yes the circumstances are unfortunate but saying I didn't know is not really a good enough excuse, anyone can say that. the fact is he had pictures of an underage child on his phone. fact is he had been unknowingly grooming that child and was very lucky Phil sent him to pick up Louise!
the moral of the story is, it is your responsibility to ensure whoever you are doing things with is appropriately aged, just thinking that they look old enough is not enough, especially this day in age when young teens dress like they are ten years older.
had Jay asked her age, its possible non of this would have happened
You think she would have told him the truth? I point you towards Belle Dingle in Emmerdale.
i find it slightly OTT, i only say this because my sisters friend (who was 21 at the time) actually had sex with a 15 year old, she told him she was 20 and at uni!!
her dad called the police but he was released after a few hours and a quick interview with the girl and that was the end of it.
I don't see how. The age of consent is 16. Lets just put this into context, If the police turned a blind eye to sex offenders targeting 15 year olds some one has ****ed up don't ya think? that is why the age of consent exists. So he should have been placed on the sex offenders register. Chances are he said he got off because he didn't want people to know.
i don't understand how jay is responsible for something he had no control over - he had no control over her sending those images, he deleted them and yet he has been deemed responsible. this is grossly unfair >:(
The police knterview scene was such a joke. It looked like that stupid policewoman was on commision the way she was manipulating jay!
Anyone would think he'd been charged with rape the way she went on! And what evidence did she think that linzi would give?? The fact they'd dated for a few weeks, had a kiss and cuddle though no sex.....and she sent him a saucy snap he found out her age and immediately finished with her so what evidence would have gone against him....!?
No it doesn't. Protecting children comes first which is why this is law. The victim always comes first. We know Jay is innocent but in the eyes of the law he is not the victim, Linzi is as she is a child and he pleaded guilty to having indecent images of a child on his phone...
I'm still shocked people don't understand any of this.
The reason i feel the sl is crap is because it makes a mockery of real abuse and victims of real crime.
Jay isnt a nonce or a paedophile because he wasnt attracted to her because of her age. He thought that she was older. A paedo would want someone to be underdage and usually prepubescent!
This isnt the case here.
even if he hadnt wanted to receive saucy snaps of linzi, he couldnt have stopped her from sending them yet he would still have been guilty in the eyes of the law! And that has to be so bloody unfair.
EE could have done a good sl here and they chose to make it so lame with fantasy writing that its fallen completely limp.
If the police didn't process every case of an adult having sexual relations with a child all genuine and real peados would be using the 'I didn't know her age' as their defence.
That is why its automatic to be placed on the sex offenders register if an adult has any sort of indecent images of children or has committed any sex act with anyone under the age of 16. Its law that isn't up for debate.
Like I said, its good EE have done this as people really have no idea of the laws.
Actually for images, it is 18 (unless you are married to the person) So get rid of your Sam Fox and Jordan pics now!
As for hands on the police/CPS are not interested if there is a 2/3 year age gap. (eg 15 and 18 yrs old)
The reason i feel the sl is crap is because it makes a mockery of real abuse and victims of real crime.
Jay isnt a nonce or a paedophile because he wasnt attracted to her because of her age. He thought that she was older. A paedo would want someone to be underdage and usually prepubescent!
This isnt the case here.
even if he hadnt wanted to receive saucy snaps of linzi, he couldnt have stopped her from sending them yet he would still have been guilty in the eyes of the law! And that has to be so bloody unfair.
EE could have done a good sl here and they chose to make it so lame with fantasy writing that its fallen completely limp.
I'm just quoting this to highlight my take on the majority of posts in this topic.
So many of you have completely missed what this storyline is about. Its about people falling fowl of the law without realizing it. Whether you know the persons age or not if you have any indecent images of a minor on any sort of device you will be placed on the sex offenders register and your life will be ruined.
That is what this story is about. Its not about whether Jay is a nonce or not, its about the fact he fell fowl of a law without realizing it and it certainly doesn't make a mockery of anything. If indecent images of children ( and yes 14 year old is classed as a child ) are found on any device you own then you have broken the law even if you didn't know about it. That is what this whole story is about... People can say its unfair but its a system in place to protect those most at risk eg children. The facts are 80% of people caught with those sort of images are genuine peados and sex offenders. So if the police and the courts didn't do their job many sex offenders would be free to pray on who they like.
Its a bummer when innocent people such as Jay get caught out but this happens sometimes and that is why EE are highlighting it.
The reason i feel the sl is crap is because it makes a mockery of real abuse and victims of real crime.
