November 25, 2004

MODERN PARENTING

An unusual circumstance matter-of-factly mentioned in this Daily Telegraph account of a quadruple fatality:

The P-plate driver who killed himself and two friends in a horrific accident was joy-riding in the high-powered, high-speed car without permission, his father said yesterday.

Emile Dousset, 20, had sneaked the Nissan Skyline GT-R from the family garage after he had been told by his father Graeme it was "off limits".

Shortly after, he died instantly along with passengers Carl Homer, 33, and Mr Homer's 15-year-old, seven-month pregnant girlfriend Natasha Schyf, when they crashed into a power pole at speeds estimated at up to 200km/h.

Curious, given recent coverage of underage-sex cases involving children of similar ages, how blandly this is reported. The dead girl’s parents seemed happy with the relationship:

Miss Schyf's parents, Margaret and Tony, were trying their best to deal with the loss of their daughter and future grandson.

Mrs Schyf had been due to take her daughter to birthing classes today to prepare for the big day, which was less than two months away.

Miss Schyf and Mr Homer, who met two years ago through friends, had just moved into a new home to start a family with their first child -- a boy -- and were already thinking of names.

"Carl and Natasha were perfect for each other, inseparable. He was a lovely guy, everything for my daughter, and we were all looking forward to the baby," Mr Schyf said.

Not that it's an issue now, sadly, but it would interesting to know if Carl Homer had ever been investigated or charged over this.

Posted by Tim Blair at November 25, 2004 04:41 PM
Comments

Creepy.

Posted by: Mr. Blue at November 25, 2004 at 04:54 PM

How do a 33 year old and a 15 year old meet "through friends".
Still, one should never speak ill of the dead.

Posted by: Simon at November 25, 2004 at 05:10 PM

The solid implication in the news report is that the "couple" started a sexual relationship when he was 31 and she was 13, and the parents of the girl are quoted as approving the relationship? I'm just glad that I grew up in what the moonbats would call a white picket fence, religous right household, and lack the capacity to reduce child abuse to some bullshit moral equivalency.

As for 20 year olds stealing high performance cars and giving friends joy death rides, all what I can say is that it is further proof that Charles darwin was right.

Posted by: Pauly at November 25, 2004 at 05:22 PM

More:

Miss Schyf's mother said her daughter's boyfriend, Mr Homer, was obviously much older but she was very happy with him.

"It is sad to have a 15-year-old leave home but she was with the right man that took care of her," she said.

Posted by: ajf at November 25, 2004 at 05:23 PM

How do a 33 year old and a 15 year old meet "through friends".

Maybe the 33 year old had a friend, who was the 15 year old's teacher.

This is a bit creepy, but at least she didn't run out and have an abortion.

Very sad for all.

Posted by: Thomas at November 25, 2004 at 05:26 PM

WTF

That is all.

Posted by: Dylan at November 25, 2004 at 05:40 PM

Also - what's a p-plate?

Posted by: Dylan at November 25, 2004 at 05:41 PM

Legal age for marriage with parental consent can go pretty low - or has until recently - as low as 13 or 14, in some US states.

Posted by: equitus at November 25, 2004 at 05:56 PM

To Equitus I say Wow.
In Australia it's irrelevant. Of course to have a prosecution -
For
Unlawful
Carnal
Knowledge
(it's an acrostic too)
you need someone to complain to the police and here obviously the parents 'consented' by not complaining

Posted by: Simon at November 25, 2004 at 06:10 PM

I noticed a difference in ages but didn't feel like commenting on it 'cause I didn't want to speak ill of the dead.

Isn't there a reasonable case to be made that the offender being a position of power (with the female teacher) makes it more serious? (Not to mention that parents can usually tell their children not to meet a certain person, whereas that isn't the case with a teacher)

Curious, given recent coverage of underage-sex cases involving children of similar ages, how blandly this is reported. The dead girl's parents seemed happy with the relationship:

What's your own opinion? The teacher was treated too harshly? Not harshly enough? And if the accident didn't happen, should the 33-year-old have faced some questioning?

