[Closed] Jeremy Forrest guilty what do we think ?

Not followed the court case but as they've not done him for sex with a minor it looks like they have mitigated to some degree.

At the end of the day he took someones daughter without their consent and put he parents through hell.

He should have known better as an adult.

I agree with you its an abuse of position as a teacher (or any other adult)with a child but if it turns out to be genuine love do we still see him in the same light.
I can see their story in one of those crap womens magazines in a few years (take a break or chat)about how she waited for him and they now have kids and how tough it was .

He had a duty of care to his pupils. He is intelligent enough and old enough to know that breaking that trust has consequences for all concerned. He will now suffer for his stupidity.

If they end up as a couple in say 5 years time do you still view him as a child abuser or not ?

What happens with them in the future holds nothing to what happened recently. If Stuart Hall had had a relationship with his victims when they were 20 not 9 anymore would should we have forgiven him?

I think he is stupid rather than a chid abuser, very very very stupid.

Probably a fair comment Pigface.

genuine love

Or he's very good at grooming.

He had a duty of care to his pupils. He is intelligent enough and old enough to know that breaking that trust has consequences for all concerned. He will now suffer for his stupidity.

This is a generous view IMO.

He was the adult she was the minor. He should not have had such an intimate relationship with the girl and he shouldn't have fled the country with her, if he was worried about her safety he should have gone to the authorities.

i can come at this with a little family experience..

my aunt 'ran away' with her RE teacher when she was 14.. they have been happily married for 65 years..

Drac - Moderator

What happens with them in the future holds nothing to what happened recently. If Stuart Hall had had a relationship with his victims when they were 20 not 9 anymore would should we have forgiven him?

Shades of grey IMO - sex with a 15 year old in the context of a relationship is not the same as a 9 year old.

Very stupid of him but not everyone can handle their feelings.

Shades of grey IMO - sex with a 15 year old in the context of a relationship is not the same as a 9 year old.

Context maybe but not as the laws stand. If precedence is set that it's Ok as long as when the victim is older you have a relationship then that's the excuse people could use.

As A-A aluded to,we teachers have a different view of people who do this,and not just because they cast a hint of suspiscion on all of us. In a nutshell, you are responsible (along with others) for the child's development and education,this is now recognised by law. Ouite rightly so as teachers can be a huge influence on young people.He has used this for his own sordid ends,the relationship started when she was 14,I can't see how that can be anything other than grooming, which to me is a fair bit away from the star crossed lovers idea.

I think he is stupid, but I doubt the daughter was in any danger.

I'm not convinced he abducted her - looks to me like she went to France of her own free will.

However he is clearly guilty of having sex with a minor/child rape, but as any prosecution would be his word against hers, and she clearly wasn't going to testify against him, I guess 'child abduction' was the best they could hope for? (as it didn't require any input from her)

He did cross lots of lines, and certainly deserves a lengthy stay in 'the big house' for his actions.

They clearly intend to resume the 'relationship' when he is released from jail, which can only be bad for her..
Bit of a sad story all round really - I'd be keen to have a chat with him at some point if she was my daughter.

Freeagent he is guilty of child abduction simples he took her away from parental responsibility absolute offence his defence was utter bol***s! He abused his position of trust as a teacher, he should not have put himself in the position to end up in a sexual relationship with her additionally she was vulnerable eating disorders, self harming etc! How is that not grooming??

It must have been horrific for her parents not knowing where she was for over a week and thinking she would end up dead. Admittedly prison isn't probably the right sentence but who knows what really is!?

girls of her age (14yo) should be protected from men of his age ++ the fact that he was in a position of authority, yup throw the book at him, hopefully she will have the chance to put it all behind her & move on, in the remote possibility that it does work of for them, then bonne chance to them.

He's a teacher, she was his pupil AND was fourteen years old when they began their relationship.

Regardless of whether they remain a couple when he's out of jail or not, he's behaved unethically and he's broken the law. There is a code of conduct for teachers for a very sound reason.

How would any of you feel if you were a parent of the girl in question?

Context maybe but not as the laws stand

he is guilty of child abduction

I think he is stupid, but I doubt the daughter was in any danger.

They clearly intend to resume the 'relationship' when he is released from jail, which can only be bad for her..

