She is a repeat offender........she holds a position of trust. Don't paint
males as any less psychologically fragile than females. That is sexist to lace
your vitriolic comments with some assertion that males are somehow less fragile
at 17 than are females. It is time that the sexism stop with regards to these
types complaints. She already received far too much leniency in her prior case.
If she were a man, the consequences would have been more severe and nobody would
have cried fowl. Equality goes both ways. Equal treatment under the law.
So how much is she going to get? A loss of her license? A slap on the wrist?
Heck, maybe 6 month of probation!But what would a male get? 15 years
in the slammer? 30?I just wish we could have some consistency.
BYU and Jazz FanTo much information...
@DXGypsyI agreed with your entire comment up until the last
sentence. Women the weaker sex? I guess but isn't that relative and
sometimes circumstantial? The power of seduction from a female with a Goddess
like complex to be a temptress is the stronger sex(ual) power in situations like
these (but not necessarily what happened in this article and case).
@shabamDo you seriously believe "every teen is sexually
active"? You really need to take a look around. I can name countless
number of teens, including my own children, who were not sexually active and
abstained from sex until they were married. A lot of those teens are still
married to their one and only partner and have happy, healthy families,
successful careers and seem very well adjusted. Your view is overly cynical.
Kids need to believe that it is okay to wait until marriage to have sex. The
world would be a better place if it were the norm.
@HappyHere is the law. Good try.Marriage of a MinorYou must
be at least 15 years old to be married in Utah. If you are over 18, you do not
need consent to get married. If you are 16 or 17, you need signed consent from a
parent or guardian, which must be given in person to the county clerk before a
marriage license will be issued.If you are 15 years old, you need
consent from a parent or guardian, and:The juvenile court must
approve the marriage, and must conclude that the marriage is voluntary and in
the best interests of the minor.The juvenile court may require premarital
counseling.The juvenile court may impose other conditions, such as
requiring the minor to continue to attend school.If you are under 18 but
you have been married before, you do not need consent a second time.Utah Code §30-1-9
@Bountiful Guy. Utah still has laws that allow children as young as 14 to marry
in Utah.They actually could have changed it a few years ago, but
voted to NOT update the law.So it's really NOT about the
children, especially since in this case, the one who could get pregnant,
probably knows where babies come from.The young man may not, thanks
to Utah's Sex Ed, but that's another argument.
Every Single Person who is a teen is sexually active, if not then go online and
find out, do your own survey. Everyone remembers when you begin puberty those
hormones going crazy.People seem to forget when they were young and
sexually active.It is natural for young teen men to be sexually
promiscuous or active. Sex is not a sin, or a intentional act of crime
like people are misled to believe, those are fundamental outdated thinking that
is only about keeping unwanted teen pregnancies from burdening the tax
payers.there are a lot of issues involved in gender and age sexual
controversies, Rape is too harsh for relationships that are formed out of
knowing the person vs. forcible rape out of an attack. The Law turns a blind
eye to these factors during their witch hunt or lynch mobbing.Abortion,Divorce is encouraged when it comes to under age sex. Contraceptives
are a personal responsibility, not a govt jurisdiction right. everyone has had
sex with someone older or younger, unless they were born in a bubble and
sheltered and shelved.Children are not able to decide to have an abortion,
draft, war, drive a car?
In connection with what Eliyahu said, here is what the Utah law says about
sodomy and forcible sodomy:76-5-403. Sodomy -- Forcible sodomy. (1) A person commits sodomy when the actor engages in any sexual
act with a person who is 14 years of age or older involving the genitals of one
person and mouth or anus of another person, regardless of the sex of either
participant. (2) A person commits forcible sodomy when the
actor commits sodomy upon another without the other's consent.
(3) Sodomy is a class B misdemeanor. (4) Forcible sodomy is
a first degree felony,I was a little confused myself so I looked it
When commenters are casual about sex between two consenting people, even when
one is a minor, you fail to mention that a potential child may come into the
world as a consequence of the sex. The fact that minors are making decisions
that can lead to birth of an innocent child is part of the reason laws are what
they are. Children should not be making such decisions legally or morally.
Parents are responsible for minor children and the law helps to protect them as
well by forbidding sex among minors. It's even stronger legislation to
keep adults from influencing children into sex that can lead to pregnancy and
legally and morally obligating children to be responsible for the children they
create. This isn't just about sex. It's about children. I hope we
can all see that side of this issue.
Grover said: "No wonder the defense attorney wants to suppress her
confession."Actually he was trying to suppress that before,
because 8 officers showed up to interrogate her at her home. Can you say
overkill or intimidation, why 8 guys, maybe to get a look at her?
I suspect that this teenage boy (the aggressor) bragged to all his friends about
his encounter with the teacher. When his parents found out about it they became
enraged and contacted the authorities. This is when the teen felt guilt and
shame? What would motivate a teen boy to hit on his teacher?
Women absolutely CAN and DO commit rape. Any time a woman has sex with an under
aged person, she is a statutory rapist, just like when a man does it. If this
teacher is found guilty then she is without a doubt a rapist. I am sick to death
of women getting away with sexual assaults and domestic violence against men
just because society is programmed to think that women just can't possibly
be sexual predators. You want equality? Then you need to start treating women
the same as men in criminal prosecutions as you do men. I for one am happy to
finally see one of these female predators get charged with the actual crime of
rape instead of a lesser charge like they usually do. Don't believe? Just
google female teachers who have sex with students, then male teachers who have
sex with students. Read the charges, then read the comment sections and see just
how biased both the legal system and the general public are in favor of women.
