The Hall sentence will stand, it looks like a sound and considered sentence based on the laws and sentencing guidelines in place at the time of the crime. It sucks, but there it is. Also, yay George North!
its down to the legal terms used - the barrister for the prosecution has had a complaint made against him for the word ` paedophile` as that's also a legal term , and a 15 year old does not fit into that category , its actually called ephebophilia
She may have gone willingly, but as a minor she was unable to give valid and informed consent to elope so technically he took her without consent.
OK, I'm not very versed on the case considering I live in DK now but was there definite sexual activity involved? If so, then it's another case of a man fulfilling his carnal desires IMO. Bugger all the fluffy ''love'' BS, he's simply acting on an overwhelming desire to have 'the younger model' and have an adoring one at that. I'd agree, that to get that from his position of authority, is an abuse of his job and title, but I'd say 3 years and a ruined life would be punishment enough. I think this opens up the wider debate about the sexualisation of kids earlier and earlier in their development, not to mention the lack of responsibility and caring most parents have towards their kids nowadays, but I digress, that's a new thread. EDIT: South Park Season 10: Episode 10 deals with the flipside of the coin in it's invariably satirical way. When a 5 year old boy starts having an affair with a 'hot' teacher. The only response from authority is; ''Isn't she the hot one? Nice..''
Not professional boundaries, legal ones. After a number of cases where the relationships came out after the child turned 16, a law was passed that techers can't have relationships with students under 18 (ie, legal age of adulthood). Can't remember the name of the law, was mentioned in some of the news stories.
The quote I saw about that I was slightly cross with; it seemed to be mainly trying to evoke emotive reaction from the court. Yes, the underlying message was that it is important how the teacher thought of the relationship (i.e.s was he, conciously or unconciously, lusting for her or was it just a natural bonding) but it seemed to be implyng slightly that he should pe persecuted for the attraction in itself.
yes and as she is over 10 her `opinion` is given legal weight - if she can be tried in a court then she can give consent (other than where consent is defined by law , eg voting ,marrying or having sex etc).
Had an interesting conversation earlier about this `new` girl that's come forward Chloe Queen age 17 now she says he did the same to her when she was 13 so that would make the year 2009 give or take 6 months. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...led-me-aged-13-says-another-former-pupil.html both her and her mum said `he taught her for 5 years` - which would be for the entire school life - aged 11 to 16 now heres my problem: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-22970462 this is supported by bishop bell pupils saying they had him for maths for 3 years - in September 2012 , when it was a missing person enquiry not a court case. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19725791 video on that page so how can 1 school pupil say he has been taught math for 3 years (since 2009) in 1 school (and its on record he was there full time from 2009 onwards) and yet suddenly we have another girl saying he tried it on with her - in a different school in another part of the country, not only in 2009 - but up until end 2011/2012. so either forrest was full time teaching in 2 schools - 100 miles apart , or this `chloe queen` isn't very good with `remembering`.
Dirty git ! He knew the risks that his career would be over and maybe prison...but still did it. Rule 1 of teaching 'Don't **** the kids'. He deserves to have the book thrown at him it sends a message to all the other teachers. I remember a teacher at school that kept looking down the Blouses of the girls, I must have been around 14, bloody pedo.
Her opinion is given legal weight, but consent is specific to the decision being made. When it comes to her, as a minor, deciding whether she can leave home to live independently and engage in a sexual relationship with an adult, guess what the answer would be? And maybe Chloe Queen remembers just fine, but it wouldn't be the first time news reporters got their facts and dates screwed up. Meanwhile two other girls have come forwards. Attention seekers? Let's not blame the victim before we have investigated their claims.
Let's face it. If the guy doesn't understand that 15 year old girls are vulnerable and impressionable then he's not going to get it full stop. Years ago I lived with my wife and her father. He met a woman with a 15 year old daughter who soon formed a crush on me. It was really, really uncomfortable. In the end I had to sit her down and explain a few things to her. I did that as a responsible adult. If my morals and logic were f**ked then I would have seen nothing wrong with it. I did, though. This guy obviously doesn't understand that 15 year olds aren't fair game for fully grown adults in the very principle so I gotta say I wouldn't be at all surprised if more girls come forward.
He took her without her consent, because she was not able to give valid and informed consent. Arguably kidnap. I would add fraud (as in: false pretences) to the list too, but there is no legal definition for "love". QFT on both counts.
I envisioned the kind looking for a quick penny and some fame on the Sun. Plenty of them about. But nevertheless you're right.
she can give valid consent as of her age , but her parents did not give consent as her legal guardians. Hence child abduction that is the crux of the difference under law - and the legal age as defined by lord Brandon (in R v D 1984) is 14. Above 14 , and the child has indicated they gave consent then it wont be kidnap. the precedent has already been set. under 14 but above 10 then the child opinion will be given weight, but above 14 if the child willingly and openly consented thn that's taken as fact.
