Age of consent for a minor

[Casehardened]

I have started a new thread here as I didn't to post-drift Allatsea’s thread with what has now transpired to be irrelevant details.

I have confirmed what I suspected regarding the age of consent in relation to prostitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent

Main article: Prostitution of children
While the legality of adult prostitution varies among different parts of the world, the prostitution of minors is illegal in all countries.[citation needed] Furthermore, some countries enforce worldwide jurisdiction over any involvement in child prostitution by their nationals


On the assumption that the definition of a minor is someone who is under the under the age of majority, which is currently 18 in the UK (though I recollect that the previous government suggested dropping this to 16!) then anyone paying a under-18 for any sexual services runs the risk of being prosecuted for child abuse.

So I suppose in the end LS and I were both right

[Rights Fighter]

In cases that do not involve prostitution the age of consent remains at 16 years. Just to clarify matters.....

[LS]

.... but plod will still regard you as fair game for a designer Label should the other party be a gnat's hair short of 18, and therefore a minor.

[Rights Fighter]

Not with you hunnikins!! Are you saying that a young lad just under the age of 18 years having sex with a girl of over 16 years (classed as a "woman over the age of 16 years" will be designer labelled? (I understand the labelling bit not the age).

[LS]

RF, I'm not saying a 17 year old lad would be in trouble, but an 18 year old lad or older might have every reason to worry. Even though a female of 16 (over the age of consent) but under18 is technically still a minor, a child, therefore her bedpartner over 18 could be accused of having sex with a child.

In other words, should I fall out of the banana tree and into the arms of this rock chick for a night I might consider myself very lucky (and her very blind):



until the morning after, when the makeup came off (hers, btw). Stunning though she is without the makeup, now her real age is easier to see.

[LS]

CH,
How on earth did we get into a thread about child prostitution???

[Casehardened]

CH,
How on earth did we get into a thread about child prostitution???

I blame wikipedia is a person between 16 & 18 a child or an adult?

Depends what they're doing and if money changes hands

[Casehardened]

double post, can't get to grips with the new technology

But not to waste the space, just wondering whose hand is so near the nymph's knee.....

[LS]

just wondering whose hand is so near the nymph's knee.....

Dunno, but if that's the knee, I've been doing it wrong all these years....

[Rights Fighter]

Just to bring this back to the OP - when you said "a gnats hair short of eighteen that suggested to me under 18.

In all the years I've been working in this field I have never come across a case where a female making a complaint under the age of 18 years has been classed as a child or minor. And cases I have reviewed which have involved a complainant aged 16+ they have been referred to on the indictment either as :

"A woman over the age of 16 years"

or

"a female over the age of 16 years".

It also makes a big difference in sentencing. I have seen "evidence" change her age in order to sentence longer for longer. I also believe "compensation" can be more if the accuser states that she was under 16 years.

I take your point about the age of the male accused, but just to clarify further, one appeal I attended a few years back the CA judge considered whether, at the age of over 16 years she had given consent, and the indictment referred to her as "a woman over the age of 16 years". The appellant was her father so obviously not just a little over 18 years.

I am wondering LS whether you were indicted incorrectly.

It's not up to the police what goes on the indictment by the way - it's the Crown. Once charged the charge can be changed by the Crown at trial and/or after charge prior to going to Crown Court.

[LS]

I can check, I'll come back in a little while and post what I've got on my paperwork.

[LS]

Hmm, although my Compo Cheat was under 16 at the time, then the example of between 16 and 18 isn't going to apply.
However, had she been 17 I have no doubts whatsoever that I would still have been prosecuted under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, as the law still dictates that a minor is someone who is under 18.

Interestingly, when it comes to indecent images it comes under the Protection of Children Act 1978, not the SOA 2003.

