This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

26 Year old Teacher jailed for lesbian sex with 15 year old

Scroll to see replies

God Damnit! , that picture is not flattering to her at all, she is far more gorgeous than that.

I was kinda hoping she got nothing, i also hope the 15 year sticks by her plans.

Reply 61

thethinker

How were they able to get away with a 'weekend in Paris'?

Reply 62

Cherudim

I think we all realise how precocious kids are all, moreso than how I was at that age. You can enforce it all you want but sexual maturity is coming at a younger age and if that can't be factored into law then it will just drive it deeper and deeper underground (No pun intended)

Reply 63

Leigh.

xTazx

I don't disagree with you OP, but would the same have been said if the teacher was a 26 year old man and the student a 15 year old girl? Just a thought.

It's feels less wrong for some reason. I guess mainly because neither girl would have a penis (I'm guessing) so there is no risk of pregnancy and less risk of an STD.

Reply 64

Atrixa

xTazx

I don't disagree with you OP, but would the same have been said if the teacher was a 26 year old man and the student a 15 year old girl? Just a thought.

That's just what I was thinking. The woman shouldn't get off lightly just because she's female.

Reply 65

menagerie

Seeing as the student 'initiated', it probably started with the student being infatuated with the teacher. From one article I read, it said that she was an extremely popular teacher who the kids liked to hang out with during breaks, which is obviously fine. What developed into a loving relationship most likely started with a schoolgirl crush on a teacher - everyone has these - and Goddard should have known better than to pursue the relationship. It's not like they instantly were in love, they built up a relationship - starting with friendship - and at some point, the teacher should have said no. It's her responsibility to stop the relationship as she is in the position of trust.

I don't think she should be jailed - she's not a threat to children - but the sex offenders register and teaching ban sound about right. I don't think jail is the correct punishment though - community service or fines many? Jail isn't going to do anything other than make an example of her.

Reply 66

AYE

Libtolu

Of course it's noty padophilia, because paedo refer to pre pubescent children, however if ti was a man and girl people would happily call him a paedo.

Yea they would, doesn't mean its correct though. Hebephilia apparently.

Reply 67

L i b

DisgruntledMoth

Such ********. People in clearly consensual relationships with other consenting people, found true by a court of law, shouldn't be made to sign the 'sex offenders register'.

For 'consenting people' substitute 'child', for 'people' substitute 'people entrusted with the care of children' and for 'found true' substitute 'found guilty of a serious crime'.

That's more the ticket.

menagerie

I don't think she should be jailed - she's not a threat to children

Of course she is: she not only molested one, but did so despite being in a position of trust.

Reply 68

menagerie

L i b

For 'consenting people' substitute 'child', for 'people' substitute 'people entrusted with the care of children' and for 'found true' substitute 'found guilty of a serious crime'.

That's more the ticket.

Of course she is: she not only molested one, but did so despite being in a position of trust.

Yes, she did, but only technically. Had the student been less than a year older she wouldn't have. And I know that 'that's not the point - the student WAS under 16', but she isn't a threat to 15 year olds everywhere. The judge recognised that the relationship was both consensual and loving, and not predatory in any sense. The abuse of the position of trust seems to be the main issue at hand in my opinion. She is rightly being banned from teaching and is being placed on a sex offenders list. Locking her up in jail, however, is not going to deter her from 'molesting children' more than the teaching ban, the sex offenders list, and another, more appropriate punishment would. Which ever punishment she gets, she won't do that again.

Reply 69

Andy the Anarchist

My two cents

Here is an individual who had sex with a child whilst in a position of trust.

The fact that she is a female makes no difference, it's still sex with a minor and it's still a terrible breach of trust.

The teaching profession is built upon entrusting the care of your children to relative strangers, abusing that trust brings the whole trust relationship down.

Though I may argue with the harshness of the sentence, in principle it is something which needs to be punished.

Reply 70

Bagration

She should be punished because she's a teacher abusing trust, not because she had a relationship with a 15 year old.

Reply 71

EnthusiasticEnthusiast

L i b

Of course she is: she not only molested one, but did so despite being in a position of trust.

The word molested means to be sexually abused. This is clearly not the case as the girl 'started' and wanted the relationship, if she had truly been molested she'd have told someone in order for it to stop.

