#1 Posted by Death Certificate (5438 posts) - - Show Bio
A married woman teacher is under investigation after allegedly being found parked in a lay-by with a sixth-former after a school dance.
Eppie Sprung-Dawson, 26, who is married to the son of a former solicitor general of Scotland, has been reported to prosecutors after police apparently surprised her with the unnamed boy.
Another pupil called officers after seeing them pull in, it is claimed.
Both Mrs Sprung-Dawson and the boy have taken time off school since the alleged incident on Dec 22, after classes broke up for Christmas.
Education officials refused to confirm whether the teacher had been suspended. But a source at the school said: “Everybody’s talking about this at the school and it’s all over Twitter and Facebook.
“Apparently they were returning from a dance when they decided to pull in at a lay-by. The rumour is that another pupil spotted them and called police.”
The source described Mrs Sprung-Dawson as a popular member of staff who was dedicated to her pupils, adding: “If this turns out to be true, she will most certainly lose her job. This is known as a respectable Roman Catholic school.”
Mrs Sprung Dawson teaches English at St Joseph’s College, a Catholic comprehensive in Dumfries with around 800 pupils. It was set up by the Marist teaching order of monks. She has a number of positive reviews from pupils on the website ratemyteachers.com.
One described her as a “legend”, adding: “She improved my English a lot and taught me good techniques and she made me read more. She tried to make her lessons as fun as possible.” Another said: “Miss Sprung is amazing! She was such a laugh at the panto.”
Her husband, Ranald Dawson, 32, also a teacher, is the son of the late Lord Dawson, a former solicitor general for Scotland and judge in the Scottish Supreme Courts. The couple married in Selkirk in April 2010.
They were not available for comment yesterday, but a source close to the Dawsons said: “As far as I was aware, they had a great marriage. This would be most out of character for Eppie.
“She and Ranald have always been dedicated to their careers and respected by their students.”
Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary confirmed that a 26-year-old woman had been reported to the procurator fiscal, adding: “It would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.” A spokesman for Dumfries and Galloway council confirmed that they were investigating.
Þ A married guitar tutor who “seduced” a girl aged 15 and bombarded her with 23,000 text messages in four months has been jailed for four years, 10 months. Nicholas Sedgley, 43, of Herne Bay, Kent, was found guilty at Canterbury Crown Court of sexual activity with a child.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...fter-ball.html

#2 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (32993 posts) - - Show Bio

Holy shit, Dumfries? That's where I'm from

#3 Posted by ReVamp (22863 posts) - - Show Bio

Hmmmmmm.

#4 Posted by lykopis (10756 posts) - - Show Bio

Horrible abuse of power. Hopefully she will get the maximum allowed if it's revealed to be a sexual relationship -- but even it wasn't, it's horrible and she should pay the price.

#5 Posted by _slim_ (13067 posts) - - Show Bio

I learned a new word today.

Colloquialism.

#6 Posted by The Stegman (23242 posts) - - Show Bio

Meh, I've seen hotter teachers.

Online
#7 Posted by ReVamp (22863 posts) - - Show Bio

@lykopis said:

Horrible abuse of power. Hopefully she will get the maximum allowed if it's revealed to be a sexual relationship -- but even it wasn't, it's horrible and she should pay the price.

I'm not sure its an ABUSE of power. Like, we don't know the context.

I'm not defending her actions, but I definitely saying she's abusing power without knowing that much may be a tad of a stretch. Though I did skim, I'm tired.

That said, I really think punishment is appropriate, how severe though depends on the context.

#8 Posted by FalconPuuunch (942 posts) - - Show Bio

@ReVamp said:

@lykopis said:

Horrible abuse of power. Hopefully she will get the maximum allowed if it's revealed to be a sexual relationship -- but even it wasn't, it's horrible and she should pay the price.

I'm not sure its an ABUSE of power. Like, we don't know the context.

I'm not defending her actions, but I definitely saying she's abusing power without knowing that much may be a tad of a stretch. Though I did skim, I'm tired.

