Daily Mail: Married JW woman, 36, had sex with 15-year-old boy breaks down in tears as she is told she faces jail. Elders there for support

by AndersonsInfo 15 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • AndersonsInfo
    AndersonsInfo

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2976095/Married-woman-36-sex-15-year-old-schoolboy-breaks-tears-told-faces-jail.html

    Married woman, 36, who had sex with 15-year-old schoolboy breaks down in tears as she is told she faces jail

    • Kelly Jane Richards admitted having sex with a 15-year-old schoolboy
    • Married mother of two broke down in tears at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court
    • Judge told the Jehovah's Witness she could face prison for the offence
    • Teenager's mother found out what happened and Richards was arrested
    • She was granted conditional bail and will be sentenced later this month

    By Claire Carter for MailOnline

    Published: 12:24 EST, 2 March 2015 | Updated: 14:22 EST, 2 March 2015

    Kelly Jane Richards has been told she could face prison for having sex with a 15-year-old schoolboy

    Kelly Jane Richards has been told she could face prison for having sex with a 15-year-old schoolboy

    A married mother-of-two broke down in tears after she was told she could be sent to prison for having sex with a 15-year-old schoolboy.

    Kelly Jane Richards, of South Wales, admitted having sex with the teenager, who is less than half her age.

    The Jehovah's Witness was arrested last December after the child's mother discovered what had happened.

    The 36-year-old had originally denied seducing the teen, but pleaded guilty to engaging in sexual activity with a child.

    Richards sat in the dock at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court, South Wales, and broke down in tears as the charge was read to her.

    Two elders from the Jehovah's Witness community were sitting at the back of the court to give her support.

    The court was told Richards 'did not reasonably believe that he was 16 or over' when she had penetrative sex with the schoolboy just two months before his birthday.

    The offence took place during term time in 2012, the court heard.

    A second similar charge was left to 'lie on file'.

    Sarah Waters, defending, told the court Richards was of 'good character'.

    Judge Richard Twomlow told Richards she would be sentenced later this month.

    He added that 'all options remain open' - which includes a custodial sentence.

    He told her: ' You will be sentenced later this month and I am going to ask for a report so the court knows more about you.

    'The fact I am asking for a report and granting bail does not give any indication of the sentence I will pass.

    'This is a serious matter.

    'Obviously I will reserve the matter to myself and all sentencing options remain open to me.'

    She was shielded going out of the court by her husband.

    Richards will be sentenced on March 23.

    Richards was pictured with a hood covering her head arriving at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court this morning 

    Richards was pictured with a hood covering her head arriving at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court this morning

    The married mother of two was said to break down in tears after she appeared at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court 

    The married mother of two was said to break down in tears after she appeared at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court



  • respectful_observer
    respectful_observer

    A very similar thing happened in California a few years ago (Santa Barbara, I think). I heard the sister only got reproved and stayed in the hall while the lives of all the others involved (friends, family members) fell apart.

    Edit: http://www.edhat.com/site/tidbit.cfm?nid=80905&showcomments=T

    Source: City of Goleta Police Department

    Detectives have arrested a 41-year old woman from Goleta for having unlawful sex with a teenage boy in 2008.

    On Monday, November 11, 2011, a man from Goleta came to the Sheriff's Headquarters to report that his, now adult, son had recently told him about a sexual relationship he had with a woman in her 30's when he was 17-years old.

    The following investigation revealed that Lisa Ann Rowell (DOB 8/5/70) and the teenager were engaged in a sexual relationship in the spring of 2008.

    Detectives arrested Rowell on Tuesday morning, February 7, 2012 and booked her into the Santa Barbara County Jail for unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor (261.5 PC; 288a(b)(1) PC) on $50,000 bail.

    Detectives continue to investigate the case. They encourage anyone who may have information regarding this or any other crime involving Lisa Rowell to contact them at (805) 681-4150 or the Sheriff's Anonymous Tip Line at (805) 681-4171.

    Due to the victim's age at the time of the crime, there will be no more details released.

  • FadeToBlack
    FadeToBlack
    You have to wonder what her husband is thinking? I don't think the boy has been overly traumatized. I doubt too many 15 yo guys would complain too much...
  • daringhart13
    daringhart13

    And there were two elders present to lend support???????