In my opinion she shouldn't have been jailed, she should have lost her job because of the consequences the relationship may have had in class and such but not jail.

Put yourself in her position, admittedly the girl is bi or gay and so is the teacher. Now to be fair, the teacher is attractive and must've had a lot of time for the girl, let's say the teacher wasn't bi or gay but straight, and wanted you when you were 15, meanwhile you had a thing for her.

Don't tell me you would've rejected sex at 15.

The only thing the teacher has done wrong is broken the teacher trust, and should rightly be banned from teaching but jail is absurd considering the circumstances.

Reply 72

L i b

menagerie

Yes, she did, but only technically. Had the student been less than a year older she wouldn't have.

And if it had been a six year old, then she would only have needed to be ten years older. That's not a 'technicality'.

And I know that 'that's not the point - the student WAS under 16', but she isn't a threat to 15 year olds everywhere. The judge recognised that the relationship was both consensual and loving, and not predatory in any sense.

I don't see how you assume she isn't a threat - she did it to one child, despite an overwhelming trust not to. In the absence of that trust situation, she'll only be more likely to do these sorts of things if the opportunity presents itself.

As for 'loving' - I don't really care. Its not the feeling that are particularly problematic, it's the acts she committed.

Locking her up in jail, however, is not going to deter her from 'molesting children'

It will, however, appropriately punish her, and also show that there is more at stake to child molesters than simply losing their jobs. Would you suggest that someone who rapes children should not be punished at all if they don't happen to be in a profession they can be expelled from?

Reply 73

Andy the Anarchist

Bagration

She should be punished because she's a teacher abusing trust, not because she had a relationship with a 15 year old.

What are your views on the age of consent generally?

Reply 74

EskimoJo

35mm_

Personally, my reaction would be exactly the same.

Mine too.

Reply 75

SiaSiaSia

harsh.

...but also quite hot?!

Reply 76

L i b

EnthusiasticEnthusiast

Children are not deemed to be capable of the informed consent which is a normal prerequisite of any sexual relationship. This is even more obvious when it is a child being molested by an adult who has authority and power.

Put yourself in her position, admittedly the girl is bi or gay and so is the teacher.

She's a child: she's neither bi, gay or straight.

Now to be fair, the teacher is attractive and must've had a lot of time for the girl, let's say the teacher wasn't bi or gay but straight, and wanted you when you were 15, meanwhile you had a thing for her.

Don't tell me you would've rejected sex at 15.

Exactly - and it's is exactly that situation which means that a child shouldn't be put in that situation.

Reply 77

EnthusiasticEnthusiast

SiaSiaSia

harsh.

...but also quite hot?!

Yes she is, I wouldn't have told anyone had she had a thing for me when I was 15 that's for sure.

Reply 78

Bagration

Andy the Anarchist

What are your views on the age of consent generally?

I think it should be abolished and replaced with a law that allows courts to decide more flexibly whether abuse of trust took place (which is really what age of consent is about, isn't it -- we all know its wrong for a 30 year old to persuade a 12 year old that a sexual relationship would be cool, but if the 12 year old thought that without persuasion, it's different...) and you have to take the different ages into account, too; I think the flexibility of the common law and the representative views of a jury are absolutely necessary here.

However, I don't ACTUALLY know how the law works in this area. If that's already what happens then good.

Reply 79

guitargirl03

Andy the Anarchist

I don't think I could have said it better myself.

People within the teaching profession have a duty of care towards their pupils. People training to be teachers are made aware of this whilst they are in training, and whilst they are at the school. I know you can't help who you fall in love with, however, when you enter the teaching profession you have to be made aware that there are boundaries. Regardless of the fact that the girl consented, the teacher still broke the law as the girl was underage. It is a long sentence, however the teacher was probably all to aware of the consequences of ever indulging in sexual activity with a pupil and thus she needs to pay for her actions.

It's stories like this which annoy me. It's teachers like this who make it hard work for the rest of the teachers who are law-abiding. In schools where I've worked at for work experience, they are so limited as to what they can and cannot do in their own classroom. In one school I went to, the teacher was not allowed to have a one-to-one chat with pupils, they had to either have the door open, or had to have another member of staff present, just in case they were accused of anything.