Problem is no one can [ to some degree] help who they fall in love with and this is what seems to have happened here.
I also know a teacher who married a pupil of his - they both maintain nothing happened when she was a pupil but they were dating as soon as she left about 25 years ago. Married with grown up kids still.

We can all get morally outraged [ of course I can see why] but there will be another case in about 5 years and then another and then another. I am not convinced they are all monsters and they are all groomers though I would not want to encourage it

I am not sure that turning both of these people into criminals has helped either of them or protected society

He is over twice her age and she was under the age of consent! As far as I know teachers are not allowed to have a sexual relationship with anyone under the age of 18 (even though age of consent is 16), that is not just limited to those who they teach!

He was in a position of trust and he abused it!

I am a teacher, and thankfully my grey hair now precludes any crushes, but when I first entered the profession there were a couple of occasions when i thought a student might be developing a crush, I went straight to the tutor/head of year, reported my concerns and ensured I was never in a position which could be misconstrued by the student. At all times I knew that this was a child who had developed a crush towards an authority figure, who was an adult and my job was to make sure she came to realise the fact it was inappropriate as soon as possible!

I think most teachers have had to deal with student crushes at some point or another, and we deal with it in a caring, professional way, we don't end up grooming an under age child into having sex!

Sod the liberal view

This dude is a paedo and if I caught him with either of my daughters I'd kick his bloody head in.

ooh, the latest internet-hard-man / parent-fearing-the-red-top-headlines-will-be-him-next gives up any attempt at analysing the issue.

Thank **** not many people like you are in power.

Drac - Moderator
Shades of grey IMO - sex with a 15 year old in the context of a relationship is not the same as a 9 year old.
Context maybe but not as the laws stand. If precedence is set that it's Ok as long as when the victim is older you have a relationship then that's the excuse people could use.

Did I say it was OK? I just said it was different - which as I understand it is reflected in sentencing?

I think the abduction verdict is wrong - she went with him under her own will.

If the girl was saying 'he made me believe he loved me but I knew it was wrong, I didn't really want to go to France' it would be different, but she isn't. She clearly went to France under her own free will, and slept with him happily.

15, even 14 is not unusual for girls to become (very) active sexually and the black and white 16yr old line of the law is totally unrepresentative of the massive difference in maturity of teenagers. As a note, one of my close friends met her husband when she was 14 and he was 25, they are happily married and the relationship is as strong now, 21 years later.

This is getting so much press coverage, and yet when 15 yr old girls are coerced into sex by 15 yr old boys (which, lets be honest happens ALL THE TIME) even when they don't want it/aren't ready for it, no-one really bats an eyelid.

We need to give young ladies the courage to say 'no, this is who I am and I'm not ready'. However, even with the best education, I'm betting that lass would have still made the same decision. You can't help who you fall in love with, and you can't stop young girls growing up.

Oh, and just to add to the debate.....in many countries in the world she would have been more than old enough to be married and would have to subject to every demand of her husband/have children. This rarely gets press coverage. Is that right? Because it happens in another country we have to turn a blind eye? Because it's an established 'cultural belief' we have to ignore it? I think not - from a female perspective I think it's tragic that a young girl in love will be denied the chance to fulfil the relationship because of an arbitrary age cut-off point......but I feel it far more tragic that millions of girls never even get the chance to feel true love and are forced into abusive relationships that last their entire lives whilst the rest of the world looks on.

Problem is no one can [ to some degree] help who they fall in love with and this is what seems to have happened here.

Sorry but that is complete and utter rot. He is a teacher, she is a child in his trust. Phil40 above details exactly what should happen. I wouldn't class him as a paedo but I find it very difficult to disagree with the sentiments of the second half of djglovers rather controversial statement.

He is an idiot who has probably lost everything. Can't think his wife will have him back and hopefully the girl will get her head sorted in his enforced absence.

Did I say it was OK? I just said it was different - which as I understand it is reflected in sentencing?

No but I didn't claim you did. It is reflected in the sentencing but my point is still the same, whatever they choose to do in the future is irrelevant it's what has happened recently that matters.

An interesting case, and one I think that is quite finely balanced.

On the one hand he has been an idiot at best, and one who has put his own gratification above the laws of the land and his marriage. The fact that he declined to take part in his own defence is IMHO a sign that he knew what he was doing was wrong, with his plea of not guilty a sign that he wasn't prepared to confront what he had done.

