I am glad at the end of the article there may be a new clarification re the age of consent. I recall this called outrage on AB when I said 13 was the age of consent!!!!!
It is the interpretation of what consent means.
In England, a person can give consent at the age of 13. This is still an offence. However, if the other person can show he (or sometimes she) they believed the person to be over 16, they have a defence. Such evidence would be presence in a nightclub, false ID from the 13 year old, they really do look 16 etc. The evidence is not stated, and evry aspect will be taken on its own merits.
If a person is 12 years and 364 days old, they can not consent FULL STOP. Therefore the above defence CAN NOT APPLY, even if the same criteria is present.
I think this is where the law needs looking in to. For a 25 year old to have sex with a 13 year old (providing they consented) is not exactly dealt with greatly in the courts. One reason being, if they did consent to the sex, they would probably not be willing to give evidence.
I would advocate that the LEGAL age of consent which is 16, and not the actual age of consent, which is 13, should be the same-both set at 16.
That way, ALL sex with under 16 year old will be dealt with the same.
Unlike the USA we only have one level of muder. IN America that have numerous. Yet in America, they have sex with a minor and that's it!!!
We need one law which is simple with no STANDARD defences. You have sex with a minor, you are a pedo, simple as that.
The law is a funny old business and needs clarity in this area.
As an expert on this matter, I am happy to answer any questions regarding the matter.