Stop giving women a free pass to be sexual predators just because you happen to
think they are the weaker sex.
@ Left Field I understand the legal term and reason for it being
called "Forcible" It just seems to indicate something that is physically
improbable. I agree with the person who wrote that if someone is old enough to
be tried as an adult for murder at the age of 17 they should certainly be able
to give consent to having sex with someone. I agree that what the teacher did
was wrong and yes, now that there are allegations of a second teen, it does seem
"predator like", but keep in mind my first comment: "Once someone
goes down any path that society (and themselves) have deemed immoral, it is hard
to say "no" the next time the opportunity presents itself." I think
we all know that once we have started something whether it be smoking, drinking
or having sex, it is hard to quit. Not impossible, but most of the time, very
To those questioning the term "forcible sodomy" in this story, it is
legally considered "forcible" because one participant in the act is
considered not to have reached the age wherein he is legally be able to give
consent to the act. Absent consent, the act, even if voluntary, is
"forcible." It's structured as such to protect the underaged
victims who can be convinced to participate in something a more mature thinking
individual might not do.
@one old man. The only part of the comment I would have changed is what I said
about sodomy. This type of behavior on either side is not limited to one gender,
as you know. :)
I think teacher student sex between consenting and willing partners ought to be
part of education, it was so for the ancient Greeks, and would go a long way
toward teaching that good love-making is part of life.
@Utah Businessman"I do not understand how a woman can commit
"forcible sodomy"!?"It's all in how the law is
written, essentially what we call a "legal fiction." "Sodomy"
in many state laws includes oral sex, and it's "forcible" because
under the circumstances he does not have the ability to give legal consent. And regardless of the sex of either party, I don't see in this
anything worth spending tens of thousands of dollars of tax money to prosecute
and hundreds of thousands of dollars to incarcerate the teacher. If the
"victim" is old enough that he'd be automatically tried as an adult
if he were to commit a similar offense, he's old enough to give meaningful
consent in this matter.
So the new revelation that this teacher had sex with two different boys in the
same time period shouldn't be taken into account. What was she doing,
playing the field? One person and she might have had some extenuating something
to explain her behavior. Two incidences spells predator in my mind. No wonder
the defense attorney wants to suppress her confession.
I have been married for quite and while and have fathered six children but I
must confess that I do not understand how a woman can commit "forcible
How come this 17 year old boy is a victim and his name withheld, but on another
article a 17 year old girl is on trial as an adult for murder? I guess the whole
age thing is adjustable for the prosecution.Rape? Hardly, dumb, yep.
Bdamajd, would you have written the same comment if the teacher had been a man?
@ Little Stream I agree with the sentiment of what you wrote. But
please read the article again and try to see it from this teacher's point
of view. Yes she was the responsible adult and should have known better but read
what led up to this. In this society, the pendulum sometimes swings too far in
either direction depending on the outrage of the times. This 17 year old knew
exactly what he was doing and continued in his persistent flirtations. (His own
words) Again, I know she was wrong and foolish, but a rapist? I think not.
Too many times the person in a "special position of trust" (teachers,
police, parents, priests) have taken advantage of children. The problem with
the law is that it keeps trying to paint different shades of gray to the same
crime. Keep looking for the different shades of gray and soon there will be no
law. Children victims already get so little protection under the law it is
It sounds clear from this article that the teenage boy was the aggressor with
his "persistent flirtations" toward the teacher. The teacher is still
the adult and has the responsibility to resist and even report his flirtations.
The trouble is that she probably enjoyed the attention and was attracted to this
boy (and another it sounds like). Once someone goes down any path that society
(and themselves) have deemed immoral, it is hard to say "no" the next
time the opportunity presents itself. The charges sound to me like complete
overkill. Rape? Really? Forcible Sodomy? By a woman? Really? Pretty tough to
force someone to perform sodomy if you are not the man. I know these charges are
in place to protect the innocent, and because she was a teacher she was in a
position of special trust, but what about this 17 year old who was apparently
raging with hormones? Yes, our students need protection but it seems clear in
this case that this teacher was not a predator but a foolish person who allowed
her lack of self discipline to ruin her career and damage these boys and
For what it's worth, most of my female teachers through school looked more
like Sgt. Schultz.
Sex is natural between people of all ages and genders, those who are in puberty
who have the ability to have a child have the responsibility to use
contraceptives, and those who have the ability to terminate a child's life,
have that right to exercise the right to whom they choose to have sex with as
well. this is not a gender thing, although the law has played both sides of the
coin when it chooses, it only proves its biased. Statutory Rape Laws apply
here. in this case they show if the person cannot exercise the right to have
sex with whom they choose then they do not have the right to terminate a
child's life or even pro create... which is every persons god given right.
not to be taken by the Law in any way shape or form, because they decide a
person is too young to choose for themselves. where is the maturity test?
where is the freedom of choice test? where is the right to pro create test? if
they are old enough to get married then they are old enough to choose whom they
want to have sex with.
This case is being prosecuted by one of the best special victims prosecutors in