ONTD Political

Calgary man seduced by underage girl will not spend more time in jail

10:18 am - 06/08/2011
By Daryl Slade, Calgary Herald
June 8, 2011 6:58 AM
 
 

A 25-year-old man who was seduced into a sexual relationship by a 14-year-old girl who lived with her mother in the same Calgary apartment building will not have to spend any extra time behind bars.

The Alberta Court of Appeal on Tuesday rejected the Crown’s bid to more than double the 17-month jail sentence imposed last year on Cheng Jun Feng for sexual interference.

Appellate justices Peter Martin, Jack Watson and Patricia Rowbotham said in their written decision that the trial judge considered several factors, including the difference in age and the fact the sexual relationship was the complainant’s idea.

Court heard that Feng and the girl would play computer games and visit during the day while her mother was at work.

The girl told her school friends that she was “infatuated” with Feng, but was cautioned that he would abandon her or end their relationship if she did not engage him in sexual intercourse.

It began in April 2008 and ended nine months later when the girl’s mother caught them having sex.

“She begged him several times and (Feng) had said no many times before relenting,” said the appellate court.

“(He) only agreed to the sexual relationship after checking the law and satisfying himself that the complainant could legally consent. He learned that in April 2008. Unbeknownst to him, the law changed in May 2008; thus he was operating under a mistake of law, which does not provide a defence, but may mitigate the sentence.”

The Crown had sought a sentence of three to four years. Defence argued for 12 months.

The appellate court also noted the man was never manipulative, predatory or abusive, nor had he groomed the complainant and the sexual relationship was never aggravated by the use of alcohol or drugs.

He also had told the girl he would marry her when she turned 18.

The man was also co-operative with police and advised them immediately that he had checked the age of consent before engaging in sexual activity with the girl.

“This led the trial judge to conclude that the (offender) was not ‘simply using her for sexual gratification,’” said the appellate justices, alluding to the Nov. 29 decision by Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Peter McIntyre.

“Importantly, the trial judge found as a fact that the complainant was not traumatized as a consequence of the relationship . . . that finding was supported by the evidence.”

Feng had no prior criminal record and had a university degree and good work history.


 
SOURCE

Not even sure how to tag this mess, TBH.
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
apis_cerana 8th-Jun-2011 04:58 pm (UTC)
A 25-year-old man who was seduced into a sexual relationship by a 14-year-old girl

So much fail in just the first sentence alone.
fuckfrosti 8th-Jun-2011 04:59 pm (UTC)
Fuck, they didn't even get past the HEADLINE without fail.
sesmo 8th-Jun-2011 05:02 pm (UTC)
As much as this is fail, I do have some sympathy for the guy, because the law changed (and probably without much fanfare). So when he started, it was legal, and shortly thereafter it became illegal. That sucks.
astridmyrna 8th-Jun-2011 05:04 pm (UTC)
So wait, I'm looking at this:

“(He) only agreed to the sexual relationship after checking the law and satisfying himself that the complainant could legally consent. He learned that in April 2008. Unbeknownst to him, the law changed in May 2008; thus he was operating under a mistake of law, which does not provide a defence, but may mitigate the sentence.”

Does that mean that the first law said that the age of consent was 14 or so, but changed so now she had to be older?
erunamiryene 8th-Jun-2011 05:02 pm (UTC)
A 25-year-old man who was seduced into a sexual relationship by a 14-year-old girl

... excuse me? HE FUCKING CHOSE, HOW THE FUCKING HELL WOULD IT BE THE FOURTEEN YEAR OLD'S FAULT?
astridmyrna 8th-Jun-2011 05:03 pm (UTC)
The girl told her school friends that she was “infatuated” with Feng, but was cautioned that he would abandon her or end their relationship if she did not engage him in sexual intercourse.
Wait a minute...the friends suggested she do this? THE HELL?! What kind of terrible friends are they?

“She begged him several times and (Feng) had said no many times before relenting,” said the appellate court.
Thing is, he shouldn't have relented in the first place.

