Yes! That was the impression I was getting too, more from the Metro article than the BBC one, but some there as well. The "sexual advances" thing seems to imply there would've been a possibility of the kid consenting (does that make sense?) and--the kid was eleven for god's sake.
The Metro article is problematic in other ways as well, like the "popularity = easy victim!" thing mentioned above, and the fact that the victim is consistently referred to by first name, whereas the perpetrator is referred to by surname only.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-10-17 01:12 pm (UTC)The Metro article is problematic in other ways as well, like the "popularity = easy victim!" thing mentioned above, and the fact that the victim is consistently referred to by first name, whereas the perpetrator is referred to by surname only.