Posted by: Andjam at November 25, 2004 at 06:22 PM

In a perfect world, Carl would have been charged, found guilty and sentenced to a (probably shortish) prison term. That would help to get the message across that YOU. DO. NOT. HAVE. SEX. WITH. FIFTEEN. YEAR. OLD. GIRLS! They are off limits, no matter how willing or how hot they may be. Heaven forfend that you may have to show some discipline or self-control or self-denial.

But we don't live in a perfect world. We live in a world of ignorant sluts, contemptible low-lifes, parents who don't know how to say "No" and a general lack of moral fibre. No doubt all of these people were just trying not to make a bad situation any worse by getting the law involved.

At least we can hope that this was the case.

Posted by: Andrew D. at November 25, 2004 at 06:46 PM

So maybe justice was done?

Posted by: Le clerc at November 25, 2004 at 06:55 PM

Wishing death to rain down on them is a bit harsh Le clerc

Posted by: Simon at November 25, 2004 at 07:05 PM

For what's it's worth.
The Father of the girl is driving around in a souped up car,thinks it's OK for his 13year old daughter to date a 30+ man.
Maybe all she was looking for was a Father.

Posted by: gubbaboy at November 25, 2004 at 07:08 PM

I read this today. I also found it a little odd that the ages seemed to be almost a footnote.

Still, I suppose none of it matters now, but it does raise a question. Just how common is this?

Posted by: Quentin George at November 25, 2004 at 07:11 PM

No I think the owner of the car was the father of the driver who was just a friend of the couple (though of who ? the guy or the girl - he was in between their ages)

Posted by: Simon at November 25, 2004 at 07:12 PM

P-plates are what newish drivers have. You get Ls by passing a written/computer test on road rules and can then drive with a licensed driver "instructing" you from the passenger seat. Once you pass a driving test you get your Ps and can drive by yourself (though you have a reduced maximum speed limit).

[There are actually two levels of Ps in NSW but thats redundant].

Posted by: sholden at November 25, 2004 at 07:18 PM

In WA P-platers no longer have a reduced speed limit, but they must keep a log-book of their driving for a certain period / mileage.

Posted by: Robert at November 25, 2004 at 07:25 PM

The concept of L-plates was used quite effectively in the recent Oz election, as this article shows.

Posted by: Quentin George at November 25, 2004 at 07:38 PM

Further to Sholden’s comments.

The “P” stands for “Provisional” – when you obtain a driver’s license you are a “P-Plater” for 12 months.

Newbies are required to attached P-Plates (about 8 inches square) on the front and back of his or her vehicle. It’s a useful way for the police and other road users to distinguish the newbies. Also, if my memory is correct, there are certain speed restrictions on P-Platers.

Posted by: Mike in Perth at November 25, 2004 at 07:39 PM

"So maybe justice was done?"

You would have really loved life in Afghanistan mate. Justice was always done. You even got to watch sometimes, which I'm sure you would have loved

Posted by: Tom at November 25, 2004 at 08:48 PM

Tom, I believe Le clerc was refering to the short-eye who died in the crash, and not to his victim.

Posted by: Cybrludite at November 25, 2004 at 09:02 PM

Trash people trashing themselves. A mother thanking a dead 33-year-old for taking a fifteen-year-old off her hands.

The welfare state's crowning achievement.

There are real lives - I'm sorry - deaths - involved in this but this is an indictment of the welfare state and forty years of 'solutions'.

That poor baby.

And screw the rest. Irresponsible idiots, all of them. Because they could make decisions, but the baby couldn't.

Posted by: ilibcc at November 25, 2004 at 09:12 PM

What a terrible story.
Cars are killers,we should ban the advertising of cars that sell speed,we should ban motor racing.
Our children are more valuable than any fast car,this selling of speed as sexy is pornographic.
I speak as a former 15 year old car theif who was involved in dozens of crimes,raced the police at over 100mph,and later got involved in rallying.
Why speed?
Isn't life short enough already-where's the fire?

