Teacher guilty of sex with two boys

[Mr Penguin]

[popeyewhite]

bhstewie said:

Is it just me or is some of the stuff on this thread sickening?

It's just you.

And you're lying.

If you truly found stuff on here sickening you would leave the thread.

[popeyewhite]

Monkeylegend said:

bhstewie said:

Wonder if part of her mitigation will be they were "lucky bds" and "they loved every minute of it" and "technically I'm not a pedophile"

She could argue that she was helping them study for their hole levels.

Christ.

[popeyewhite]

oddman said:

Another assumption is that this story started in the classroom or school. It probably started years before in the personal history of the perpetrator and her choice (conscious or otherwise) to take a role that placed her in authority over children.

An interesting comment. Has any event like this been documented?

[Oakey]

asfault said:

I can't comment on 15 year old girls or blokes who are 30 into pedo stuff but having been a 15 year old boy with crushes on 30 year old female teachers i can comment.

It's normal for teenage boys and girls to fancy 30yr old men and women. Less so for 30yr men and women to fancy school kids. Do you see the difference?

[asfault]

Mr Penguin said:

That episode was genius and so funny. The clip of the pedo dressed up as an entire school as well had me in stitches.

[asfault]

Oakey said:

asfault said:

I can't comment on 15 year old girls or blokes who are 30 into pedo stuff but having been a 15 year old boy with crushes on 30 year old female teachers i can comment.

It's normal for teenage boys and girls to fancy 30yr old men and women. Less so for 30yr men and women to fancy school kids. Do you see the difference?

I completely understand the wrongs of the situation. It still doesnt change my own personal opinion on what I would have been happy with. Or for that matter 90% of my mates when we were that age. Infact if you'd said no to that all your mates would call you a gayboy.

[RSTurboPaul]

Dibble said:

Oliver Hardy said:

Surely the meaning of statutory rape is sexual activity with a child who is not old enough to consent to sex, isn't that in the UK under 13 according to UK law? Don't really get why women can't be charged with statutory rape in the UK.

The law actually says a child over 13 can consent to sex but sex with a child under 16 is unlawful

I worded it badly. It’s not known in England/Wales as statutory rape. If the child consents, it’s still not true consent, because a child under 16 (in law) can’t consent to sex.

This seems most confusing. The first comment seems to say that 13-15 year olds can consent to sex, but the latter comment seems to say they can't.

Is this a situation of 'the Law' versus 'Case Law in practice'?


If it is the case that 13 year olds can (in the eyes of the law) consent, I presume that removes the risk of prosecution for two consenting 13-15 year olds undertaking a sexual relationship, but leaves in place that <12s cannot consent. (Although I'm not sure who would get prosecuted if two 12 year olds formed a sexual relationship - both parties??)

[Lotobear]

popeyewhite said:

oddman said:

Another assumption is that this story started in the classroom or school. It probably started years before in the personal history of the perpetrator and her choice (conscious or otherwise) to take a role that placed her in authority over children.

An interesting comment. Has any event like this been documented?

...it's a fairly well established and recognised phenomenon - Saville, Barry Bennell et al

[otolith]

Lotobear said:

popeyewhite said:

oddman said:

Another assumption is that this story started in the classroom or school. It probably started years before in the personal history of the perpetrator and her choice (conscious or otherwise) to take a role that placed her in authority over children.

An interesting comment. Has any event like this been documented?

...it's a fairly well established and recognised phenomenon - Saville, Barry Bennell et al

I believe the Catholic Church has had an issue or two too.

[popeyewhite]

otolith said:

Lotobear said:

popeyewhite said:

oddman said:

Another assumption is that this story started in the classroom or school. It probably started years before in the personal history of the perpetrator and her choice (conscious or otherwise) to take a role that placed her in authority over children.

An interesting comment. Has any event like this been documented?

...it's a fairly well established and recognised phenomenon - Saville, Barry Bennell et al

I believe the Catholic Church has had an issue or two too.

Yes, but I meant specifically a schoolteacher. A person who trained through their college years to be a teacher. Often with a degree, but certainly with a PGCE. Is there any documented evidence specifically of that?

[otolith]

popeyewhite said:

Yes, but I meant specifically a schoolteacher. A person who trained through their college years to be a teacher. Often with a degree, but certainly with a PGCE. Is there any documented evidence specifically of that?

You mean "are there any nonces known to have entered teaching specifically in order to enter pupils"? Don't know. How would you ever prove what their motivation was?

