15-year-old ‘sex victim’ begs for suspect’s release
I came across another fine example in a local newspaper of the unnecessary problems caused by policies promoting sexual suppression and repression in society. I decided to translate it from Dutch to English and post it here for easy reference in the future.
Here’s from de Ware Tijd, “15-jarig ‘zedenslachtoffer’ smeekt om vrijlating verdachte” (November 18th 2020):
PARAMARIBO – “I have a serious love affair with the suspect. I therefore feel guilty that he has been locked up.” Words from an emotional fifteen-year-old girl facing a court-martial led by Cynthia Valstein-Montnor. She was heard on Tuesday as a witness against 45-year-old military officer Audy K., who has been detained since July 24 for sexual abuse of a minor.
However, the child does not see herself as a victim and has therefore begged for the man to be released as soon as possible. She emphasized that she did not have sex with Audy K. under coercion. “Everything happened voluntarily,” she clearly stated. At a question from the accused, the underage child let him know that she loves him very much and still wants to marry him. The two started the relationship a few weeks before he was arrested.
The case started rolling when an uncle of the ‘victim’ realized that she had been in a pension. The child had shared the photos on social media. At her uncle’s insistence, she revealed her secret, after which he reported it to the police. The girl and her uncle live with her grandparents. Her caretakers — apart from her uncle — now no longer have any problem with her choice.
Although the child has indicated from the beginning that she has a serious relationship with Audy K., Auditor Officer Manro Danning points out that this is an offence because the law has to protect the girl. He therefore unconditionally demanded an imprisonment of eighteen months. Lawyer Edward Redjopawiro, who is providing legal assistance to the accused, emphasized in his plea that there was no question of coercion anywhere. “It is about a love affair. A voluntary agreement of consent. They also had very advanced wedding plans,” the counsel noted. However, due to the fact that the defendant was arrested, these plans did not go ahead.
The lawyer also asked special attention for Javanese traditional marriages in Suriname. He pointed out that such cases occur frequently. The lawyer also noted that there is case law on this matter. “Of course I am not in favor of sexual abuse of minors. But it is a social reality that most Javanese girls under the age of sixteen have sexual intercourse. At this age they also marry with permission of the parents,” says Pawiroredjo to de Ware Tijd.
A condition for this type of marriage is that the children are guided by both parents. “I know cases where parents have not given permission and the children have been derailed. In some cases the children have committed suicide,” he further explains. The lawyer points out that this form of common law has been tolerated in Suriname for a very long time. The court-martial sentenced Audy K. to twelve months in prison, seven of which are conditional and a probationary period of three years. He will be released in December.
I can imagine the completely unnecessary trauma the girl had to go through at that age simply because she wanted to satisfy her fundamental biological need for intimacy and sex. Like I explained in my post on sexual suppression and repression, these ‘laws’ restricting people from having sex have nothing to do with “protecting the children” and everything with abuse of the individual — specifically a severe violation of their right to life. As I’ve discussed in other posts, these policies cause all kinds of damage to the individual and are responsible for a host of problems in society, among which psychological problems leading to sexual perversion and child sexual abuse.
Meanwhile, in other parts of the world such as the USA, children deal with the same ‘laws’ restricting their ability to satisfy their sexual needs (‘castration’), while simultaneously they are allowed to make far reaching and often irreversible decisions to physically ‘change’ their genders even at the age of 4. It’s not difficult to understand why this contradiction is allowed to exist once you know what the purpose is of sexual suppression and repression and who benefits from that.
Comments
There are 2 responses. Follow any responses to this post through its comments RSS feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.