Should there be a point at which the court stops deciding what is good for a young person and allows them to decide for themselves? Is this case even unusual, given that the girl is now 16 which I think is the legal age for consent? I'm sure there have been cases of people getting done for carnal knowledge and then going on to marry the victim. How was the girl betrayed?

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Debnam-calls-for-appeal-on-coach-reunion/2007/01/19/1169095962084.html

NSW Opposition Leader Peter Debnam has called on the state government to appeal a court's decision allowing a 16-year-old girl to continue a relationship with a 39-year-old man.

Graham Andrew Mulholland, the girl's former netball coach, was convicted of sexually assaulting her when she when she was 14, News Ltd newspapers have reported.

In what is believed to be a NSW first, the teenager won an appeal in Wyong Local Court against an apprehended violence order preventing her from seeing Mulholland.

"Because that decision not only betrayed the young girl, betrayed the family, but it betrayed the community.

The law can only go so far. This girl to everyone probably looks like she is messed up in the head and I am sure a psychologist would have some type of terminology for her brain damage. We must respect her will as she is now old enough to make her decisions, or so the law states.

The law is definately not perfect because it is generic. Some 16 year olds may still only be at 12 year old maturity levels so if they were to rewrite the law maybe they should state "16 year old maturity levels" instead of "16 year olds", but this would never happen.

This girl has chosen her way of life so she must now live with it. The community should congratulate themselves for the right action even though the outcome wasn't what they percieved.

What I want to know is why a sex offender of any type is allowed outside prison in under 10 years especially with a minor involved. I am a firm believer in chemical castration currently utilised as a voluntary basis in South Australia. Except I believe it should be mandatory not voluntary.

It's possible that they do love each other and there must have been extenuating circumstances for the perpetrator to have his sentence suspended.  

I actually knew a young girl - 25 years ago - in the same situation.  She shocked everyone with her obsession with this older married bloke.  She was 15 - her parents didn't take action - but she left home not long after to live with him and married him as soon as his divorce came through when she was 18.

Today she's still happily married to the same old, old man and loves him devotedly.

Many magistrates are fair and perhaps in this case there were a few hearings and conferences which persuaded him/her that it would be in the best interests of everyone not to jail Mulholland.

Human nature is unpredictable and no-one will know if this is the right decision for a few years yet.

what really stinks is that this bloke was her netball coach and he only got a pissweak sentence for taking advantage of a 14 year old who was supposed to be in his care as a coach.

It's the only way to outbreed the Moslems and Sudanese at their own game

Women in control at their very best.....

So this happened 12 years ago... I wonder what the outcome was ?

freediver wrote on Jan 19^th, 2007 at 3:00pm:

Should there be a point at which the court stops deciding what is good for a young person and allows them to decide for themselves? Is this case even unusual, given that the girl is now 16 which I think is the legal age for consent? I'm sure there have been cases of people getting done for carnal knowledge and then going on to marry the victim. How was the girl betrayed? http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Debnam-calls-for-appeal-on-coach-reunion/2007/01/19/1169095962084.html NSW Opposition Leader Peter Debnam has called on the state government to appeal a court's decision allowing a 16-year-old girl to continue a relationship with a 39-year-old man. Graham Andrew Mulholland, the girl's former netball coach, was convicted of sexually assaulting her when she when she was 14, News Ltd newspapers have reported. In what is believed to be a NSW first, the teenager won an appeal in Wyong Local Court against an apprehended violence order preventing her from seeing Mulholland. "Because that decision not only betrayed the young girl, betrayed the family, but it betrayed the community.

12 year old news article .... she's 28 now & he's 51.

Pity an update to circumstances isn't available ... otherwise it's history.

What I find strange is that at 37 yrs old he 's a "netball" coach?

That he was obviously a hebephile stands out as well.

What does a man of that age have in common with a 14 yr old besides fulfilling his sexual bent?

What sort of meaningful conversations would have been had?

Gnads wrote on May 7^th, 2019 at 9:16am:

freediver wrote on Jan 19th, 2007 at 3:00pm: Should there be a point at which the court stops deciding what is good for a young person and allows them to decide for themselves? Is this case even unusual, given that the girl is now 16 which I think is the legal age for consent? I'm sure there have been cases of people getting done for carnal knowledge and then going on to marry the victim. How was the girl betrayed? http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Debnam-calls-for-appeal-on-coach-reunion/2007/01/19/1169095962084.html NSW Opposition Leader Peter Debnam has called on the state government to appeal a court's decision allowing a 16-year-old girl to continue a relationship with a 39-year-old man. Graham Andrew Mulholland, the girl's former netball coach, was convicted of sexually assaulting her when she when she was 14, News Ltd newspapers have reported. In what is believed to be a NSW first, the teenager won an appeal in Wyong Local Court against an apprehended violence order preventing her from seeing Mulholland. "Because that decision not only betrayed the young girl, betrayed the family, but it betrayed the community. 12 year old news article .... she's 28 now & he's 51. Pity an update to circumstances isn't available ... otherwise it's history. What I find strange is that at 37 yrs old he 's a "netball" coach? That he was obviously a hebephile stands out as well. What does a man of that age have in common with a 14 yr old besides fulfilling his sexual bent? What sort of meaningful conversations would have been had?

unfortunately in Australia one off's are not considered Pedo's just sex offenders....

DonDeeHippy wrote on May 7^th, 2019 at 9:49am:

Gnads wrote on May 7th, 2019 at 9:16am: freediver wrote on Jan 19th, 2007 at 3:00pm: Should there be a point at which the court stops deciding what is good for a young person and allows them to decide for themselves? Is this case even unusual, given that the girl is now 16 which I think is the legal age for consent? I'm sure there have been cases of people getting done for carnal knowledge and then going on to marry the victim. How was the girl betrayed? http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Debnam-calls-for-appeal-on-coach-reunion/2007/01/19/1169095962084.html NSW Opposition Leader Peter Debnam has called on the state government to appeal a court's decision allowing a 16-year-old girl to continue a relationship with a 39-year-old man. Graham Andrew Mulholland, the girl's former netball coach, was convicted of sexually assaulting her when she when she was 14, News Ltd newspapers have reported. In what is believed to be a NSW first, the teenager won an appeal in Wyong Local Court against an apprehended violence order preventing her from seeing Mulholland. "Because that decision not only betrayed the young girl, betrayed the family, but it betrayed the community. 12 year old news article .... she's 28 now & he's 51. Pity an update to circumstances isn't available ... otherwise it's history. What I find strange is that at 37 yrs old he 's a "netball" coach? That he was obviously a hebephile stands out as well. What does a man of that age have in common with a 14 yr old besides fulfilling his sexual bent? What sort of meaningful conversations would have been had? unfortunately in Australia one off's are not considered Pedo's just sex offenders....

I don't know that that case is a one off.

Pedos and Hebos have an age related difference.

Ones prepubescent the other pubescent.

Either way it's abhorrent.