• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

Pedophile escapes jail, says he didn't know sex with a 13 year old was illegal

Mr. X

Mr. X

It's... kinda effective?
    • 2,391
    Posts
    18
    Years
    A muslim who raped a 13-year-old girl he groomed on Facebook has been spared a prison sentence after a judge heard he went to an Islamic faith school where he was taught that women are worthless.

    Adil Rashid, 18, claimed he was not aware that it was illegal for him to have sex with the girl because his education left him ignorant of British law.

    Yesterday Judge Michael Stokes handed Rashid a suspended sentence, saying: 'Although chronologically 18, it is quite clear from the reports that you are very naive and immature when it comes to sexual matters.'

    Earlier Nottingham Crown Court heard that such crimes usually result in a four to seven-year prison sentence.

    But the judge said that because Rashid was 'passive' and 'lacking assertiveness', sending him to jail might cause him 'more damage than good'.

    Rashid, from Birmingham, admitted he had sex with the girl, saying he had been 'tempted by her' after they met online.

    They initially exchanged messages on Facebook before sending texts and chatting on the phone over a two-month period.

    They then met up in Nottingham, where Rashid had booked a room at a Premier Inn.

    The girl told police they stayed at the hotel for two hours and had sex after Rashid went to the bathroom and emerged wearing a condom.

    Rashid then returned home and went straight to a mosque to pray. He was arrested the following week after the girl confessed what had happened to a school friend, who informed one of her teachers.

    He told police he knew the girl was 13 but said he was initially reluctant to have sex before relenting after being seduced.

    Earlier the court heard how Rashid had 'little experience of women' due to his education at an Islamic school in the UK, which cannot be named for legal reasons.

    After his arrest, he told a psychologist that he did not know having sex with a 13-year-old was against the law. The court heard he found it was illegal only when he was informed by a family member.

    In other interviews with psychologists, Rashid claimed he had been taught in his school that 'women are no more worthy than a lollipop that has been dropped on the ground'.

    When Judge Stokes said Rashid 'must have known it was illegal, unless he was going round with his eyes shut', defence lawyer Laban Leake said reports suggested Rashid had a 'degree of sexual naivety'.

    'The school he attended, it is not going too far to say, can be described as a closed community and on this occasion this was perpetuated by his home life.

    'It is not too far to say that he may not have known that having sex with a 13-year-old girl was illegal.' Judge Stokes sentenced Rashid to nine months youth custody, suspended for two years, along with a two-year probation supervision order.

    Describing Rashid, the judge said: 'He's had an unusual education, certainly in terms of the sexual education provided. Comparing women to lollipops is a very curious way of teaching young men about sex.'

    But he said that Rashid knew what he was doing was wrong.

    'It was made clear to you at the school you attended that having sexual relations with a woman before marriage was contrary to the precepts of Islam,' he said.

    Addressing Rashid, the judge said: 'I accept this was a case where the girl was quite willing to have sexual activity with you. But the law is there to protect young girls, even though they are perfectly happy to engage in sexual activity.'
    Click to expand...

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ing-meant-didnt-know-illegal-sex-girl-13.html

    We can expect the crime rate in the UK to take a massive jump - I didn't know it was illegal to steal this car, I didn't know it was illegal to beat this guy to death, I didn't know it was illegal to rape that woman, I didn't know it was illegal to... ect, ect. You get the idea.
     
    Well I don't think it will, seeing how the judge knew better than to hear his excuses, even though he didn't get a sentence. Especially after this I don't think people will get away with such an excuse easily.
     
    Since when does ignorance of the law mean that the law doesn't apply to you? o_O

    The guy is scum and the judge is a fool
     
    Wait.. the beginning of the article said he raped the girl. But yet later it says he seduced her.. so what the hell happened?

    Raped or seduced?
     
    I literally facepalmed at this.

    I'm not going to be so fast as to call scum on the guy. I'm Muslim myself and have seen these Muslim schools which I would do anything NOT to go to, mind you. I'm not saying all of them teach that women are worthless, cause they don't. But I wouldn't be surprised if one did, because, sadly, I've seen cases where people degrade women to that point. It's really sad, honestly.


    That being said, I do think this guy is lying out of his teeth. My proof is the fact that he has Facebook, to be totally honest. From what I've seen, the people who insinuate that women are worthless are people who are old fashioned and don't really like technology. I know many brown people who hate Facebook. Hell, my mother did.


    Going back on topic, I still feel this guy should have been sentenced. If not prison, give him community service or something. As for the girl, if what the dude says is true, then this is also her fault for instigating the union.
     
    So claiming you didn't know something was illegal gets you a free pass????

    WHY WAS I NOT INFORMED OF THIS???? XP.
     
    LilJz1234 said:
    Wait.. the beginning of the article said he raped the girl. But yet later it says he seduced her.. so what the hell happened?

    Raped or seduced?
    Click to expand...
    I thought he said that she seduced him. Don't believe it.

    But, if she was of legal age that still wouldn't make sense because how can you be seduced by someone you think is worthless?
     
    In the US, this would never fly. "Ignorance of the law is not an excuse to commit a crime." This is basic US legal standard.

    EDIT: Looks like you're misrepresenting the very article you posted. You imply that the judge let him go because "he didn't know it was wrong," but that's not at all why he escaped a sentence.
     
    Hardly. The excuse he gave was that he didn't know it was illegal.

    While his upbringing played a part in his lack of knowledge, it doesn't change the fact that he made this claim, and it was accepted.
     
    Actually, I think I misread it.

    Still, like I said, that wouldn't fly in the US.
     
    Speaking of weird ways the laws work. Here in Finland you can get about 6months (whats the word for prison time when you dont have to nessesarily be in prison?) for rape or pedophilia and maybe about few thousand euros of fine. But if you illegally download a file you can get 2years unquestioned prison time and about 10.000 euros fine. Doesnt make sence at all. These have caused quite a commotion here. :/ Of course these are case sensitive and vary between cases.
     
    He gets away with rape by saying he didn't knew that having sex with a minor was illegal? I tend to have mix feelings about excuses like these, because what if it's actually an innocent citizen who wasn't fully aware of some of the laws in his/her residence and accidentally breaks the law and is sent to jail, but then there's alsoone individual who enjoys breaking the law and uses this excuse to get away with his/her self-intended crimes.
     
    Well if any good does come of this then it will give people who are unaware of actual obscure laws an excuse to be let off.

    Of course the case is awful and I feel terrible for the parents of the girl, though. People should pay more attention to what their kids are doing / kids should be smart enough to not talk to old strangers these days.
     
    This sickens me. I'm incoherent with how wrong everything about this is.

    You don't rape children. They can't consent to sex. Nothing at all excuses this scum's behavior. Not his ignorance of the law, if in fact he is ignorant and that's not just some excuse, nor his or anyone's upbringing that teaches them to debase women. I cannot believe any institution of civilization like a court would excuse terrible behavior like this.
     
    I thought that not having sex with someone who's 13 was just common sense. Time to throw that thought out the window.
     
    He says the little girl "seduced" him. 13 year old girls do not seduce. 13 year old girls get raped. Even if she consented, even if she thought it was what she wanted. She was ****ing 13 and he was an adult!
    Pleading ignorance is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Next thing you know, a little girls going to get shot in the head by a Muslim and he's going to get excused because he didn't know it was wrong. Because he compares girls to lollipops.
    That judge should not have let this slide.

    I for one think the guy is full of ****. If he was just basing his excuse off of the Islamic religion, then he wouldn't have had sex with her in the first place. Surely pre-marital sex isn't allowed. So **** that.

    The fact that he says she seduced him just goes back to the victim-blaming crap. "She wore a low cut shirt, she tempted me." "She was drunk." "The way she talked to me was like she was asking for it." If someone says no or stop at any time, you stop! And if it's a child, she can't even make that decision because, well, she's a child. Just take a child as an automatic "no," because they aren't prepared to make that decision. THAT is why it's illegal to have sex with a child, damn!

    To think that she wasn't even a teenager, not a highschooler, but a potential 7th grader. Ugh. He should have known better, and being a damn misogynistic Muslim isn't an excuse.
     
    His charges shouldn't have been dropped, and the parents should be charged with child endangerment as well. I don't see how they can be exchanging Facebook messages, texts, and phone calls for two months with the parents being completely ignorant. And then letting her go to some random hotel room alone? What 13 year old does that? What if he did something more than rape?
     
    This dude must be the only person to not know this. The girl knew, the girl's friend knew, his family knew - but not him. Isn't that weird? Who would have thought that the only person to not know that having sex with a minor is illegal would end up in court over it? The judge must have been so surprised.

    This case is some serious horse crap. Even if the dude didn't know it was against the law, the judge flat-out said that the school he went to taught that it went against Islam. So even if he didn't know it was wrong for reason A, he knew it was bad for reason B. He just chose to ignore reason B and do it anyway because - surprise - he chose to.
     
    Keiran777 said:
    His charges shouldn't have been dropped, and the parents should be charged with child endangerment as well. I don't see how they can be exchanging Facebook messages, texts, and phone calls for two months with the parents being completely ignorant. And then letting her go to some random hotel room alone? What 13 year old does that? What if he did something more than rape?
    Click to expand...

    The parents could have done a better job but it's really not hard for a child to conceal this stuff. I know my parents know virtually nothing about what I do on the internet or who I text (not that I'm up to anything that would endanger me, obviously, but I like my privacy). Letting her go to the hotel was quite the oversight but I would assume she said she was going to a friend's house or something like that. It's a lesson for the parents for the future, I suppose.
     
    Miss Anne Thrope said:
    He says the little girl "seduced" him. 13 year old girls do not seduce.
    Click to expand...
    That's simply not true. Puberty begins at a different age for everyone, but I know I was well aware of the opposite sex as early as third grade, which would have been when I was 9. By the time I was in 7th grade or so, I was actively seeking sexual activity like most boys my age, and that was age 13. Girls generally start puberty even earlier.

    The argument has never been that young teens don't pursue sex. If you honestly think that, you're somewhere between naive and amnesic. The argument is that they pursue it but they are not mentally developed enough to make an informed, logical judgment regarding the issue without letting their libido get in the way. But personally? I hardly think that's something unique to people under an arbitrary age. Plenty of adults think with their libido and get into all sorts of trouble because of it. AoC needs major reforms and like I've said a thousand times, there's no easy solution.

    That said, law is law, and ignorance of it should not be an excuse to violate it. And in the US, using that excuse would just make the judge laugh at you. As it should. The solution should be that any education require basic knowledge of laws surrounding such topics.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top