Us Teacher Marries Boy She Raped, Former US schoolteacher marries ex-pupil Options

[froggle-rock]

Here is the news story from the Beeb, down the left hand side are their older aarticles about it.

What do you think? Were they paid? Should they have continued thier relationship after she was convicted? Are you happy for them? Are you angry that they have been able to marry, have their children and now set up home? Have you ever had a relationship with a tutor/ teacher/ lecture? Did you, as a teen date a person old enought to be your parent, or vise versa? What do you think? Tell us

[Aislinn Faye]

What, what, what?! She married him? Omg...I don't see how it started in the first place, a 6th grader's hoo-hoo can't really be that tantalizing to a 30-some-year-old teacher. I think the most age difference relationship I've been in.. oldest.. me- 17 him- 14 and me- 17 him- 22, but never with a person who was old enough to be my parent. I think if they wanted to get married go for it, I mean I'm sure that happens every three days in the U.S. they just don't get this much attention.

[Snugglebum the D...]

Really hard to say from the story.

The eternal romantic in me says you fall in love with who you fall in love with. Of course, age issues always come into play. I've dated men 15 years my senior and still found them lacking in the department they should know better.

Hmmm - I'm just rambling now.

[Jonman]

Well, they're both consenting adults, so why the hell not? Sure, it's all a bit twisted and weird, but that's people for you. Ain't nowt queerer than folk.

As to getting paid, would you invite paparazzi to your wedding without a good reason (like a wad of crisp 50 dollar bills)? No, me neither.

[ravein]

Well, they're both consenting adults, so why the hell not? Sure, it's all a bit twisted and weird, but that's people for you. Ain't nowt queerer than folk.

As to getting paid, would you invite paparazzi to your wedding without a good reason (like a wad of crisp 50 dollar bills)? No, me neither.

Yeah I am with you on this one. It may be twisted but they are of legal age and can do whatever they want. I don't condone what she/he did, but if they are still together today after going through all that then maybe it was "love". Who knows..

Actually in the past it was very common for this type of thing to happen. Back in the 1930-50's it was not unusual for an older man to marry a 12-13 year old girl. If a girl was unmarried by the time she was 18 she was considered a spinster. My own parents for example; my mom was 25 when she married my dad who was 50 at the time. He used to babysit her and she always had a crush on him. While it is a little creepy they have been together almost 30 years now.


BTW here is a much better artical about this.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/.../1.html?sect=19

[Museum Girl]

I think it's odd and on her part at the time it was an abuse of her position of trust, but if they're happy then leave them alone. Eispecially as they have children together. Looking at the article it seems more like the press turned up uninvited.

The biggest dating age gap I have encountered was when my friend dated his ex boyfriends father.

[believe]

The initial abuse is disgusting and was rightly punished. At this point, I'm not sure it matters. The damage has been done, she did her time and there's the slim hope their kids might have a somewhat stable home. Who knows.

[ravein]

I think one of the things here that bothers me, this is purely a case of classification, is the word rape. She didn't rape him. He came on to her. Yes he was 12 but he was well aware of what he was doing and even bragged to friends that one day he was going to have sex with her. He even bet money on it. It is also important to know that this kid came from a very rough background, which can cause people to grow up very fast. Again I am not condoning this at all. But it really can't be rape if both parties consent. Had this happened in my state the charges would have been indecent liberties with a minor, which is closer to what happened; she as an adult had a mutual consenting relationship with a child under the age of 18.
With that said the whole thing still creeps me out.

[believe]

He was 12. Maybe a 'mature' 12, but 12. We wouldn't consider him capable of supporting himself, driving or voting even with his potential maturity. If we can't consider him capable of those basic things or caring for himself, I don't see the part where people consider him capable of having (and making informed choices) to have a mature and healthy sexual relationship with an adult. There's a reason the age of consent isn't 12. I consider statutory rape to be statutory rape, regardless of 'consent' for that reason. The article also shows her encouraging him for months before it even got physical, with all that attention and such. heh.

