Ireland....soon to be known as Pedoland

[IncubusGod]

In a ruling today in the Supreme Court in Ireland the offence of Statutory Rape was deemed unconstitutional and therefore can no longer be applied in this country.

News report here.

Basically it was ruled unconstitutional because according to the 1935 act if intercourse was shown to have occured with a girl under the legal age, the man was immediately guilty of Statutory Rape. Meaning there was no defense to the charge no matter what age the man or boy was or no matter if they had been convinced by the girl that she was of legal age etc.

To be honest it makes sense in alot of cases, including the one that caused the ruling. A man, who is now 23, had sex with a girl who had convinced him she was 16. He was 17 at the time and they were shown to have slept together four times.
Under the law he was guilty and could face up to life in prison under the act and would be placed on the sex offences register. The fact that she had lied and convinced him she was 16 ment nothing, until now that is.

(And specifically in this case the man is actually currently living with the girl who is now 21 and they have a child together, but she became pregnant at 15 so thereby showing underage sex)

But this also opens up the system to serious abuse now, as now no man can be found guilty of sex with an underage girl in Ireland.
The court called for new, different legislation to discourage sex with very young girls...which would certainly suggest that there is now no current legislation that can deal with it.

So...Dace, is this your new holiday destination of choice?

Victory for common sense or big exploitable loophole for fans of underage girls?

[SYMM]

But the court said today's decision does not prevent the Oireachtas from enacting different legitimate laws to discourage sex with very young girls.

Is the exact opposite of your summation.

And surely 'normal' (Non-statutory?) rape laws will still apply in cases of non-consent.

[IncubusGod]

Originally Posted by SYMM

Is the exact opposite of your summation.

No it's not, that means that the fact that this particular act has been deemed inapplicable will not affect any future legislation the government wishes to pass.

Basically it means that there is now no law against consentual sex with underage girls.

And surely 'normal' (Non-statutory?) rape laws will still apply in cases of non-consent.

Yes, normal rape laws will still apply. But my point is it opens up grooming and sex with underage girls by men of any age, so long as they convince the girl to do so and it is consentual.

[Yahwe]

The court made its decision on several grounds, including the failure to allow the defence that a genuine mistake had been made about a girl's age.

It doesn't mean that you are pro-peadophiles

it doesn't even mean that you are considerate liberals

it just means that you can't draft statutes

(nothing is ever as exciting as it seems)

[Ephor]

Makes sense to me, I only briefly read the report but the old legislation seems draconian and inflexible toward sentencing. The lines people draw on the topic are divisive enough without laws stripping people further of the right to a fair trial (which I'm assuming is part of your constitution?)