High Court bans man with low IQ from having sex | Mail Online
No wonder sasguru is so angry all the time.
No wonder sasguru is so angry all the time.
-
-
Originally posted by DimPrawn View Post
-
An interesting statement:
I didn't realise the Bellylaugh was so influential.because sex is 'one of the most basic human functions' according to the Daily Telegraph.
A better source than the Daily Wail for the details is here.
The judge has ruled that within law, that as the bloke concerned does not have the mental capacity to consent to sex, he must be protected from the other bloke in the institution that wants sex with him. That's rather a different slant on the story.
The judge also ruled the bloke is to be given sex education by the local authority in the hope he will gain the capacity to decide whether he wants to consent to sex.
So, a different way of reporting the story would be:
"Adult 'paedophilia' within council care home prevented by courts
A judge has ordered that a man with the mind of a child must in future be protected from predatory men resident in the same council-run institution."My all-time favourite Dilbert cartoon, this is: BTW, a Dumpster is a brand of skip, I think.Comment
-
A different slant, although not actually supported by that link as far as I can see.
What a F* waste of money this court case was and now they are planning to waste more on sex education in the hope he will gain the capacity to decide whether he wants to consent to sex? Ludicrous! He appears to have sufficient IQ to say if he is happy or not and since neither of these blokes is likely to get pregnant it would seem a lot cheaper to just give them both a health check and monitor him.
Anyway, you can't believe a word Mostyn J says. Munby J is much sounder chap altogether.bloggoth
If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'
John Wayne (My guru, not to be confused with my beloved prophet Jeremy Clarkson)Comment
-
If he did not or could not give consent then why there is no prosecution for rape?Comment
-
Actually, The Daily Mail is the best source as it mentions one crucial fact that the other sources don't. That he himself enjoyed the relationship and wanted it to continue.
Amid all the legalistic, interfering bollux I think that one fact is pretty crucial.bloggoth
If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'
John Wayne (My guru, not to be confused with my beloved prophet Jeremy Clarkson)Comment
-
I get the impression the council has gone to the courts for clarification as to what they should do. Should they be permitting man A to continue as it his right to do so, or should they be protecting man A from what is being done to him?Originally posted by AtW View Post
Until that is clarified, it is unclear whether there is rape.
I cannot imagine details of activities occurring prior to the ruling being able to be used in court as evidence of a crime since there was no intent or knowledge of a crime being committed. And, even of a prosecution were successful, what could you do? Fine someone who is in permanent residential care? Or send them to prison? This looks like one of those cases where it is best to not dwell too much on what went on before the ruling. There are no winners here.My all-time favourite Dilbert cartoon, this is: BTW, a Dumpster is a brand of skip, I think.Comment
-
And if it were a 9 year old girl saying she liked it?Originally posted by xoggoth View PostMy all-time favourite Dilbert cartoon, this is: BTW, a Dumpster is a brand of skip, I think.Comment
-
-
What about when a female teacher has relations with an underage male student?Originally posted by RichardCranium View PostOriginally posted by MaryPoppinsOriginally posted by vetranComment
Comment