One of the girls was aged 11 years while the other two were twelve years each. .
During the court process, the girls contended that they had participated in sexual intercourse with the boy willingly implying that they had not been forced. However, it is unfortunate that, despite all the participants being minors, only the boy was charged for allegedly participating in sexual activities with girls who were below the age of sixteen. Despite the lawyer's efforts to file a case to protect the boy from being prosecuted owing to the fact that they were all minors, his attempts never succeeded. In essence, charging the boy alone amounted to discrimination because parties were equal before the law. The fact that all the participants were minors implies that all should have been prosecuted or if not, they could have been set free without favouring any party. Despite the fact that girls are doing the same thing with boys, and also are yet only the boy is being prosecuted imply that the statutory rape law is just there "to protect the interest of girls without equally considering the interest of boys" (Fischel 282). .
It is worth noting that in this current generation, both the girls, as well as, boys are equally recognised by the law. Therefore, no sex should be granted a privilege more than the other. This implies that the law should not only protect girls, but instead, boys too should equally be protected by the same law. It is prudent that the statutory rape laws be made neutral in the sense that in the event that an older individual engage in sex with the opposite sex aged 15, then, statutory rape occurs. .
This should also apply to women. For instance, in the event that a woman aged thirty years participates in sexual intercourse with a boy aged fifteen years, then that should be treated as a rape case. However, it is sad to note that, despite the fact that a number of women have sexually assaulted boys, they are rarely prosecuted.