A Slap on the Wrist for Perverted Crime
“Back in August, a now-17-year-old Scarborough girl — her name protected by the Youth Criminal Justice Act — was sentenced by Justice Paul Robertson to 20 months probation after pleading guilty to the Criminal Code offence of ‘compelling bestiality’ — as in using a neighbour’s pit bull as a sexual weapon in the anal rape of a then-12-year-old boy… In August 2003, the then-15-year-old girl was hired by a neighbour in her apartment building to look after her pit bull terrier… [The police report describes] the girl attending the apartment to feed the pit bull, and taking along the 12-year-old ‘victim’ who also lived in the same building. They were sitting on the couch when the dog climbed up and began ‘humping’ the boy. Both, according to the report, thought it was ‘funny.’ ‘We need to get rid of his horniness,’ the girl reportedly said, and then instructed the boy to get down on the floor on his hands and knees where she then forcibly pulled down his pants and underwear, and put the pit bull in position. The boy told her to stop — that it was ‘no longer funny.’ But it wasn’t about to stop. ‘The victim began crying in pain,’ reads the police report. ‘After about 10-15 seconds of the dog penetrating the victim, the accused began hitting the dog on the head to break him off. The accused instructed the victim not to tell.’ Back at his own apartment, the boy initially told his mother that his ‘puffy’ face — swollen from crying — was the result of banging his head on a shelf. After he went to the bathroom and discovered he was bleeding, however, he let the entire story spill out, including showing her the scratches on his back that were consistent with claw marks.” —Toronto Sun (Canada)
(Thanks to Rick — who wrote “How about the trauma the boy went through? If it had been a boy forcing a girl to have sex with a dog would the charges have been harsher?” — for the link.)
However cruel teens can sometimes be, the girl who facilitated this anal rape demonstrated such an incredible cruelty that it makes you wonder if those critics who claim that internet porn is corrupting today’s youth are right. Where would she get such an idea? In your mind you can see the claw marks on the boy’s back, and it’s not a pretty image.
At the same time, it’s hard to understand exactly how or why the boy allowed himself to be mounted. A pit bull is a powerful animal, and perhaps the girl was more physically imposing than the boy. But still, why didn’t the boy scamper away, roll over, punch the girl, kick the dog? Is it possible that he simply didn’t understand what was about to happen to him?
The girl certainly understood, and that’s precisely the frightening part. What’s the matter with her? Probably she’s not a bestialist in the sexual sense of the word but rather in the sense that connotes savagery. The point was not to get off but to hurt and humiliate the young boy. With friends like her you don’t need enemies.
Which does indeed make it bizarre that she got off with such a light sentence, some therapy and twenty months probation. The prosecutor had sought a more severe punishment that included the seemingly reasonable request to submit the girl’s DNA to a sex offender database. Why was it denied? Because she was a girl? The judge claimed that the sentence reflected the fact that the boy’s injuries were “transient in nature” and that they wouldn’t result in “psychological damage far in excess of the physical nature.” Hell, if you have to wonder what’s wrong with the girl, you also have to wonder what’s wrong with this judge. He thinks that being ass-raped by a pit bull won’t result in psychological damage? Maybe he should try it sometime.
He probably already has. Why else would he say that the boy wouldn’t get psychological damage. He probably thought the boy liked being mounted, just like he liked it. However, that does raise the question whether or not the boy really did like it. When he got home, he didn;t tell his mother about what had just happened, but after finding that he had been injured he told his mother everything. I doubt that finding himself bleeding would get him talking if the girl had threatened him into silence. That leaves only two other explanations for his silence: Shame and hope. Shame would have been a stronger tool than fear, and I once again doubt that that would have kept him from talking in that degree. Then all that remains is hope, hope that the girl would once again force him to have sex with a dog, while he keeps telling himself that he is just being forced. The bleeding would’ve gotten him out of the illusion that dogsex was harmless and made him realise that it would be too dangerous to do it again.
But I shouldn’t assume things. A boy might have been forced to have unpleaserable sex and that’s just unforgivable. Imagine him in twebty years still afraid to have sex because something could bleed. That could be way more damaging that the actual rape itself. Could you imagine your life without sex? I sure couldn’t. Maybe the judge realised just that and decided that the girl had done the right thing for getting him out of his sexual behavior. I don’t know which of the two I’d prefer: A judge who lets a girl walk because he believes that raping a boy would be pleasurable to him, or a judge who lets a girl walk because he believes that raping a boy would thankfully make him celibate. Let’s just hope that the jude was related to the girl, for I find the other possibilities too gruesom.
