Jeremy Forrest

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
I can't make my mind up about this. One indisputable fact is that there are 15-year old girls who are more mature than 16-year old girls and, of course, vice versa. However, maturity is not very easily quantifiable, so I suppose the only option is to set limits purely on age.

Then again, although not in this case, unwary men have only the girl's assertion of age to go by.
 
Is he in the same league as the Asian groomer rapists? Hardly.
 
And surely a mitigating factor is that the girl wanted to go with him. She has now announced that she intends to marry him when he is released.
 
joe-90 said:
Is he in the same league as the Asian groomer rapists? Hardly.
Click to expand...

But as a teacher, he hud a duty of care to those in his charge. One things for sure, he'll never be allowed near a classroom again in his life. The only difference between him and the Asian grooming gangs is the fact he didn't use drink and drugs to snare his victim. (and a victim she surely is)

How would you lot feel if she were your 15yr old daughter? I doubt whether you'd be bloody ecstatic about it.
 
If he'd waited a couple more months would he still be a heinous criminal? If not - then why not. If so then why?

Will you tell us? (he won't). :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
 
joe-90 said:
If he'd waited a couple more months would he still be a heinous criminal? If not - then why not. If so then why?

Will you tell us? (he won't). :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Aye I will tell ye Joe, (but you winna listen will ye, ye'll just argue that black is white as usual)
The usual term used for the duty of care a teacher has is "In Loco Parentis"
Literal translation is " in the place of the parent" Teachers have a moral obligation (do you know what morals are though? I doubt it) to ensure the safety of pupils in their charge, much the same as any parent has towards their offspring.
Had he waited until she was sixteen, she'd still have been a pupil at the school he was employed at. He's broken the moral obligation imposed on him by his employers. IMHO he's unfit to be near children at all (and the authorities will do all in their power to ensure he's not near children again in the future.
I know the moral high ground is far above ye Joe, but dinna worry, she's no your daughter ,, is she?
 
I think the 'age of consent' for a scholar is eighteen if you are a teacher or anybody else like that in a position of responsibility over them. Somebody will surely google.
 
The girl was in favour. Her Dad was in favour. What the problem? No crime has been committed. On a comparable scale Stuart Hall should have got three life terms.
 
I agree he shouldn't be in a classroom again; it's definitely a severe case of overstepping the mark...

*But*, he did not "abduct" her, regardless of what statutory law says.

Also, he's treated her well, is clearly actually genuinely in love with her, and I'm sure he did not do any of this lightly, knowing the possible repercussions.

If she was my daughter, an initial shock followed by deep anger would by now have given way to more reasoned feelings. Knowing that my daughter was being treated well by him, that she trusted him and loved him, and her feelings were reciprocated would be enough for me.

Better than a male classmate who was just looking for his first shag to impress his mates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sponsored Links

Similar threads

HERTS P&D
Oops! I smell a rat!
Replies
3
Views
494
ladylola
ladylola
B
B&Q Christmas Bash
Replies
7
Views
1K
ricicle
R
M
Couple really move house
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
tim west
T
Rob
How do you punish criminals like this!
2 3
Replies
44
Views
3K
Zampa
Zampa
L
balls
Replies
5
Views
583
Blasphemous
B
Back
Top