This is my second post of a teenage boy accused by a teenage girl, of an act they claim they didn’t do. They were school mates with their whole life ahead of them, propelled into a case of jeopardy. Who do we believe?

Our teenage years would be considered one of the most volatile phases of development with changeable emotions and fluctuating hormones. We can’t afford to have them running all over the courts too, especially, if the allegations are historical in nature with no physical evidence. We are seeing more of these types of cases than ever before post #MeToo. Just look at how the Brittany Higgins and Bruce Lehrmann case in Australia played out. It’s still not over even though all charges have been dropped. The monumental effects for both involved will haunt them for years to come and at the end of the day, only they will know the truth.

If more investigations were to be done by the gatekeepers, the police and magistrates, involving professional experts on whether someone is fabricating a lie, there would be less criminal matters before the courts. This of course, does not just apply to teenagers, but surely, a starting point to uncover deceit. You may say, that is what the court system is for but is it, or, is it just a scapegoat for the too hard basket because of the lack of expertise. We give the gatekeepers power to raise AVOs, lay charges and judge us, but should we in cases like this where it’s not black and white?

Ask yourself … do we really know our teenage children? Did our parents fully know us? Why does someone lie? And, who are we more likely to believe, the girl or the boy? These are only some of the questions in this case of jeopardy between two adolescents with their whole life ahead of them, now in the hands of the courts, because of a possible lie?

The case I’m referring to is about a sixteen year old boy from Sydney, convicted by the Children’s Court of a “violating and humiliating” rape, May 2022. He was sentenced to a possible two months in jail and has just won his appeal. The judge overturned the verdict because it could not be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Why?

• The judge wasn’t satisfied that the person making the accusation was honest and reliable. “The timing of the disclosure and the fact that the complainant made a number of false statements … are influential factors in my determination.” he said
• Judge Baker acknowledged a delay in making a complaint, does not mean the accusation was false, but “the lies she later told and the delay in complaint … adversely impact on her credibility”.
• The evidence the boy gave was in strong contrast to the girls and he was consistent with his details on the sexual activity. There was no intoxication of either of them. No drugs or alcohol that the girl had made claim, and the boy was insistent that the sex was consensual. Judge Baker could not rule out his account as being incorrect.

Naturally, the girl’s parents are very upset and believe in their daughter and are considering taking up the matter further with a civil suit against both the boy, and the NSW Education Department. However, this is a sad tale of two teenager school mates entangled in an adult system. It should have never have happened this way.

You can read the full article in The Sydney Morning Herald: https://apple.news/AG_4CvNJuRmeUmghXE6fqgw