FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Jeremy Forest

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Jeremy Forest who had an affair with a 15 year old school girl was jailed for 5 and a half years, did he realy deserve that long a prison sentence?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Forest who had an affair with a 15 year old school girl was jailed for 5 and a half years, did he realy deserve that long a prison sentence?"
nope she was as guilty as him

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh

Wrong! They've made an example of him and whilst I understand the wrong he did, that's just made a mockery of our justice system all over again.

His life is over because he fell in love.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

He should of got longer

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

When all the kiddy fiddling celebraties are going to get away with a slapped wrist, it is a bit of a joke.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"He should of got longer"

Absolutely!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

5 years out in 3 divorced and they will get married

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Jeremy Forest who had an affair with a 15 year old school girl was jailed for 5 and a half years, did he realy deserve that long a prison sentence? nope she was as guilty as him"

Yes and wasnt the girls mum a bit melodramatic about it all? obviously he was in the wrong but people are comparing stuart halls lenient sentence, seeing as one of the girls was only nine, at the time.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *allDarkFoxForYouMan
over a year ago

Winchester/London

At face value re the facts it does sound harsh.

It is one of those scenarios whereby the sentence is longer because he was a teacher in a position of trust one suspects ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hyllyphyllyMan
over a year ago

Bradford

Yeap, because it's still "statutory rape".

Anyone goes near my 15 year old daughter has me to deal with.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *els_BellsWoman
over a year ago

with the moon n stars somewhere in gtr manc


"Jeremy Forest who had an affair with a 15 year old school girl was jailed for 5 and a half years, did he realy deserve that long a prison sentence? nope she was as guilty as him"

This, but he did have a position of trust and he was warned about her and him needing to take a step back.

5 years and probably will never be allowed to teach again (haven't read the sentencing yet) is harsh, especially as one teacher who had downloaded images of child abuse was allowed to carry on teaching

Then you have Stuart Hall getting a few months for abusing a number of girls and abusing his position of trust.

I do not understand the judicial system sometimes and how the sentencing tarrif works. I'm aware it is up to the judge, but there needs to be some consistency when sentencing.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Hang on a mo folks she was under legal age so therefore he is a pedophile as the law stands.

If the girl was your daughter would yoh think its ok because he loved her.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

5 years remind me what did Stuart Hall get for abusing young girls ah I remember now 1 month for every child

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think the sentence is way to harsh.. to be fair I think he has already suffered enough...

far worse things going on.. and it was stupid of him but not really the crime of the century.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Hang on a mo folks she was under legal age so therefore he is a pedophile as the law stands.

If the girl was your daughter would yoh think its ok because he loved her.

"

No if it was my daughter i wouldnt be happy about it, i may be a bit annoyed with her too, but i remember what i was like at that age

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *issHottieBottieWoman
over a year ago

Kent

Seeing as she was only a few months away from being 16 and it was consensual branding him a peado is a bit harsh IMHO BUT he should never of started anything with an underage pupil and from what I understand some of the sentence was because he was guilty of 'abduction' as they disappeared to France together.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"............I do not understand the judicial system sometimes and how the sentencing tarrif works. I'm aware it is up to the judge, but there needs to be some consistency when sentencing."

It's all but impossible to judge a sentence (and I know I've done it on here) unless you've sat through the entire proceedings and had access to the papers.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *issHottieBottieWoman
over a year ago

Kent


"Hang on a mo folks she was under legal age so therefore he is a pedophile as the law stands.

If the girl was your daughter would yoh think its ok because he loved her.

I fucked older blokes when I was underage and whilst its nothing to be proud of, it was consensual underage sex. They've made an example of him which is fair enough, he should have known better but at least be consistent with sentencing. The media has a lot to answer for."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's not that this 'person' has got a harsh sentence - he could have got seven years.

It's that Hall got an unduly lenient one (which was referred same day to the Attorney General for review btw).

I don't give a toss if they say they were 'in love' - she was 14 and he was 28 when they started having sex. She was a child and he was an adult in a) a position of responsibility over her and b) in a position of 'in loco parentis'.

On both counts he was as guilty as f**k and should have got the full sentence as far as I am concerned.

And, just to clarify, underage sex is NOT consensual in the country (or any other as far as I know - even Spain where the age of consent is 13).

ted.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *els_BellsWoman
over a year ago

with the moon n stars somewhere in gtr manc


" They've made an example of him which is fair enough, he should have known better but at least be consistent with sentencing. The media has a lot to answer for."
Again, This! I find it interesting that she was named at the time, and it was on every newspaper and news station, but when it comes to the trial she is protected. I thinks she was as much to blame. As I said, he abused his position of trust but I don't think she is as innocent as what her Mum and the press have made her out to be.

