I came across this story the other week, and I’ve been mulling it over since, debating whether to post a link, and if I did, what comment, if any, to add.
The story refers to a case before the Brisbane Supreme Court, in which it was revealed that a 12-year-old boy – posing as an 18-year-old homosexual man – actively pursued and engaged in sexual encounters with a man he met via an Internet dating service. He’d used a ‘mainstream’ dating service called Oasis Active to set up the site.
The court was told that over the space of three months, the boy would sneak out his family home, in Brisbane’s east, late at night and slip down the street to a nearby golf course to meet his online liaison who was at that time a 30-year-old lifesaving fundraiser.
The boy indicated that when he met males online – including Powell who went by the nickname “Johnny” – he would inform them he was 13-years-old, a year older than he actually was.
Recovered Internet chats found on Powell’s laptop computer reveal he discussed having a weekend “sleepover” with the boy, a possible “threesome” with “another “guy”.
They also included a request from the child that “this time your going to (expletive deleted) me.”
During another online chat Powell asked the boy why he was at home on his computer during a school day.
“When the child responded that he was pretending to be sick and was home alone all day, he (Powell) suggested: ‘Maybe I should come over’,” the schedule says.
“When the child advised that another guy was coming over they discussed a possible threesome.”
- Would our reaction be the same if rather than being 30, the convicted male had been 18? If so, why?
- Had the boy not revealed he was 13 subsequently (which was also a lie), and insisted he was 18 all along, would we react the same way?
- Had the boy posted a picture on his profile in which he appeared older than he was, would we take that into account in reaching a moral (as distinct from legal) view?