On the other hand, she seems to have been rather mature for her years, possibly looking to escape a less than happy home life. She told the court that [u]she[/u] had decided to leave, and if he did not join her she would harm herself/commit suicide. She also told the court that the police had manipulated her evidence and that they had been threatening to her when what she said did not match the narrative they had written of "nonce abducts kiddie".

I half expected him to get off ( not knowing that he had declined to give evidence) and was surprised by the quick guilty verdict. I would not be surprised if there was an appeal and he overturned that verdict.

I think he is stupid rather than a chid abuser, very very very stupid

+1 but probably had mental health issues as well.

Doesn't look like any malice in his intent.

EDIT: also littlegirlbunny +1000

I think he is stupid rather than a chid abuser, very very very stupid.

I firmly see him as a child abuser. Also, if in 5years?

Sorry I wouldn't trust him anywhere near a school-age girl in the future.

Its wrong on quite a few levels. Impressionable, imature school girls have crushes, grown men can take advantage. Am I on a different plain to some of the above?

as the law stands he is guilty of child abduction, it doesn't matter that she consented to go away with him, the law states he had taken her away from her parental responsibility, there will be no appeal as he doesn't have a leg to stand on. This is also why the jury found him guilty so blinking quickly! Also if he felt so strongly about his innocence why would you not take the stand and give evidence? probably because he realised he was screwed.

As phil the teacher says above. "you can't help who you fall in love with" what a load of drivel! when you're a 30 year old teacher and she's a 14 years old kid you can.....

Its wrong on quite a few levels. Impressionable, imature school girls have crushes, grown men can take advantage. Am I on a different plain to some of the above?

Possibly, but what if he was the impressionable one with issues and she drove the whole thing? Still technically illegal, and yes he should have know better, but I wouldn't call him a child abuser.

Remembering back to Uni. We were in a Uni club and a mate was chatting to a girl. Her mate (I wasn't angling for her/just being friendly)- said casually 'guess how old we are'? I replied 'dunno 18'? (assuming why they were in there etc/must be students). 'Heres my bus pass' - She was 15. I remember thinking erm no. Firmly so.

Thats when I was a teenager.

but what if he was the impressionable one with issues and she drove the whole thing?

I'm really confused now. Are you saying he has learning difficulties?

Mental issues as in depression etc?

I don't understand how someone can go through education, go through interviews, go into a role and then say they have personal issues why they started shagging a 14yr old child? How can a 14yr old manipulate an adult.

Beyond me.

I'm out. I don't get the angle that feels any sort of empathy or even pity for him.

The emotional language "impressionable, immature, 14 year old kid" doesn't help. We don't know for sure she was any of these. In many countries she'd be considered an adult.

Personally I see it wrong on the level of student:teacher relationship well over stepping the bounds. I'd be concerned about a 30 year old and 14 year old, but not enough to brand the bloke a "peado". These kind of relationships can work (as above in this thread) if both are willing to take it slowly, not do anything silly (as what happened here) and generally keep with the bounds of social acceptability I don't really see a problem.

If a student and teacher develop mutual feelings then I think removing that part of the relationship would be the best course of action. Why he didn't quit his job when he knew things were likely to progress I don't know. At least then they could've had a fair chance. Doubt that'll happen now.

Ok at what age would you class someone a Paedo?

Lets say the boy is an 18yr old. Some countries (including our own) class an 18yr old male a man.

Sorry- I went to school, there were the odd girls and boys who were mature for their age (15/16yr olds) but that was mature in our eyes at that age. Don't mistake maturity with intelligence. A child isn't worldly, wise and mature.

In some countries? Sorry are we now selectively selecting the laws and customs from other countries/cultures and apply to our own laws as we sit fit?

14yr olds can be sex mad. Why not let them be sexmad with someone of a similar age to them.

This dude is a paedo

Except, he's not, is he. Paedophiles are attracted to prepubescent children, not fifteen year old girls.

He's guilty of a lot of things, primarily an abuse of trust. He took advantage of a position of power / authority with a girl half his age, and that makes him either an idiot or a scumbag. But not a paedo.