[sarcastic150]

You've gotta think when the children ask how their parents met for an essay or something it should make an interesting story, a slightly disturbing one for the child but none the less interesting. you can imagine the parents answer, "how did you and dad meet?" " Oh it wasn't very interesting, I just raped him when he was twelve"

[Hobbes]

A teacher in my old sixth form college was fired, and a pupil expelled, when their secret relationship was discovered. I think she was in her 30s, and he would have been 16 or 17. After they left, they moved in together and - I believe - got married.

I know it is not the same - particularly the ages. But I just thought I'd share.

[beccareb]

I think in some way it proves she wasn't just a pervert, but that it was something about that kid that attracted her. If they really are in love, I wish them the best.

[Calantyr]

I think in some way it proves she wasn't just a pervert, but that it was something about that kid that attracted her.  If they really are in love, I wish them the best.

Trouble is that when it is discovered, you must err on the side of caution. The law (in this case) is there for a reason, to protect easily impressionable youngsters. You have no real way of knowing if it truly IS love until years later.

So she was imprisoned. And now it seems that the ruling was wrong, but it is still something that had to be carried out.

Now if there was a way of judging *mental and emotional* age accurately there would not be this problem.

Different cultures and countries draw the line at different ages. You can find the age of concent being as low as *9* in places. In Spain I think it is 12 or 14.

Even the Prophet Mohammad consumated his marriage with a girl who was 9 years old... after marrying her at the age of 3.

Very very muddy waters there...

[believe]

The lifespan in medieval cultures were much, much lower than today. Women also had very few, if any rights and were treated as property. Their consent or desire for sex was rarely part of the equation. I'm not sure that quoting marriage ages from that time or countries that still follow some of those laws/traditions says much at all.

12 or 13, well.. at least there's some development hopefully going on.

[Calantyr]

The lifespan in medieval cultures were much, much lower than today. Women also had very few, if any rights and were treated as property. Their consent or desire for sex was rarely part of the equation. I'm not sure that quoting marriage ages from that time or countries that still follow some of those laws/traditions says much at all.

12 or 13, well.. at least there's some development hopefully going on.

I know that, and that raises a point I think. How valid is it raising moral values from religious text and trying to apply them to today when the past is so different?

People married young back then because of many reasons. People died earlier, and women had no voice.

Now people live longer and women DO have a voice, so the precedent shown by medieval rulers and even the Prophet Mohammad seem... outdated. So can the same be applied in a much wider arc?

But that's off-topic I think.

And i'm not sure how much progress is being made. Before the distinction was whenever a woman started menstruating and a boy when they had wet dreams.

Now we have a rather arbitrary line that doesn't seem to have any logic behind at all.

When does someone suddenly become sexualy responsible?

Is it down to world experience, if that can ever be quantified?

Or maybe there a financial, political, and safety assured criteria that can be met in order to say "No."?

And I'm not too sure if that made sense... I'll try to explain it better if someone picks up on it.

[believe]

I know that, and that raises a point I think. How valid is it raising moral values from religious text and trying to apply them to today when the past is so different?

Very vaild. Most of us agree with the major religious values to some extent. To love your neighbor and your God, live an honest life, be faithful to your spouse, try to do good things and so on. Those things (and in them bulk of religious values) are still approved of, even if people now (like the Bible times) still have a hard time choosing love over violence and a good life over a pointless or wasted one.

Now people live longer and women DO have a voice, so the precedent shown by medieval rulers and even the Prophet Mohammad seem... outdated. So can the same be applied in a much wider arc?

To a point. Some Biblical and Islamic rulings are blatantly cultural. Jewish food/purity laws, Mohammad's rulings on purdah or whatnot and so on. These are laws which people need to look at the heart of it and follow that in a way thats logical for the culture. In modern America, not having your head covered isn't a sign of possibility prostitution, so modesty has been adapted to not wearing certain skirts, shirts, ect.

And i'm not sure how much progress is being made. Before the distinction was whenever a woman started menstruating and a boy when they had wet dreams.

There is no perfect answer. Arbitary is our best guess and enforced to protect the most people we can. I don't know how many 11-13 yr olds you know, but the majority I've meet are not ready to start and maintain a productive sexual and emotional relationship. They aren't living or raised in ancient times where they expect and have to be a woman at 13 and it shows. Or maybe the ancient teenagers were no more ready, we'll never know. The point is that there will always be mistakes and people the laws don't comfortably fit. Its just the way it is with something like this. You protect who you can and err (hopefully) on the side of the victim, the defenseless or children.

