am i the only one who feels sorry for the forrest teacher dude going to jail?

[Wilko]

Really good blog post I found

http://thesecondbesttime.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/some-sympathy-please-for-jeremy-forrest.html

Now that is a very good read.

 

[Wilko]

That is exactly what statutory rape is - sex without consent - the Sexual Offences Act 2003 states that a person under the age of 16 cannot give consent.

I think you know what I mean. Sorry to be to the point here but would you agree that a 16 year old point having agreed sex with his 15 year old girlfriend should earn the same word as a woman forced against a wall by a stranger in an alley? Apologies for being graphic but I think you know what I am getting at.

 

[El Presidente]

My thoughts exactly.

How many of those making excuses for this guy or advocating leniency would feel the same if the girl had been their daughter.

Probably not as many who would be high fiving their 15 year old son if he had shagged a 28 year old teacher. In fact they would probably be asking if he had any pictures of her with her kit off, and offering to make the teacher gas tight the next time the son was boffing her.

Don't get me wrong, the teacher knows the rules and broke them, but he isn't an animal.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Probably not as many who would be high fiving their 15 year old son if he had shagged a 28 year old teacher. In fact they would probably be asking if he had any pictures of her with her kit off, and offering to make the teacher gas tight the next time the son was boffing her.

Don't get me wrong, the teacher knows the rules and broke them, but he isn't an animal.

I am with you on this one El Pres.

 

[Creaky]

I think you know what I mean. Sorry to be to the point here but would you agree that a 16 year old point having agreed sex with his 15 year old girlfriend should earn the same word as a woman forced against a wall by a stranger in an alley? Apologies for being graphic but I think you know what I am getting at.

Both would be instances of rape but as is the case with all offences there are different degrees of seriousness. Whether a child steals a packet of Polos from the corner shop or millions are stolen from a bank or a pensioner has their life savings stolen the crime is still theft.

 

[Creaky]

Probably not as many who would be high fiving their 15 year old son if he had shagged a 28 year old teacher. In fact they would probably be asking if he had any pictures of her with her kit off, and offering to make the teacher gas tight the next time the son was boffing her.

Don't get me wrong, the teacher knows the rules and broke them, but he isn't an animal.

Would you really "high five" your son in such a situation?

 

[happypig]

I think you know what I mean. Sorry to be to the point here but would you agree that a 16 year old point having agreed sex with his 15 year old girlfriend should earn the same word as a woman forced against a wall by a stranger in an alley? Apologies for being graphic but I think you know what I am getting at.

In the situation of a 16 yo boy and 15 yo girl, he is almost always given a caution. However this leads the gutter press to get all indignant over "cautions for rapists".

 

[Billy the Fish]

But at 14/15 she has the right to be naive, he on the other hand cannot use that excuse.

Disagree. We are all products of our environment, perhaps he has never developed emotionally like most people would. Lets be honest, you can tell from the pictures that he looks like a right drip! I know it's not and excuse or a mitigating factor, but it might still be true.

That is exactly what statutory rape is - sex without consent - the Sexual Offences Act 2003 states that a person under the age of 16 cannot give consent.

Just because a piece of paper says it, doesn't make it true. The eyes of the law do not take account of life experience or human emotion, cases like this aren't black and white and need to be judged on their individual merits. If it was black and white, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[Creaky]

Just because a piece of paper says it, doesn't make it true. The eyes of the law do not take account of life experience or human emotion, cases like this aren't black and white and need to be judged on their individual merits. If it was black and white, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

That doesn't make sense - the word statutory means "enacted by statute" which is exactly what the Sexual Offences Act does - it is because a piece of paper, (Sexual Offences Act), says that someone below the age of 16 cannot give consent that the offence is called "statutory rape".

 

[Muzzy]

He should have known better. He has ruined his own life for what ultimately was an ego boost. He deserves to be punished and rightly so but how long is he looking at serving and will he be a rule 43 prisoner?

 

[blue2]

He was her teacher and she was his pupil, that's where the problems start. He deserves a prison sentence because young children need to be protected

This is the correct answer

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

If it has been a few months either way this would not be making the news. I think these two genuinely thought they loved each other. Maybe they do ? Most likely the worst charge is that he should have known better and for sure he should have but for me labelling this guy as a predatory paedo, nah I don't get it. He was a bloke who is seriously challenged to even consider what he did and he may be kicked to shit in prison for his actions but for not for me I would rather have people who actually deserved it and this bloke, no, not for me.

 

[Footsoldier]

He should have known better. He has ruined his own life for what ultimately was an ego boost. He deserves to be punished and rightly so but how long is he looking at serving and will he be a rule 43 prisoner?

Yes he'll be on rule 43.

 

[happypig]

Disagree. We are all products of our environment, perhaps he has never developed emotionally like most people would. Lets be honest, you can tell from the pictures that he looks like a right drip! I know it's not and excuse or a mitigating factor, but it might still be true.



Just because a piece of paper says it, doesn't make it true. The eyes of the law do not take account of life experience or human emotion, cases like this aren't black and white and need to be judged on their individual merits. If it was black and white, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

That's exactly what the judge will be doing tonight, considering all the circumstances, offender mitigation and the like and deciding on a structured sentence that fulfils the necessary requirements, one of which is punishment, another being as a deterrent.

 

[Muzzy]

Yes he'll be on rule 43.

Will get plenty of opportunity to reflect then.

 

[hybrid_x]

some of you seem to think a sexually active 15 year old is a young child? weird......and weird in most parts of the world too.

yes, he was her teacher - a little wrong - but to lock him in a cage for years? come on.

it was no ego boost - reád the timeline - they genuinly loved eachother - and if thats a crime - then this planet is pretty messed up.

i know someone who rattled a chick who was 16 when he was 28 - very close to this scenario - they liked eachother - should he go to a cage?

yes, lose his job in teaching - but locked up - that is crazy.

 

[hybrid_x]

ps i hoped after 4 pages Gus would have been sacked :-(

 

[Footsoldier]

Will get plenty of opportunity to reflect then.

No doubt he'll get some right perverts coming into his cell asking for graphic details. I don't think he should be banged up next to some kiddie fiddler to be honest as there are some really sick nounces in Lewes. He'll stay there for roughly 4 days then be shipped out. Probably Highdown in Surrey but he'll have cell mates just as bad.

 

[martyn20]

some of you seem to think a sexually active 15 year old is a young child? weird......and weird in most parts of the world too.

yes, he was her teacher - a little wrong - but to lock him in a cage for years? come on.

it was no ego boost - reád the timeline - they genuinly loved eachother - and if thats a crime - then this planet is pretty messed up.

i know someone who rattled a chick who was 16 when he was 28 - very close to this scenario - they liked eachother - should he go to a cage?

yes, lose his job in teaching - but locked up - that is crazy.

It's legal at 16 so he would not go to jail clearly.
I will ask the question I have asked before if it's ok for a teacher to have sex with a 14/15 year old student at what age is it not OK with you?

 

[TheJasperCo]

So at what age do you feel it's ok for teachers to sleep with their pupils?

That's not the point I was making. It was, from what I understood of the case, a mutual relationship, one in which both parties happily reciprocated. Unlike other cases, where the other person is forced against their will. Hence the popular meaning of the term "abduction".

Misconduct, yes. A breach of trust, possibly. A de facto criminal offence punishable by a lengthy custodial sentence and having to sign the sex offenders' register for life? Not so sure. Yes, the pupil was underage, and yes she was considered vulnerable, but I don't think he took advantage of her.