Jay isnt a nonce or a paedophile because he wasnt attracted to her because of her age. He thought that she was older. A paedo would want someone to be underdage and usually prepubescent!
This isnt the case here.
even if he hadnt wanted to receive saucy snaps of linzi, he couldnt have stopped her from sending them yet he would still have been guilty in the eyes of the law! And that has to be so bloody unfair.
EE could have done a good sl here and they chose to make it so lame with fantasy writing that its fallen completely limp.
Thank you - as a survivor i said the same - Jay being sentenced (if this was real) makes a mockery of the sentence my abuser got and make a mockery of my struggle.
I'm just quoting this to highlight my take on the majority of posts in this topic.
So many of you have completely missed what this storyline is about. Its about people falling fowl of the law without realizing it. Whether you know the persons age or not if you have any indecent images of a minor on any sort of device you will be placed on the sex offenders register and your life will be ruined.
That is what this story is about. Its not about whether Jay is a nonce or not, its about the fact he fell fowl of a law without realizing it and it certainly doesn't make a mockery of anything. If indecent images of children ( and yes 14 year old is classed as a child ) are found on any device you own then you have broken the law even if you didn't know about it. That is what this whole story is about... People can say its unfair but its a system in place to protect those most at risk eg children. The facts are 80% of people caught with those sort of images are genuine peados and sex offenders. So if the police and the courts didn't do their job many sex offenders would be free to pray on who they like.
Its a bummer when innocent people such as Jay get caught out but this happens sometimes and that is why EE are highlighting it.
It is a bad law if innocent people can fall foul of it, Children should be protected, but they are not protected by convicting innocent people.
Thank you - as a survivor i said the same - Jay being sentenced (if this was real) makes a mockery of the sentence my abuser got and make a mockery of my struggle.
Sorry about your case but I don't see how it makes a mockery of anything.
He had indecent images if a 14 year old minor on his phone and he told a judge he was guilty. He was placed on the sex offenders register as a result of pleading guilty to a sex crime.
It is a bad law if innocent people can fall foul of it, Children should be protected, but they are not protected by convicting innocent people.
He pleaded guilty. People can fall fowl of any law but Jay pleaded his guilt in front of a judge as a result of that the judge was left with no option but to place Jay on the sex offenders register for having indecent images on his phone.
Its really not that difficult to understand what has happened.
Sorry about your case but I don't see how it makes a mockery of anything.
He had indecent images if a 14 year old minor on his phone and he told a judge he was guilty. He was placed on the sex offenders register as a result of pleading guilty to a sex crime.
What are people failing to understand here?
the images were sent to his phone - he had no control over receiving them. what do people not understand about that? if someone sent such images to your phone you would be liable to conviction - how is that fair?
I think a lot of the problem was that Jay received very biased counsel from Richie. She clearly had a problem with defending him and called him a paedophile and then told him straight away to plead guilty. Jay had spent a terrifying night alone in a cell, was probably still trying to get his head round what had happened to him, and then he had a lawyer who has defended the Mitchells for years telling him to plead guilty and that if he did so he'd be home by the afternoon. She didn't tell him he'd end up on the SO register and I truly think he was surprised when that happened. He seemed to have no idea. Not even his duty solicitor told him. That's awful. He should have been fully aware of the consequences of pleading guilty, and the course of action that would have followed if he'd pleaded not guilty.
If Jay had pleaded not guilty, they'd have had to have questioned Linzi/Star who may well have attested that Jay had no idea of her age. He would have had time to collect his thoughts on the issue meaning he could have argued his case more eloquently, his solicitor would have had to have gathered evidence and found character witnesses who also would have attested that they too had believed Linzi was over sixteen. He would have had a very strong case. But in many ways, a lot of people's hands are tied now. He's on the Sex Offenders register which has implications for where he can go, where he can work and who he can live with.
It's a really horrible situation and I feel immensely for Jay but I do think this storyline is doing a good public service as it is very educational.
the images were sent to his phone - he had no control over receiving them. what do people not understand about that? if someone sent such images to your phone you would be liable to conviction - how is that fair?
The records from his phone would have shown him sending flirty messages to Linzi, encouraging her to send the photos etc. Someone who is literally sent photos without any interaction with the person sending them would have a far stronger case as the police wouldn't be able to say, "Look, you clearly encouraged it here."
He pleaded guilty. People can fall fowl of any law but Jay pleaded his guilt in front of a judge as a result of that the judge was left with no option but to place Jay on the sex offenders register for having indecent images on his phone.
Its really not that difficult to understand what has happened.
