BVI News


Teen gets ‘one chance’ after sex with 12-y-o

Justice Nicola Byer yesterday handed down a suspended sentence of two years imprisonment to a 19 year-old man who had sex with a girl under the age of 13 years.

While stating that she was giving the teen ‘one chance’, Justice Byer stated that the prison term will only be activated if the offender commits another crime within the next 24 months.

“You do not interfere with people’s little children… I don’t expect to hear about you again. You’ve gotten one chance – use it wisely,” Justice Byer told the offender whose name she said should not be published in order to protect the identity of the minor.

The judge further told the young sex offender: “If you misbehave for any matter…that [suspended] sentence will take effect, and you will be going to [Her Majesty’s Prison at] Balsum Ghut.”

The High Court judge, while handing down the sentence, stated that she did not order immediate incarceration because she believes the circumstances of the offence are ‘exceptional’.

She noted the fact that the sexual encounter happened when the offender was 17 years old. The victim was 12 at the time.

Justice Byer further noted the offender’s ‘youth and immaturity’ when he committed the sex crime.

One older than the other, judge notes

It was reported that, on the day the incident took place, the victim had invited the offender to her residence.

The offender, who was a friend of the little girl’s family, agreed to visit.

The girl – dressed in pajamas – met the offender at her yard gate.

The two then voyaged to an abandoned lot, where they had sexual intercourse behind a parked truck.

The victim’s family got wind of the sexual encounter some time later and alerted the police.

The offender was charged eventually.

He pleaded guilty in the High Court this month.

Just before the teen was sentenced yesterday, his attorney Ruthilea Maximea lobbied for a non-custodial sentence.

“The offence before the court can be considered as a one-off offence [that happened] when children are eager to explore [sex]… Both were children, both naive, both consented,” Maximea said.

“Give him (the offender) a chance, because he is a fit and proper person to be rehabilitated.”

Justice Byer accepted that both the offender and the victim were young, and that neither of them was forced into sex.

“However, one was older than the other and he needed to know when to stop,” the judge said.

She then made it clear that a minor cannot consent to sex. Notwithstanding that, Justice Byer declared: “I am satisfied that this defendant should not be considered as a [sex] predator.”

Make him an example

Meanwhile, shortly before the sentence was handed down yesterday, prosecuting attorney Tiffany Scatliffe-Esprit also made submissions to the court. She argued for the offender to be imprisoned.

“The message must go out as a deterrent that this type of behaviour is unacceptable,” she said while she noted that the offender needed to be ‘rehabilitated’.

Copyright 2018 BVI News, Media Expressions Limited. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed.


Disclaimer: BVI News and its affiliated companies are not responsible for the content of comments posted or for anything arising out of use of the comments below or other interaction among the users.

  1. hmmm says:

    not cool Ms Prosecutor

  2. Wow says:

    Why would the prosecution behave in this manner? The dude is 17yrs old, still a minor and the girl was 12 and based on the story he didn’t force himself on her.

    Yes it’s wrong but I think the suspended sentence was the right call by the Judge.

  3. TRUE says:


  4. truth says:

    IF she was 14 or 15 I would agree with u but 12? HELL NO.. he knows better than that

    • @truth says:

      I 100% agree with you. He was also a friend of the family so he knew damned well how old the girl was. This is statutory rape. Shame on the judge for being so lenient.

    • @truth says:

      Times are changing my friend. A 12 yr old in 1999 wouldn’t dare invite a 17 yr old to her parents’ house and then LEAVE with him. Hell… even then there were some bold enough.

      But NOW? 12 is the new 18 for these girls who are curious and educated. Children know more about sex than we knew in our day.

      So while legally she was under the age of consent, socially and emotionally, let’s just keep it real; she was ripe.

      • SB says:

        Sad but true don’t look at 12 and figure naw she don’t know nothing. Once you have internet and no restrictions YUP she knows tooo much.

      • Family friend says:

        Make it worst he does mess with guys for money. Damn shame

      • Daz says:

        ‘She was ripe’ – you must be trolling otherwise you are a sick individual.

