This case demonstrates that Judges are just as often ill informed about sexual abuse no matter what gender the offender is:
A judge caused outrage yesterday after he refused to jail a woman who had sex with a 14-year-old boy and instead told her: 'He seduced you.'
Sharon Edwards, 40, bombarded the boy with as many as 50 text messages and emails a day, offered to buy him cocaine and regularly lured him into her bed.
Yet she walked free from court yesterday after Judge Peter Fox QC said the married housewife was an unhappy woman who was unable to resist the advances of a child. 'You had been a very unhappy lady for a very considerable period of time when this 14-year-old boy seduced you, and not you him, both so far as sexual matters and drugs are concerned,' he said.
If the 14 year old had been a girl and the 40 year old a man would the result have been the same? Apparently the victim's mother did not think so:
But last night the boy's mother attacked the judge's decision. She said: 'He's still a child. If this had been a man he would almost certainly have been jailed but instead she gets to walk free and pick up her life.
'She still lives round here and can now do whatever she wants and go wherever she wants. It's outrageous. I can't believe what's happened.'
Edwards, a mother of two, admitted having sex with the boy on four separate occasions between September last year and January and yesterday was given a 12-month jail term, suspended for two years.
She also pleaded guilty to offering to supply the teenager a Class A drug. The boy, who cannot be named, was a pupil at the same school her two sons attend when the relationship began.
This just sends a terrible message to people.
Last night Claude Knights, director of children's charity Kidscape, said: 'This sentence sets an awful precedent. The judge seems to be suggesting that in some way this is all down to the victim.
'But how on earth can he be regarded as responsible for what happened? He is just a child. He may look mature and he may even be sexually active but he is still a child and this is still abuse.'
Diana Sutton, head of policy at the NSPCC, said: 'It is unacceptable to describe the child victim in this case as the seducer. This gives out completely the wrong message - that sex abuse is the fault of the child, when in reality it never is.'
I have to agree with Mr. Knight and Ms. Sutton and hopefully someone will be able to educate this judge so he gets some understanding. You can read the entire article here.
To quote Dr. Christine Hatchard:
In our society, mothers are automatically given special status, and certain characteristics, such as “nurturing, caring, protective” are attributed to them. The truth is, at her core, a mother is a woman and a human being, and like any other human being, is capable of the same range of violence, hate and autonomous behavior. To view women or mothers any differently, is to not realize their full potential as human beings, for better or for worse.
Double Standard
Friday, October 17, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)



No comments:
Post a Comment