[popeyewhite]

otolith said:

popeyewhite said:

Yes, but I meant specifically a schoolteacher. A person who trained through their college years to be a teacher. Often with a degree, but certainly with a PGCE. Is there any documented evidence specifically of that?

You mean "are there any nonces known to have entered teaching specifically in order to enter pupils"? Don't know. How would you ever prove what their motivation was?

Yes that's what I mean. I was thinking that teaching as a vocation is hard enough without having an ulterior motive for your study running in the background. I'm not sure it could ever be 'proved', but obviously court ordered forensic psych evaluations are regularly performed.

[bitchstewie]

popeyewhite said:

It's just you.

And you're lying.

If you truly found stuff on here sickening you would leave the thread.

Rather than question it you mean?

Change it around a bit.

Imagine if Someone said:

The type of 15 year old a teacher is willing to have sex with isnt going to be you or me geeky 15 year old. It will be the bad girl of the class probably quite confident anyway and in future likely to be a single mother to a couple of different fathers anyway...

Thats alot of assumptions I know but smoking hot sex mad teacher isnt going to be shagging little Hannah Montana specy geek is he?

It's gross.

[fly by wire]

:cough: Jeremy Forrest :cough:

[gregs656]

bhstewie said:

It's gross.

Female sexual abuse of minors is fine.

Two consenting male adults gets a very different response - indeed a common accusation there is grooming even if there is no evidence for it, and apparently they would be fine with it if it was a female teacher.

That's PH for you.

[Mr Penguin]

popeyewhite said:

Yes that's what I mean. I was thinking that teaching as a vocation is hard enough without having an ulterior motive for your study running in the background. I'm not sure it could ever be 'proved', but obviously court ordered forensic psych evaluations are regularly performed.

It's extremely unlikely that no teachers join for that reason, in whole or in part.

[popeyewhite]

Mr Penguin said:

popeyewhite said:

Yes that's what I mean. I was thinking that teaching as a vocation is hard enough without having an ulterior motive for your study running in the background. I'm not sure it could ever be 'proved', but obviously court ordered forensic psych evaluations are regularly performed.

It's extremely unlikely that no teachers join for that reason, in whole or in part.

Yes, maybe. I don't know, which is why I asked.

[Oakey]

gregs656 said:

Two consenting male adults gets a very different response - indeed a common accusation there is grooming even if there is no evidence for it, and apparently they would be fine with it if it was a female teacher.

That's PH for you.

If you're talking about Schofield, he's probably a wrong un as well. Unless you think he likes befriending young boys and kickstarting their careers for altruistic reasons?

[Dibble]

RSTurboPaul said:

Dibble said:

Oliver Hardy said:

Surely the meaning of statutory rape is sexual activity with a child who is not old enough to consent to sex, isn't that in the UK under 13 according to UK law? Don't really get why women can't be charged with statutory rape in the UK.

The law actually says a child over 13 can consent to sex but sex with a child under 16 is unlawful

I worded it badly. It’s not known in England/Wales as statutory rape. If the child consents, it’s still not true consent, because a child under 16 (in law) can’t consent to sex.

This seems most confusing. The first comment seems to say that 13-15 year olds can consent to sex, but the latter comment seems to say they can't.

Is this a situation of 'the Law' versus 'Case Law in practice'?


If it is the case that 13 year olds can (in the eyes of the law) consent, I presume that removes the risk of prosecution for two consenting 13-15 year olds undertaking a sexual relationship, but leaves in place that <12s cannot consent. (Although I'm not sure who would get prosecuted if two 12 year olds formed a sexual relationship - both parties??)

The law says a child under 16 cannot consent to sex. So even if the child gives consent, someone having sex with them would commit an offence.

It’s a minefield when dealing with 15 year old kids, because if they’re having sex with each other (consensually) they’re simultaneously both victims and offenders. It’d be very unlikely they’d be prosecuted though, because criminalising kids for being kids isn’t really in the public interest.

I dealt with a job a while back where a child (14) sent a sexual image of themself to someone else claiming to be 15 (they were 16). The child sending technically makes/distributes an indecent image of a child. Without going into loads of detail about it, with CPS blessing they weren’t prosecuted because they’d effectively been coerced into it. The other party was prosecuted for possession of IIOC. I can’t go into the rationale, but generally where it’s kids with kids and they’re both consenting, similar age, no aggravating factors, diversion/education/support is a much better solution than prosecution.