mini sluts with big heads.
…for example, when I was in Kindergarten at a Catholic primary school the kids there would make fun of each other by referring to sexual act as they had learnt about it on free to air t.v.

I tell you now, you don’t lose your ‘innocence’ from engaging in intimate physical contact with another human beings private parts; but when you are alienated and judged by your own family and peer group who fail to support you to make empowered decisions about your own body, and fail to provide you with an outlet through which to discuss and make sense of what happens to you in your day to day life.

I think that is when young people are most at risk.

As a parent, if you don’t want your kid to engage in unsafe, respectless, sexual relationships, which can cause them serious emotional and/or physical harm; then I don’t think that alienating them is a good way to go about that.

Wow. Poor girl.

First I should note that I support the age of consent. I am glad it is not the 17th Century any more, where the age of consent was 10, and you had to be raped in public and crippled before the perpetrator was prosecuted.

However, at 14 I had been living independently and supporting myself for a very long time. My peer group were university students, and my lovers were between the age of 23-30 (and would have been mortified if they knew how old I was). I was very emotionally and sexually mature and could make my own decisions.
It is a biological fact that girls these days physically mature earlier due to our exceptional modern health. We also grow up in a highly sexualised culture – e.g four year olds consuming ‘brats’ products that idolise mini sluts with big heads.
…for example, when I was in Kindergarten at a Catholic primary school the kids there would make fun of each other by referring to sexual act as they had learnt about it on free to air t.v.

I tell you now, you don’t lose your ‘innocence’ from engaging in intimate physical contact with another human beings private parts; but when you are alienated and judged by your own family and peer group who fail to support you to make empowered decisions about your own body, and fail to provide you with an outlet through which to discuss and make sense of what happens to you in your day to day life.

I think that is when young people are most at risk.

As a parent, if you don’t want your kid to engage in unsafe, respectless, sexual relationships, which can cause them serious emotional and/or physical harm; then I don’t think that alienating them is a good way to go about that.

What the f….
The school intercepted an email…daddy’s relationship has broken down with “his little girl” because she has had sex and “lost her innocence”. If this is what is being said publicly, then I shudder to think about what is being said to this girl privately.
ARRGGH! this type of thing makes me very angry..

That’s what i was thinking too FC.

Did anyone read the update story.
It seems like the man was 20 and the girl was 14 at the time.
It sounds like this girl has a horrid family.

“in a victim impact statement read out in court, the victim said she had lost the trust of her family and that Carcach’s actions would affect her for the rest of her life.

Her mother said the offence had resulted in a breakdown of the girl’s relationship with her father, and that the family had had to move homes to escape the bad memories.

She said that she believed her daughter had lost her innocence, and that Carcach would never understand the impact of what he had done until it happened to his own daughter.”
So her family believe she is a victim, but are blaming her? Is anyone else getting suss vibes about this?

I’m not sure that the victim needs everyone at school to know what happened, which would certainly happen if they named him. I would hope that our society has sufficient rehab mechanisms in place to help this guy without resorting to public name and shame approach, which won’t help his victim, and may make it slightly harder for him to find young girls to have sex with in the future, but it wouldn’t make it impossible and it would make it much more difficult to rehabilitate him. Ultimately I suspect the gain from naming him would be less that the loss.

#6 – a child cannot consent to sex, as I understand it. Hence the concept of statutory rape as opposed to rape.

I appreciate the point of protecting the victim by not naming the paedophile, but the sentence seems remarkably lenient to me. If a person has admitted guilt, has an”attitude” problem and a history of seeking out under-age “companionship”, surely there is a need to protect others while also seeking to rehabilitate him?

There are plenty of comments on here attempting to justify his actions. He tried with on girl and she wouldn’t have sex with him so he groomed the friend. Then has an attitude problem. I very much doubt he will modify his behaviour.

Lock up your daughters and get out the pitch forks as the courts won’t protect your family from sexual predators.

Roma said :

I dont get the impression that this guy was a predator, and as someone has posted earlier, there are a lot of 14 year olds out there these days who look MUCH older. Not to mention that alot of 14 year olds these days act alot older and actively seek out sexual contact. This guy could have simply been showing poor judgement or was mislead to believe that he was having an encounter with someone older than she actually was.

Lets not be so quick so send out the lynch mob.

Sorry Roma, correct me if I’m wrong but my reading of your comment is that you’re suggesting this guy could actually have been a victim of some young girl acting older than she was and purposely leading him astray?! Sorry, but I prefer not to make out that the victims of sexual abuse/rape are in any way shape or form responsible for having leading their abusers astray, particularly when teh vitim is only a child.

I’ve also re-read the thread and I don’t think your reflecting any other comments made to date, as you’re suggesting to Granny.

Now this isn’t an attack on you personally but I think you’re stretching it a bit to even consider blaming a 14 (or possible 12, noting VYs comment)year old victim over the 22 (or 20) year old offender.

To be fair…

It wouldn’t be a crime if the legal age of consent was reduced to 14…

🙂

I’m sorry, Roma.

Many posters know of my personal situation in this regard.

Nevertheless, I think the fact that an adult can usually manipulate a child into consenting to their wishes is self-evident. There will always be an unacceptable power differential in these circumstances.

