Inquisition 21
 |
 |
|
|
| Log In
|
|
|
|
|
| Search Articles
|
|
|
|
|
| Comments
|
|
|
You don't have to,
but if you log in,
you can add comments.
|
| Page Referral
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sex abuse
|
|
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14
Sex abuse is the latest expression of absolutism
Age of consent - Gerald's story.
Blackmail comments at bottom
On June 23 2005 Gerald was sentenced to 15 months in prison. See bottom where he says farewell to his friends.
Background
Gerald (not his real name) has recently been charged with engaging in illegal sexual activities with under-age boys many years ago when one boy was in his early teens, one in his mid teens, and Gerald in his early Twenties. He now awaits trial. The main boys are now called Man A and Man B. The relationship, which was intimate between Gerald and each of the two at various times, remained friendly and what Gerald perceived as ‘loving’, with all three meeting socially in Gerald’s house every Friday night for at least ten years. The reader needs to note that one reason they are now considered to be underage is that the age of consent in the UK, as elsewhere, has been changed over recent years.
At this stage events that were to be a disaster for Gerald took place. Man A and Man B married Woman A and Woman B. Woman A is a counsellor, and both women work for Social Services. Man A and Man B got jobs working with them in Social Services.
Under the probable orchestration of Woman A, complaints were made to the police and Gerald’s life is now in ruins. Two more boys from his past, who worked in the same social services establishment, have also testified against him. All were regular friends at the Friday night get-togethers in Gerald’s house. They also shared holidays and Christmas and other festive occasions together
His dialogue with the Home Office
Apart from the immense bad fortune of his two former boyfriends marrying social workers, one a counsellor, the case has wide implications for any relationship that began with an underage person, including young men starting out with girlfriends under 18. What may be of some value for us is that Gerald is fighting, not the main perceived facts of the case, but what he perceives to be the injustice and illogicality of the process that has convicted him. “What I dispute is that where friendships and relationships have been known to exist for a period of ten years or so, the state should not be getting involved at all. Someone going to the police and saying I was abused as a teenage boy but stayed with him for fifteen years as a lover should be swiftly shown the door. If this case goes forward, no one is safe. ”
Here now are relevant extracts from his dialogue with an official of the Criminal Law Policy Unit of the Home Office.
Gerald: Firstly thank you very much for your response on this matter, you folks must be busy, as I had given up all hope of a reply. I would like to continue this discussion by taking your comments and observations one at a time. Please note that my typing is in much smaller font so you can see where I am commenting (We have used normal font below). I hope that you will bear with me in regards to this, as I would like to discuss some of the points and underlying assumptions.
Please note that I am not really concerned in my studies with issues involving young children who certainly need maximum protection under the law, but in teenage sexuality and all its highs and lows. For the purpose of this discussion I would suggest we confine the ideas to teenagers only.
Home Office: Dear (Mr Name)
Thank you for your e-mail dated 31:03:2004 regarding the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which came into force on 1st May.
There is, where the Sexual Offences Act is dealing with children and other vulnerable groups, a natural tension between the prevention of exploitation and the rights of the individual. However, the new Act makes no changes to the age of consent this remains at 16.
Gerald: Not all children are vulnerable I certainly was not in my teenage years and there are those who would find this assumption troubling and paternalistic. It also smacks of a legislation catch-all that could lead to problems for those who see themselves as self determining in many areas before this cut off date.
Is the idea that a child can consent to invasive surgery, be held responsible for a crime and held to task for it before sixteen not an indicator that to prohibit consensual activity before this age makes fools of us all?
Why have you criminalized the young?
Are we facing an epidemic of exploitation I was unaware of?
Home Office: The Act sends a clear message to anyone who has the intention to abuse children, that sexual activity with a child is unlawful.
Gerald: Are you saying here that all sexual contact with a person under sixteen by someone under or over sixteen is abusive? My own experiences as a young man do not bear this out and I am a bit confused here. What about love, mutual attraction and good old-fashioned lust are teenagers incapable of these?
Home Office: Furthermore, the Government also believes that the age of consent is welcomed by many young people, because it can help them to resist unwelcome sexual advances.
Gerald: Can you prove this please and also indicate how this helps over and above other laws that already exist? How many young people has the government consulted on this issue? How many young people where consulted before the bill became law?
What was the nature of these consultations? Who represented and was consulted on the positive aspects of teenage sexuality and expression in order to level the argument? Sources please?
Home Office: There are enough pressures on young people today, in the media and elsewhere, to be part of a perceived teenage sexual culture; the Government is concerned that decriminalizing any type of sexual activity will place them under even more pressure to take part in sexual activity before they are ready to do so.
Gerald: This troubles me greatly; can you please give me concrete examples of these pressures? In addition the perceived teenage sexual culture! Is this saying that there is no teenage sexual culture? I am aghast that this would be so, as I for one hope there is a thriving teenage sexual culture where young people are as free to explore their sexuality as the rest of us. I suspect this is more to do with teenage pregnancy and fears over STD than anything else and is a typical of over reactionary policies in this area. Can you confirm what is the thinking behind the idea that teenage sexuality is only a perceived thing and how this thinking is backed up? In regards to when they are ready to do so, can you please tell me how this is defined, when is one ready? This seems to assume that suddenly we all learn everything about sex in one huge lump when it is in fact a learning process that is filled with successes and failures, as is any other. People do have fantastic and bad sex at all ages. They come away and feel fulfilled or not, regret it or don’t - this carte blanch idea that feeling bad about the sex you had in some way makes it abusive is dangerous and breeds a victim culture that can seriously damage people. It is often part of a natural learning curve that we should not be messing with, your comments on this please.
