An example of bias against men in the courts

The following article appeared in the Brisbane Times on the 13th of December. It is a blatant example of the manner in which men are treated unfairly by the courts.

When reading this story please note that although the female perpetrator (the sister of the victim) initiated the most severe acts of abuse including three counts of rape and taking photos of the sex acts, she was sentenced to only 9 months, while her boyfriend was sentenced to 12 months gaol.

You would assume that the longer sentence would be related to a more severe crime but in this case perhaps it is more a reflection of society's underlying prejudice.


Sex pics show sister raping 9yo
Christine Kellett - December 13 Brisbane Times

A Brisbane private schoolboy who kept on his school computer photograghs of his teenage girlfriend raping her nine-year-old sister has been jailed for four months.

The District Court in Brisbane today heard the youth, now 19, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was engaged in a full-blown sexual relationship with the then 15-year-old schoolgirl in April 2005 when the couple decided to draw into their x-rated activities the girl's younger sister.

As well as masturbating in front of the nine-year-old child, the youth simulated anal sex with her in her older sister's bedroom, the court heard.

In acts described by prosecutors as "depraved", his girlfriend also photographed herself raping her younger sibling before emailing the pictures to the youth to use as sex aides.

The couple was busted when a student at Brisbane Boys College found the photographs on the youth's school email account and notified a school counsellor.

The boy pleaded guilty today to 17 separate child sex charges, including unlawful carnal knowledge of his underage girlfriend and the indecent treatment of her sister.

His girlfriend, now 17, is already serving a nine-month sentence for three counts of rape following her appearance in the Children's Court in September.

''This is a case of gross misjudgement,'' the youth's defence barrister John Griffin QC argued in an unsuccessful bid to keep his client out of jail.

The court was told the couple had met over the internet and began having sex as "boyfriend and girlfriend" in November 2004.

Their parents were aware of the situation, but did not realise the extent of their exploits, which included the use of sex toys.

Crown prosecutor Petrina Clohessy said it was towards the end of their 18-month fling when the couple began to involve the nine-year-old.

In one incident, the youth bent her over a bed and rubbed his genitals on her buttocks while her older sister watched.

But Mr Griffin said there had been no force or violence used against the youngster, and the more serious offences had in fact been committed by her sister.

The youth had not instigated the taking of the photographs or used them for any other purpose after receiving them by email, he said.

Senior Judge Gilbert Trafford-Walker agreed, but insisted jail was the only punishment befitting the youth.

He sentenced him to a total of 12 months' jail for the abuse of the little girl, but did not record convictions for his unlawful carnal knowledge of her sister.

He will be released after serving four months behind bars and will spend two years on probation.