Charges of sex with 2nd teen filed against former Davis High teacher

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • mufasta American Fork, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 2:15 p.m.

    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.

  • The Educator South Jordan , UT
    Aug. 6, 2014 11:50 a.m.

    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.

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    Aug. 6, 2014 9:05 a.m.

    BYU and Jazz Fan

    To much information...

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 6, 2014 1:09 a.m.


    I 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).

  • 1Observer Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 8:50 p.m.


    Do 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.

  • Bountiful Guy Bountiful, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 12:57 p.m.

    Here is the law. Good try.
    Marriage of a Minor
    You 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

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 12:03 p.m.

    @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.

  • shabam Ogden, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 11:59 a.m.

    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?

  • BYU and Jazz Fan Provo, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 11:21 a.m.

    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 up.

  • Bountiful Guy Bountiful, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 11:08 a.m.

    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.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 10:02 a.m.

    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?

  • LOU Montana Pueblo, CO
    Aug. 5, 2014 10:00 a.m.

    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?

  • DXGypsy Bridgeton, NJ
    Aug. 5, 2014 9:50 a.m.

    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.

  • Bdamajd Centerville, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 9:38 a.m.

    @ 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 difficult.

  • Left Field Cocoa Beach, FL
    Aug. 5, 2014 9:23 a.m.

    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.

  • Bdamajd Centerville, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 9:17 a.m.

    @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. :)

  • mikerol seattle, WA
    Aug. 5, 2014 9:13 a.m.

    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.

  • Eliyahu Pleasant Grove, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 9:12 a.m.

    @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.

  • Grover Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 8:59 a.m.

    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.

  • Utah Businessman Sandy, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 8:51 a.m.

    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 sodomy"!?

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 8:28 a.m.

    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.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 8:18 a.m.

    Bdamajd, would you have written the same comment if the teacher had been a man?

  • Bdamajd Centerville, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 8:11 a.m.

    @ 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.

  • LittleStream Carson City, NV
    Aug. 5, 2014 7:51 a.m.

    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 shameful!

  • Bdamajd Centerville, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 7:48 a.m.

    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 herself.

  • SharpHooks Lake Sammamish, WA
    Aug. 5, 2014 7:28 a.m.

    For what it's worth, most of my female teachers through school looked more like Sgt. Schultz.

  • shabam Ogden, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 6:03 a.m.

    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.

  • John Charity Spring Back Home in Davis County, UT
    Aug. 4, 2014 7:17 p.m.

    This case is being prosecuted by one of the best special victims prosecutors in the State.