Home Office: However the Government does recognize that young people are sexually active before the age of 16 and much of that behaviour is consensual and not exploitative.
Gerald: Thank goodness for that, some common sense but confusing. This poses a number of questions.
Why if you understand the above are you criminalizing it? Are you talking here only about sexual activity between people under age or between people of unequal age?
Please define ‘much’. Are we saying that 10% is exploitative or 50%? Please define exploitative.
Home Office: The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) exercises its discretion in deciding whether or not a prosecution is in the public interest. The CPS and other criminal justice agencies must also act in accordance with the Human Rights Act to apply the law in an appropriate manner. The Government is confident that the requirement that any prosecution must be in the public interest will mean that where the there is no evidence of coercion or exploitation for example, and where sexual activity is genuinely consensual, cases will not be brought before the courts. This is the position now and we can see no reason why it should change.
(Editor’s note – is this new? Or true?)
Gerald: The naivety of this is astounding. It is obvious here that the belief is that the CPS is making the right decisions in regards to these cases. Why, if that is the case is (A named person) now heading up the historical abuse appeals panel as a direct result of miscarriages of justice in cases of historical child abuse?
In cases involving investigations of child abuse by the time it gets to the CPS the investigation has done untold damage not just to the victim (if there is one) but also the accused, his or her family and friends. In fact just about everyone loses. I am, interested to see that you mention evidence here and would like you to define exactly what evidence is. Are we talking about multiple accusers as justifiable concrete evidence? My research shows that actually little or no evidence is shown in most of these cases over and above word against word testimonies. Can you confirm or refute this please?
I have read more than one case where the young person involved did not want a prosecution to take place but it did? Are these anomalies? Can you please define genuinely consensual: is it possible one party could change their mind for any reason after the event and then use the law to seek redress?
You mention the human rights act; can you please indicate where the 2003 legislation may conflict with this?
Home Office: The offence of "meeting a child following sexual grooming etc." requires that the meeting is set up by an adult with the intention of engaging in unlawful sexual activity with that child. This new offence would require evidence of this intent.
Gerald: Please can you expand on the evidential requirement for me? Is this not thought crime? As you state under sixteen’s are capable of consenting, so why this law?
Home Office: In your e-mail, you talk about the particular need of gay persons to contact others who understand how they feel and that the internet does provide an opportunity to do that when it is perhaps not possible to discuss this with family or friends. I am sure you will appreciate that your 15 year old may be vulnerable at such a time and the Law is there to offer some protection. However, the process of learning about one's sexuality from others who have experienced the same thing is not the subject of this offence.
Gerald: This sentence is confusing also. I have placed a document I found on the Internet at the end of this letter; please note it is a graphic adult document. (The document, not included here, is a simple but dramatic example of how a sexual relationship can evolve between two people chatting over the Internet) But it does make my point adequately and I believe it could happen quite easily. Your comments please.
How does one learn about one’s sexuality other then by experimenting and having sex? Who from the gay community was involved in the consultation process for this law?
Home Office: I note what you say about the extension of the Protection of Children Act 1978 offences to people of 17 and 18. The purpose is not to interfere with the private behaviour of individuals of that age, but to protect them from exploitation by others through making and distribution of indecent images, particularly on the Internet.
Gerald: I understand the point but do not believe it will be used for that. This section of the law also discriminates against people who are not in relationships. If what you stated were true, if a sixteen-year-old girl sends a 25-year-old man an indecent photo of herself then would he not be guilty? Again a bit confused.
Also please define indecent. In one foul swoop this creates criminals of many, true or false?
Home Office: I hope this information is helpful.
Yours sincerely
Comfort Labeodan
Criminal Law Policy Unit
Home Office
END
Gerald goes to court to find that this first session is a cock-up
More background from Gerald
In one of our responses to Gerald we said, “It seems to us that you have a clear case of being able to use this in your defence. One would think that the facts of the length of the relationship speak for themselves. Can you prove that they were in your place after they passed the 18 year old mark, or letters from them, or third party corroboration?”
Paragraph in question: Home Office: ‘The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) exercises its discretion in deciding whether or not a prosecution is in the public interest. The CPS and other criminal justice agencies must also act in accordance with the Human Rights Act to apply the law in an appropriate manner. The Government is confident that the requirement that any prosecution must be in the public interest will mean that where the there is no evidence of coercion or exploitation for example, and where sexual activity is genuinely consensual, cases will not be brought before the courts. This is the position now and we can see no reason why it should change.’
We advised Gerald that it appeared to us that this Home Office response could be used in his eventual defence, but we shall have to wait and see about that. Meanwhile Gerald has collected formidable evidence to support his case that the relationships did in fact go on until the men were well into their adulthood years, such as letters and photographs.
Here now are some of his further musings as he awaits trial.
This is Gerald speaking.
There where originally four accusers and an allegation of downloading child pornography. The police raided the house, took all and sundry and found nothing that as they stated ‘they could prove I had seen’. They were very interested in whether or not I knew two boys of about 13 dressed in denim that were on the computer and could have come from any site like Tescos or Asda. It was ridiculous and bizarre. In addition they pointed to pictures of nude men and Gaydar logos, which they used to pinpoint my sexuality as gay! Why this is relevant is beyond me. They were absolutely insistent I admit I was gay as if this was some sign the accusations were true. I cannot imagine them doing this to a straight man.
In fact if they had a woman make a charge after living with a man for 9 years and knowing him for 15, saying she was abused and so were her mates I doubt they would even bother with the case. A fifth accuser then came forward and I was again arrested and questioned.