Not that I'm jumping to defend him, but this isn't the Daily Mail.

paedophile
Web definitions
pedophile: an adult who is sexually attracted to children.
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Legal definition of a child

NSPCC factsheet

Our factsheet looks at the legal definition of 'child' in the UK in various contexts, including child protection guidance, sexual offences, criminal responsibility and parental consent.

Knock yourself out.

this isn't the Daily Mail.

This needs to be in big letters across the page 😆

[url= http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Kay_Letourneau ]http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Kay_Letourneau[/url]

this isn't the Daily Mail.

Slightly creepy though that male posters are somehow reducing what he did to 'her' being abit more than a schoolchild who was groomed by an adult to part-guilty-party.

Knock yourself out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking_%28fallacy%29

Ok at what age would you class someone a Paedo?

It's not about age though is it? In this case I wouldn't call him a peado.

Sorry- I went to school, there were the odd girls and boys who were mature for their age (15/16yr olds) but that was mature in our eyes at that age. Don't mistake maturity with intelligence. A child isn't worldly, wise and mature.

You can't generalise, well, you can but you'll be wrong to! A child or rather a young person, can be far wiser than someone older than them. Intelligence and wisdom are to separate qualities and one would be mistaken for confusing them.

In some countries? Sorry are we now selectively selecting the laws and customs from other countries/cultures and apply to our own laws as we sit fit?

We? You can, I'm not! I'm simply pointing out that the age based laws don't account for individual cases and people. If these two had been in a school 1 few hundred miles south (say in Spain) things would be different I'd imagine. Food for thought, not "selectively selecting laws as we see fit".

14yr olds can be sex mad. Why not let them be sexmad with someone of a similar age to them.

I'm not stopping them! I'm also not going to jump up and down if there's a significant age difference though.

Slightly creepy though that male posters are somehow reducing what he did to 'her' being abit more than a schoolchild who was groomed by an adult to part-guilty-party.

Not at all, we don't know what part each played in the relationship. You're assuming something that may not be the case.

There's nothing creepy about acknowledging the reality that there is a world of difference between being a "paedophile" attracted to children (various definitions already cited) and being attracted to a fifteen year old girl / young woman. If you really don't see a difference between being attracted to a fifteen year old girl and a nine year old girl than I'd be worried. When I was 18 I copped off with a girl who I thought was older than she was - she was 15.

Was it Charlotte Church or Billie Piper that Chris Moyles (or someone like that) did a big thing about "being legal" on their sixteenth birthday? Yeah, cos she was an innocent child the day before and if you had mucky thoughts about her yesterday you were an evil paedo who should be castrated but today, happy birthday and lets have a letch...

And fifteen year olds and thirty year olds falling in love? It happens.

BUT this guy was her teacher. In that respect, it is totally wrong and an abuse of trust and authority and if he'd waited until her 16th birthday and she "was legal" then it would still be exactly the same abuse of trust and authority. This particular story is not about underage sex in particular, but an abuse by a person in authority of someone in their care. I would categorise it as more akin to a father committing incest with their 17 year old daughter than with Stuart Hall style "kiddy fiddling".

I'm not stopping them! I'm also not going to jump up and down if there's a significant age difference though.

I would if it was with somebody who is supposed to be responsible for their care.

Slightly creepy though that male posters are somehow reducing what he did to 'her' being abit more than a schoolchild who was groomed by an adult to part-guilty-party.

I must be reading a different thread from you. As others have said, we don't know the dynamics of this relationship, but we do know that he was her teacher and should have known better even if, for the sake of argument, she was the chaser and he the chasee.

I would if it was with somebody who is supposed to be responsible for their care.

Well, yeah. Sorry I thought that was self-evident from the general consensus on this thread. For what it's worth, and for the record. I am in complete agreement.

Is an 18-year-old having a relationship with someone just prior to their 16th birthday a paedophile? Under the definition given earlier, yes, but I'm not sure we would want to classify a teenage relationship in these terms.

Forrest is a criminal - he abused his position of trust to allow a relationship with someone vulnerable to attention from an adult in a position of authority.

The abduction is a technical offence - in legal terms she is unable to give consent to leaving the country, only her parents can do that. So 'her own free will' doesn't come into it. Also easier to prove than trying to prove underage sex, particularly if the two of them were silent on the issue.