I understand it, but i don't agree with the law as the law itself makes no sense. jay had not received proper legal advice; he did not fully know the consequences of pleading guilty.
How does placing innocent people on the sex offenders register help anyone - how is that hard to understand?
Paedophiles target children - Jay thought he was in a relationship with an adult and so he clearly wasn't targeting children and clearly isn't a paedophile. He will be banned from working with children, even though he is quite safe to work with them, whilst a real offender who has yet to be caught could quite legally be caring for your child.
I understand it, but i don't agree with the law as the law itself makes no sense. jay had not received proper legal advice; he did not fully know the consequences of pleading guilty.
How does placing innocent people on the sex offenders register help anyone - how is that hard to understand?
Paedophiles target children - Jay thought he was in a relationship with an adult and so he clearly wasn't targeting children and clearly isn't a paedophile. He will be banned from working with children, even though he is quite safe to work with them, whilst a real offender who has yet to be caught could quite legally be caring for your child.
You still miss the point.
Jay pleaded guilty to a judge so the judge had no option but to place him on the sex offenders register. Its automatic for these cases.
Maybe the next part of the story will be Jay trying to appeal it but right now everything regarding how Jay was placed on the sex offenders register is realistic and would happen in real life. He pleaded guilty to a sex crime. I'm not sure how to spell it out any clearer?
The records from his phone would have shown him sending flirty messages to Linzi, encouraging her to send the photos etc. Someone who is literally sent photos without any interaction with the person sending them would have a far stronger case as the police wouldn't be able to say, "Look, you clearly encouraged it here."
We don't that is part of the storyline and even if it was he believed her to be over 16 - he believed he was encouraging an adult to send adult images. That should be taken into consideration - if it was properly investigated, surely it is obvious no offence has been committed? Star's mum should have taken the time to explain to her that taking and sending indecent images is not wise at any age, not blaming the person she sent them to.
What is stopping Star now sending those photos to her mum and having her mum arrested and convicted? If she is as angry with her mum as she says she might just do that.
Jay pleaded guilty to a judge so the judge had no option but to place him on the sex offenders register. Its automatic for these cases.
Maybe the next part of the story will be Jay trying to appeal it but right now everything regarding how Jay was placed on the sex offenders register is realistic and would happen in real life. He pleaded guilty to a sex crime.
Did you miss the part where i said that Jay did not receive proper legal advice? I understand completely that he has pled guilty and therefore nothing more can be done, but i don't agree with the law or the legal process that allowed this to happen. it helps no-one.
Thank you - as a survivor i said the same - Jay being sentenced (if this was real) makes a mockery of the sentence my abuser got and make a mockery of my struggle.
I feel very sorry for what happened to you and you're amazing for telling us what must have been an absolutely horrendous experience.
However this storyline is about the issue of the blurred lines between the age of consent in law. It's not a case of grooming and abuse but the age of consent is there for a reason.
I feel sorry for Jay as he didn't know what age Linzi was though. The storyline is actually a very good one.
Did you miss the part where i said that Jay did not receive proper legal advice? I understand completely that he has pled guilty and therefore nothing more can be done, but i don't agree with the law or the legal process that allowed this to happen. it helps no-one.
And like I said... maybe the next part of the story will be Jay trying to appeal the decision.
Comments
He's pleaded guilty because he was guilty. What to appeal?
And that is why he got a light sentence.
You think she would have told him the truth? I point you towards Belle Dingle in Emmerdale.
Belle is 17. OK she is making out she is older than she is but she is not a 14 year old kid.
Correct
I don't see how. The age of consent is 16. Lets just put this into context, If the police turned a blind eye to sex offenders targeting 15 year olds some one has ****ed up don't ya think? that is why the age of consent exists. So he should have been placed on the sex offenders register. Chances are he said he got off because he didn't want people to know.
Anyone would think he'd been charged with rape the way she went on! And what evidence did she think that linzi would give?? The fact they'd dated for a few weeks, had a kiss and cuddle though no sex.....and she sent him a saucy snap he found out her age and immediately finished with her so what evidence would have gone against him....!?
Jay isnt a nonce or a paedophile because he wasnt attracted to her because of her age. He thought that she was older. A paedo would want someone to be underdage and usually prepubescent!
This isnt the case here.
even if he hadnt wanted to receive saucy snaps of linzi, he couldnt have stopped her from sending them yet he would still have been guilty in the eyes of the law! And that has to be so bloody unfair.
EE could have done a good sl here and they chose to make it so lame with fantasy writing that its fallen completely limp.