This time they tried to suggest that there was a pattern of dungeons and dragons playing that indicated a pattern or MO (modus operandi). (Unbelievable quite frankly and I anticipate you are smiling at this bit). During my questioning they raised every moral panic you can imagine, from video nasties to the Internet and pornography. At one point one of the officers howled "Oh come on, all these people coming forward how can they be lying?" Or words to that effect. Subsequently charged with 26 counts they have dropped anything in relation to child pornography and one of the cases where the guy was obviously over 16.
I have in the last week received their statement and it has given me something to get my teeth into and analyse. It contains numerous references to all sorts of counselling terms, references to video nasties, dungeons and dragons, pornography and grooming techniques, all this in language that they would never use, most bizarre.
The best part and one which gave me the biggest laugh I have had in a long time was that one of my accusers said that in order to allow me to abuse him I told him that in Italy cinemas had audiences that masturbated and then they shone a spotlight on them so everyone could watch. Well thank goodness for a good grounding of film knowledge as this is remarkably close to two scenes in a film called Cinema Paradiso in which the projectionist turns around the projector and shines it on the wall outside the cinema so the whole village can watch the film. The confabulated narrative that they have constructed between them has remarkable similarities across the statements and uses similar terminology. I hope having the statements analysed can show this.
The difficulty is going to be that because I knew these people so well and they knew me so well, that they have an ability to provide concrete information that I cannot refute, and then add on events that never occurred or that occurred in our lives later together. I always feel I am understating the degree of my relationship with these people whenever I write or talk about it. How can I fully express that these folk were at my house on a regular basis for years, Xmas, parties, holidays, every Friday night for dinner when I would cook? This is like the tearing apart of a family by the state and people who have become victim to the child abuse hysteria. It is ironic that they have all worked or work at the same place, a social services care centre. One is married to the manager and my ex-boyfriend is married to the assistant manager. They were apparently ‘counselled’ by the manager to help them ‘recover from their abuse’ as was stated in the vicious e-mails I was sent.
The fourth accuser who came forward later in the day, April this year, was the man I bought my current property with when I was first hounded from my home by the original harassment. His statement names nobody but simply verifies one claim made by the others, the details of which he knew because I told him them and he was present through all of this. Last year he walked off with £30,000 that he made in the house renovation business with me. This year I am his abuser. The e-mails I had printed and kept, that started all this, strangely disappeared the same time as he did. He is the only one I honestly believe is doing this for money. The degree of betrayal is horrific and as you stated in your message, the main problem I have with this whole case is what on earth is the state doing when it gets involved in things of this nature that have historic and founded relationships embedded at its core? Can they not see the blatant homophobia in this?
I do sincerely believe, as I have not been able to find another case like this, that we are in danger of setting a precedent that will mean anyone who met their partner when one was underage, will be open to this kind of allegation and state intervention in their lives at anytime. I do wonder and hope, knowing that the evidence they will give will be emotive and filled with rhetoric, that a jury will look at them and think, "Why would someone stay with this man in a relationship or as a friend for all those years when what they allege is supposed to have happened" and maybe somewhere in that thinking see a reasonable doubt that will enable this to once and for all, end.
(Editor’s note: Gerald has so much on his mind that he cannot be blamed for not being aware that much grief is being caused by the new legislation raising the age of consent in girls in both sex and child pornography cases. Arthur Blair writes comprehensively about this on this web site. See also the sad story below, ‘A 21st century tragedy’.)
I so much want my life back, I have only been ‘out’ as a gay man since my ex left to be with this woman. I believe it was my coming out that sent a jolt of fear through all of them that they may be ‘outed’ too and their involvement in same sex activities as me would come to be told. I feel we must never underestimate the fear that can overtake a man when he is in danger of being labelled gay. The only way they could stop this from happening was to label me a child abuser and in one simple act of betrayal and destruction label what happened to them as abuse and exonerate their past in the eyes of their family and new friends. In effect they are trying to ‘control the news cycle’.
(Editor. This is an interesting point. In an age of fear, one can escape punishment by pointing the finger first at an obvious target, such as the ‘offending older man’, and become a ‘victim’.)
As you can imagine the effect on my family has been devastating. My mum simply cannot understand why her son-in-law is doing this, or why these people whom she called friends also, could hurt me in such a way after so many years of hostility. (Editor. Mother saw boyfriend as son-in-law.)
I was studying a degree in XXX and YYY at university but that has unfortunately gone down the pan as well, as I simply could not cope. I am now nearly broke, the house is on the market and I am not well enough to work. Panic attacks are frequent, and I now live my life in safe areas, which consist of home, Asda, and the odd gay pub in (Home town) providing I am with friends. (Asda is a European supermarket.)
Friends - how thankful am I that I have those still around me, people I have met since coming out and old friends who knew my accusers and me well.
Where would I be without them? They are my only reason for going on really, that and the promise of some kind of future at this terrible times conclusion. I have faith in my solicitor as they have acted in similar cases before with success, but I will be urging them to join the Historical Abuse Appeals Panel. In addition I will be asking for an abuse of process hearing as a lot of the locations the accusers mention no longer exist and the fact that they were friends for so long enables them to emote until the cows come home about all manner of events that are true but can be easily twisted. In the event that this fails it is over to the courts some eight months from now by which time the house will be gone and I shall be penniless. I have researched the Selwyn Bell case after you mentioning it and unfortunately the judiciary has backtracked somewhat in a number of trials since in that it now only applies where there is a single allegation that is ‘word against word’ so it may or may not help.
(Editor. Someone else mentioned the Selwyn Bell case.)
Editor. Gerald’s disappointment with the intellectual level of his police questioners caused two of our UK readers to reflect on their own reactions to a recent BBC documentary on the work of the UK’s police child protection unit, which showed graphic footage of accused paedophiles being interviewed. Both readers were shocked at what they perceived to be intellectual shortcomings but they were equally shocked by one official being heavily tattooed and another sporting multiple ear piercings.
Gerald prepares for court
Gerald writes: “There have been a few developments since last I wrote, some quite bizarre. It turns out that one of my accusers, my ex boyfriend has been happily fitting kitchens for my family in the last few months. My mum discovered this gem quite by accident when talking to her brother about my case. He then dropped the bombshell that he was employing this guy to fit his kitchen and he had already fitted his daughters! This has caused them to have a dreadful falling out that may be beyond repairing. Mum loves her brother but he has put her in a very strange situation. Apparently he has cancelled the kitchen and with the cheek of the devil this guy then rings my mum’s brother and apologises for putting him in that position. Unbelievable, he knew the trouble it could cause and he is playing mind games. It does not look like
we can do anything about it though - it's too indirect unfortunately.
”I went to court for charges to be laid and the CPS cocked up the charges, could not decide on which ones and how many. I spent six hours sitting around and it was then adjourned for two weeks. Mental torture I say. The CPS has refused to let me sleep anywhere but at my home address, citing reasons they ‘did not want to go into now’.
I lost my rag a bit and had a pop but it really was a comedy of errors. And the language! There was plenty of use of the word child, victim and aggravating factors etc, distasteful, and disturbing to say the least.
”Have now received more statements from the police, including transcripts of my interviews, which they have edited nicely to fit the picture they want to present. At least when we get the tapes I can do some compiling of my own.”
Gerald refuses to plea bargain
(Gerald speaking again)
I have now moved, three hours from my original home and birthplace, and I’ve been four weeks here. The euphoria experienced on my arrival in a new city where I do not
have to keep looking over my shoulder all the time was amazing and my panic attacks stopped completely. Whether that is permanent or not I am unsure, and only time will tell.
But I am getting very depressed again and must snap out of it. It is the day after meeting my barrister and having to return to my old turf, and those events brought me down greatly. My thoughts are still dark after the meeting.
Been to the first ‘plea and directions' hearing that was adjourned for four weeks. I am now informed that the next one will be adjourned also, so I have made two trips to XXX this week and driven for 12 hours in total. At the hearing, the judge praised the prosecution for the case summary, like a proud schoolteacher – it was bizarre. I was unable to speak at that time, not that anything I would have said would have made any difference to the situation. All in all a strange day, as, when I walked into the court and sat, there was the mother of one of the accusers! I sat next to her and she hissed quietly "What is going on?" I explained that she should know as her son was an accuser.
She tried to get me to plead guilty, saying that I should not be going to prison, as I would never survive it and if I plead guilty I would not go to prison. She said that no matter how she tried to change his mind her son was going through with this and that he was completely under the influence of the main instigator and would not listen to her (his mother).
I asked why she had not been to see me, as she had been one of my closest friends. She replied that it was because her son had asked her not to. She asked for my mobile number and I said no, a wise decision I think. She said she was still my friend and felt caught in a terrible position. She is a friend, but first and foremost she is a mother whom I believe will do and say anything to protect her son.
I informed her that she may be called as a witness and she hissed that if she were she would tell the ‘truth’. She left the court and disappeared before we could talk. It was a strange and unsettling encounter.
As I already told you, I have met my barrister and he and the team want me to plead guilty to the accusations of one of my old friends and fight the rest. I have refused and stated that my plea would be ‘not guilty’ across the board. They were not best pleased, but do understand my position in regards to the issues. This has nothing to do with the law, which is simply the medium through which this tale shall be told. I have always maintained and still do, that in cases of long-term friendships that lasted as many years as this, that the state has no business even entertaining such claims, true or false.
Indecently assaulted people do not:
• Move in with their abuser and have a relationship
• Stay with him for years
• Visit him twice weekly
• Sleep in his house
• Eat his food
• Accept all his hospitality
• Spend birthdays, Christmas and holidays together
• Remain friends over 10 years
• Start businesses with their abuser
• Take £30,000 from the abuser when the business is sold
• Harass the abuser for 2 years before going to the police
• Tell the police that the abuser never hurt them in anyway
• Go on holidays together
• Pay half the bills
• Tell him they love him and demonstrate that
• Stay with him for 10 years and then say they never instigated sex
Again the spectre of prison raises its gnarled finger - six years my barristers
estimate. They see little hope of winning the case, and the prosecution have
made it clear already that they want a guilty plea on most of the indictments. My barrister has stated that we better hope for many women on the jury, as the men are not gong to like me as a witness at any rate. As a gay man I cannot get a fair
trial, as there is a strong likelihood that the jury will contain some homophobia that will compound the child abuse concept they already have in their minds.
When I get out in six years time, I shall be forty-six, unemployable and penniless, but if I plead guilty, I will be out in less than two years, but still unemployable and
penniless: either way, I can see no way to survive in prison. It will be the end of me. I feel hounded.
I am trying to piece together a chronology of my life, but am unable to see how this helps, as I knew them all at the times they are stating. They know that. This makes proving my innocence impossible. I am going to be unable to keep my home, as it looks now, so that takes my last asset. I have spent my life savings over the last year just keeping myself afloat. Unable to work for so long, I had no choice. I am at work now but making no money - my heart is not in it and I cannot focus.
