Oz body slam, now house mistress abuses boys in NSW.

Oz body slam, now house mistress abuses boys in NSW.

Author
Discussion

caziques

Original Poster:

2,590 posts

170 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
An Australian school house mistress who sexually abused six boys should be sentenced on the basis of her crimes, not her gender, a Sydney judge has been told.

In December, Judge Garling rejected her defence of mental illness, finding her guilty of 21 sex offences involving boys, aged 11 or 12, who attended the NSW school where she worked.

The 2009 offences included 18 counts of sexual intercourse, involving fellatio and penile-vaginal penetration.

In one incident when five boys were in a tent, she was naked and asked: "Does anyone want a blow job?"

Full story:

www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/4793551/House-mist...

So what's the consensus?

Better or worse than bloke and young girls?

Lock her up?

Wish you had been there?

isee

3,713 posts

185 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
If it were a guy, he'd be hung by an angry mob already.

At the age of 11 I was still happily playing with my toy soldiers and tanks and thought that girls and their "bits" were wierd and alien.

Jerwatt

22,263 posts

203 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
I think it should be the same punishment as if it was a man. It will still have messed the kids up.

caziques said:
In one incident when five boys were in a tent, she was naked and asked: "Does anyone want a blow job?"
If she was decent looking and they were a few years older that would have pretty much been the dream for any young guy!



Blib

44,348 posts

199 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
It's still abuse. Pure and simple. The same punishment should apply, IMO.

joe_90

4,206 posts

233 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Is she fit?

brilliant:
Defence lawyer Christopher Watson said while the boys suffered harm, the damage was "unlikely to be as significant" as if the perpetrator was male and the victims female, "because of the actual nature of the act". rolleyes

ZesPak

24,446 posts

198 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
No note of her age, but with 11-12yo boys(or girls for that matter) it's a big no-no and she should be prosecuted as a paedophile imho.

Now if the boys/girls would be 15/16 and she 22 or the like, it's a different matter imo. She could still be prosecuted as she abuses her position as a teacher/... and that's "not done", but I wouldn't think she's a paedophile.

Blib

44,348 posts

199 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
She's 41.

Google [bot]

6,682 posts

183 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
There was a pic elsewhere, I'll find it as it is the discussion can't continue without imagery.

ZesPak

24,446 posts

198 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Blib said:
She's 41.
Well, like I said, in this case it doesn't matter anyway as the boys were just 11/12, so it would be very wrong even if she was just 18.
Like I said, if the boys were 15 and she 21, I'd think it would be another discussion.

SC7

1,882 posts

183 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Ah, good old Bi-Polar; the new excuse for anything.

Piersman2

6,609 posts

201 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Unfortunately there is no photo of her in the article to pass judgement.

If she's a swamp donkey, as I suspect, then send her down.

singlecoil

33,928 posts

248 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
joe_90 said:
Is she fit?

brilliant:
Defence lawyer Christopher Watson said while the boys suffered harm, the damage was "unlikely to be as significant" as if the perpetrator was male and the victims female, "because of the actual nature of the act". rolleyes
Seems a very reasonable mitigation to me. It is different to the adult male-pubescent girl scenario.

Godzuki

73,668 posts

257 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Why is it when it is a women you never hear the term paedophile? She is a paedophile, and should be treated as such.

Google [bot]

6,682 posts

183 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Blib said:
She's 41.
She's 'a youthful looking 41'.

Sorry, looks like I missed my picture saving window. She wasn't bad IIRC.

singlecoil

33,928 posts

248 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Godzuki said:
Why is it when it is a women you never hear the term paedophile? She is a paedophile, and should be treated as such.
Paedophilia is a state of mind, not a criminal activity.


Godzuki

73,668 posts

257 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
singlecoil said:
Paedophilia is a state of mind, not a criminal activity.
Ah, so someone who molests multiple underage boys is NOT a paedophile. They do it for other reasons? What were her 'other reasons'?

Eric Mc

122,213 posts

267 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Godzuki said:
singlecoil said:
Paedophilia is a state of mind, not a criminal activity.
Ah, so someone who molests multiple underage boys is NOT a paedophile. They do it for other reasons? What were her 'other reasons'?
Singlecoil is correct. BEING a paedophile or having a paedophile mentality is NOT a crime. There is no such criminal offence in the statute books.

ACTING on those urges CAN be a crime depending on the nature of those actions.

People find it very difficult to differentiate between thoughts and actions.

George Orwell wasn't wrong.

Godzuki

73,668 posts

257 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Singlecoil is correct. BEING a paedophile or having a paedophile mentality is NOT a crime. There is no such criminal offence in the statute books.

ACTING on those urges CAN be a crime depending on the nature of those actions.

People find it very difficult to differentiate between thoughts and actions.

George Orwell wasn't wrong.
I never said it was a crime. However this woman DID commit a crime, and molested kids. Now if this was a man, as someone said, they would be shouting it from the rooftops, but why not this woman?

ZesPak

24,446 posts

198 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
SC7 said:
Ah, good old Bi-Polar; the new excuse for anything.
If you ask her, she'll tell you she was bi-winning.

Asterix

24,438 posts

230 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
SC7 said:
Ah, good old Bi-Polar; the new excuse for anything.
Indeed - the new ME (Multiple Excuses).