Well, sirwizalot? You make some interesting points in your article about the law and how it is supposed to be applied, and I am just as anti-pedophile as you are. However, unless you're adhering to the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Edition (ICD-10), the defendant described in your article would fall short of being a pedophile. There is a provision in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) that stipulates that a man in his late teens who takes an extra-Platonic interest in a 12- or 13-year-old girl does not qualify to be a pedophile. Other factors also play into determining whether or not he is a pedophile. For example, whether or not the girl he had intercourse with was a prepubescent child. I'm not trying to make this guy out to be a goodie-two-shoes, but I'm just clarifying the fact that he would not be deemed to be a pedophile from a clinical standpoint by the same token that one would not accuse someone of armed robbery for sticking a slug in a gumball machine or parking meter.