    Wow

  • brandnew
    brandnew
    I think the two elders were there to take notes, to send to the mother ship.
  • Hairtrigger
    Hairtrigger
    Can't help but feel sorry for her and her children. Imagine the KH ripping her to shreds with their shunning, snickers and backbiting! Just hope the kids don't find out- too soon.
  • Esse quam videri
    Esse quam videri

    In Canada, until 2008, an adult could have sex with a 14 year old 'legally'. Prior to 2008, if you saw your 14 year old daughter walking up the back stairs of a seedy motel with a 50 year old man, there was basically nothing you could do about it. If you called the police and the daughter told them that she wanted sex with the man, the police would tell you to leave them alone and 'mind your own business'.

    Now things have changed. Now a 50 year old man can take your 16 year old daughter up the stairs of a seedy motel and there is nothing you can do about it. Yessireee Bob. Things have really changed in Canada alrighty !

    What is Canada's age of consent?

    The age of consent for sexual activity is 16 years. It was raised from 14 years on May 1, 2008 by the Tackling Violent Crime Act.

    However, the age of consent is 18 years where the sexual activity "exploits" the young person -- when it involves prostitution, pornography or occurs in a relationship of authority, trust or dependency (e.g., with a teacher, coach or babysitter). Sexual activity can also be considered exploitative based on the nature and circumstances of the relationship, e.g., the young person's age, the age difference between the young person and their partner, how the relationship developed (quickly, secretly, or over the Internet) and how the partner may have controlled or influenced the young person.

    Are there any exceptions to this?

    The Criminal Code provides "close in age" or "peer group" exceptions.

    For example, a 14 or 15 year old can consent to sexual activity with a partner as long as the partner is less than five years older and there is no relationship of trust, authority or dependency or any other exploitation of the young person. This means that if the partner is 5 years or older than the 14 or 15 year old, any sexual activity will be considered a criminal offence unless it occurs after they are married to each other (in accordance with the "solemnization" of marriage requirements that are established in each province and territory, governing how and when a marriage can be performed, including the minimum age at which someone may marry).

    There is also a "close-in-age" exception for 12 and 13 year olds: a 12 or 13 year old can consent to sexual activity with another young person who is less than two years older and with whom there is no relationship of trust, authority or dependency or other exploitation of the young person.

    Are 16 and 17 year olds also protected against sexual exploitation?

    The Criminal Code protects 16 and 17 year olds against sexual exploitation, where the sexual activity occurs within a relationship of trust, authority, dependency or where there is other exploitation. Whether a relationship is considered to be exploiting the 16 or 17 year old will depend upon the nature and circumstances of the relationship, e.g., the age of the young person, the age difference between the young person and their partner, how the relationship developed and how the partner may have controlled or influenced the young person. As well, 16 and 17 year olds cannot consent to sexual activity that involves prostitution or pornography.

    What are the actual Criminal Code offences against child sexual abuse and exploitation?

    The Criminal Code protects all Canadians, including children, against sexual abuse and exploitation. For example, the Criminal Code contains offences that protect everyone against all forms of sexual assault (section 271); sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm (section 272); and aggravated sexual assault (section 273), voyeurism (section 162), obscenity (section 163) and trafficking in persons (section 279.01).

    Children are also protected by child-specific offences in the Criminal Code. These offences include the following:

    • Sexual Interference (section 151) - no one can touch any part of the body of a child under the age of 16 for a sexual purpose. The penalty for this offence is a mandatory minimum period of imprisonment of up to a maximum of 10 years;

    • Invitation to Sexual Touching (section 152) - no one can invite a child under the age of 16 to touch himself/herself or them for a sexual purpose. The penalty for this offence is a mandatory minimum period of imprisonment of up to a maximum of 10 years;

    • Sexual Exploitation (section 153) - no one in a position of trust or authority over a 16 or 17 year old (for example, a teacher, religious leader, baby-sitter or doctor) or upon whom the young person is dependent, can touch any part of the body of the young person for a sexual purpose or invite that young person to touch himself/herself or them for a sexual purpose. The penalty for this offence is a mandatory minimum period of imprisonment of up to a maximum of 10 years;