My mother and sister are now estranged from me, as they just cannot take the strain, and who can blame them? I have still not told my father. Thankfully my friends are still with me in this darkest of times.
The thing just keeps going on and on, and all I want now is for it to stop.
(One of our advisers writes him)
“Gerald,
“Before trying to advise you on the plea decision, let me tell you that Peter Ellis in NZ (See his story under 'Country by country' in the menu), a gay man, wrongfully imprisoned for child sex abuse, refused parole several times rather than plead guilty, and served a full sentence. A woman bestselling author wrote a book about him which is causing a Royal Commission of Enquiry in NZ.
”While I have the greatest admiration for Ellis, here is another point if view I want to give you. It goes like this. You are being forced under the wicked plea bargaining system, which is torture, to plead guilty. Like Galileo, you can accept the plea, but in other ways go on asserting your innocence and when you come out after a much shorter sentence, you can write about it and reassert your innocence. If your lawyer agrees, we can go on writing about you after the sentence as ‘Gerald’ and try to keep the story alive.
”Don't assume you won't survive this. Many a good man, including those who pleaded guilty to 'actual child abuse', found friends, and new friends, on the outside after sentencing, offering to help them upon their release.”
Gerald replies:
“I like the idea of finding a publisher. Would any be interested in me or my story? I do agree that it looks like the only way out. Regarding your comments about the plea
bargain option, it simply cannot be. I will not wipe out the years of my life I spent with these guys because they were fantastic years. To plead would be for me to deny to myself the beauty of my life. In some way I am saying that this is not about innocence or guilt, but simply about it being no one’s business when relationships of such duration exist. I will not do it. But, as ever, thank you for your kindness and support.”
Editorial commentary
It is clear now that Gerald wants to fight this despite the risks and probable cost.
The issue here is also clear, and it could become a popular cause. That draconian sentencing guidelines for 'under age' sex should not apply where there has been consent and a resulting long duration relationship. The instances are legion, from grandparents, who first met at 14 and 15, to the huge number of potential accusations from bitter partners against their former lovers, created by the recent raising of the age for legal under-agedness, and even to the current travesty that is destroying the Pitcairn Islands. The exceptional issue in gay relationships is, as Gerald pointed out so well, the greater need and tendency for young men to find an understanding older partner or mentor.
Now that Gerald is determined to fight, there are still some options. The first, high risk with high potential, is to seize the high moral ground and go public under his real name. This exposes the accusers to being named and opens up the court to public scrutiny. The papers could go for it because they have real people, but the risks are obvious. The judge will hate it, while Gerald sacrifices anonymity and risks a public witch hunt . But his accusers could panic and run.
A less dramatic version is what is happening anyway - a campaign under the 'Gerald not his real name' story, which, while possibly of interest to the media, is of less interest than if they had a real name, and he loses the impact of scaring the hell out of his accusers by going public.
You are seventeen, going on eighteen – so watch it!
As Gerald’s court case draws closer, Arthur Blair continues to examine the age of consent conundrum.
To Gerald and Editor
1.You raise concerns about the Sexual Offences Act 2003 criminalising young people under 16 who engage in sexual experimentation.
It does this and it does it very well.
2. I think the first point to make is that the age of consent to sexual activity is not changing; it remains at 16.
However, the SOA’s new provisions on child pornography and prostitution mean that
a) anyone asking a person under 18 to provide a “sexual service” for “payment” commits a crime and the child (under 18) is classed as a “prostitute”
b) anyone asking a person under 18 for a nude-photograph is committing a criminal offence of “inciting child pornography”. While this could have been made out in the past as an offence of “inciting the taking of a indecent photograph”, the fact that a child is now anyone under 18 means that two people engaged in a relationship that is perfectly legal when expressed physically becomes criminal when it involves the use of webcams etc.
Those of 16 and 17 are no longer able to consent to certain things that older people are able to consent to.
Creating these new offences is a statement of intent; while the rareness of “incitement to take photographs” charges might suggest that the offence is not one that is intended to be pursued all that rigorously, the creation of these new offences is a message to the police and others that they are to be taken seriously.
The “pornography” offences had the proposed “consent” defence removed. This in itself implies that the “child’s” consent is IRRELEVENT. A court might well decide that a “child’s” consent to being photographed is irrelevant without referring to Hansard, but if it does refer to Hansard it will be forced to infer that such consent is indeed not a defence for the accused.
Hence, the government reveals its disdain for the “child’s” consent.
3. The Government's priority is to ensure that the law provides protection for children and enables the prosecution of anyone, whether an adult or another child, who coerces or exploits them into sexual activity.
Then why does the law not say this explicitly? It actually criminalizes ALL sexual behaviour where one party is under 16 and leaves the discretion to prosecute with the authorities – from the police becoming involved to a decision not to prosecute might take 12 months.
4. The Government does recognise that much sexual activity involving children under the age of consent is consensual and experimental and that, in such cases, the intervention of the criminal law may not be appropriate.
Again, then, why not criminalise coerced sexual activity rather than ALL criminal activity?
5. Of course, adults do not have a monopoly on child abuse and children can be bullied or coerced into sexual activity by one of their peers, One can envisage the scenario where a l6-year-old boy bullies a l4-year-old girl into engaging in sexual activity and it is essential that the law provides the same levels of protection for children regardless of the age of their sexual partner.
What if a 14-year-old girl coerces a 16-year-old boy into engaging in sexual activity?
Does the government believe that a 14-year-old boy can engage in sexual activity with, say, a 16-year-old woman without coercion?
Would the police et al believe that a 14-year-old boy would engage in sexual activity with, say, a 40-year-old woman without coercion?