[Hobbes]

This thread has moved a little further into the realms of conversations I've had with a woman I've known for a few years. We've discussed the likes of the age of consent, and emotional/physical maturity several times - and have found it a very difficult topic, fraught with a great many 'sides to the story'.

I just started to write a longer post, but I'm going to check first whether there has been an 'age of consent' debate in the forum's past - before using this thread as such.

But, briefly for now: I find the notion that every person becomes emotionally, physically and sexually mature enough for sexual interacourse at one age (16 in the UK) ridiculous. HOWEVER, I also understand why the age of consent exists - but I wonder to what extent this law actually prevents underage teenagers having sex. Has anyone here not had sex before 16 (or whatever the age of consent is in your country) because it is illegal, or just because they felt that - at the age they were - they were just no personally ready to do so... for whatever reason?

[believe]

Hobbes, do you mean with each other or with adults?

[artist.unknown]

My younger brother is the same age as this boy was, and I can gaurentee you that I wouldn't qualify him as old enough to kiss a girl, let alone a woman, and let alone have sex with her. He only just gave up his Yu-Gi-Oh cards. I agree that people age differently, but I don't agree that kids are old enough to understand love or sexual responsibility.

I think in some way it proves she wasn't just a pervert, but that it was something about that kid that attracted her. If they really are in love, I wish them the best.

I tend to take the pessimist's attitude, and say that if she was so desperate that she would have to bonk a kid, they why not marry him? It would have made a deep impression on him, and he is still young enough to act impulsively. If there are children, he might also feel responsible for them. And so-on. *shrug*

[Ashbless]

Just raising a point that I believe she was married at the time of the affair(?) and has children with her first husband. So if she was desperate it was only in a desperate housewife sort of way.

I wonder, will those two be comfortable if their daughter brings home a 30 year old when she's 12 or 13?

[Museum Girl]

Even the Prophet Mohammad consumated his marriage with a girl who was 9 years old... after marrying her at the age of 3.

Very very muddy waters there...

Actualy Aisha was 14 when the marriage was consumated. They married when she was nine and they were betrothed when she was three. The consumation when she was nine story is one I keep hearing for some reason. There would have been no point consumating the marriage before she started menstruating.

Has anyone here not had sex before 16 (or whatever the age of consent is in your country) because it is illegal, or just because they felt that - at the age they were - they were just no personally ready to do so... for whatever reason?

I wouldn't have had sex before sixteen because it was illegal. My boyfriend would have got into trouble if we had been caught and it would have been too risky. But I didn't get a boyfriend until after I turned sixteen so maybe I would have acted differently.

Thing is, while the age of consent is necessary to protect vunerable people, if you catch a seventeen year old with a fifteeen year old a month away from her sixteenth birthday, do you prosecute? If you obeyed the law to the letter then yes.

[CommieBastard]

Thing is, while the age of consent is necessary to protect vunerable people, if you catch a seventeen year old with a fifteeen year old a month away from her sixteenth birthday, do you prosecute? If you obeyed the law to the letter then yes.

And the letter of the law has been obeyed in such cases.

This is why there's a need for "Romeo and Juliet" clauses, I believe they're called - it doesn't apply if the two parties are within a certain age of each other. So a sixteen-year-old sleeping with a fifteen-year-old wouldn't be charged, but a twenty-five-year-old doing the same would.

[Museum Girl]

Thing is, while the age of consent is necessary to protect vunerable people, if you catch a seventeen year old with a fifteeen year old a month away from her sixteenth birthday, do you prosecute? If you obeyed the law to the letter then yes.

And the letter of the law has been obeyed in such cases.

This is why there's a need for "Romeo and Juliet" clauses, I believe they're called - it doesn't apply if the two parties are within a certain age of each other. So a sixteen-year-old sleeping with a fifteen-year-old wouldn't be charged, but a twenty-five-year-old doing the same would.

This is true but I don't think English law has those.