http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-23004956 5 1/2 year for going to france with a willing girl (who apparently still loves him) , and says the police threatened her with prison if she refused to co-operate , and also allegedly threatened to put her 5 year old brother into care as well. yet stuart hall got 15 months for abusing a 9 year old.
He seems a bit messed up to me. But I don't understand how 5.5 yrs prison is going to help. If you look at it like this, someone (taxpayer probably) is going to pay a large sum of money to commit this man to an facility for 5.5 years, and what does it achieve? I understand that prison is an incentive not to commit crimes, and that you have to convict people in order for it to hold any value as a deterrent, but in this case it will probably only make things worse. Maybe the guy needs therapy or something. Without therapy or something, when he gets out in 5.5 years nothing will have changed. He might be more worse than before.
Well, there are these things called "position of trust" and "boundaries" and stuff. It's the reason why a doctor or therapist sleeping with a patient is also frowned upon. The professional is in a position of power and authority; the patient is in a vulnerable and dependent position. Valid and informed consent is not possible. Similarly, this girl is a minor and in an unequal position of power with respect to her adult teacher. She is obviously vulnerable and needy. She is not in a position to give valid and informed consent. His job is to maintain appropriate professional boundaries. So screw him; he's going down.
This. 15 year old girls fall in love very easily and have pretty strong crushes. It's a bit bad when a teacher takes advantage of that.
If she was psychotic at the time, she should get off with an insanity plea. You cannot compare cases without knowing the whole story. The legal system does not have a simple linear sliding scale for punishments for offences. There is a reason why being a judge is considered to be a complex specialist profession.
Since I'm not familiar and don't feel like adding it to my search history... what's the age of consent over there? Surely 14 is under it, and likely 15 as well. Five years for statutory rape doesn't seem too out of place. And then this. Given his position it's not exactly surprising that she claims to love him and be fine with it. Goes back to the whole age of consent bit, teenagers have a funny tendency to be easily influenced by trusted adults. Imagine that.
Ok, what about Stuart Hall doing 15 months for raping girls as young as 9? Nearly a fifth of this guys sentence
Age of consent in the UK is 16, but still given that the person was in a position of trust as Nexxo said whether she was 15 or 16 it is still wrong. Morally wrong in my opinion. Now if the relationship had continued from 15 into 16 and then sexual intercourse had taken place it would have been seen a grooming. I agree with what Nexxo said, being in a position of power and trust puts a relationship firmly in the teacher/student category.
1. He did not rape the nine-year old; he molested her by putting his hand up her skirt. Just as bad in my book, but the law thinks differently. 2. Just because he got off lightly doesn't mean every other offender now should. In fact Stuart Hall's sentence is already under review as it is judged too lenient.
I was somewhat surprised to hear it's that low. To share, because sharing is always fun unless it involves minors, Washington state uses 16 as a default. Teaches and such are restricted to 18 or older for those under their supervision or care for reasons evident in this very case.
a bit of the case history (will add links later) - living in the town for this does help he was in an abusive marriage - his wife was bi polar and was barred from the school for attacking staff - he was on anti depressants. the girl (btw her name was all over the media last year) - had trouble at home , her mum and dad were divorcing in 2011/12 and apparently a nasty court fight ensued... and the kids got ignored. so the girl wanted someone to pay attention to her, and was in trouble a lot at school - drink and drugs have been mentioned. from the court case , the idea to go to france was hers (he actually wanted to make sure she didn't kill herself , as apparently there was a note about that.) in fact , in her own testimony - she said a lot of it was her idea , and he was aware of the consequences but she *maybe* pressured him. theres a huge amount more , will have to ask my son what he`s heard (you know facebook and wider circles of friends). its a bloody mess and far more convoluted than the media let on ; but the bottom line , he is a teacher and she is a pupil - and although is does happen , it shouldn't. but in this case , its not quite as black and white as the bbc lets on. and my gosh go read sky news.
Stuart Hall's sentence shouldn't be messed with. Yes, it seems lenient, but to change the law and apply those changes retrospectively undermines the legal system and the democracy it is designed to protect. This teacher's case...hmmm. IDK. I haven't followed the story but the sentence seems harsh to me. If they'd waited less than a year then we wouldn't be having this conversation. I think the law has been applied a bit too rigidly and has made a young man shoulder everything in what was probably a very emotional situation for both of them. Teacher/pupil relationship seems disproportionately more likely to develop romantically and yet our society demands even higher standard for teachers than the rest of us. Not saying it shouldn't be controlled but the sentence sounds hard in light of the support he was trying to give her. If his motive was always to get her into bed then that's a different story...
Sorry, but it is. She is a troubled, vulnerable and needy pupil starved for attention and affection, but he is a teacher with a duty of care. The France flit may have been all her idea and she may have threatened to kill herself, but as a teacher his duty is to keep her safe. He could have told her parents, told the GP, warned the school counsellor/nurse/educational psychologist; persuaded her to seek appropriate help. But he did not keep the boundaries when she most needed him to contain her. He put his own needs before hers. He should have been the one who contains, who makes the wise decisions, acts in her interests no matter how hard that is, how much it may upset her, how much she may hate him for it. He cared more about how she felt about him than about what she actually needed. He should have been the adult. The teacher. He wasn't. He betrayed her trust, her parents' trust, the trust bestowed on him by the profession. He broke the one rule you never, ever break. So he deserves everything he gets.
Got what.. Arguably less, than he deserved. It doesn't matter that she "loved him" - She's 15, she's lucky to know which way is up (as are boys) at any given moment. He abused his trusted position as a teacher. Prove that the police did anything and I'll still say the same - The police didn't coerce him into running away to France, he went with her and is now paying the price for his abuse of position.