Putting aside the fact that he was her teacher, which automatically makes it very wrong, the reason that we have an age of consent is to fix a point in law when the majority of young girls are considered mature enough to offer meaningful consent to having sex. Some girls reach that level of maturity earlier than 16, others never fully reach it (the same could easily be said for boys, of course). So the fixed age point is so that society can protect the more vulnerable, even if it might seem that an individual underage girl is capable of a mature relationship.

We're never going to have a perfect system, but I'd suggest that consent at 16 is about the right threshold.

Slightly creepy though that male posters are somehow reducing what he did to 'her' being abit more than a schoolchild who was groomed by an adult to part-guilty-party.

it is slightly more complicated that the Hora he is a dirty paedo binary stance but you don't seem to do subtly or grass the possibility of a sliding scale that ranges from dangerous deranged paedo to inappropriate adult behaviour.....its not either or or simply black and white in this case though it can be.

Forrest is a criminal - he abused his position of trust to allow a relationship with someone vulnerable to attention from an adult in a position of authority.

The abduction is a technical offence - in legal terms she is unable to give consent to leaving the country, only her parents can do that. So 'her own free will' doesn't come into it. Easier to prove than trying to prove underage sex, particularly if the two of them were silent on the issue.

He also undeniably knew what he was doing was against the law. Why else would he have lobbed his mobile into the Channel and dyed their hair as a disguise? He has been foolish at best, but is now a convicted criminal.

OK he has 'fallen in love', but as a teacher he should not have allowed himself to get close enough to a pupil for that to happen in the first place.

Edric 64 - Member
If they end up as a couple in say 5 years time do you still view him as a child abuser or not ?

Yes. He abused a child.
That will never change.

Junkyard - lazarus
it is slightly more complicated that the Hora he is a dirty paedo binary stance but you don't seem to do subtly or grass the possibility of a sliding scale that ranges from dangerous deranged paedo to inappropriate adult behaviour.....its not either or or simply black and white in this case though it can be.

No, it's not ambiguous.
He had sex with a child.

edlong - Member

There's nothing creepy about acknowledging the reality that there is a world of difference between being a "paedophile" attracted to children (various definitions already cited) and being attracted to a fifteen year old girl / young woman. If you really don't see a difference between being attracted to a fifteen year old girl and a nine year old girl than I'd be worried.

Whereas your statement worries me.

Look, it's very simple.
If you are an adult, you don't have sex with children.
No ifs, no buts, you just don't do it.
It's immoral and illegal.

I find some of the attitudes expressed on this and previous threads on the subject quite alarming.

Not impressed with his not guilty plea, and then using the girl as a proxy to peddle a truly fatuous, self-serving defense on his behalf. He was obv bang to rights as far as the law goes, so it seems like the right time to admit that things got badly out of hand, step up and pay the price.

There may be good lawyerly reasons for not wanting to admit guilt I guess - maybe it was the best percentage play for him and in the future he can say he fought the accusation and doesn't accept it.

TBH there is no "mitigation" to be had here, especially for a teacher...

I don't think it's an age gap issue, its more about emotional maturity and the fact that a teacher should never place them self in this sort of position Ever...

From my memory of being 14/15, teenage girls often think they are more emotionally mature than they really are, hence many started up relationships with local lads in their late teens / early twenty's (most of whom would be knobbers by most peoples's standards TBH), but they're older and appear more mature to a 15 YO girl...

I don't see Jeremy in any different light really to those 18 YO cocks in Nova's hanging outside the school gates, He's taken advantage of a teenage infatuation, he knew this was wrong, he lied and evaded, and when things started to close in he attempted to take the girl and go on the run. He knew just how seriously wrong this was, he had very clearly defined boundaries as an adult who's job required him to work with children and he still went ahead with a sexual relationship with a minor.

15 YO girls like a bit of drama and believe they understand adult relationships already, TBH between 15 and ~25 most do a lot of growing up and learn from their mistakes, unfortunately her mistake was very visible and involved this knob head. He should have know all of this as a Teacher, a 30 YO male and a married man, he's had twice as much "Life experience" as her, so I think there's a fair bit of emotional immaturity evident in Mr Forrest...

