Source: Daily Mail
A man who admitted raping a 12-year-old schoolgirl walked free from court after convincing a judge she tricked him into believing she was an adult.
Barman Michael Graham, 25, met the girl through a social networking website.
She had posted pictures of herself on the site and her web profile said she was a 19-year-old college student and single mother who enjoyed drinking and having sex.
The girl was inundated with offers from admiring men, but only replied to Graham because he was the best looking, Leeds Crown Court was told.
They arranged to meet and went to Graham’s flat where they watched television, drunk vodka and beer and smoked skunk cannabis, the court heard Graham and the girl had ‘consensual sex’ four times during the overnight stay, but he admitted four counts of rape because legally a child under 13 cannot consent to sexual activity with an adult.
Well she obviously bloody did consent didn’t she? Not only was she willing, she sought him out, and what does smoking skunk have to do with this? She obviously consented to that too. I guess the author thought they could attack the drug through association while they are at it.
The girl’s parents thought she was staying overnight at a friend’s house and called police when she didn’t return home the next day.
She picked up a morning after pill after leaving the flat at 5pm and by the time she got home her parents had found her incriminating website on the family computer and she admitted the truth.
After hearing the full background the judge took a sympathetic view towards Graham and gave him a 12-month conditional discharge.
Judge Jennifer Kershaw, QC, said there was a ‘striking’ contrast between how the girl looked in school uniform while giving video evidence to police and the image she used of herself on her personal website.
Explaining the sentence to the court, she said:’I accept the defendant did not know how old this girl was. I accept he did not know she was under the age of 16, still less did he know she was in fact 12.
Once upon a time a man could reasonably guess a female’s age. Now, with the proliferation of make-up, provocative clothes, young people being used sexually as models etc, the lines have blurred.
‘It seems to me that this defendant was deceived. He was deceived in a number of material respects, both beforehand and during their encounter.
‘It is putting it too high to describe that which she did as sophisticated, but it was certainly deliberate, it was sustained and it was unfortunately effective.’
Females, deceitful? Never! I refuse to believe it, my feminist Marxist upbringing won’t allow it.
The court heard Graham communicated with the girl by email, text and phone after seeing a picture and profile of her on her Netlog site. He messaged her to say she was ‘fit’ and she replied ‘you’re fit as well.’
Her fake web profile said her ‘favourite person’ was her baby boy, she had taken three attempts to pass her driving test, had previously worked at a care home and was now a student living with her brother.
Weeks later they arranged to meet up at Leeds bus station on Friday 7th March and went to Graham’s rented flat in Headingley.
The schoolgirl told police she packed a condom in her overnight bag, but had unprotected sex with Graham that night and the following morning.
Kama Melly, defending, said the girl had received many messages from men who logged on to the website entry. ‘All of those men potentially could have found themselves in the position Mr Graham is in today,’ she said.
She appeared knowledgeable about sex and knew different positions. Miss Melly added:’He didn’t notice any difference in the complainant’s sexual development compared to other women he had had sexual intercourse with in the past.’
Well, the sex books for 6 year olds must be doing something…
The girl did not seem upset at the time and even sent Graham a text thanking him for a ‘great night,’ the court heard.
A psychiatrist’s report on Graham concluded he had no sexual interest in children and was not a paedophile.
As opposed to blokes in a park, obviously.
When he was phoned by the girl’s sister and told her real age he replied:’Oh s***.’ He later tried to access the Netlog site to leave a message warning other men about being tricked, but the site had been deleted and her parents have banned her from using the computer.
Graham has previous convictions for being drunk and disorderly, driving over the limit, supplying cannabis resin and possessing a bladed article.
His name will be on the Sex Offender’s Register for 12 months – the legal minimum – and he was made the subject of a 12-month Sexual Offences Prevention Order banning him from contacting the girl.
After the case Michele Elliott, director of the charity Kidscape, said she was ‘surprised’ at the sentence. ‘I find it hard to believe you would be fooled by a 12-year-old girl into thinking she is 19, especially if you talked to her.’
She said she had ‘some sympathy’ with Graham if he was tricked, however that was ‘tempered by the fact that all he wanted to do was jump on her, get her drunk and have sex with her.’
Who gives a fuck what she thinks anyway. I guess she expected him to just dedicate his life to providing her with useless little trinkets and shoes. She (like most women) seem to forget that they are equally (or more so) responsible for sexual encounters. They are the gatekeepers, no matter what they say to try and absolve each other of responsibility (just read the comments).
‘There’s also a message here to all parents to know what your 12-year-old daughter is doing.’
Fuckin’ A. She obviously knew what she was doing. Still, this man is put on the sex offenders register, and of course his face is plastered all over the place, while hers is ‘protected’. It’s a farting outrage.