Re my indictment, the words used are as follows:


c1 Sexual Assault
[name], on the [date] intentionally touched another, namely [name], and that touching was sexual and without her consent and you did not reasonably believe that she was consenting.

c2
Sexual Activity with a child
[name], between [date] being a person aged 18 or over intentionally touched a child under the age of 16, namely [age], that touching being sexual and involving the penetration of her vagina with a part of your body, namely your finger, not reasonably believing that she was aged 16 or over.

[Rights Fighter]

You never know it might help ............

I like your signature!!! In November 2004 I woke up on life support machine after suffering an often fatal form of pneumonia. My last memory was sitting in a restaurant and thinking "it's too smoky I have to get out of here". I was in the non-smoking area -which of course made no difference whatsoever.

I am asthmatic and smoke will set me off. Apparently I already had a chest infection and sitting in the smoky restaurant put the tin hat on it all. Not a pleasant experience.

[LS]

Yes I liked it too. I tripped over it by mistake last night when I was googling the history of Pan Am, and noticed the forum I was in had lots of these kind of isms at the end.
If anyone feels that bored, http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...1307168/#menu1

I might have to update my sig for daily isms.

[Rights Fighter]

SUMMARY

5. The Act is in three Parts:

6. Part 1 makes new provision about sexual offences. It covers the non-consensual offences of rape, assault by penetration, sexual assault and causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent. It defines "consent" and "sexual" and sets out evidential and conclusive presumptions about consent.



It covers child sex offences and offences involving an abuse of a position of trust towards a child. Familial child sex offences and offences involving adult relatives are provided for, as are offences designed to give protection to persons with a mental disorder. The age of a "child" in the Protection of Children Act 1978 has been amended to 18, and defences are provided for in limited cases where the child is 16 or over and the defendant is the child's partner.



A limited defence is also introduced to the offence of "making" an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child where the purpose of the "making" is to combat crime.



This Part also covers offences relating to prostitution, child pornography, and trafficking. It provides for preparatory offences, such as administering a substance with intent to commit a sexual offence, and a number of miscellaneous offences, such as voyeurism and intercourse with an animal.



Section 72 provides that there is extra-territorial jurisdiction for many acts which, if committed in England and Wales or Northern Ireland, would amount to offences under Part 1 committed against a child under 16 or (in the case of Northern Ireland) under 17. The Part extends to England and Wales and some provisions also extend to Northern Ireland.

7. Part 2 contains measures for protecting the public from sexual harm.



Part 1 of the Sex Offenders Act 1997 has been re-enacted with a number of amendments. A notification order enabling the notification requirements to be applied to offenders with convictions abroad has been created. Sex offender orders (s.2 of Crime and Disorder Act 1998) and restraining orders (s.5 of Sex Offenders Act 1997) have been combined into a new civil preventative order - a sexual offences prevention order. Risk of sexual harm orders, specifically designed to protect children from sexual harm, have been created, as have foreign travel orders, which can be used to prevent an offender with a conviction for a sex offence against a child from travelling to countries where he is at risk of abusing children.



Part 2 extends to England and Wales and Northern Ireland, and, save for Schedule 4 and the risk of sexual harm orders, to Scotland.

8. Part 3 contains general provisions relating to the Act, including minor and consequential amendments and commencement provisions.






Reading your last post:

c1 Sexual Assault
[name], on the [date] intentionally touched another, namely [name], and that touching was sexual and without her consent and you did not reasonably believe that she was consenting.

c2
Sexual Activity with a child
[name], between [date] being a person aged 18 or over intentionally touched a child under the age of 16, namely [age], that touching being sexual and involving the penetration of her vagina with a part of your body, namely your finger, not reasonably believing that she was aged 16 or over.

As I recall I do not think you were only a smidgen over the age of 18 years. The magic wording, to me, is "not reasonably believing that she was aged 16 or over". These are the words I am used to seeing in a non-familial situation.

Interesting though. It shows how complicated the "law" is and how easy it is for both parties to twist it to suit their needs. This is often where appeals succeed on a technicality - the judge has allowed the wrong bit to be added, or not, as the case may be.