Coercion does not need to be proved. In many cases it will simply be assumed.
6. With regard to the position of young people themselves, the Act includes a number of offences that criminalise sexual activity with children under 16. Where the defendant was under the age of 18 at the time of the sexual activity and the child was aged 13 to 15, there is a reduced maximum penalty of 5 years' imprisonment. The laws are drafted in such a way that they maximise protection for children by making it possible for children under 18 to be prosecuted for abusive or exploitative sexual activity involving other children. However, this does not mean that young people will face prosecution for mutually agreed sexual activity where there is no evidence of exploitation but the activity is simply part of normal child development.
What if a 15-year-old has a relationship with an 18-year-old? Will the existence of this reduced maximum penalty for under 18s cause the authorities to infer that a relationship with a person older than 18 is undesirable and therefore to be automatically punished?
Arthur Blair
Gerald goes on trial
Gerald speaking:
Well one more day to go till the trial and time for a little reflection. It's been four years after all (come August) since my harassment and persecution began and I have learned many lessons, some good, some bad and some downright awful.
The crushing horror of accusations of this nature leave no room for respite once made: they consume you in everyway. If asked to recall the man I used to be since my friends’ betrayal I would be hard pushed to remember what I was like, how I was with people, what successes and failures had made me the man I was.
I know that I was gregarious and outgoing, confident and strong, but I have forgotten how that feels now, and the flat line that is my emotional life means I may have forgotten how to feel as well, although I am sure with time this will return.
The degree of cruelty with which these men and women have acted beggars belief but despite it all I still find no reason to let hate into my heart, as it has a horrible tendency to make a home there.
It was the initial persecution that hurt the most, over and above police cells and visits to courts littered with human tragedies and presided over by power-blind despots. That absolute betrayal that only friends can manage, tearing apart years of love for ends that even they do not fully comprehend, leaves indelible scars.
I abhor the process that requires a gay man to come out - for me it was painful and wonderful at the same time. Probably the most traumatic but ultimately anti-climactic act I have ever done. To expect the support of my friends was surely not asking too much?
But support I did not get. Fear was driving them to realise that the years of on/off sex and relationships were about to be exposed because they would have to explain why they spent so long with a gay man if they themselves were not gay.
For many a straight man, sleeping with other men is an enjoyable experience, providing a number of rules and criteria are met. It must be secret, not as in no one should know, but that ‘in know’ one must talk about it. It must never impinge on their idea of being heterosexual and most importantly they must never be asked to admit to having any homosexual needs. It also helps if they have had a bit to drink as well.
Understanding the fear that being labelled gay is to a self identified straight man can perhaps lead us some way in understanding how what was fun for all concerned suddenly becomes a devastating experience suffused with the mythology of child molestation and filtered through therapeutics. If they aren't gay they must have been abused!
I expected at the initial arrest that the police and prosecution service would realise that I had been persecuted by these people. Would see that folks who stay around for so many years simply have no case to present. I was very wrong on both counts.
He police, CPS and the judiciary are intrinsically flawed in regards to these cases. I experienced homophobia at the hands of the police and lawyers, one-sided conviction- driven investigative techniques that avoid obvious pointers to different stories to be told.
I received the last of the unused material today and it is now clear that in some cases the statements were written and amended three times before finally being signed. That an original statement from my ex-boyfriend went from half a page to 30 pages and facts have been omitted to shore up the mythology that permeates the whole situation.
One accuser writes clearly in his pre-amended statement that he also was present when men where masturbating to pornography in other situations at which I was absent. Did the police ignore this important fact? You bet they did, completely omitted it from further statements and never investigated whom it was, and there is a reason why.
In the wording the accuser states that he was present whilst a guy whacked off to porn, but unlike me he was not interested in the accuser but just getting off. So this was ok as my accuser just sat there and let him get on with it.
Off course what this statement really means is that he was quite fine with it then and now, because there is no hint of homosexuality, just a bloke wanking off. That's ok; it's a little straight secret that can be kept between them. No prosecute, no persecute because no gay present!
In addition time frames have been changed between statements, amendments made as they tried to fit narrative to actual time events. Wording tidied up so as to make the statements more emotive. This is English fiction class writ large by the accusers and the state officials who ‘helped them’ get it right, right enough to ruin a life at any rate.
Guidelines for investigation into child abuse cases set down by the ACPO have been openly flaunted, no permission was obtained from the head of the DPP as is required, the recommendation not to use local officers to investigate was ignored. Notebooks from the police interviews have not been supplied during disclosure and the primary recommendation of looking out for evidence of collusion has been completely ignored as an insignificant fact that just gets in the way of achieving a conviction.
These people plotted for months to get their revenge: anyone can see that, but the police and CPS chose to ignore this helpful information. I insisted they interview every young person I had ever worked with and they did not bother. I informed them that an untrained woman who was also a wife of an accuser was counselling the so-called accusers. They investigated this and she made a statement denying she had counselled anyone. But lo and behold there in print in the first statements taken and prior to amendment the main accuser states that through counselling thoughts and memories have come to him! Who was this counsellor? Was it investigated? Of course not, that would be just too inconvenient. It was of course his wife who has denied all knowledge of it.
The original case overview sent to the CPS made no mention of anything that could have prevented this going forward; any shred of information that was able to help my case was omitted before being lodged for a decision on a trial.
Consistencies that appeared in statements, showing collusion, same phrase, and same words all pointed to a group effort but all concerned have ignored this. It just gets in the way of a good story after all.