If she's still infatuated with him when she hit's 20, and her peers are generally engaged in more "normal" relationships with people who aren't on the sex offenders register (as I assume he will still be?) then I'd say he's damaged her ability to form a "Normal" relationship and intentionally or otherwise wound up stunting her emotional development...

All IMO...

I think there's a fair bit of emotional immaturity evident in Mr Forrest...

TBH, a lot of what was presented to the court - writing crap songs for your crap band about some girl you like - are the sort of things your average 17-year-old would do. As I said before, some girls and boys are never capable of mature relationships.

It's his poor wife I feel sorry for. After all, she married a child without even realising it.

If you are an adult, you don't have sex with children.
No ifs, no buts, you just don't do it.
It's immoral and illegal.
...
I find some of the attitudes expressed on this and previous threads on the subject quite alarming.

Just so I'm clear,

Are you suggesting then that the figure of 16 attached in law is the only yardstick we should be considering here?

Sidestepping the teacher / age difference aspects for a second, if someone (let's say a 17 year old boy) wants to have a relationship / sex with a girl who is 15 years and 364 days old, it's illegal and immoral, but if he hangs on a week he can happily be balls deep with impunity?

From a legal standpoint, that's correct of course. From a moral one, what changes that day? Does a girl go to bed as a child on the eve of her 16th birthday, and magically wake up as an adult the following morning? We should probably take the time of birth into account as well, just to be absolutely on the money. Can't be ten minutes early or you're a paedophile.

This is, of course, absurd. As Junky's said, an age of consent is an absolutely necessary thing for all manner of things, but it's a best-fit figure aimed at protecting the majority of children / young adults from situations they're not emotionally equipped to deal with. People mature at different rates, it's not that black and white. Some people aren't ready for a sexual relationship at 16 or way past that age, some will be.

pedophile: an adult who is sexually attracted to children.

Son1's Godfather, who was a curate at the time, fell in love with a young lady half his age. He waited until she older before starting a relationship with the consent of her parents. They have been married over 10 years now.

Tired he fell for a child then? He found a child attractive. Sorry, the visual attraction thing will always be there.

I personally find young girls to be just that. No attraction. Same when a 30yr old female doea the same. 14/15yr old boys are imature/young/different era

Im struggling with the grey areas. A 17 and a 15yr old is closer in age/tastes/etc. A man with a child is firmly grooming.

He knew what he was doing was likely to land him in trouble. If not prison, then loss of job, reputation etc. But actually, quite likely to be prison.

He then [u]chose[/u] to carry on regardless. He is guilty. He is 'lucky' they are not going after him for statuatory rape.

If you break the law you should expect consequences.

You should also have some moral compass about what is right and wrong as well.

The amateur psychologist view would see him as a bit of a tragic character - seeing himself as a bit 'rock and roll' being in a band and all. A pillock really, but now one with a criminal conviction for child abduction.

Cougar - Moderator

Just so I'm clear,

Are you suggesting then that the figure of 16 attached in law is the only yardstick we should be considering here?

Providing that there are no other issues such as capacity to consent etc, yes.

Sidestepping the teacher / age difference aspects for a second, if someone (let's say a 17 year old boy) wants to have a relationship / sex with a girl who is 15 years and 364 days old, it's illegal and immoral, but if he hangs on a week he can happily be balls deep with impunity?

There has to be a cut off point, a statement of law that defines childhood for purposes such as these.

Does a girl go to bed as a child on the eve of her 16th birthday, and magically wake up as an adult the following morning?

As Junky's said, an age of consent is an absolutely necessary thing for all manner of things, but it's a best-fit figure aimed at protecting the majority of children / young adults from situations they're not emotionally equipped to deal with.

People mature at different rates, it's not that black and white. Some people aren't ready for a sexual relationship at 16 or way past that age, some will be.

I believe it is illegal and immoral for an adult to have sex with a child, ie a person under 16.

Which bit of this do you disagree with?
If you do disagree, please let us know the circumstances where an adult having sex with a child can be justified.

So how do we see sentencing ?Is a long one cut and dried or is the fact that the victim albeit a young girl of 16 allegedly in love with him and going to apply for prison visits taken into consideration?Or is it seen that he was bloody good at grooming a young girl to the point that she still feels this way even though we assume she cannot have had contact with him for months?

