Completely Unnecessary

In case you thought Werribee was a one-off, Judge Sarah Bradley wants you to know that boys’ fun is for all ages.

Judge Bradley refused to record convictions against six teens and suspended the sentence of three more in the gang rape of a ten-year-old girl in far north Queensland. In her ruling, the judge said that the girl had ‘probably agreed’ to the sex.

Leaving aside for a moment the fact that a ten-year-old can’t legally consent to sex with anyone - really Judge Bradley? You think a fifth grader said, ‘Yeah, let’s get it on’ to nine boys and men several years (at least) her senior?

Three of the men, the ones who received suspended sentences, are 17, 18 and 26 years of age.

According to the Daily Telegraph, the men all come from powerful Cape York Aboriginal families, whereas the girl ‘does not enjoy the elevated family status of her attackers’. She’s now been put in foster care.

Judge Bradley argues that her judgment was legitimate since it’s the ruling for which the Crown asked.

I know it’s unfair that I’m extra appalled that a female judge handed down this ruling. Women shouldn’t be held to higher standards, nor should they be expected to rule more harshly cases where violence has been visited upon women. But, god, all I can think about is how little I was when I was ten.

From what I’ve read of the court statements, it seems as though Judge Bradley is explaining to the men that sex with those under sixteen is wrong. And ideas about legal consent are different in some Aboriginal communities. But I just can’t understand a 24-year-old man who participates in the gang rape of a fifth grader.

Or the judge (and Crown) who excuses him.

Links:
PM ‘disgusted’ at gang rape comments [The Age]
Row over gang rape of 10yo [The Daily Telegraph]
Girl, 10, ‘probably agreed’ to sex [The Courier Mail]

Vaguely Related

• Family of ‘Rape Girl’ Finally Interviewed
• Women and the World: It’s Not Going Well.