Child abuse stories are the best as far as the public is concerned, Michael Jackson's on- going tribulations and the imminent release of Jonathan King mean my trial will take place amidst all this. What influence will it have? Does it help or hinder?
They will cry, say they are damaged, show tolerance and acceptance for gay people, hide the mental illness that is homophobia and lie as much as it takes, for to tell the truth now would be unthinkable. Courts and its attendees already believe that there is no smoke without fire and the CPS and police play on this by loading the number of incidents to ensure that finding someone not guilty 18 times would be almost impossible. After all, if they say it happened it must have! People do not lie about abuse, do they?
So to trial I go! It is not really a trial of course, just a shadow of one: it is really an inquisition, presided over by moral absolutists and judged as a story by a group of the public. The accused can only hope these 12 have not been so flooded with propaganda from the child abuse industry and the media that they may see some sense amidst the malicious torrent of hate they must decipher.
The trial gets underway
It is Day 2 and Gerald is in touch each evening. We cannot yet report what he is telling us as it is all from his point of view and sub judice. We can say that he is surprisingly bullish and finding the judge to be human and friendly.
Day 3. As it's in the public domain we can report that five of the charges have been dropped.
Day 4. We cannot yet bring the full account as we have only private sources supplying us from court, but on Day 4 in an act of incredible courage Gerald took the stand, faced his accusers and made a dramatic speech. He was cross examined first by the prosecutor and then in his defence he made the speech and the judge let him. The moment we can legally do so we will publish all we have.
Jury verdict - Guilty on some counts not on others. Now awaiting sentencing
We will publish his version of the court proceedings later.
Arthur Blair responds
Gerald’ case does have implications for people who have been involved in a sexual relationship with someone who was underage at some time during the relationship. But it also has implications for people who were in relationships with people who were NOT under the age of consent, but who later claim to have been. A 19 year old (say) could be dating a 16 year old, but then some years later the junior partner might decide to blackmail the older one, because they fall out, or anything.
It is all a matter of WHAT is allowed as evidence, and the difficulty of it being countered after a great deal of time. This is a problem in other areas as well (note many of the Operation Ore cases where someone was charged with offences between 1999 and 2004, for example).
This whole area was one of the reasons for lowering the decriminalisation of homosexual sex in the first place - men were being blackmailed.
Comment
As usual, Arthur Blair has come up with a central point. All men can be blackmailed, but homosexual men much more so than others. So, we now have two alarming potential consequences from any couple who begin a relationship when one is under the legal age. The first that the older partner can become a criminal if a later accusation is made by the younger one, even if prompted out of malice. The other that the younger partner, especially in a homosexual relationship, can become involved in blackmail. There is an interesting parallel with sex abuse cases where money extorted by the so-called ‘victims’ is described by the media, if it has been discovered, as ‘hush money’. So in sex abuse cases, even blackmail has been legalized and sanitized.
The other major point of interest in Gerald’s case (which may not be apparent to many men or women) is that some heterosexual men occasionally engage in sex with other men – something much better known to homosexual men than to heterosexuals. This apparently was the case in Gerald’s story. A question we must then ask is this - if that heterosexual is exposed or is in danger of being exposed as having had sex with a homosexual man is he more likely to scream ‘abuse’ and adopt the role of ‘victim’, as these are acceptable social attributes.
A homosexual man is hardly likely to claim abuse if we intends to continue a gay sex life, but what is the heterosexual man facing the shame of willing sex (even if just masturbation) with a ‘queer’ to do if the act of doing it becomes public? For example one of his colleagues, also involved in the ‘wanking session’ goes to the police.
On reflection, once Gerald’s main lover married a woman counsellor, he hadn’t a chance.
The probation service report
Summary. We are waiting until after sentencing before revealing Gerald’s real name (with his permission) and fuller details of what he is sending to us. The reason for the delay in sentencing was that the judge required a report from the probation service.
Gerald’s first experience with that service however suggests that it is more like a continuing grilling under the Inquisition than an assessment of him as a risk to society. What is also clear however is that he is throwing all caution to the wind, refusing to conform and challenging the system.
Here has written a letter of complaint to the probation service, very critical of one woman interviewer. A summary of the complaints about her follows:
She claimed that people do not lie about abuse. She ridiculed him as sounding ‘like a typical sex offender’ to her. When he offered the defence that people (victims) do not move in with and stay with their ‘abuser’ for years after the event, she stated that it was quite common for that to happen. We will be asking her where the evidence is that those abused move in with their abuser, or if she confused this with those who have to stay living with an abusive parent or other overseer. She refused to recognise that things were different within gay culture and equated the pain of being gay in school with that of being fat, which she admitted had been her own problem.
Worse from our point of view, she used abusive and insulting labelling full of a priori bias, such as that he was using ‘avoidance techniques’, meaning “You are not saying what I want you to say.”
Her interview appears to us to have been a grilling bordering on, if not already, psychological torture to make him confess and conform.
On June 23 2005 Gerald was sentenced to 15 months in prison.
Gerald says farewell to his friends
(The day before Gerald went to prison for 15 months, he sent this message to his friends.)
Well tomorrow is the last day of this whole fiasco and we shall see what that brings. I have attempted to start proceedings against various people, complaints against the police etc but to no avail. They simply do not want to know. My MP has responded and I am now happy that has happened but it
will be too late for the inevitable. Nevertheless the fight will continue after my release and we shall see what that new future brings. I have met some extraordinary people throughout this affair and reaffirmed how extraordinary my friends are, so for me changing the past would not be done
even if I could. To anyone who is about to enter this process that you know, I hope that you can tell them never to give in, to keep fighting, to laugh amongst the misery and remember that to face adversity with a strong heart and a healthy sense of humour will mean your best chance of coming out the
other end the decent person you went in.