It began in April 2008 and ended nine months later when the girl’s mother caught them having sex.
D:

My heart goes out to the mother.
evewithanapple 8th-Jun-2011 09:16 pm (UTC)
Wait a minute...the friends suggested she do this? THE HELL?! What kind of terrible friends are they?

The fourteen-year-old kind.
krazykat88 8th-Jun-2011 05:04 pm (UTC)
When I was 14, I had a crush on a man who was 21 - most of my friends had crushes on guys in their late teens/early 20s. We all wanted to "date" them, but in retrospect, I'm not entirely sure we know what dating an adult entailed, (as opposed to dating another 14 year old.
From the article, it sounds like she if she was pressured, it came from her friends, - who said "he would abandon her or end their relationship if she did not engage him in sexual intercourse". and not the man himself (who apparently refused several times).
Really though, Feng should have known better - and when she kept asking him, he should have ended the relationship.
TL,DR - basically, there are a lot of fuckups here, but I don't think the
krazykat88 8th-Jun-2011 05:04 pm (UTC)
aaah hit post before I was done typing. that was supposed to say - I don't think the judge did anything wrong.
mercaque 8th-Jun-2011 05:04 pm (UTC)
A 25-year-old man who was seduced into a sexual relationship by a 14-year-old girl

FAIL

I really hate how this article presents the man as some passive, innocent little lamb who just ~couldn't help~ having sex with a teenager. As if checking the consent laws makes him some kind of gentleman?!
thecityofdis 8th-Jun-2011 05:18 pm (UTC)
A 25-year-old man who was seduced into a sexual relationship by a 14-year-old girl

These words.

I do not think they mean what you think they mean.
beoweasel 8th-Jun-2011 05:23 pm (UTC)
A 25-year-old man who was seduced into a sexual relationship by a 14-year-old girl.

OH THAT POOR MAN. HOW COULD HE POSSIBLY BE ABLE TO DEFEND HIMSELF FROM THE DEVILISH WHILES AND WANTON DESIRES OF A YOUNG TEENAGED TEMPTRESS? I mean christ, he was only Twenty-Five how could he have know better, sure the fourteen year-old</i> should have been responsible, but can we really expect the same of an adult??? LUDICROUS, I SAY.
roseofjuly 9th-Jun-2011 03:16 am (UTC)
TWENTY FIVE

I mean that is what is really getting me about this. Dude is getting the pitying public act and he's a motherfucking 25 year old who had sex with a 14-year-old. WHAT WHAT? Like...why? I'm 25 and 14-year-olds...just no. WHY?

I mean, personally I don't even understand why they were "friends." I can't really be "friends" with high school freshmen unless it's in a "Big Brothers/Big Sisters" type format. I ain't gonna be at their house playing video games without their parents there.
thedorkygirl 8th-Jun-2011 05:30 pm (UTC)
If he really wanted a relationship with the girl, the mother would have known from the beginning.
mercaque 8th-Jun-2011 06:17 pm (UTC)
This is a really good point.
iolarah 8th-Jun-2011 05:44 pm (UTC)
*leosquint*
She was 14 and he was 25. Who cares whether she initiated? It should barely matter that it was (at one time) legal. She's still a child, he's still the adult, and he should have walked away.
beautifiers 8th-Jun-2011 06:07 pm (UTC)
The article is horribly written, but as mentioned in this comment (http://ontd-political.livejournal.com/8249126.html?thread=508277798#t508277798) the guy isn't exactly a scheevy predator. ... Though I personally find it distasteful that a man is entering a relationship with a very young teenage girl, so he's definitely in the wrong for me.
stalkedbychibis 8th-Jun-2011 06:14 pm (UTC)


A 25-year-old man who was seduced into a sexual relationship by a 14-year-old girl




...Aaaaand enter urge to throw books at people.


