Everyday Victim Blaming

challenging institutional disbelief around domestic & sexual violence and abuse

Judge describes 13 year old girl as “sexual predator”

http://courtnewsuk.co.uk/newsgallery/?public_id=33935

YORK A judge allowed a paedophile to walk free today (Mon) after his 13-year-old victim was described as a 'sexual predator' in court. Judge Nigel Peters told Neil Wilson, 41, he had also taken account the fact the child looked older. Prosecutor Robert Colover, told the judge: 'The girl is predatory in all her actions and she is sexually experienced.'

Bloody outrageous.

Added by Admin:

We have started a petition to campaign against victim blaming language being used by the CPS. You can sign it here:
http://www.change.org/dontblamethevictim

Download this post as PDF? Click here Download PDF

, , , , , ,

Comments are currently closed.

12 thoughts on “Judge describes 13 year old girl as “sexual predator”

  • Shira says:

    How can this be permitted to stand? It is the responsibility of adults to teach children how to behave. Man or woman, no adult should be allowed to excuse criminal behavior on his or her part by saying it was induced by a child’s inappropriate behavior. Of course children act inappropriately. And adults correct them and that is how they learn. This is an insane decision that poses a threat to all of our children, both boys and girls.

    • Lynne says:

      This truly is an insane decision and unbelievable comments made. It just seems to keep happening. The issue of so many people, almost entirely male, not understanding child sexualisation must be dealt with. Judges must be educated properly until they ALL understand. I do hope the sentence can be reviewed.
      I am pleased to hear that judges will be hand picked and get extra training for these cases but it is a sad reflection that. It is necessary.

  • charlene todd says:

    Disgracefull….we are talking about a child.this has just taken us years back.

  • Mike PITHER says:

    Perhaps the judge should be investigated. Would you trust him with your child; I wouldn’t

  • Caroline says:

    This is absolutely disgusting. This is bullying at it’s worst in courts. The prosecutor and the Judge should be removed form their positions because neither are doing their job properly. We see bullying like this in courts when a Prosecution lawyer is “trying to win their case” with little respect for the victim they are abusing, little respect for the children they put at risk when the paedophile goes free. This must stop. How dare they treat the child this way!

  • Caroline says:

    A 13-year-old girl “looked a bit older” and “had a mental age of about 14-15”, so therefore she can not only apparently give consent but can be described as a “sexual predator”. Her abuser, Neil Wilson (who had a stash of child abuse images on his computer), puts the blame on her, claiming she “made him do it”, and therefore walks free.

    A 15-year-old girl who both looked and had a mental age of about 20 spontaneously fell for Jeremy Forrest, who happened to be 30 years old and her teacher, but had no inappropriate images of children on his computer nor any history of predatory behaviour. He reciprocated her feelings and they had a genuinely consensual relationship, which both still want to maintain. Neither of them blame each other or claim the other exerted any pressure, but she is treated as a victim of abuse (against her will) and he is given 5 1/2 years.

    Swap the sentences round and then you’ll have justice. And give Stuart Hall 15 years instead of 30 months. Oh, and stop implying that a 13 year old girl is capable of “forcing” herself on a 41 year old man. Jesus.

    • Moira says:

      A 13 year old who is coming on to somebody must be seen by that person as vulnerable in the first place, so taking the child up on it is doubly wrong.

  • Dave Hignley says:

    can we have some clarification here? on the bbc News it says the accused was handed a suspended sentance. I wouldn’t like to think that the petition could be in some way voided because the situation its describing is not accurate

    • Admin says:

      The offender was given a sentence of 8 months, suspended for 2 years. Which means that if he offends again during that time, the suspension us removed and he would serve the sentence for the new offence, plus the 8 months from these ones. Hope this is clear.

      Although it is a moot point now as we WON and the CPS are investigating! The sentence review will be undertaken by the Attorney General, as per usual procedure.

  • […] aggressive” (in case you’ve been living under a rock, here’s a link to the EVB campaign against such language). This blog post was tweeted out by David Allen Green today, so that […]

  • cat says:

    No one has mentioned the fact that sex with a child under 16 is illegal anyway, regardless of anything else, he clearly broke the law and should be punished for it. As a 41 year old man,he should not have been involved sexually with a 13 year old. how the hell is it her fault ??? the judge should be investigated as he clearly doesnt know the law about consent to sexual activity and that no one under 16 can give consent due to being a child !