I personally find young girls to be just that. No attraction.

So, assuming you were free, single, and drinking at a bar, and a sexy 18 yo girl starts chatting you up, you get on well; presumably there's some attraction. (And I strongly doubt you'd be immune to being attracted to a sexy 18 yo woman).

What happens if that "18 yo woman" then confesses, after the act, that she was actually 15? I know that's not what happened in Forrest's case, but it's quite a clear scenario where you would have, albeit inadvertently, been attracted to and slept with (in your eyes, and the law's) a child.

Medically however, you'd have been attracted to and slept with a young adult.

five and a half years.

So, assuming you were free, single, and drinking at a bar, and a sexy 18 yo girl starts chatting you up, you get on well; presumably there's some attraction. (And I strongly doubt you'd be immune to being attracted to a sexy 18 yo woman).

For starters your Court Defence would have some credibility and assuming the girl LOOKED 18.

Going back to 14/15yr olds. If you have friends/family with children of this age you don't need telling. Its wrong. They look in so many ways young. They act/interests are totally different to your own. Even if you rodes mountain bikes in the same group as a 15yr old - you'd say 'cool kid', geeky kid, nice kid and a credit to his Dad.

Age difference at 30-40 etc isn't a gulf like it is between a minor and an adult. Ones developing, learning, still learning about the world.

Anyhow, who am I trying to convince. Apparently sex between a 14-15yr old girl and a 30yr old man is understandable.

Legally, yes.

And morally?

Which bit of this do you disagree with?

I wasn't inherently disagreeing, I was making sure I understood your opinion as it seemed to me that an arbitrary figure was a fairly poor way of gauging maturity.

If you do disagree, please let us know the circumstances where an adult having sex with a child can be justified.

Well, that's a loaded question isn't it. It's never appropriate for an adult to have sex with a child, what I'm picking at is how we define "child" in this context.

If I'm sixteen and my girlfriend is fifteen years and eleven months, if I consomethinge that relationship then by your definition I'm an adult having sex with a child. And purely from a legal standpoint you're right and I could be arrested for it. But is the law correct in this case, I've committed a heinous act of sex with a minor due to an age difference of a couple of weeks, and should go directly to the sex offenders' register without passing Go?

[img] [/img]

Ah, poor conflicted media...

I've mentioned before when I was at school, loads of my school friends had much older boyfriends - when they were 13 - 15, they were in relationships with guys who were 20 - 35.

In some cases, the guys were proper creeps, blatantly wanting a sex toy that they could easily control, video and photo to their heart's content.

In most cases though, the 'men' were chronically immature blokes who genuinely loved or at least cared for their much younger girlfriends. A couple of them genuinely didn't know the age of the girls until after a few weeks (they'd often met in the local nightclub). Quite a few of the blokes had their hearts broken when the girls grew up and realised that what they found funny and appealing when they were in their mid-teens became immature and annoying by their late teens.

That said, I genuinely wouldn't expect an educated 30-year old [b]married [/b]teacher start a relationship with a pupil, never mind run off with her to France. He had no excuse - he knew her age from the start, and was in a position of trust. That does kind of put a more exploitative angle on the whole thing.

For starters your Court Defence would have some credibility and assuming the girl LOOKED 18.

Hora, you were the one saying you unequivocally felt no attraction to 15 yo 'girls'. I took that to be your unequivocal viewpoint. Seems it's not so unequivocal after all if you accept you could have been in the plausible position I outlined.

Apparently sex between a 14-15yr old girl and a 30yr old man is understandable.

Just so as we're clear and I don't get tarred with something I didn't say,

I agree with this, and I said as much in an earlier comment: "Sidestepping the teacher / age difference aspects for a second." I'm not suggesting for a second that what he did was right, justifiable, or defensible at any level. I'm debating hypotheticals and that it's not quite as simple as the black and white "you've shagged a fifteen year old therefore you're a nonce".

You presented one of those impossible analogies.

IF I was in a bar and a sexy 18yr old chatted me up. Funnily enough it has happened but none of the girls back then were 15 as they'd have looked it. I answered as in IF it did happen and I found out post-event.

I've never met a sexy 15yr old. I've only ever seen heavily made up 15yr olds.

This argument is crock. Are you arguing in the hope that I too will agree having sex with a minor is 'ok' somehow?