      • truth says:

        While I do understand that times are changing u have to look at in form a different perspective. As in Yes she knew what she was doing but at 12 she didn’t UNDERSTAND the CONSEQUENCE of that act.
        I’ve seen little kids throwing hand full gravel in the air at a laundry parking lot and running from getting hit by falling gravel, but the gravel then falls on the park cars , they knew what they were doing but didn’t know the consequences.
        Same with a 12 yrld old she wanted to act grown, but at 17, he damn well knew that 12 is jail, that’s why he took her to an abandon place and didn’t just go in the house.

    • truth is says:

      while i agree i see none of you see how young girls carry themselves and behave these days you thing that “12” year old did not know better either stop looking at AGE .. I think she knew what she was doing and what she wanted i like the road the judge took on this one and it should be looked at more some young men go to jail for this same thing and they had even dated the girls over time but because a mother find out they god time and its unfortunate how lives get off track as easy as that

      • truth says:

        I understand what u guys are telling me, I am a male and I know how it is when girls lie about their age and what not, but this guy was 17, that’s 5th form age, she was either class 5 or 1st form,… I cant side with him on this one.

        I don’t know the girl, have never seen her or anything, I’m just saying, knowing better than using the empty house since nobody was home and go to someplace where no one would see them means he knew what he was doing was not right.

        Weather she wanted to or not u cant say “she was asking for or she wanted it”.. she was 12 … at 12 I wanted to eat ice cream for breakfast lunch and dinner, that doesn’t mean somebody older should have given it to me

  5. Concern says:

    Not condoning his behavior, but I wonder if it was her first encounter. Her parents should really look themselves in the mirror as to why their young child is aware and doing such things at that age. At 12 I was still playing with dolls 🙁

  6. smoothoperator says:

    Parents we have to watch our children. Technology is making it relatively easy for them to lose their dignity.
    Computers’ in their rooms’, cell phones in their hands, too much space and trust.
    We are not taking the time to focus on our kids and monitor their activities.

    I understand we cant monitor them 24hrs per day but some of us aren’t doing it at all. Too caught up in living this glamorous life and of course some of us work so hard.

    They are losing respect and themselves.

    The internet has a firm grip on this generation- some aren’t channeling it in the right direction.

    When are we as parents going to see that and starting acting on it?!

  7. Wendy says:

    A seventeen year old in these days of heightened awareness and emphasis on the matters of rape child abuse sexual molestation and other related issues,most certainly knows or should know that sexual contact with a minor is a criminal offense.

    The Court’s decision in this matter trivialized the gravity of the offense. Some crimes just cannot be given a second chance. Pedophilia tops the list in this regard.

    I do mot base my opinion on certain current rumored facts within the small community of the BVI,regarding the perepetrator…

    • Opened eyes says:

      I didn’t realize how interesting the comments section of the news really is.

      I’m getting a little off track here but I really have to thank the media for being a the public’s eyes in court.

      THIS IS A SOCIAL ISSUE! And it needed to be reported on. This story has people rallied and discussing it. It’s not even who’s right or wrong – we each have an input and we’re acknowledging each other’s opinions in the matter.

      Thank you media. You are important.

  8. Justice in the BVI for is a phu$*#ng joke says:

    There’s no justice in the BVI. Law in the BVI is a money making scheme

  9. Wai Too Young says:

    these dudes need to start asking for i.d

  10. Well says:

    A 17 year old knows he should not be having sex with a 12 year old. STOP THE MADNESS!

  11. Mother says:

    The girl was influenced by something or some one. The boy should not be having sex at 17. If so it would be with a 17 year old or older female. If older who would be charged. We need more moral integrity in these circumstances. As parents and a community we have a lot to consider and work on. The judge’s decision is final.

  12. Mockery says:

    Some of the judges that we hire make a mockery of the legal system. There should be a no nonsense policy when it comes to such acts. Shame on the judge for making the lines of justice blurry. I wonder if the same will stand for the next 17 year old that is convicted of the same act.

Leave a Comment