_________________

To grab his balls? That seems like the extent of their "sexual contact".

To me we have to go back to the definition of crime. And I would have to say it's one where one of the parties can display an injury of some sort. When we as a society are saying that this party is injured because we say so, then we are venturing into so difficult territory at best. We say you are a minor at 17 this case, but if this same 17 year old killed someone he would be almost certainly tried as an adult.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

Right, but laws aren't equal to justice in many cases.

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.

You seem to be changing the discussion, to the discussion of what a "crime" is. It's what the law states. If you don't like that law, you need to vote (or run for office yourself, or write op-eds, etc.) to change the law. But, as the law stands, she violated it. Should she go to jail? I think not, and I doubt she will. Should she teach again? I doubt that as well.

In some respects, it's not different than other crimes. If you are caught speeding, it's a crime, and you can be charged. If you speed all the time, are twice the legal limit, etc., the punishment may change, but the crime is the same. Once on a while, a small fine. Speed all the time, and you can indeed end up in jail.

She committed a crime according Texas law. I think her punishment will be minimal.

Again, to make you think about this differently, imagine your 17 year-old son being asked to rub JDC's private parts, while she rubs him. And she might state, to get an "A" in my classs, you need to do this. And to get a "letter of recommendation" for college, you need to not only rub me but espouse liberal values. You can see where this goes from being "cool" (hot teacher) to "gross" (JDC) pretty quickly, and therefore a crime. Their position as an authority over the minor changes the nature of crime--different if they are simply the neighbor of the same kid, but not their teacher.

imo the drunk sex addict mom from georgia was hotter

For my bread the one from Florida years ago was the best of the lot. I think her name was Debra Lafave. She was a smoker!

_________________

Do you really think that's the issue? That people feel it's not a crime because the woman is "hot"?

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.

Well, in this case, the "crime" was sexual contact with a student and age of consent doesn't matter with that. I think that is undoubtedly a good law in regards to high school students.

However, I think your whole point would now be reliant on you stating what would be a logical age of consent. 17 may or may not be the correct line to draw. However, it is the common line to draw it at 18 and it seems pretty fair to me. If that is the line that is drawn then adults need to deal with it.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Do you think the age of the adult matters? Is a 19 year old who has a relationship with a 17 year old different than a 50 year old having the same relationship?

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.

As a teacher, it would not matter, though obviously that is very unlikely.

I think the two year rule, which seems common but I'm no expert on various laws on consent, is a good one.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Right off the bat I would suggest that if two people attended high school at the same time a relationship between them is no crime.

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.

I think the very title of this thread bears that truth out. I'm guessing most heterosexual guys on this board find her attractive, and think "I would today." We can also easily go back in time to being a senior in High School and think, "I would have then, too."

If the teacher is hideous, it does change the discussion.

Being fired and having a criminal record is not a minimal punishment. And as for level of attractiveness, you are trying to make an emotional argument. With any case I would recommend trying to look at the facts of who was pursued by who. What if the 17-year-old is a genius sociopath, who manipulated a naive and repressed 27 year-old?

I don't think there are hard fast rules. And spare with the get elected and change the law argument. Juries interpret laws all the time.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

I think that is a little too wide of a range there.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

75 years ago, brave, young 17 year old young men were storming the beaches of Normandy. Today these same 17 year old Beta Fags cry to the police when a hot ass 25 year old hits on them. Jesus fucking Christ, America is doomed.

It's the way of the world. Tall and more attractive people tend to be more successful, they tend to be more intelligent, they receive more lenient punishments, they are given more opportunities. Sucks for the rest of you.

_________________

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

I think I read that Texas has a 3 year rule, with a minimum age of consent set at 14. A 17yo with a 14yo is ok.

_________________

Only in so much as those who are widely viewed as "attractive" get breaks in most facets of life.

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.

Then maybe we should think about segregating them so they aren't in a situation where they have many social interactions, e.g. dances, events, sports, etc.

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.

I don't think there are hard fast rules. And spare with the get elected and change the law argument. Juries interpret laws all the time.[/quote]

Well, they are indeed "hard and fast rules"--literally laws that were passed by the Texas legislature and written down, hard and fast. I agree that juries (and judges) will interpret the law, that's why I stated I don't think she will have any jail time, simply be banned from teaching again. A jury interpreting the law is different than whether she broke the law, and I would expect they would go easy on her given the relatively minor interaction she with the kid (no actual sex), and it being a first time offense.

I would also venture that if one of these "hottie" teachers came in front of a JDC looking judge, they'd have more book thrown at them than if they went before a good looking dude judge.

_________________

Well, we'd have to get rid of the adults too.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

We've moved away from that discussion. I think we're all in agreement that teachers shouldn't massage the balls of their students.

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.

You ignored the quote function rules. I'm glad that you think rules set by the Texas Legislature are important laws of the land, and that they would not be interpreted by a jury as it pleases.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

Male teachers at least.

Especially if they looked like Susannah Collins.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

I miss Susie Collins. Fuck the BlackHawks of all people for getting her fired.

this

_________________

They should not get involved with a student of any age. Students at a University are mostly over 18, yet if a Professor has a sexual relationship with a student, they are fired. Students are just off limits....period.

_________________
Go Cubs!!!!