Spidey, I would not have a dig at you even if I disagreed ’cause you’re my mate!

: )

The paedophile’s name is suppressed to protect the identities of the victim. Arguably, the victim would be identified to her peers if his name was made public, as no doubt friends would recognise the perp’s name. Unfair on some levels as he should be named and shamed but the victim’s privacy is paramount.

You can’t ‘browse’ Bebo – it’s restricted to friends you give permission to.

lol! Actually, Granny, I wasnt making excuses for anyone. I was putting forward a different point of view (that actually wasnt that different as it had been presented in various forms by previous posters in this thread). But thanks! 🙁 🙁

Phew. Granny, I thought you having a dig at me for a little bit there 😉

That was @Roma.

Oh, c’mon! He was going out with the friend *until* she wisely refused to have sex with him. If it has been so harmless to this girl and her family why did they bother taking the guy and his *specifically noted bad attitude* to court?

But keep making excuses.

IF and and I say IF it is true this “thing” browsed bebo to find his victims, it well known that bebo is a young person social network. I would then find it hard to believe he thought they were “older”.

I dont get the impression that this guy was a predator, and as someone has posted earlier, there are a lot of 14 year olds out there these days who look MUCH older. Not to mention that alot of 14 year olds these days act alot older and actively seek out sexual contact. This guy could have simply been showing poor judgement or was mislead to believe that he was having an encounter with someone older than she actually was.

Lets not be so quick so send out the lynch mob.

Was she 14 in 2007, or 14 now…?

uh oh…

Given the fact that the perpetrator ‘used the social networking site Bebo to become friends with the girl and three of her school mates in 2007,’ I would doubt that they are related or otherwise move in the same circles.

‘The Macgregor man was in a relationship with one of the victim’s friends who decided not to have sex with him when he contacted the victim online.’

So he hangs out on the internet hoping to find girls to statutorily rape.

The judge considers that the offender ‘still has some distance to go with respect to his attitude,’ yet here he is walking and surfing and posting among us and our kids.

Brilliant.

The Mad Max conundrum. Good thinking banshee. Perhaps the two are from South of Mt Taylor, in which case they’re related, and that’s why the judge suppressed the names.

Given the lack of details of the story, I tend to think there is more to the case than open and shut.

My mum had a solution for people like this. Put them in a small wooden shack with their balls in a vice, give them a blunt knife and set the shack on fire.

What has that got to do with anything?

Perhaps because if the abuser is known or related to the victim then naming the ‘perp’ can also give away the identity of the victim?

I don’t think WillowJim meant anything by that remark. I think he was just making the correlation that most of these are perpetrated by a known person to the victim and therefore is easier to identify the victim if the name of the offender is released.

Correct me if I’m wrong?

WillowJim said :

Most child abuse (or statutory rape, if that’s what this was) is committed by people related or known to the victim.

What has that got to do with anything?

Spideydog said :

They can’t name him as it may identify the juvenile if they did.

Exactly. Leaving aside the issue of whether he deserved time behind bars, naming him would probably hurt the victim even more. Most child abuse (or statutory rape, if that’s what this was) is committed by people related or known to the victim.

They can’t name him as it may identify the juvenile if they did.

Just as they’re protecting all the other 14 year olds in the region from this internet predator and convicted child sex offender.

This sounds a little grey – from the report the sex was consensual. It’s not clear who made the complaint.

For all we know the girls could have listed their ages on Bebo as 16/17/18 and the man may have thought it was legal (I’ve seen some 14 year olds who I wouldn’t be able to tell if they are over the age of consent or not)

This may well have been his only offense and by publishing his name he would be stuck with a sex offender stigma that could be impossible to shake off (something that those falsely accused and later cleared often never do)

This doesn’t sound like some 40+ year old preadator, but a young man who made a misjudgment against a societal norm

Either that or he knew full well of their ages and makes a habit of picking up under 16 year olds

however i reckon if he plead guilty – name and shame and save another young person

Probably to do with his age, which would indicate good rehabilitation prospects (and it is much easier to attend rehabilitative programs if not being hounded by the media and others).

There may also be mitigating circumstances – for example, was he aware of the girl’s age at the time, etc. The article appears to indicate that the intercourse was consensual.

While in no way excusing the offence, there can be grey areas in these kinds of cases where both victim and perp are young – and it can be complicated by parents, who can be somewhat naive about their own children’s actions, wanting to press charges.

Also, just a guess, but he is probably still living with family, so a suppression order also protects the family (who are also victims of the crime) from vigilantes who like to take the law into their own hands.

It’s usually a good idea to accept judge’s decisions about these kinds of issues, as they are cognizant with the full circumstances surrounding the offence.

maybe his name was not released to protect the identity of the 14 year old??

Ozi said :

What a joke ruling. This guy gets a fully suspended jail term and has to do a course. The 14 year old lives with it for the rest of her life.

+1

The only reasons I know of is that a) he wasn’t convicted or b) the magistrate made an order to suppress his name from being released.

As he WAS convicted, it must be the latter. Probably because it was his first serious offence. (Well, first offense he was caught for.)

What a joke ruling. This guy gets a fully suspended jail term and has to do a course. The 14 year old lives with it for the rest of her life.