Rape is rape, if it wasnt sentanced as such, then the judge should have his title removed, and the case should be re-tried by a competant judge. Im SICK of hearing about matters of law that were dismissed simply because the judges -opinion- came higher than the actual law.
chances are she’s been abused herself. that’s often where precocious sexuality in a child comes from.
If the boy had been the aggressor and the girl the victim there would be no hand-wringing, no attempt to “explain away” this behavior, and no sypmathy. Just punishment and condemnation.
That is so true! The system does favor women to
men. It is a double standard! The judge must
have been a giagantic moron and a mook, high
on chrystal meth, and some serious ganga, to let
the girl off after this assault on the boy!
It seems to me that there are details to this story that don’t quite ‘ring true’. First of all, I happen to know a litle about dogs sexually ‘acting out’ toward humans. I doubt that the animal would have tried to initiate sex with the boy to begin with - unless provoked to do so - or perhaps the dog has been practicing sex with humans on a regular basis. It would seem far more likely that the dog would be much more attracted to the girl sexually assuming that her body odors would be much more appropriate for sexual attraction. Very strange.
And what about the owner’s’ of the pet? Should the owner be held responsible, at least in part?
After all, a male pit bull of breeding age, which I would assume was not neutered, is an awesome sex machine with vast energy reserve and raw power. The point being, what was a 15 year old girl doing in charge of an adults perverted sex toy? Isn’t it obvious that the girl would likely experiment? That very thought might have been the exact intention of the owner! maybe?
Anyway, there is probably more to this story than has been told. My guess is that the young girl coerced the boy into being mounted by the animal. Females, even at that age, can certainly put a powerfull controlling spell upon us poor male victims! I sort of believe the young girl used the boy to experiment before trying it herself! She could never have forseen the violence of a dogs sexual attack or known the pain and injury which would likely occur. She should have tried it on herself first - it would have served her right! I say shame on the young girl, but a more severe punishment would serve no good purpose. The OWNER should be held accountable in a big way. Endangering the welfare of a minor child is serious stuff! I would not be surprised if the owner has regular sex with the dog - just a thought - just my opinion. The point though, if the owner was ‘intimate’ withe the dog, then the animal would ‘know’ that it is OK to seek carnal pleasure from humans. Also, if my suspicions are correct, the owner would KNOW that the dog would act out in a sexual way, andthis is what the owner waned to happen and expected to happen.
It just might be that the owner wanted to share the nice sex toy with the ‘little girl down the hall’. Just something to think about…
Love to you All PR
But PR, it isn’t a crime to have an unneutered dog. And that’s a young woman, not a girl. If you’re fifteen, you know pretty much what you’re doing.
Let’s just say that it is true and that the owner has the dog for her sexual pleasures, then that’s really not a crime. That’s like expecting your three year old niece would find the vibrator hidden in your room and immediatly know where to put it. She’s 15 years old, so she would know what to use a vibrator for, but I doubt she would look at a dog and think: ” His cock looks big, let’s put it somewhere in tha one kid I know.”
The dog could just as easily have not been neutered for breeding purposes. YOu should not immediatly suspect bestiality from people who can, that would be the same as suspecting all the people working in the morgue are necrophiles.
In closing, it was pretty much the girl’s fault. You can’t hold someone responsible for providing the means, that would be like sueing a kitchen knife company because one of their knives was used in a murder.
Wow, I seem to have nothing else to say, that usually doesn’t happen to me.
I would analy rape that girl till she dies if i were the boy
Halene, I do appreciate the thoughts that you have introduced. I maintain my position unmoved.
I can agree that a 15 year old girl is a young woman - some girls at that age more ‘grown up’ than others - but pretty much sexually mature and knowlegable about many things. However, even at age 17 she is considered by the courts in the part of the world in which she lives as a minor, evidenced by the fact that her name was protected by the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
I have not, and I do not “immediatly suspect bestiality from people who can”. The dog was ’sexed up’ by someone. According to the official account, the dog tried to have sex with the boy while he was sitting on the couch. This behavior was probably not the dogs idea, but more likely the result learned behavior. Even if the behavior WAS entirely the dogs creation, does anyone actually believe that the dog, ‘out of the blue’ suddenly wants to have sex with a 12 year old boy who is seated on the couch???
