O, I didn't, Deb; because, I started writing before it was posted, and, when I had posted, all of yours were there!
I agree wholeheartedly with what you've said. In England, unfortunately, consent can be used as a defence, due to a very stupid case (W v DPP, I think it was,) which involved a nineteen-year-old boy and a twelve/thirteen-year-old girl; a depravity case. Because he had thought that she was over sixteen, he got away with it; but, in the Judges' binding reasons for decision, that she consented, allegedly, was also allowed; so, consent was made a defence. Because of our Judges' wanting, in their own words in a recent House of Lords case, to 'wait for about 20 years before discarding a law,' this will affect many young women for the forseeable future.
Yeah - I think degree of coercion/trauma reasonably comes into play re sentencing - ie holding a gun to his head would have made it worse.
I had a friend in high school, she was 14, who had a 18- or 19-year-old boyfriend, by the way - and they seemed pretty happy together. I would have hated them to have been dragged to court by, say, a disagreeing parent or something. So I'm not all about uncompromising age barriers, at all. 14-, 15-year olds fall in love, and they can easily fall in love with an 18-, 19-year-old - I dont see anything meaningfully less natural about that than about a relationship with someone their own age <shrugs>
BUT a teacher / student thing is definitely different, especially if its your student. And I mean, come on, the teacher/student relationship has been problematicized, because of so many abuse cases, to such an extent that you'd need to be an utter fool to still get yourself into that.
AND I am mystified about how the gender set-up (male teacher / female student or female teacher / male student) can be said to make any difference, whatsoever.
Statutory rape, in the US, is what's called a strict liability matter. All that needs to be proven are the ages of the participants and that sexual contact occurred - so birth certificates and a swab are enough for a conviction.
This is as it should be. We consider people under 18 to be children. Like it or not, accept it or not, but being under 18 means a person is legally an infant. Their consent is null and void and means nothing whatsoever.
If coercion is involved, then the case is not only one of statutory rape but is also one of forcible rape.
Oh, and the genders of the participants are wholly irrelevant, as is whether it's heterosexual or homosexual contact, or whether a pregnancy results from the contact, etc. It's just age and evidence of sexual contact (obvious a bit more difficult if both participants are female, or if the action is brought long after a medical sample could have been taken) which matter.
Jespah, the age of consent varies by state. In Michigan, for example, it's 16.
Did anyone think that that supposedly 23-year old teacher looks about 14? My 14-year old daughter looks older than she does.
I'd hit that...5'9, 110lbs, blond...why didn't I have any teachers like that??? That kid has achieved bragging rights for the rest of his life.
CerealKiller wrote:Couldn't agree more. I would loved to have sex with my ninth grade English teacher and would never have ruined it or her by shooting off my mouth. Don't these kids learn nuthin at the academy.
<shuddering with recollections of my decidedly un-sexy ninth-grade English teacher>
At one time, the age of consent in Delaware was seven, which was a nod to arranged marriages as practiced by the residue of Swedish settlers in a formerly Swedish colony.
A fourteen-year-old and a sixteen-year-old cannot sign a legally valid contract, being considered incompetent to give informed consent. But we should observe differences when it comes to possibly interferring in the selfish consummation of the sexual desires of adults? I for one think not.
When i worked in a hospital in Virginia a woman came to deliver a child. Her gravidity was 15, her parity was 13. This means that she had previously been pregnant 15 times, of which 13 children were born living. At the time of this, her sixteenth pregnancy, she was 31 years of age. None of her children were bastards, she had legally married in North Carolina at age 14. I know this because she frankly told me as much as i admitted her. She looked like 40 miles of bad road, and i'd have judged her to be in her fifties until she presented her identification. No one aged 14 should be considered competent to make such decisions.
Damn it, I can't get to that link because of this piece of **** firewall at work!
You'd bang her.
Although the mugshots are pretty funny. Looks like a before/after picture for a Sally Jesse Ralphael makeover show. On the left, she looks pretty hot wth her hair pulled back, and makeup on. Picture on right, no makeup, hair a mess.
Frankly, Kick, you ain't missin' nothin' . . . she's one in a million . . . as in you could find a million young women who look like that without strainin' yerself . . . i don't think she's so hot . . . i do think she's fairly witless, though . . .
I think she's hot considering the whole teacher/student fantasy running through my head.
I used to look down the front of my chemistry teacher's dress, because she was stupid enough not to know she was showin' it off. We all did it, intentionally screwed up our samples so she'd bend over the lab table.
I wouldn't have screwed her with your dick . . .
cj, you're right, I posted too quickly.
Yes, there are differences in age of consent - and about all that means is that some liaisons will be legal in some states and illegal in others.
Miss Charles, our science teacher, used to make it a habit of bending down into the lower filing cabinet while wearing a provocative and short skirt. I still won't forget those lovely silk panties - never mind.
How does she compare to the girl in that Van Halen "Hot for Teacher" video?
dlowan wrote:There are laws to protect children. These are a necessity, in my view. Does anyone dispute this?
This teacher appears t have broken the law.
If she had any kind of sexual contact with him, that is the end of story re guilt.
The law takes the view that a person under the age of consent is unable to give informed consent - therefore, consent is of no moment in relation to whether or not a crime has been committed - although, in practice, at least here, if the participants are people are of similar age, there is considered to be no crime.
The teacher was nine yars older.
This teacher had a duty to the young man as an adult. As a teacher, even more so if she was HIS teacher, she had duty of care and special professional obligations over and above that of an ordinary adult.
She appears to have abused her position - which makes the offence even worse.
Obviously, had the sexual activity been coerced, that would add gravity to the offence.
I agree with everything you're saying about laws to protect children in these instances and I don't dispute the fact she abused her power.
My point was when you're doing something wrong or illegal you don't broadcast it.
How stupid does this kid have to be to enjoy his sexual escapades with her and then turn around and make trouble for her by shooting off his big mouth.
He must have known his parents, the school, and the law would want her head on a stick. If he were an enterprising lad he could have blackmailed her, seeing he had her over the proverbial barrel.
Slappy Doo Hoo wrote:You'd bang her.
Although the mugshots are pretty funny. Looks like a before/after picture for a Sally Jesse Ralphael makeover show. On the left, she looks pretty hot wth her hair pulled back, and makeup on. Picture on right, no makeup, hair a mess.
LMAO
Ahhh the miracles of makeup ... let's put lipstick on this pig.
