Olympian/former world champion Mark Jamieson admits to child sex charges

Seems wrong that there is so little distinction made between raping a child and getting it on with a couple of teenagers, especially when the chap is so young as well. (24 is young, isn't it? I find it hard to tell anymore)

It allows for a degree of judicial lattitude to take into consideration the finer points of the case.

Quite often the conditions for conviction, sentencing and perception of future threat to public safety will be more lenient where the victim is closer to the age of majority. At the end of the day, "getting it on with a couple of teenagers" is still a crime and still rape. When the word rape is used it is often percieved as a violent crime of forced sexual activity. In reality it's an act of sexual activity without one parties consent of their own reasoned free will. Any person beneath the age of majority is deemed legally incapable of having the capacity to determine consent of reasoned free will. Ultimately the fact remains for a fair judicial system to be in place a line must be drawn somewhere.

Take your above statement about "getting it on with a couple of teenagers" and now add a hypothetical factor where one of the teenagers suffered from emotional retardation and learning difficulties. Is it still "getting it on with a couple of teenagers" or would you want that to be seen as an act of rape?