This bloke is a martyr with learning difficulties who managed to land a teaching job, lead a normal life then be tricked by a young girl?

Finally a quote for you from the School

"It is important that the strongest possible message is sent to all who work with children that they hold a position of responsibility and trust for the lives, and wellbeing, of those in their care,"

I've never met a sexy 15yr old. I've only ever seen heavily made up 15yr olds.

I met bloody tons when I was 15.

he has been an idiot at best

I have nothing to add to the disturbing debate over whether a 30 year old man sleeping with a girl who is under the age of consent could ever be "justified" so I will just make a comment.
My eldest daughter is 14, same as this girl was when the "relationship" started. If one of her teachers "fell in love" with her I suspect it would be [i]me[/i] who would be looking at prison time. Whilst he would be looking at an equally long stay in hospital (if he was lucky)

Cougar - Moderator
And morally?

However, as a society, we have decided that 16 is the current age of consent.
To, as you say, protect the majority of children.
You can justify sex with a child however you like, but it's still just that.

If I'm sixteen and my girlfriend is fifteen years and eleven months, if I consomethinge that relationship then by your definition I'm an adult having sex with a child. And purely from a legal standpoint you're right and I could be arrested for it. But is the law correct in this case, I've committed a heinous act of sex with a minor due to an age difference of a couple of weeks, and should go directly to the sex offenders' register without passing Go?

It's not my definition - it's the law.
Carefully considered to protect the majority of children.

And if such a case came before a court, I'm sure the relative ages of both parties, the adult and the child, would be taken into account.

It's never appropriate for an adult to have sex with a child, what I'm picking at is how we define "child" in this context.

I have nothing to add to the disturbing debate over whether a 30 year old man sleeping with a girl who is under the age of consent could ever be "justified" so I will just make a comment.
My eldest daughter is 14, same as this girl was when the "relationship" started. If one of her teachers "fell in love" with her I suspect it would be me who would be looking at prison time. Whilst he would be looking at an equally long stay in hospital (if he was lucky)

Carefully billy, the liberals didn't like it when I said that earlier.

Apparently its better to shag a minor than thump someone who has.

Apparently sex between a 14-15yr old girl and a 30yr old man is understandable.

That's a bit of a silly thing to write, and implies that you don't really understand what a lot of posters are trying to explain.

The point is, this kind of scenario older (immature) bloke, adolescent girl happens so regularly that we should make an effort to understand it and be aware of all the dangers associated with it*. As Mrs Toast points out there is nothing unusual here except that it's a married teacher/pupil situation which puts a much darker spin on it.

*Interestingly the dangers associated with this kind of relationship aren't that different to any relationship. The potential for abuse is always there no matter the ages of the players, a vulnerable adult can be at more danger from a potential abuser than a mature adolescent. Something that is often unfortunately overlooked in adult/adult relationship dynamics...

I've never met a sexy 15yr old.

Never???? What if you didn't know they were 15?

This argument is crock.

No it's not, it's just one you can't answer without conceding that you're wrong on this occasion

Are you arguing in the hope that I too will agree having sex with a minor is 'ok' somehow?

What I am arguing is that the definition of 'minor' from a medical and moral standpoint isn't quite as black and white as the law is on its definition. The fact you seem to be struggling with my point above confirms this.

5 1/2 years seems nuts to me, especially given Stuart Hall was sentenced to 15 months for 14 instances of sex [b]abuse[/b] (with one girl as young as 9).

I have nothing to add to the disturbing debate over whether a 30 year old man sleeping with a girl who is under the age of consent could ever be "justified" so I will just make a comment.

Has anyone actually said that though? I missed it if so.

Carefully billy, the liberals didn't like it when I said that earlier.

Apparently its better to shag a minor than thump someone who has.

Who's saying that?

Has anyone actually said that though? I missed it if so.

I think he interpreted the stance taken by you and some other posters that blur the lines between the age of concent, and then the creation of other hypothetical scenarios involving people just under and over the age of concent as an attempt to mitigate / justify this mans actions. thats how it reads to me also.

Ah, poor conflicted media...

This! Absolutely, this.

In the distance I can hear the "Thread closed" machine being fired up.

What is the law of consent in other countries?

13 in Spain 😯

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe