Texas High School teacher in orgies with teenage boys

Started by Syt, August 16, 2012, 10:19:01 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Barrister

Posts here are my own private opinions.  I do not speak for my employer.

HVC

His girlfriend probably cheated on him whe he was away and now he's bitter. That or he has really crappy taste in Internet comics.
Being lazy is bad; unless you still get what you want, then it's called "patience".
Hubris must be punished. Severely.

CountDeMoney


MadImmortalMan

It's a play on the meme that military wives are notorious for being unfaithful to their husbands, methinks.
"Stability is destabilizing." --Hyman Minsky

"Complacency can be a self-denying prophecy."
"We have nothing to fear but lack of fear itself." --Larry Summers

CountDeMoney

Quote from: MadImmortalMan on August 16, 2012, 11:27:49 AM
It's a play on the meme that military wives are notorious for being unfaithful to their husbands, methinks.

Yeah, but it would help if it were in English.

garbon

Quote from: CountDeMoney on August 16, 2012, 11:36:14 AM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on August 16, 2012, 11:27:49 AM
It's a play on the meme that military wives are notorious for being unfaithful to their husbands, methinks.

Yeah, but it would help if it were in English.

And if it were funny.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

dps

Quote from: Syt on August 16, 2012, 10:19:01 AM
http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/08/16/4185438/more-students-tell-of-sexual-escapades.html

Quote

If convicted, Colleps, a 28-year-old married mother of three, could be sentenced to the maximum 20 years in prison and a $10,000 fine on each of five charges of an improper relationship between an educator and student.

The students were 18 or older at the time.

OK, given the bolded bit, this should be something that a teacher can be fired for, but it probably shouldn't be criminal.

Syt

Generally I agree, but the quetsion would be whether she used the authority of her position to goad/coax the students into sex.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.
—Stephen Jay Gould

Proud owner of 42 Zoupa Points.

dps

Quote from: Syt on August 16, 2012, 11:53:26 AM
Generally I agree, but the quetsion would be whether she used the authority of her position to goad/coax the students into sex.

Sure, the abuse of authority issue is why it should be a fireable offense.

derspiess

Quote from: dps on August 16, 2012, 12:06:00 PM
Quote from: Syt on August 16, 2012, 11:53:26 AM
Generally I agree, but the quetsion would be whether she used the authority of her position to goad/coax the students into sex.

Sure, the abuse of authority issue is why it should be a fireable offense.

I don't have a problem with the law.  We should hold teachers to a higher standard than the general public.
"If you can play a guitar and harmonica at the same time, like Bob Dylan or Neil Young, you're a genius. But make that extra bit of effort and strap some cymbals to your knees, suddenly people want to get the hell away from you."  --Rich Hall

Barrister

Quote from: dps on August 16, 2012, 11:47:45 AM
Quote from: Syt on August 16, 2012, 10:19:01 AM
http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/08/16/4185438/more-students-tell-of-sexual-escapades.html

Quote

If convicted, Colleps, a 28-year-old married mother of three, could be sentenced to the maximum 20 years in prison and a $10,000 fine on each of five charges of an improper relationship between an educator and student.

The students were 18 or older at the time.

OK, given the bolded bit, this should be something that a teacher can be fired for, but it probably shouldn't be criminal.

Well that's presumably the basis of the defence.

In Canada that would be a defense to the charge (though as you say, not to being fired).
Posts here are my own private opinions.  I do not speak for my employer.

Neil

Quote from: Syt on August 16, 2012, 11:53:26 AM
Generally I agree, but the quetsion would be whether she used the authority of her position to goad/coax the students into sex.
That doesn't seem to be the question.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

CountDeMoney

Quoteword spread about the sexual encounters to other students, one of whom told their mother, a school employee.

Always a fucking rat.

crazy canuck

Quote from: Barrister on August 16, 2012, 12:14:30 PM
Quote from: dps on August 16, 2012, 11:47:45 AM
Quote from: Syt on August 16, 2012, 10:19:01 AM
http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/08/16/4185438/more-students-tell-of-sexual-escapades.html

Quote

If convicted, Colleps, a 28-year-old married mother of three, could be sentenced to the maximum 20 years in prison and a $10,000 fine on each of five charges of an improper relationship between an educator and student.

The students were 18 or older at the time.

OK, given the bolded bit, this should be something that a teacher can be fired for, but it probably shouldn't be criminal.

Well that's presumably the basis of the defence.

In Canada that would be a defense to the charge (though as you say, not to being fired).

Not would, might.

I didnt think you were correct so I looked it up.

QuotePursuant to section 265 of the Criminal Code, the criminal act (actus reus) of sexual assault is defined as direct or indirect contact with another person's body that is (1) sexual in nature, and (2) engaged in without the consent of the other person.  To be legally effective, consent must be freely given.  Therefore, even in situations where a complainant indicated consent by words or conduct, circumstances may arise which call into question the factors which prompted consent.  According to s. 265(3) of the Criminal Code, the law will deem, that is assume, an absence of consent in assault cases where the consent was obtained by reason of force, fear, threats, fraud, or the exercise of authority.  Further, section 273.1(2)(c) stipulates that in cases of sexual assault, no consent is obtained where the accused induces the complainant to engage in sexual activity by abusing a position of trust, power or authority

Barrister

You're not looking at the right section.

Section 153, sexual exploitation, makes it an offence for anybody in a position of authority to sexually touch a young person, regardless of consent.  A young person is defined as someone 16 years of age or more, but under 18.  That goes along with s. 151, which makes it illegal for any adult to sexually touch someone under the age of 16.

The article seems to make it clear there was consent, and there was no abuse of authority.  It is of course dangerous to rely on a newspaper article for facts.  But if the boys were under 18, merely by being their teacher any sexual touching would be illegal.  But over 18, only by abusing that position of authority in order to obtain consent would it be illegal.
Posts here are my own private opinions.  I do not speak for my employer.