Posted by: marklatham at November 25, 2004 at 09:12 PM

What is a short eye ?
I am sufficiently hip to know a shorty is a girlfriend or child but obviously there is a gap in my vocab with this one.

Posted by: Simon at November 25, 2004 at 09:30 PM

Simon -

'Shorteye' is an American prison term for child molestor. It isnt used in Australia to my knowledge.

Posted by: dee at November 25, 2004 at 09:48 PM

Gotcha, thanks Dee
I don't even want to think about the derivation of that one

Posted by: Simon at November 25, 2004 at 09:54 PM

I worked at a youth shelter for about a year. Sadly, 15 year old girls hooking up with 30+ year old guys is not all that uncommon. Very creepy, and very sad.

Posted by: Mr. Blue at November 25, 2004 at 10:01 PM

'Shorteye' is an American prison term for child molestor. It isnt used in Australia to my knowledge.

I think one term used here is "rock spider". I don't know how the term came about though.

Posted by: Andjam at November 25, 2004 at 10:03 PM

I prefer the term 'deceased'

Posted by: Sheriff at November 25, 2004 at 10:41 PM

Hey, lay off the Skyline, bro; by the time we've put in the doof kit and had the polychromatic paintjob done there's fuck-all left for brake pads. How are we gonna pick up chicks in a 120Y?

Posted by: Habib at November 25, 2004 at 10:42 PM

What the hell is wrong with these parents? If I had a teenaged daughter/son and I caught an older man/woman even sniffing around them I'd have his/her ass in handcuffs faster than you can say "jailbait".

Posted by: Betsy in America at November 26, 2004 at 12:25 AM

Maybe they're all Dutch. As they say in the Netherlands 'if she's old enough to pee, she's old enough for me'.

or Canada where a couple of years ago a convict with aids shacked up with a young girl while he was on parole. Police investigated and determined there was nothing they could do because the girl was 14, the age of legal consent.

Posted by: Arty at November 26, 2004 at 12:41 AM

Hmmm.

"What the hell is wrong with these parents? If I had a teenaged daughter/son and I caught an older man/woman even sniffing around them I'd have his/her ass in handcuffs faster than you can say "jailbait"."

Or as an uncle of mine would put it: "A shotgun, a shovel and a nice piece of empty land up in the mountains.".

Posted by: ed at November 26, 2004 at 01:50 AM

I seem to remember reading an article by Theodore Dalrymple which said that Ian Huntley, the Soham murderer, had had a string of underage live-in girlfriends with the consent of the parents.

It is hard to understand the mores of the underclass. However, I would suggest that the do-gooder middle-class wankers who thought that everyone could handle promiscuity and the removal of shame from matters sexual have been proven wrong once again.

Posted by: Toryhere at November 26, 2004 at 07:45 AM

We are talking the NSW Central Coast- bogan central. At 15 she should be on her third pension provider- at least the boyfriend had some style with a Skyline- up there you're regarded as classy if you've got a VP Commodore with a home-made bonnet scoop and wear double-plug thongs.
Evolution at work I reckon.

Posted by: Habib at November 26, 2004 at 08:26 AM

... I'd have his/her ass in handcuffs...

Asscuffs, surely?

The mental image is quite disturbing.

Posted by: Andrew D. at November 26, 2004 at 11:09 AM

According to my daughters, the age of the boyfriend is the topic de jour around their workplaces.

A common comment is - 'she must have been 13 when they started having sex'.

What happened to DOCS? Too busy sending abused children back to violent homes?

Posted by: dee at November 26, 2004 at 02:05 PM

I'm with Ed on this one, only replacing the shovel and mountain land with something to weight the body down and some reasonably deep water with lots of crabs. Gotta stick with the shotgun, though. No rifling marks to trace...

Posted by: Cybrludite at November 26, 2004 at 04:16 PM