Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Overall, the statement is accurate in its assertion that the offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming under s.15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is beneficial in providing police with an opportunity to take legal action against individuals prior to any physical abuse occurring. This addresses a crucial issue regarding proving attempted offences, since it removes the need for prosecutors to prove intent and instead focuses on evidence of grooming behaviour itself.
However, this does not necessarily mean that it circumvents difficulties associated with other elements which must be proven in order to bring about a successful prosecution. These could include demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge or reason to believe that they were knowingly engaging in sexual activity with someone who was under 16 years old or vulnerable due to other circumstances. Furthermore, the evidence of grooming behaviour itself may be difficult to establish or prove in a court of law, as it could depend on circumstantial accounts from adults or children involved.
In summary, while the introduction of this offence is beneficial in providing an extra tool for police and prosecutors to use against potential abusers, there are still challenges associated with proving such offences which must be taken into account before conclusions can be drawn about its overall effectiveness in combatting child sexual abuse.
Customer ID: 100351