If the 15 year old was sole person interacting sexually with the dog, then the dog would have gone to her and not the boy. That leaves the OWNER who ’sexed up’ the pet. Even if this train is not correct, how can you believe that tis would be the first time the dog ever acted out in a sexual way? The owner KNEW the dog would try to have sex with the girl.
I don’t buy your ‘kithen knife analogy’ either.
A kitchen knife in not animate, and will never jump into your hand and try to entice you to murder. A vibrator does not have a will of its own, and will never turn itself on or insert itself into a person. A dog is both animate and has a will of its own, and will grafically demonstrate its desire, ability, and means toward sexual copulation.
While it is no doubt that the minor girl cimmited a horrible crime, the adult pet owner should be held accountable for the means to commit that crime. It amazes me that this obvious connection was not made by the courts.
I would also like to add that, as far as I can tell, necrophelia is quite rare, while dog sex is far more common than most of us would like to think. It is a remote comparison to claim that morgue workers are necrophiles compared to suspecting that a sexed up male dog is ‘getting it on’ with its master.
Anyway, pit bulls have a reputation for attacking and even killing people, especially children. The minor child was put in danger allright, sexual assault aside. the OWNER SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE IN A BIG WAY. PR
This story is pure unadultarated bullshit! first, ain’t no dog gonna do that unless he’s been trained to do it. A dog humping your leg is not going to fuck you up the ass the first time you get down on all fours unless he’s been showed how before. second, no kid is gonna is gonna stay in that position moaning a crying while some big dog plummets him, and third, the fact that he had scratches on his back consistent with paw scratches is deceptive because a dog should have his paws around the torso, so if there were any scratches, they should have been on the kids sides or his front side.
I think I read a somewhat different version of this scenero in a woman domination novel once.
If anyone got ass-fucked, it’s the idiots that would be gullible enough to believe this bullshit.
ass rape is hilarious
I think they were both turned on. Him by the idea of having sex in the same room with her and the idea that maybe if he pleased her now she would give herself up to him later. And she was turned on by the idea of dominating a boy the way she was, perhaps, dominated by other boys or even men. So they’re both horny and experimenting and it goes horibly wrong. I’m not buying that the boy had his pants and undies taken down and he let a dog enter him all against his will. She wasn’t holding a gun to his head. The only power she had over him was sexual, I think.
What is being missed here is that girl is not committing rape out of curiosity but out of the need to have power over the young boy. Regardless of whether it was a boy or a girl on the receiving end, the fact of the matter it was a child!
The judge was deficient in his duties OR he himself has a Domina at home who controls him. Perhaps he was a child victim of such a girl and felt if he could get past it— so could this young boy. However, he is doing both the girl and the boy an injustice.
The girl will continue to control the young boy—as she more than likely as been doing for some time; why else would he submit to her command to be mounted? Why would he get on all fours? Simply put, she had been molesting the young boy for a period before the incident.
So for the judge to let her loose sends a message to her to that her behavior is acceptable—as long as no one catches her next time.
At the same time he sends a message to the boy that he is worth less than a human to be defiled—this will no doubt instill in him the victim mentality or worse a rapist mentality.
Either way it is a lose-lose situation and a disgrace on childhood. No child should endure being molested or raped by anyone or thing.
It was experimentation went wrong. No more rape then when I was 12 and a girl I had the hots for ‘compelled’ me to have sex with her in front of her sister. It was fun. I guess if she had scratched my back and I complained about it this would have been rape too? Please.
I have been having anal sex with dogs for 30 years now and truely love it. I have never had any problems, nor want any from anyone out there, with the legal bullshit. I have had strange dogs before, and only one time, and never se the dog again. I’ve had that dog and many other one timers mount me to have sex. Dog are great sex mechines. Better then any person I have ever been with.
i know this girl her name is teneesha i met he with my boy roy nd the kis was seriously fucked up and they were smokin weed before it happend its really fucked up
All comments become the property of PervScan. You must use an email address to post a comment. However, PervScan disallows email addresses in the text of comments.
Meet Hotties