That said, I really think punishment is appropriate, how severe though depends on the context.

I'm not sure what age range this kid was in, but if a teacher is having sexual relations with a preadolescent child, then it's safe to say that it is an abuse of power no matter what context their relationship was under. Kids generally look up to their teachers and trust them full-heartily, sort of like a parent. If this is an underage kid then I feel like she should be punished severely and labeled as a sex offender for the rest of her life just like any other sex offender.

#9 Posted by ReVamp (22863 posts) - - Show Bio

@FalconPuuunch said:

@ReVamp said:

@lykopis said:

Horrible abuse of power. Hopefully she will get the maximum allowed if it's revealed to be a sexual relationship -- but even it wasn't, it's horrible and she should pay the price.

I'm not sure its an ABUSE of power. Like, we don't know the context.

I'm not defending her actions, but I definitely saying she's abusing power without knowing that much may be a tad of a stretch. Though I did skim, I'm tired.

That said, I really think punishment is appropriate, how severe though depends on the context.

I'm not sure what age range this kid was in, but if a teacher is having sexual relations with a preadolescent child, then it's safe to say that it is an abuse of power no matter what context their relationship was under. Kids generally look up to their teachers and trust them full-heartily, sort of like a parent. If this is an underage kid then I feel like she should be punished severely and labeled as a sex offender for the rest of her life just like any other sex offender.

Yeah, okay. I kinda of interperted it more of a nearly adult (god knows how many crushes all of the boys in this world have on teachers), but that does brig a fair point, it was my own assumption.

And now that I read that, my last line makes totally no sense. If they were engaged in sexual acts, context means nothing.

#10 Posted by Nefarious (18863 posts) - - Show Bio

Crap like this happens all the time. This is nothing new.

#11 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@lykopis said:

Horrible abuse of power. Hopefully she will get the maximum allowed if it's revealed to be a sexual relationship -- but even it wasn't, it's horrible and she should pay the price.

Wait, so even if she did nothing wrong, she should be punished?

For what?

This sounds like a witch hunt.

#12 Edited by laflux (14382 posts) - - Show Bio

@Nefarious:

@minigunman123:

While this is certainly isn't ideal, the age of consent in the U.K is 16. So if the kid is a sixth former, he is at least that age. Making it totally unprofessional and morally questionable, but not illegal.

Makes one think.............

#13 Posted by Nefarious (18863 posts) - - Show Bio
@laflux said:

@Nefarious:

While this is certainly isn't ideal, the age of consent in the U.K is 16. So if the kid is a sixth former, he is at least that age. Making it totally unprofessional and morally questionable, but not illegal.

Makes one think.............

It makes one think indeed. What a world we live in....
#14 Posted by lykopis (10756 posts) - - Show Bio

@Nefarious said:

@laflux said:

@Nefarious:

While this is certainly isn't ideal, the age of consent in the U.K is 16. So if the kid is a sixth former, he is at least that age. Making it totally unprofessional and morally questionable, but not illegal.

Makes one think.............

It makes one think indeed. What a world we live in....

Here in Canada the age of consent is sixteen as well but when it applies to student/teacher relationships, it is considered illegal. It's a breach of trust. This includes relationships which aren't sexual.

In England, it's the same. No matter if the child is sixteen or older -- if they are a student of the teacher or attends the school as a student, the breach of trust is applicable.

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 made it an offence for a person over 18 in a position of trust to have a sexual relationship with a child under 18, regardless of whether the relationship is consensual and even if the person does not teach the child.

Teachers are in a position of trust. This teacher has been suspended and the victim's family have publicly stated he is the victim here.

So -- If there is a relationship between the two, she should be charged appropriately.

Source

@minigunman123 said:

@lykopis said:

Horrible abuse of power. Hopefully she will get the maximum allowed if it's revealed to be a sexual relationship -- but even it wasn't, it's horrible and she should pay the price.

Wait, so even if she did nothing wrong, she should be punished?

For what?

This sounds like a witch hunt.

Take a look above.

#15 Edited by laflux (14382 posts) - - Show Bio

@lykopis said:

@Nefarious said:

@laflux said:

@Nefarious:

While this is certainly isn't ideal, the age of consent in the U.K is 16. So if the kid is a sixth former, he is at least that age. Making it totally unprofessional and morally questionable, but not illegal.

Makes one think.............

It makes one think indeed. What a world we live in....

Here in Canada the age of consent is sixteen as well but when it applies to student/teacher relationships, it is considered illegal. It's a breach of trust. This includes relationships which aren't sexual.

In England, it's the same. No matter if the child is sixteen or older -- if they are a student of the teacher or attends the school as a student, the breach of trust is applicable.

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 made it an offence for a person over 18 in a position of trust to have a sexual relationship with a child under 18, regardless of whether the relationship is consensual and even if the person does not teach the child.

Teachers are in a position of trust. This teacher has been suspended and the victim's family have publicly stated he is the victim here.

So -- If there is a relationship between the two, she should be charged appropriately.

Source

Well haven't I got egg on my face then :(

Just for the record I in no way think what she did is correct- and I guess the law backs me up on this.

Friendly reconciliation Cupcake?

*Oh right that's Samimista's thing* :P

#16 Posted by lykopis (10756 posts) - - Show Bio

@laflux: LOL

How about we give a cupcake to Samimista. ;p

#17 Posted by spetsnaz_gru (235 posts) - - Show Bio

@Jonny_Anonymous said:

Holy shit, Dumfries? That's where I'm from

Hey a Doonhumer!

#18 Posted by PowerHerc (81712 posts) - - Show Bio

Apparently this stuff happens in other places besides the U.S.

#19 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@lykopis said:

@Nefarious said:

@laflux said:

@Nefarious:

While this is certainly isn't ideal, the age of consent in the U.K is 16. So if the kid is a sixth former, he is at least that age. Making it totally unprofessional and morally questionable, but not illegal.

Makes one think.............

It makes one think indeed. What a world we live in....

Here in Canada the age of consent is sixteen as well but when it applies to student/teacher relationships, it is considered illegal. It's a breach of trust. This includes relationships which aren't sexual.

In England, it's the same. No matter if the child is sixteen or older -- if they are a student of the teacher or attends the school as a student, the breach of trust is applicable.

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 made it an offence for a person over 18 in a position of trust to have a sexual relationship with a child under 18, regardless of whether the relationship is consensual and even if the person does not teach the child.

Teachers are in a position of trust. This teacher has been suspended and the victim's family have publicly stated he is the victim here.

So -- If there is a relationship between the two, she should be charged appropriately.

Source

@minigunman123 said:

@lykopis said:

Horrible abuse of power. Hopefully she will get the maximum allowed if it's revealed to be a sexual relationship -- but even it wasn't, it's horrible and she should pay the price.

Wait, so even if she did nothing wrong, she should be punished?

For what?

This sounds like a witch hunt.

Take a look above.

Well, maybe she would be committing a legal offense then.

But to be honest, I think that's a ridiculous law; sounds extremely open-ended, and if they are in consent and both of age, they shouldn't be demonized by the law. Beethoven was in love with (at least?) one of his students in his lifetime, but the only reason they didn't marry was because of class difference.

#20 Posted by CapFanboy (4520 posts) - - Show Bio

@lykopis said:

Horrible abuse of power. Hopefully she will get the maximum allowed if it's revealed to be a sexual relationship -- but even it wasn't, it's horrible and she should pay the price.

I dunno, it says sixth former which means 16-18+ and legal age here is 16 so legally it's legit.

#21 Posted by lykopis (10756 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123:

The Head of the Teachers' Union in that country spoke out to have the law changed -- more for the 17-18 year olds who could be still going to school with the teacher. Children's groups successfully got the Union to back down.

I took a quick look at the laws in regards to teachers and students and all over it is references to the teacher taking on the position of a parent. So, they know what they are getting into.

Just wait until the student graduates. Better safe than sorry - plus it discredits the teacher in the eyes of students who are aware of the relationship so it's for the teacher's benefit as well.

#22 Posted by lykopis (10756 posts) - - Show Bio

@CapFanboy said:

@lykopis said:

Horrible abuse of power. Hopefully she will get the maximum allowed if it's revealed to be a sexual relationship -- but even it wasn't, it's horrible and she should pay the price.

I dunno, it says sixth former which means 16-18+ and legal age here is 16 so legally it's legit.

Seriously, it's not. It's illegal if the teacher and student attend the same school.

#23 Posted by Nefarious (18863 posts) - - Show Bio
@lykopis said:

@Nefarious said:

@laflux said:

@Nefarious:

While this is certainly isn't ideal, the age of consent in the U.K is 16. So if the kid is a sixth former, he is at least that age. Making it totally unprofessional and morally questionable, but not illegal.

Makes one think.............

It makes one think indeed. What a world we live in....

Here in Canada the age of consent is sixteen as well but when it applies to student/teacher relationships, it is considered illegal. It's a breach of trust. This includes relationships which aren't sexual.

In England, it's the same. No matter if the child is sixteen or older -- if they are a student of the teacher or attends the school as a student, the breach of trust is applicable.

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 made it an offence for a person over 18 in a position of trust to have a sexual relationship with a child under 18, regardless of whether the relationship is consensual and even if the person does not teach the child.

Teachers are in a position of trust. This teacher has been suspended and the victim's family have publicly stated he is the victim here.

So -- If there is a relationship between the two, she should be charged appropriately.

Source

@minigunman123 said:

@lykopis said:

Horrible abuse of power. Hopefully she will get the maximum allowed if it's revealed to be a sexual relationship -- but even it wasn't, it's horrible and she should pay the price.

Wait, so even if she did nothing wrong, she should be punished?

For what?

This sounds like a witch hunt.

Take a look above.

I see.
#24 Posted by CapFanboy (4520 posts) - - Show Bio

@lykopis said:

@CapFanboy said:

@lykopis said:

Horrible abuse of power. Hopefully she will get the maximum allowed if it's revealed to be a sexual relationship -- but even it wasn't, it's horrible and she should pay the price.

I dunno, it says sixth former which means 16-18+ and legal age here is 16 so legally it's legit.

Seriously, it's not. It's illegal if the teacher and student attend the same school.

Oh crap, right, 2001. Oh well, he's still probably being patted on the back right this second.

#25 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (32993 posts) - - Show Bio
@spetsnaz_gru

@Jonny_Anonymous said:

Holy shit, Dumfries? That's where I'm from

Hey a Doonhumer!

Haha no heard that for a while
#26 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (32993 posts) - - Show Bio
@minigunman123 Scotland has diffrent laws than England
#27 Posted by dngn4774 (2803 posts) - - Show Bio

It's nice to see that other countries try to take this issue seriously. In the U.S. most guys brush it off with the stupid "I wish I had a teacher like that when I was in school" remark. Meanwhile, if it was a male teacher doing this to any student, we'd call for the maximum.

Online
#28 Posted by Bruxae (12680 posts) - - Show Bio

If it was a male teacher, ewwwww.

Since its a female teacher, HIGH FIVE!

#29 Posted by Vortex13 (12223 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123: Uh, Beethoven lived from 1770 to 1827. So laws and perceptions of what was right then have literally no bearing on today. Use a more recent example if you want to make a point, and by recent I'd say at least past 1980.

#30 Posted by Tommy_X (27 posts) - - Show Bio

Guy got to bang teacher?! NICE! Wish I had a teacher like that!

Don't see a problem with that. Yes I know it's illegal sure but... Somehow I bet the "victim" wasn't seriously traumatized by the experience

#31 Posted by Aiden Cross (15562 posts) - - Show Bio

Doesn't matter if it was consensual, teachers are not allowed by policies to engage in a sexual relationship with their students. So yes, this teacher should be punished according to the rules.

#32 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@Vortex13 said:

@minigunman123: Uh, Beethoven lived from 1770 to 1827. So laws and perceptions of what was right then have literally no bearing on today. Use a more recent example if you want to make a point, and by recent I'd say at least past 1980.

What you just wrote is utter nonsense.

#33 Edited by Vortex13 (12223 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123:

@minigunman123 said:

Well, maybe she would be committing a legal offense then.

But to be honest, I think that's a ridiculous law; sounds extremely open-ended, and if they are in consent and both of age, they shouldn't be demonized by the law. Beethoven was in love with (at least?) one of his students in his lifetime, but the only reason they didn't marry was because of class difference.

You were the one who made that comparison. All I was saying was that it wasn't an adequate example given that it occurred over a hundred and fifty years ago and perception on consent and what is appropriate in this day and age is not comparable to what was appropriate over a hundred and fifty years ago. There is also no need to be rude or abrasive.

#34 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@Vortex13 said:

@minigunman123:

@minigunman123 said:

Well, maybe she would be committing a legal offense then.

But to be honest, I think that's a ridiculous law; sounds extremely open-ended, and if they are in consent and both of age, they shouldn't be demonized by the law. Beethoven was in love with (at least?) one of his students in his lifetime, but the only reason they didn't marry was because of class difference.

You were the one who made that comparison. All I was saying was that it wasn't an adequate example given that it occurred over a hundred and fifty years ago and perception on consent and what is appropriate in this day and age is not comparable to what was appropriate over a hundred and fifty years ago. There is also no need to be rude or abrasive.

Morals and morality don't change over time, just society's collective will to twist or abuse them/it.

#35 Posted by Vortex13 (12223 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123: I disagree. In the old west it was thought to be ok to have bounty's on people which were labeled dead or alive. Which allowed bounty hunters to kill people and get money for it and it was legal. It used to be thought that it was immoral for women to play sports or show skin. Morality changes as people become more or less open minded and how society changes.

#36 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@Vortex13 said:

@minigunman123: I disagree. In the old west it was thought to be ok to have bounty's on people which were labeled dead or alive. Which allowed bounty hunters to kill people and get money for it and it was legal. It used to be thought that it was immoral for women to play sports or show skin. Morality changes as people become more or less open minded and how society changes.

But you're not describing morality.

You're describing society's perception or interpretation of morality, or even certain individuals' wanton disregard for morality, which not every individual shares.

In certain areas in South Africa, it's legal and fine for you to kill gays. Their society kills homosexuals.

Does that make it moral?

#37 Posted by Vortex13 (12223 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123: In my opinion no. I guess this is where the issue arises between us. You seem to assume that there is some set rules of morals that everyone most adhere to when that is not the case in my opinion. Morality is another one of those thing that is subjective and is not a constant. If you are reffering to the Christian bible then I see. But Christianity is a belief structure and is not a set of morals for everyone since not everyone adheres to the same belief structure or religion. There is no absolute moral guide that applies to everyone in the world. There are different gods to others as well as other forms of worship.

#38 Posted by Vortex13 (12223 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123: Oh, and South Africa is a country, and a pretty modern one as well. It would not be legal there to kill homosexuals. There are countries in Africa with these practices though so your right there, but not South Africa.

#39 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@Vortex13 said:

@minigunman123: In my opinion no. I guess this is where the issue arises between us. You seem to assume that there is some set rules of morals that everyone most adhere to when that is not the case in my opinion. Morality is another one of those thing that is subjective and is not a constant. If you are reffering to the Christian bible then I see. But Christianity is a belief structure and is not a set of morals for everyone since not everyone adheres to the same belief structure or religion. There is no absolute moral guide that applies to everyone in the world. There are different gods to others as well as other forms of worship.

You didn't answer my question.

If killing homosexuals is legal and accepted by society in another country in the world, which it is, does that make it moral?

#40 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@Vortex13 said:

@minigunman123: Oh, and South Africa is a country, and a pretty modern one as well. It would not be legal there to kill homosexuals. There are countries in Africa with these practices though so your right there, but not South Africa.

I didn't mean the country "South Africa", I said "south african country". I'm referring to Zimbabwe.

#41 Edited by Vortex13 (12223 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123 said:

@Vortex13 said:

@minigunman123: I disagree. In the old west it was thought to be ok to have bounty's on people which were labeled dead or alive. Which allowed bounty hunters to kill people and get money for it and it was legal. It used to be thought that it was immoral for women to play sports or show skin. Morality changes as people become more or less open minded and how society changes.

But you're not describing morality.

You're describing society's perception or interpretation of morality, or even certain individuals' wanton disregard for morality, which not every individual shares.

In certain areas in South Africa, it's legal and fine for you to kill gays. Their society kills homosexuals.

Does that make it moral?

No you said in South Africa, though everyone makes mistakes so I apologize for not understanding.

And I thought I did answer your question I said In my opinion no. But to some of the people in the countries that practice this act it is. That was my point. Morality is subjective to every different person in the world. Even within one belief structure where everyone is supposed to have the same guidelines as the whole faith people sometimes ignore the parts they disagree with.

Let me ask you something then, you gave that example of Beethoven earlier and how the only reason they didn't marry was because of class difference. Does that mean you think what this teacher did is ok?

#42 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@Vortex13 said:

@minigunman123 said:

@Vortex13 said:

@minigunman123: I disagree. In the old west it was thought to be ok to have bounty's on people which were labeled dead or alive. Which allowed bounty hunters to kill people and get money for it and it was legal. It used to be thought that it was immoral for women to play sports or show skin. Morality changes as people become more or less open minded and how society changes.

But you're not describing morality.

You're describing society's perception or interpretation of morality, or even certain individuals' wanton disregard for morality, which not every individual shares.

In certain areas in South Africa, it's legal and fine for you to kill gays. Their society kills homosexuals.

Does that make it moral?

No you said in South Africa, though everyone makes mistakes so I apologize for not understanding.

And I thought I did answer your question I said In my opinion no. But to some of the people in the countries that practice this act it is. That was my point. Morality is subjective to every different person in the world. Even within one belief structure where everyone is supposed to have the same guidelines as the whole faith people sometimes ignore the parts they disagree with.

Let me ask you something then, you gave that example of Beethoven earlier and how the only reason they didn't marry was because of class difference. Does that mean you think what this teacher did is ok?

How can you think it's immoral, if by your logic there is no standard for morality? If there's no standard, no absolute, no basis, then it might as well not exist, correct?

I don't know what this teacher did or didn't do. That's the whole case that's being discussed. Why don't you give me an example of a teacher/student relationship, in detail (though, obviously, without being vulgar in the details), so that I can better understand what you're asking?

#43 Posted by Vortex13 (12223 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123: There is no one set of absolute morals is my point. There are many sets of morals all over the world. Of course some people get their morals from belief structures, their parent's, their countries laws, philosophical works, or books in general. That is what I meant, there is not one absolute moral code that everyone adheres to, believes in, belongs to or is even right for everyone. It is very easy to stand on a plinth and say that your (not referring to you using your as a plural applying anyone in particular) way is the right way but that wouldn't be just in my opinion, and again morality is subjective to each person so some people may think that their way is the only right way. Morals often conflict with another morals which is, to me, the main basis of conflict. Close mindedness to others ideas or morals.

As for what the teacher did she had a romantic (and possibly sexual) relationship with one of her students who was past of legal age of consent for that country which is 16. However he was still in what is the equivalent of highschool there making him 17 or 18. And in the country the law states that a teacher can not have romantic relations with a student. So she broke the law.

As you've seen by a very few of the comments in this thread some people think it is not bad because the teacher is female and the student is male, and if it was the reverse it wouldn't be ok which to me is complete bull. They say if it's a man taking advantage it's bad because it seems the misconception is that if it were a man he would be physically forcing himself on her which could not be the case entirely the girl may do it because in her young understanding of feelings she believes she loves him and he is taking advantage of the naivete of the girl. Now that is just as bad if not worse than if he forced himself on her however why it is any different from a woman taking advantage of a boys naivete in the same circumstances is beyond me and just wrong that some people believe that.

