This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/21/jeremy-forrest-creep-pupil-sex-teenagers
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Jeremy Forrest is a creep, even if his pupil doesn't think so | Jeremy Forrest is a creep, even if his pupil doesn't think so |
| (3 months later) | |
| Nobody wants to rush to conclusions in a complex case like this, even one whose conclusions have been reached. Nevertheless, it's not exactly hasty to say that Jeremy Forrest is clearly a creep, of derelict morality: it's pretty open and shut that if you won't undertake as a first principle not to have a sexual relationship with them, then you can't be left in charge of teenagers. | Nobody wants to rush to conclusions in a complex case like this, even one whose conclusions have been reached. Nevertheless, it's not exactly hasty to say that Jeremy Forrest is clearly a creep, of derelict morality: it's pretty open and shut that if you won't undertake as a first principle not to have a sexual relationship with them, then you can't be left in charge of teenagers. |
| "This is not Romeo and Juliet," the prosecuting QC stated, as the teacher mouthed "I love you" across the courtroom to the girl, who is now 16. She clearly does think that's what this is about – star-crossed lovers, beset on every side by a hostile environment that only serves to intensify their commitment to one another. The tragedy is, she'll probably wait for him, and waste even more of her youth on this guy who is, as we have established, a creep. Throughout the case, she has been his stoutest defender, insisting that he didn't want to run away, that he only went with her to stop her from self-harming, and that she was going to run anyway. | "This is not Romeo and Juliet," the prosecuting QC stated, as the teacher mouthed "I love you" across the courtroom to the girl, who is now 16. She clearly does think that's what this is about – star-crossed lovers, beset on every side by a hostile environment that only serves to intensify their commitment to one another. The tragedy is, she'll probably wait for him, and waste even more of her youth on this guy who is, as we have established, a creep. Throughout the case, she has been his stoutest defender, insisting that he didn't want to run away, that he only went with her to stop her from self-harming, and that she was going to run anyway. |
| But the laws around consent put the onus on the adult to take responsible decisions, and reject the viewpoint of the child entirely – this is how it has to be. Yet it is inconceivable that a 15-year-old, in this situation, would ever think: "They're right; I am too young to know my own mind." | But the laws around consent put the onus on the adult to take responsible decisions, and reject the viewpoint of the child entirely – this is how it has to be. Yet it is inconceivable that a 15-year-old, in this situation, would ever think: "They're right; I am too young to know my own mind." |
| In the US, they deal with consent differently: in some states under-16s are allowed to have sex, so long as there is no more than a year's difference between them and neither is over 18. This leads to the somewhat absurd situation where a 16- and 17-year-old might be in a relationship that becomes illegal once the 17-year-old has a birthday. Otherwise, though, it does something useful, which is to make a distinction in law between the act of sex and the act of exploitation. However, it's noticeable that they have many more cases of teacher-student sex: a New Jersey newspaper crunched the numbers on cases just in that state (with a population roughly the same as London's) and found 97. This spanned 10 years; nevertheless, for nearly 100 cases to come before prosecutors, many more will probably have occurred and this far outstrips the numbers of cases that London has seen since 2003. | In the US, they deal with consent differently: in some states under-16s are allowed to have sex, so long as there is no more than a year's difference between them and neither is over 18. This leads to the somewhat absurd situation where a 16- and 17-year-old might be in a relationship that becomes illegal once the 17-year-old has a birthday. Otherwise, though, it does something useful, which is to make a distinction in law between the act of sex and the act of exploitation. However, it's noticeable that they have many more cases of teacher-student sex: a New Jersey newspaper crunched the numbers on cases just in that state (with a population roughly the same as London's) and found 97. This spanned 10 years; nevertheless, for nearly 100 cases to come before prosecutors, many more will probably have occurred and this far outstrips the numbers of cases that London has seen since 2003. |
| New Jersey law on consent, incidentally, is that a person aged 13 or older can generally consent to have sex with anyone who is no more than four years older. Nobody under the age of 13 can legally consent to sex, regardless of the age of their partner. | New Jersey law on consent, incidentally, is that a person aged 13 or older can generally consent to have sex with anyone who is no more than four years older. Nobody under the age of 13 can legally consent to sex, regardless of the age of their partner. |
| So it's possible, though of course I can't prove it, that the framing of the law makes a difference to the taboo: the very fact that sex with a 14-year-old is legal in some circumstances in the US disturbs the solemnity with which teachers tacitly swear never to engage in it. | So it's possible, though of course I can't prove it, that the framing of the law makes a difference to the taboo: the very fact that sex with a 14-year-old is legal in some circumstances in the US disturbs the solemnity with which teachers tacitly swear never to engage in it. |
| It's a roundabout way of saying that, as arbitrary and, frankly, patriarchal as it must seem to the girl whom Jeremy Forrest abducted, our law probably has it about right; righter, at least, than the alternatives. | It's a roundabout way of saying that, as arbitrary and, frankly, patriarchal as it must seem to the girl whom Jeremy Forrest abducted, our law probably has it about right; righter, at least, than the alternatives. |
| • The thread on this piece is being premoderated for legal reasons | • The thread on this piece is being premoderated for legal reasons |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |