On May 12, 3:26=A0pm, Cynic wrote:
> On Sat, 10 May 2008 22:46:56 +0100, Cub Reporter
> wrote:
>
> >>You have seriously misread an article which was not particularly clear
> >>anyhow, but even in its un clarity, did not suggest what you claim.
> >"We will now be able to prosecute UK nationals here for a .ual
> >offence committed against a child anywhere in the world, so long as
> >the act committed would be a relevant offence in this country."
> >This means that UK laws will apply to .ual offences against a child
> >committed abroad, not the local laws if they are less stringent.
> >"We have also raised the age of a child for these purposes from 16 to
> >18."
> >If that doesn't mean that . with a 16 or 17 year old abroad could be
> >prosecuted on the person's return to the UK, what does it mean?
>
> It could be prosecuted, but *only* if it was an offence in the UK. =A0If
> a teacher were to have . with a 17 year old student he was taking on
> an educational trip to Spain, for example.
>
> --
> Cynic
Why is the reference always "he"?
TDG |