    • Incest (section 155) - no one may have sexual intercourse with their parent, child, brother, sister, grandparent or grandchild. The penalty for this offence is a maximum of 14 years imprisonment;

    • Child Pornography (section 163.1) - no one may make, distribute, transmit, make available, access, sell, advertise, export/import or possess child pornography. Child pornography is broadly defined and includes materials that show someone engaged in explicit sexual activity who is, or seems to be, under the age of 18 years; or show a young person's sexual organ or anal region for a sexual purpose. Child pornography also includes written and audio material that encourages others to commit a sexual offence against a child, or is primarily a description of unlawful sexual activity with a child that is intended for a sexual purpose. The penalties for these offences are mandatory minimum periods of imprisonment and vary up to a maximum of either 5 or 10 years;

    • Luring a Child (section 172.1) - no person may use a computer system, such as the Internet, to communicate with a young person for the purpose of facilitating the commission of a sexual or abduction offence against that young person. This offence is sometimes called "Internet luring". The penalty for this offence is a maximum of 10 years imprisonment;

    • Exposure (subsection 173(2)) - no one may expose their genital organs for a sexual purpose to a young person under the age of 16 years. The penalty for this offence is a maximum of 6 months imprisonment;

    • Procuring (sections 170 and 171) - it is against the law for parents and guardians to procure their child under the age of 18 years to engage in illegal sexual activity or for owners, occupiers or managers of premises to allow a person under the age of 18 to be on those premises to engage in illegal sexual activity. The penalties for these offences include mandatory minimum periods of imprisonment and vary up to a maximum of 10 years imprisonment.

      Child Prostitution (subsections 286.1(2), 286.2(2) and 286.3(2)) - it is against the law for anyone to offer or obtain the sexual services of a young person under the age of 18 years, to materially benefit from child prostitution or to procure a person under the age of 18 for the purposes of prostitution. The penalties for these offences include mandatory minimum periods of imprisonment and vary up to a maximum of 14 years imprisonment.

    • Bestiality (section 160) - it is against the law for anyone to engage in sexual activity with an animal, including making a child do this or doing this in front of a child. The penalties for these offences vary up to a maximum of 10 years imprisonment; and,

    • Child Sex Tourism (subsections 7(4.1) - 7(4.3) - it is against the law for a Canadian to travel outside of Canada and engage in any sexual activity with a young person that is against the law in Canada. If the Canadian is not found guilty of committing such a sexual offence in the country where it occurred, the Canadian could be convicted in Canada and would face the same penalty as if that offence had occurred in Canada.

    In addition to these criminal laws against child sexual abuse and exploitation, each province and territory has its own laws to protect children against abuse, exploitation and neglect.

  • rip van winkle
    rip van winkle

    Of course it is Satan's fault. Not.

    I hope she is prosecuted the same as a 36 year old man who has sex with a 15 year old girl.

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    Judge Richard Twomlow told Richards she would be sentenced later this month.

    ............................................How Did I Attract Such A Weird Wife??!!..

    http://i201.photobucket.com/albums/aa113/Lee1959/Dogs/Ahhhh.gif.....Richards was pictured with a hood covering her head arriving at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court this morning 

  • OnTheWayOut
    OnTheWayOut

    These elders probably are not there to "support" her but rather to take notes as was mentioned.

    But if they were there to offer support to a repentant member along the lines of priests who have received confessions from repentant sinners, that would be great. Standing there with someone doesn't mean you approve of what they did. But I am confident they are following up for Watchtower Legal and have no real concern for the woman.

    Now, it's a whole different ballgame if she were to get back to the congregation and meet with field service groups that include minors and nothing of a warning is said. That kind of support for her would be in conflict with the safety of others.

    And as a guy, I would like to say that a 15 year old male is not really hurt by such things. I would like to say that, but it isn't true. Sure, he won't be traumatized the same way a 15 year old female taken advantage of might be traumatized, but make no mistake. His views of sex and women can be warped by this. He may think they are all predators, they all want it, they are just tools, people should just take what they want. It increases his chances of being a predator in the future.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit