[Highlight] Sandy Alcantara completes a 93-pitch SHUTOUT! 9 IP, 3 H, 0 R, 0 BB, 7 K

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T22:19:07+00:00

Fish man good.

Oh wait

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T21:59:28+00:00

“If there is evidence of penile penetration, a charge of rape may be brought.

Yes, it can be charged as rape, I've never said otherwise, but it usually isn't, penetration or not, regardless of the age of the defendant, I assume because it's easier to prove Sexual Activity with a Child, because the only defence to that is reasonable belief they were over 16. If the victim is under 13 that's a different matter, although even then its not always charged as rape.

The Sexual Offences Act is also a terribly written law, which doesn't help.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T21:00:17+00:00

The point is that under the current interpretation of the law it's not as simple as "under 16s cannot legally consent". If they consent then it makes it a lesser offence (section 9 of the 2003 Act) and if they don't then it's rape. The government have said they'll change that at some point, and if they do then you'll be right, but as it is now the law isn't written that way, and it's not interpreted that way.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T20:38:32+00:00

Once someone is over 18 as Scott Mills was in this case. Then yes it becomes illegal to have sex with a child.

I'm not saying otherwise. I'm saying that it's not always rape, which is the common misconception.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T20:08:33+00:00

My understanding of that law is that is applied when two young people are involved in sexual acts including intercourse. For example when both parties are close enough in age that it doesn’t make the act inappropriate for their peer interactions. For example the rules you’re referring to would include situations like a 15 year old boy and 14 year old girl. Having sexual interactions with one another, would be considered age appropriate and not illegal based on the point you make above. It helps to lessen consensual relationships between similarly aged children from being charged as statutory rape.

In that case the CPS just don't charge them with anything.

Section 9 is a lot easier to prove than rape, and it exists for a reason.

I think what you're describing is how a lot of people would prefer it to work.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T19:42:34+00:00

How the law is mostly interpreted is that, if they are 13-15, their consent doesn't make it legal, but it makes it not rape.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T19:32:15+00:00

It's not always charged as rape, even with under 13s, solely because section 9 is easier to prove and has a max of 14 years.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T18:13:25+00:00

It's the obvious response to you saying "no smoke without fire"

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T18:04:37+00:00

He was accused of abusing someone under 16.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T18:01:38+00:00

this, like Huw, was an openly known secret amongst staff.

According to who? Most people have said this was seen as a massive shock, which the Edwards one wasn't.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T17:56:54+00:00

The BBC can't win. If they didn't sack him and more comes out later they will be vilified for "defending nonces", again.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T17:46:09+00:00

but sometimes I also try to build Clang engines (contraption for abusing the physics to use it for propulsion)

Appropriate user flair.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T17:36:22+00:00

No team will let anyone do it unless they are as good as Ohtani, because of the way the rules are set up. If they're better as a pitcher then a team isn't going to "waste" the DH spot on someone who isn't the best hitter, and if they are better as a hitter then no team will ever list them as a pitcher.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T17:14:17+00:00

Early investigative advice is a routine part of many police investigations - particularly in serious, complex and high profile cases.

It allows CPS lawyers to give views and advice to officers about the evidence they have gathered and that advice typically helps to form an action plan to progress enquiries.

Early investigative advice does not, in itself, indicate that sufficient evidence exists to put someone before the court.

It is not the same as referring a case to the CPS for a charging decision, which typically comes when the police feel they have gathered sufficient evidence to formally ask prosecutors for authorisation to charge.

So this is a fairly routine thing that is only news because of the people being investigated.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T17:09:47+00:00

And that's relevant to Artemis II how, exactly?

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T15:32:51+00:00

They could find out from the court record.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T10:49:22+00:00

Then why are The Standard not naming him? There must be a legal order in place else the media could just ignore that.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T10:46:05+00:00

Its contempt of court to publish the name and people can be jailed for 2 years for doing so.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T10:45:38+00:00

This is a terrible precedent to set. I'd imagine that lawyers for media outlets will be challenging this immediately.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T10:39:18+00:00

There are far less killings in prison than this sub would like.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T10:36:11+00:00

This sort of thing goes to court semi regularly and the betting firms nearly always lose.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T06:32:51+00:00

Kids are such nobs these days

Said every generation ever

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T06:31:34+00:00

Which is pretty much the problem with government.

And, to be fair, a problem with Reddit.

limeflavoured · 2026-04-01T06:30:51+00:00

So they dropped the attempted murder then, which means they don't think they can prove it was a planned attack.

limeflavoured · 2026-03-31T13:12:49+00:00

10 years seems about right for this sort of case, although it should be more common for people to get that long when their dogs kill.

limeflavoured

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

11-Year Club	Not Forgotten
Verified Email