Does the journalist have to use "seduced"? Painting a fourteen year-old up as a ~seductress~ brings a whole new brand of Squick to this...
stalkedbychibis 8th-Jun-2011 06:16 pm (UTC)
Gaah, italics fail! **Glares at slash-button** I wish I could edit...
cricketmemoirs 8th-Jun-2011 06:43 pm (UTC)
A 25-year-old man who was seduced into a sexual relationship by a 14-year-old girl

Um.
angelofdeath275 8th-Jun-2011 06:50 pm (UTC)
Ugggh the whoe article is frame like that "lolita book no one ever bothers reading

Rather unfortunate the law passed in like a month, but the article is fail
avashida 8th-Jun-2011 06:53 pm (UTC)
Ignoring the blatant fail in this article - I was fifteen when I fell for my now-fiance, who is five years older than me. So in that sense I have some sympathy with the whole mess.

On the other hand...It's three years later, and we still haven't had sex. Even if you're head over heels in love, you can wait. So even if these two were head over heels, I see no reason for it to have gotten sexual when it did.

I mean, even if they thought it was legal, surely anyone with sense can see that fourteen is not a good age to be having sex? Hence why the law was changed?
keithmex17 8th-Jun-2011 07:09 pm (UTC)
Obligatory:

eggvip 8th-Jun-2011 07:23 pm (UTC)
I still say parents of statuatory rape victims should be charged, as well.
Sure, parents can't know where you are every moment of every day, but I'm sure they'd try harder if they were gonna get in trouble if you got in trouble.

"It's ____ o'clock. Do you know where your children are?"
holdyourdevil 8th-Jun-2011 07:31 pm (UTC)
I have issues with this argument. Short of placing a monitoring device in their child's body or locking them up in the house, how are parents supposed to be responsible for their teenager's whereabouts and actions 24/7?
bluescreenmofo 8th-Jun-2011 07:58 pm (UTC)
I really don't like how they use the word "relenting." A million no's means nothing when you finally do commit the act. Who are these fucking lawyers/judges?

But, considering that the law was JUST changed, I can see why they'd be so lenient. Though to forgo any punishment at all is ridiculous.
forwhataim 8th-Jun-2011 08:39 pm (UTC)
Did you get the impression that they're forgoing punishment? He's still sentenced to serve 17 months according to this article. The court rejected an appeal requesting that he serve 3-4 years.
lightningxsnow 8th-Jun-2011 08:02 pm (UTC)
The fuck is with the wording on this?
dangerousdame 8th-Jun-2011 09:07 pm (UTC)
I get that the law changing could result in a reduced sentence, but it's possible to say that in an article without pulling out 'seduction' bullshit.
thenakedcat 9th-Jun-2011 04:08 am (UTC)
Agreed. I think it's reasonable to reduce the sentence since the guy was at least intending to obey the letter of the law, if not the spirit. Taking intent into consideration in sentencing is pretty standard procedure. Putting restrictions on his contact with minors is also within reason. But the article misstated the whole situation like a mofo.
the_gabih 8th-Jun-2011 09:53 pm (UTC)
Oh geez. If you can't help but have sex with a 14-year-old girl with a crush on you, then clearly you shouldn't be allowed out in society.
umi_mikazuki 8th-Jun-2011 10:04 pm (UTC)
"A 25-year-old man who was seduced into a sexual relationship by a 14-year-old girl"

...really?
thevelvetsun 8th-Jun-2011 11:05 pm (UTC)
The only thing I'm capable of thinking right now is "EWWW."
bubonicapple 8th-Jun-2011 11:11 pm (UTC)
he can hide behind his assertion that he checked the law to make sure he wasn't doing anything wrong, but the fact that this was carried on behind the mother's back suggests otherwise. you don't hide shit if you think it's just and magical and fair.

this is so gross. and it's always stuff like this that gets my old hometown in the news. o calgary why you gotta be like that
stevie_jane 8th-Jun-2011 11:51 pm (UTC)
Those 14 year olds girls sure are a sexual menace. Um. How about no?

Yeah, I'm going to blame the adult in this situation. I'm wacky like that.
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
This page was loaded Dec 26th 2014, 8:07 pm GMT.