#44 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@Vortex13 said:

@minigunman123: There is no one set of absolute morals is my point. There are many sets of morals all over the world. Of course some people get their morals from belief structures, their parent's, their countries laws, philosophical works, or books in general. That is what I meant, there is not one absolute moral code that everyone adheres to, believes in, belongs to or is even right for everyone. It is very easy to stand on a plinth and say that your (not referring to you using your as a plural applying anyone in particular) way is the right way but that wouldn't be just in my opinion, and again morality is subjective to each person so some people may think that their way is the only right way. Morals often conflict with another morals which is, to me, the main basis of conflict. Close mindedness to others ideas or morals.

As for what the teacher did she had a romantic (and possibly sexual) relationship with one of her students who was past of legal age of consent for that country which is 16. However he was still in what is the equivalent of highschool there making him 17 or 18. And in the country the law states that a teacher can not have romantic relations with a student. So she broke the law.

As you've seen by a very few of the comments in this thread some people think it is not bad because the teacher is female and the student is male, and if it was the reverse it wouldn't be ok which to me is complete bull. They say if it's a man taking advantage it's bad because it seems the misconception is that if it were a man he would be physically forcing himself on her which could not be the case entirely the girl may do it because in her young understanding of feelings she believes she loves him and he is taking advantage of the naivete of the girl. Now that is just as bad if not worse than if he forced himself on her however why it is any different from a woman taking advantage of a boys naivete in the same circumstances is beyond me and just wrong that some people believe that.

Well, she broke the law, and he is of questionable age definitely, but since we don't know the facts all the way it's hard to say.

Give me a more specific example.

#45 Posted by Vortex13 (12223 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123: How can I when I don't know the whole story about what the women did either? I read the article and they didn't give all the information. If you want me to tell you exactly what she did I can't because the article didn't give the specifics. I also don't understand why you want to know all of the specifics, does it really matter? She broke the law and took advantage of a young persons trust and the naive nature that comes with that age to proceed in a romantic relationship with someone she was supposed to have a mentor student relationship.

#46 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@Vortex13 said:

@minigunman123: How can I when I don't know the whole story about what the women did either? I read the article and they didn't give all the information. If you want me to tell you exactly what she did I can't because the article didn't give the specifics. I also don't understand why you want to know all of the specifics, does it really matter? She broke the law and took advantage of a young persons trust and the naive nature that comes with that age to proceed in a romantic relationship with someone she was supposed to have a mentor student relationship.

I didn't ask you for more details of THAT example, I said give me a, as in one, specific example.

I'm 17 and capable of deciding who I want to date.

The issue is motive. Why was she apparently (and yet, not undoubtedly, since the case is still open) interested in this student? We don't know. Was she having sex with him? We don't know. Was she even romantically involved? We don't know.

You are telling me your opinion of an open-ended case I don't give a damn about.

Give me a SPECIFIC example of a student/teacher relationship, not a half-assed case in England nobody cares about, and don't give me your opinion of what the woman did; I don't care what your opinion is. This question is, actually, all about me. You asked me something. I'm defining the parameters needed for a full answer. Full stop. You can even make up a fake incident if you want, just give me something more specific than "this teacher might have been seen with a student, but we don't know if that's true or what they might have been doing or really, anything about what's going on".

#47 Posted by Vortex13 (12223 posts) - - Show Bio

@minigunman123 said:

@Vortex13 said:

@minigunman123: How can I when I don't know the whole story about what the women did either? I read the article and they didn't give all the information. If you want me to tell you exactly what she did I can't because the article didn't give the specifics. I also don't understand why you want to know all of the specifics, does it really matter? She broke the law and took advantage of a young persons trust and the naive nature that comes with that age to proceed in a romantic relationship with someone she was supposed to have a mentor student relationship.

I didn't ask you for more details of THAT example, I said give me a, as in one, specific example.

I'm 17 and capable of deciding who I want to date.

The issue is motive. Why was she apparently (and yet, not undoubtedly, since the case is still open) interested in this student? We don't know. Was she having sex with him? We don't know. Was she even romantically involved? We don't know.

You are telling me your opinion of an open-ended case I don't give a damn about.

Give me a SPECIFIC example of a student/teacher relationship, not a half-assed case in England nobody cares about, and don't give me your opinion of what the woman did; I don't care what your opinion is. This question is, actually, all about me. You asked me something. I'm defining the parameters needed for a full answer. Full stop. You can even make up a fake incident if you want, just give me something more specific than "this teacher might have been seen with a student, but we don't know if that's true or what they might have been doing or really, anything about what's going on".

First of all whatever you may think there is a big difference in maturity level and thought development in a 17 year old and a twenty six year old which were the ages. I gave you all the information on this case I know of and you respond by being rude and saying nobody cares about this case. Clearly some do for an article about it. You want a more specific example but then you say it can be made up. How does that make sense? You want a specific example of a teacher seducing a student, you have one a real one. I wasn't giving you my opinion, I was telling you what had been reported in the article. But fine you want to know another one I'll give you one, I have no idea why the article this topic is about doesn't count. But here, enjoy the read.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/14/cara-dickey-teacher-rape-parole_n_2471598.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/23/stephanie-fletcher-teacher-sex_n_2177108.html

#48 Posted by minigunman123 (3116 posts) - - Show Bio

@Vortex13 said:

@minigunman123 said:

@Vortex13 said:

@minigunman123: How can I when I don't know the whole story about what the women did either? I read the article and they didn't give all the information. If you want me to tell you exactly what she did I can't because the article didn't give the specifics. I also don't understand why you want to know all of the specifics, does it really matter? She broke the law and took advantage of a young persons trust and the naive nature that comes with that age to proceed in a romantic relationship with someone she was supposed to have a mentor student relationship.

I didn't ask you for more details of THAT example, I said give me a, as in one, specific example.

I'm 17 and capable of deciding who I want to date.

The issue is motive. Why was she apparently (and yet, not undoubtedly, since the case is still open) interested in this student? We don't know. Was she having sex with him? We don't know. Was she even romantically involved? We don't know.

You are telling me your opinion of an open-ended case I don't give a damn about.

Give me a SPECIFIC example of a student/teacher relationship, not a half-assed case in England nobody cares about, and don't give me your opinion of what the woman did; I don't care what your opinion is. This question is, actually, all about me. You asked me something. I'm defining the parameters needed for a full answer. Full stop. You can even make up a fake incident if you want, just give me something more specific than "this teacher might have been seen with a student, but we don't know if that's true or what they might have been doing or really, anything about what's going on".

First of all whatever you may think there is a big difference in maturity level and thought development in a 17 year old and a twenty six year old which were the ages. I gave you all the information on this case I know of and you respond by being rude and saying nobody cares about this case. Clearly some do for an article about it. You want a more specific example but then you say it can be made up. How does that make sense? You want a specific example of a teacher seducing a student, you have one a real one. I wasn't giving you my opinion, I was telling you what had been reported in the article. But fine you want to know another one I'll give you one, I have no idea why the article this topic is about doesn't count. But here, enjoy the read.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/14/cara-dickey-teacher-rape-parole_n_2471598.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/23/stephanie-fletcher-teacher-sex_n_2177108.html

I'm not being rude, I'm being candidly honest. You're emotionally vested in the case this thread is about, though, I can tell.

Now, after reading the articles, yes, the teachers were in the wrong and are reprehensible.

#49 Edited by VercingetorixTheGreat (2823 posts) - - Show Bio

just a joke. I hope she pays for her crime.

#50 Posted by satyrgod (2115 posts) - - Show Bio

No wonder she was such a popular teacher if that's what she was doing. A man's life would be in ruins, his reputation shattered, publicly vilified, imprisoned, forced onto a sex offenders list for life, threatened with castration... As a woman, she'll walk with probation, a new job and a happy young boyfriend.