[ChavInAHat]

Just come back from my therapy session.
My T informed me that a 12 year old who rapes a 12 year old, by UK law, is classed just as much as a victim as the other child they raped

Which means that only one of the group of lads that raped me over the 2 year period would have ever been accountable for what happened. In the eyes of the law they would not be entirely accountable.

I feel sick.

I don't have any other words

:-o I didn't know that. I wonder how it is in my country. I suspect one would be held accountable and the other would not, or maybe they both would not.

No matter. It was wrong what they did and I'm not planning on pressing charges anyway.

But I'm sorry this was such a blow to you. It's wrong, no matter what the law says. Don't forget that.

[ChavInAHat]

I wasn't planning on pressing charges, but I was at least under the assumption that they were accountable for their actions and would have been seen as much in the eyes of the law.
I didn't expect my T to say that it is a safeguarding issue for the child rapist as well as the child who was raped.

I know it's wrong, but how can I give them the blame that I need to when it seems that they can't be blamed for their actions?

Who is there left? Their parents?

It's left me feeling more confused

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My T said my assaulters were probably exposed to a lot of pornography or something at home.

[ChavInAHat]

Is it bad that I don't care what they went through at home?
I was badly physically and emotionally abused by my mum which made me an easy target for these lads.

I didn't go round hurting other people!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh CIAH No, it's not bad at all.

[Miktis25]

Not at all bad; nothing that has happened to someone can ever excuse that person abusing someone else.

[starfruit504]

I don't care what UK law says, that kid is culpable. 12 is old enough to know the difference between right and wrong. If he had murdered someone, he'd still be a murderer. Children are prosecuted and sent to juvenile detention all the time.

Whether or not he'd be prosecuted to the full extent of the law because of his age is one thing -- to say he's not responsible for his actions at all because he's not an adult yet is preposterous.

Pretty sure if my therapist told me something that disappointing, I'd have to unpack it with her. It wasn't helpful at all.

[BlueEyez87]

I didn't know that but certain cases I can understand but not all you have to know the intentions behind it as well as the background. The child could just as well be a victim themselves and are acting out what has been done to them, or it could be a psychopathic child who does not care. In my opinion that is and would be a very fine line to walk.

[starfruit504]

Both children could be victims of abuse. But the rules don't change because of what happens to us -- survivors know that very well.

Intention doesn't matter. Just because you don't intend to hurt someone's feelings doesn't mean you didn't. Just because you didn't intend to abuse someone doesn't mean you didn't. You can be negligent, no matter your intent.

[ChavInAHat]

I just never thought any of this would be up for debate.

I was in quite enough of a bad situation at home without the added sexual abuse from a group of (when it started) then 12 year olds. The only one who would have been 'responsible' would have been the one older one.

I knew one of the boys pretty well his mum was a drunk who didn't care about him, but that shouldn't turn him into a rapist.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[starfruit504]

I'm really sorry that your T had to drop that bomb in session. I just can't see where that information is helpful at all. It sounds like vindicating the abuser. If my T did something like that I'd bring it up in session. "When you said xyz, it made me feel like you were xyz."

From outside legalese, it looks like most of us here would hold him responsible.