The Sarah Case:
April 24, 2017; Montmagny Square, a 28-year-old man had sex with an 11-year-old girl. The case was judged as an indecent assault (Faced with the lack of violence and the victim's consent) and not for rape (pedophilia). (jurisprudence conflict- Pontoise court)). Currently French case law only considers under-5s automatically victims of rape.
Due to recent recurring cases they have decided to elaborate laws to remove ambiguity over the word consent, impose a more severe, rigid penalty and high costs. And here we come to the Shiappa law. Lawyers failed to prove that the girls did not give consent.
What has changed with the Shiappa law? Increased penalties and money to be paid. But, the question is: does it still happen in practice? Have they removed the ambiguity of the word consent? In its final version, the Schiapa law states that for children under the age of 15, "moral restraint or surprise is characterized by abuse of the vulnerability of the victim who lacks the necessary judgment for these acts." However, "vulnerability" and "surprise" leaves room for pedophiles to escape punishment before the law.
In summary, the new law does not define a legal age of consent despite the fact that there is already a legal age for penalties, which means that adults who have sex with children will not be arrested for rape if the victim can not prove the existence of violence, threat or rape.
And now I say, have they closed the door to pedophilia? What I see is the state making more money and punishing more time in jail, but not solving the real problem, which in theory was the intent of the Schiappa law. A new way of do nothing new.