I think it's disgusting.... However i spent many nights fantasizing about female teachers at that age (o.0)
There was this 25yo history teacher, back in the days, the real porn cliché (Blonde, black glasses, short skirt and infinite legs) (o.0)
You were horny teenagers. You were supposed to fantasise about young hot teachers. But the important thing is: they were adults and teachers. They were not supposed to fantasise about you. The law wouldn't be changed. Any change in sentence would be in accordance with the law, and the result of a review of the application of the existing law. That was exactly always his motive. He should have acted in her interests, even if that meant she would hate him for it. Instead he did what she wanted so she would continue to love him. He was thinking more about his need to be loved by her, than about her need to be contained and guided through her difficult time. he should have been her teacher, not her lover. It does not matter how old she was. He was in a position of power, authority and trust. He had a duty of care. He should have maintained professional boundaries.
But five and a half years seems excessive for the crime of breaching professional boundaries and statuary rape but not abusive beyond his position as a teacher. Its not going to help him become more "normal" and from a deterrent point of view losing your job and a year or two of jail time is already plenty to anyone thinking rationally.
In practice he will do half --two years and nine months. And sorry, but abusing a position of authority, breaching professional trust and transgressing professional boundaries should be punished harshly. And an adult having sex with a minor half his age should be treated as a criminal offense. Or should we just let him off because he's a troubled man who couldn't help himself? What message does that give? If you're unhappy in your marriage and plead temporary insanity you can get away with sleeping with minors in your care? Does the word "responsibility" mean anything anymore?
This isnt going away as the young lady herself is in custody. She was arrested on warrant on tuesday morning
I think that the UKs current sentencing guidelines are to be revised soon (the new stuff is in a draft version at the mo). Currently these guidlines place emphasis on 'what part of this person touched what part of that person' when giving guidance on appropriate sentencing to judges. In future they will focus much more on the level of harm done to the abused/molested. The other thing to bear in mid is that sentences are handed down according to the guidelines set at the time of the crime. When Hall was committing his crimes this type of offence was considered as 'Indecent Assault' and had much lower maximum/minimum sentences set (Some of his offences would, if commited today, carry a maximum sentence of life in prison). If you are interested, you can read the Judges closing remarks from the Hall case here, it is worth a quick scan.
As I said a year or two would be a sufficient deterrent. Fair enough about sentence often being shortened substantially. That really shouldn't be the case though. Rape or abuse, then you throw the book at the person.
Nexxo She was arrested at the end of her maths gcse exam edit: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4978143/Jeremy-Forrest-girl-still-loves-teacher.html she doesn't live with her mum anymore and wants to marry forrest when he gets out he`s also appealing
So she is not in custody; she was made to show up in court to testify. Not the same thing. I'm not sure what you are getting at. It does not matter whether she thinks she loves him. She was a minor when the affair started. She was vulnerable and needy. He was her teacher. He should have put her needs before his own; acted not on what she wanted or he wanted, but on what she needed. She was not in a position to give valid and informed consent. There are consequences to his actions. There are plenty of people who choose to be in dysfunctional relationships, because they are needy and don't know any better. That does not make it a functional relationship that meets their needs appropriately.
The length of this thread (Really, he abused his position and diddled an underage girl.. What's there to discuss?) has made me lose track of what you think should have happened, Harlequin. Do you think he should be released, or have his sentence reduced.. I don't know.
what do I think? he should have gone to his superiors in the first instance and sent a flag up saying ` im not happy with this attention`. http://uk.news.yahoo.com/teacher-guilty-abducting-girl-015659048.html which would have meant no one would have known who he is and we wouldn't have such amazing reporting as : but - his sentence is longer than the female nursey worker has got (vannesa George is allready in an open prison , ready for parole - that's 18 months of a 7 year minimum sentence, for *rape by penetration* of 5 year olds) and the twitter feeds are still mentioning Stuart hall and his 15 months for a 9 year old`. what do I think? yes he should go to prison , every action has a consequence and reaction . Nex - are you saying that all teen are `vulnerable and needy` if their familes break down? will happily show you some that truly are not and very vocally tell you otherwise!
Right, thanks for clearing that up. I had this weird idea that you were saying it's all fine and everyone should leave them alone or something.
Indeed. But he thought of his own needs, not the girl's. And now she is being eaten up by the press, and reinforced in her commitment to a dysfunctional relationship. Way to go, teach! Vanessa George actually got a longer sentence; she just hasn't served as much of it. How much Jeremy Forrest actually serves is still to be seen. As for Stuart Hall, his sentence is under review for being considered too lenient. But the logic is flawed: just because one offender got of lightly doesn't mean they all should. I don't think that I made such a sweeping generalization. Regardless a teenager simply does not have the same wisdom, emotional self-regulation and life experience that an adult twice their age has (or at least, is supposed to have). They may think they do, and loudly proclaim they do, but they really don't. There is a reason why they don't get to drive, marry or vote before 18, why they have special protections in law until then. In the Netherlands you're not even allowed to leave education before that age.
Its not offender - case studies have shown that female child abusers get lighter sentences than male ones and serve less and are treated better in prison - the all women paedophile ring , as reported, are currently doing pretty much what they want , in furnished single cells and in open prisons, all for continued and systematic rape of 5 year olds which was then shared over the internet. UK laws are different at 16 you can get married (with guardian consent) join the army as infantry and ride a restricted moped. at 17 you can drive a car , or motorbike (again restricted motorbike - 125cc or under 33hp with an A1 licence) UK law is ridiculous - a 17 year old Is under definition is a child , yet if arrested for motoring offences are treated as an adult http://news.sky.com/story/1070693/parents-of-suicide-teen-call-for-law-reform and currently a 16 year old leaves permanent education (although that's now changing to 17 next year and 18 year after) so the bottom line here - Forrest is being re investigated (as is MS) for allegedly contacting during the trial , she could well be sent down for perjury; which says 1 thing - the only winners in this mess are the lawyers , with the CPS , social services and the police all angling for holier than thou.
Can't help but agree that it's a breach of professional boundaries which have then progressed into a statutory rape, given the position that he had he's a ****ing idiot for not thinking 'hang on, this could end really badly for me'. All that aside, it's nice to see that I'm just within the general creepiness rule with my missus (She's 53, I'm 33)
Most of the posts in this thread seem to ignore the child kidnap aspect of the case, which arguably caused more collateral damage than the sexual relationship. Teacher starts having sex with underage pupil, eventually kidnapping her. Terrified family, friends and school. Busy police. Even if it was all her idea, he made the grave error of saying yes in the first place. Considering he'll serve a shade over two years and then be under very close supervision thereafter, I don't think the sentence was harsh at all. That girl needs to spend some time with nuns.
Shirty - she wasn`t kidnapped ; that's very specific under law she went willingly so in those 4 `points to prove` you can discount 2 parts. hence why they charged him with child abduction ; a lesser offence but since she was under 16 , she was under lawful custody of her parents.