As for hands on the police/CPS are not interested if there is a 2/3 year age gap. (eg 15 and 18 yrs old)
I'm just quoting this to highlight my take on the majority of posts in this topic.
So many of you have completely missed what this storyline is about. Its about people falling fowl of the law without realizing it. Whether you know the persons age or not if you have any indecent images of a minor on any sort of device you will be placed on the sex offenders register and your life will be ruined.
That is what this story is about. Its not about whether Jay is a nonce or not, its about the fact he fell fowl of a law without realizing it and it certainly doesn't make a mockery of anything. If indecent images of children ( and yes 14 year old is classed as a child ) are found on any device you own then you have broken the law even if you didn't know about it. That is what this whole story is about... People can say its unfair but its a system in place to protect those most at risk eg children. The facts are 80% of people caught with those sort of images are genuine peados and sex offenders. So if the police and the courts didn't do their job many sex offenders would be free to pray on who they like.
Its a bummer when innocent people such as Jay get caught out but this happens sometimes and that is why EE are highlighting it.
Thank you - as a survivor i said the same - Jay being sentenced (if this was real) makes a mockery of the sentence my abuser got and make a mockery of my struggle.
It is a bad law if innocent people can fall foul of it, Children should be protected, but they are not protected by convicting innocent people.
Sorry about your case but I don't see how it makes a mockery of anything.
He had indecent images if a 14 year old minor on his phone and he told a judge he was guilty. He was placed on the sex offenders register as a result of pleading guilty to a sex crime.
What are people failing to understand here?
He pleaded guilty. People can fall fowl of any law but Jay pleaded his guilt in front of a judge as a result of that the judge was left with no option but to place Jay on the sex offenders register for having indecent images on his phone.
Its really not that difficult to understand what has happened.
the images were sent to his phone - he had no control over receiving them. what do people not understand about that? if someone sent such images to your phone you would be liable to conviction - how is that fair?
If Jay had pleaded not guilty, they'd have had to have questioned Linzi/Star who may well have attested that Jay had no idea of her age. He would have had time to collect his thoughts on the issue meaning he could have argued his case more eloquently, his solicitor would have had to have gathered evidence and found character witnesses who also would have attested that they too had believed Linzi was over sixteen. He would have had a very strong case. But in many ways, a lot of people's hands are tied now. He's on the Sex Offenders register which has implications for where he can go, where he can work and who he can live with.
It's a really horrible situation and I feel immensely for Jay but I do think this storyline is doing a good public service as it is very educational.
The records from his phone would have shown him sending flirty messages to Linzi, encouraging her to send the photos etc. Someone who is literally sent photos without any interaction with the person sending them would have a far stronger case as the police wouldn't be able to say, "Look, you clearly encouraged it here."
I understand it, but i don't agree with the law as the law itself makes no sense. jay had not received proper legal advice; he did not fully know the consequences of pleading guilty.
How does placing innocent people on the sex offenders register help anyone - how is that hard to understand?
Paedophiles target children - Jay thought he was in a relationship with an adult and so he clearly wasn't targeting children and clearly isn't a paedophile. He will be banned from working with children, even though he is quite safe to work with them, whilst a real offender who has yet to be caught could quite legally be caring for your child.
Jay pleaded guilty to a judge so the judge had no option but to place him on the sex offenders register. Its automatic for these cases.
Maybe the next part of the story will be Jay trying to appeal it but right now everything regarding how Jay was placed on the sex offenders register is realistic and would happen in real life. He pleaded guilty to a sex crime. I'm not sure how to spell it out any clearer?
We don't that is part of the storyline and even if it was he believed her to be over 16 - he believed he was encouraging an adult to send adult images. That should be taken into consideration - if it was properly investigated, surely it is obvious no offence has been committed? Star's mum should have taken the time to explain to her that taking and sending indecent images is not wise at any age, not blaming the person she sent them to.
What is stopping Star now sending those photos to her mum and having her mum arrested and convicted? If she is as angry with her mum as she says she might just do that.
Did you miss the part where i said that Jay did not receive proper legal advice? I understand completely that he has pled guilty and therefore nothing more can be done, but i don't agree with the law or the legal process that allowed this to happen. it helps no-one.
I feel very sorry for what happened to you and you're amazing for telling us what must have been an absolutely horrendous experience.
However this storyline is about the issue of the blurred lines between the age of consent in law. It's not a case of grooming and abuse but the age of consent is there for a reason.
I feel sorry for Jay as he didn't know what age Linzi was though. The storyline is actually a very good one.
And like I said... maybe the next part of the story will be Jay trying to appeal the decision.