When the state extends the doctrine of absolutism into the hearts, homes and minds of its people then it is time for change. Not revolution, which as we have seen in regards to ‘The Child Protection Revolution’ currently underway
leaves battered families and bleeding people in its wake, but evolution. One that requires us all to say that enough is enough, that societies, children, our future, must not be branded abused at the whim of a corrupt police or social services. That families and individuals have the power to sway the forces that assail their world so no human is afraid to touch, help, love or chastise a child.
How many have already borne the mental anguish that comes with inner turmoil over the ‘appropriateness of ones thoughts and actions’! What can be the future for us when we are bombarded with the culture of victim hood that pervades society and provides financial gain for the maliciously motivated.
Those whose motives are impure and ignoble, inflamed by the fans of hate. Will the perpetrators of lies and deceit be brought to justice or are they too victims in some way? Can the obsessive hate of sex be nipped in the bud and bring forth a new era of rapture and joy at nature’s most wonderful of gifts? Will we allow the young to be oppressed by ‘Sex Haters’ in any form?
What follows next will require a sea change involving law reform and repeal and direct action the nature of which I am unsure of. This can only be achieved by the very people the state is meant to serve, you and me.
As the months pass and I am able once again to fight back I can only hope that the strength you have all engendered in me will remain and grow stronger and upon my return that I may bring to fruition a new thinking that embraces intimacy, love and sex whilst respecting the individual and protecting the vulnerable.
Until then my friends
(Signed with his real name)
Commentary
Now there is one significant change. The case is no longer sub judice and Gerald wants his real name released. How will those who betrayed him now feel when he begins to fight back at the injustice he has suffered? What about the ex-boyfriend who after years with him married a counsellor and joined her working in Social Services? Even if his probation officers demand that he be silent to obtain early release, the sentence is only 15 months. Who would now want to be one of his accusers?
Gerald writes from prison
What a strange experience this is proving to be! I could understand how someone could ease into a life where absolutely each tiny thing is done or there ready for you, food brought, shower gel, razors, shaving foam – all provided. Tea, 3 squares if you can keep it down. All that's required is not to buck the system at any cost. It pays for nought from what I have seen so far and I cannot help thinking that co-operation rules over any conflict. False allegations wreck lives, we know, we have been there, are there or are going there. But we cannot affect any real change in the blink of one or more individual’s experience of tragedy, grief or loss. There is no silver bullet, shining armoured knight or panacea for change.
As a virus would destroy a larger organism by a process of gradual destruction, so must those of us who are fighting off this organism, try against all odds to recognise that we may be at the very start, halfway or near the end of the real change and the strength of numbers that will eventually lead to what we need. We could all list the things that would help, Statutes of limitation, and an end to trawling. More open police work, the return to former and more just times of the 'similar fact principle', removal of the compensation payable to be replaced by the provision of top notch counselling services that truly address the needs of those who have been genuinely abused. The list goes on and on. Currently we seem to be heading in the wrong direction in many ways. The cult of the victim, a predominantly therapeutic culture and a vicious sentencing policy born of media hype and myths are the norm. But that does not help the individual caught in the latest moral panic. It does not help the family and friends, or our society. The help that is needed is on a very personal level, and also a very grand scale. On a personal level we have the only possible way to look upon our plight, as a part of the great force for change that is the microcosm. Perhaps in 2, 5, 10 years time, a young man will find himself leaving the first interview with the police and them closing the case for lack of evidence or because the law has changed. It is this thought that provides me with succour, for any individual who faces this darkness, try to feel this sense of oneness with an idea whose time has come, then realise that in a grand scale you, in your denial of the absolutism of the state on these issues, stand alongside men such as Ghandi, Nelson Mandela and Peter Tatchell who for our futures have placed themselves in jeopardy and died in some cases for what they believed to be right and truthful. So when you face the worst, be you the one who goes to jail, or those who support those who will, the writers of letters, keepers of loves flame or friends who will refuse to let the bond break, remember, you may be a small part of a large issue, but when you fight for what is correct, an ‘idea whose time has come’ can never be kept down, and in believing that not only are you always free but you are in good company.
Gerald.
Jonathan King responds to the above
Gerald is right.
I found prison a life-enhancing experience, making me happier and more patient and tolerant. Half those in prison cannot read or write. Can you believe that? So I was able to help them enormously.
There are many "lost souls" who should not be in prison or in Broadmoor, but in a safe, secure, caring unit. I was able to console many of them. There are guilty people who are superb people with just one or two dark areas. There are the innocent who suffer like you would not believe. And there is the vast majority like me (and you); guilty of something but not what they were jailed for.
And society prefers to demonise (like Prof Roy Meadow) instead of seeing that the SYSTEM is institutionally immoral and that police and lawyers and judges and media are taught to blur the edges. When Gerald first wrote to me on my KingOfHits.com website, he titled his post LIKE YOU I AM FINISHED. I replied (from HMP Maidstone) "I'm certainly not finished; I'm only just started".
I like to think that attitude is sustaining him in Bristol.
JK
Sex abuse
Age of consent - Gerald's story.
A 21st century tragedy
'Speed assaults’ on children
Parents, your children are now truly at risk
The Australian inquiry
Death penalty for sex acts in Georgia
The atrocities of consensual sex
Jessie and Tyler - did the dog do it?
His art became his life
Reflections on Thomas O’Carroll
Salivating over paedophilia
Another front is opening up
God help human sexuality!
 |
|
|