I've got Don't Stand So Close by The Police going round my head now

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

i didnt have sex until i was 17, maybe they should lower the age of consent as i think it is 15 in france.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *els_BellsWoman
over a year ago

with the moon n stars somewhere in gtr manc


"............I do not understand the judicial system sometimes and how the sentencing tarrif works. I'm aware it is up to the judge, but there needs to be some consistency when sentencing.

It's all but impossible to judge a sentence (and I know I've done it on here) unless you've sat through the entire proceedings and had access to the papers."

I am aware of that, but it seems like it is all down to how one person interprets something, i.e the Judge.

It was even said that the Justice Secretary was to look into the leniency Stuart Hall got when it came to sentencing.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *allDarkFoxForYouMan
over a year ago

Winchester/London

Obviously the sentencing aspect of any case can be complex within the legal guidelines.

Not withstanding this I suspect that the average opinion is going to be that he certainly committed a crime and deserved a sentence but longer than Mr Hall I think not.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

This isn't about apportioning blame between the two of them ... he was a teacher in a position of trust that he abused FFS keep it in your pants. For anybody thinking it was harsh; what if she was 14, 13 or younger? At what point does it become alright? In my mind the answer is never ... if you can't resist then don't become a teacher.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Forest who had an affair with a 15 year old school girl was jailed for 5 and a half years, did he realy deserve that long a prison sentence?"

To be fair he did a little more than have an affair with a 15 year old, he was a teacher so should have respected the position he was in not take advantage of a child, then he took her out the country which without her parents concent is illegal

so not only did he have sex with a underage girl, he abused his position as a teacher and took a child out the country

most kids will get a crush on their teacher but as the adult he should have known better, so no I don't think 5 and a half years is to harsh personally

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"i didnt have sex until i was 17, maybe they should lower the age of consent as i think it is 15 in france."

and in some coutries girl are married off as young as 8 don't mean we have to

I don't think we should lower the age, people should just respect what it is, 30 is old enough to understand your breaking the law

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *issHottieBottieWoman
over a year ago

Kent


"This isn't about apportioning blame between the two of them ... he was a teacher in a position of trust that he abused FFS keep it in your pants. For anybody thinking it was harsh; what if she was 14, 13 or younger? At what point does it become alright? In my mind the answer is never ... if you can't resist then don't become a teacher. "

I don't think the sentence was harsh. Totally agree that he abused his position of trust. And yes took her out of the country without her parents permission.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

abduction [æb'd?k??n]

n

1. the act of taking someone away by force or cunning; kidnapping, correct me if I'm wrong but I never seen any of the above as they walked through the station hand in hand

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"

And, just to clarify, underage sex is NOT consensual in the country (or any other as far as I know - even Spain where the age of consent is 13).

ted."

Just to clarify... I wasn't talking about the legal implications, I was talking about personal consent. I was willing, he was willing... there wasn't anything untoward about it. Teenagers having sex has been going on before me and it will go on forever. I just didn't fuck a teacher and I didn't get caught. It's happening all over the world regardless of what the law says. I don't believe that he deserves to be labelled in such a way for a mistake, albeit a pretty whopping error of judgement, it was not against her will.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *issHottieBottieWoman
over a year ago

Kent


"abduction [æb'd?k??n]

n

1. the act of taking someone away by force or cunning; kidnapping, correct me if I'm wrong but I never seen any of the above as they walked through the station hand in hand

"

No but if they are accusing him of grooming her then I suppose it could apply x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Hang on a mo folks she was under legal age so therefore he is a pedophile as the law stands.

If the girl was your daughter would yoh think its ok because he loved her.

I fucked older blokes when I was underage and whilst its nothing to be proud of, it was consensual underage sex. They've made an example of him which is fair enough, he should have known better but at least be consistent with sentencing. The media has a lot to answer for."

in the eyes of the law there's no such thing as consensual underage sex its called statutory rape

you cant give consent by law to something your not legally allowed to do

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

i heard a woman who was married to a school teacher saying that a pupil kept sending him sexualy explicit text messages and that school girls arent always as innocent as you think they are, well i know some werent even when i was at school.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *issHottieBottieWoman
over a year ago

Kent


"abduction [æb'd?k??n]

n

1. the act of taking someone away by force or cunning; kidnapping, correct me if I'm wrong but I never seen any of the above as they walked through the station hand in hand

"

And I think it was child abduction which is different x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *issHottieBottieWoman
over a year ago

Kent


"i heard a woman who was married to a school teacher saying that a pupil kept sending him sexualy explicit text messages and that school girls arent always as innocent as you think they are, well i know some werent even when i was at school. "

No your right there!!! But it's the adults responsibility to not persue it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *issHottieBottieWoman
over a year ago

Kent


"Hang on a mo folks she was under legal age so therefore he is a pedophile as the law stands.

If the girl was your daughter would yoh think its ok because he loved her.

I fucked older blokes when I was underage and whilst its nothing to be proud of, it was consensual underage sex. They've made an example of him which is fair enough, he should have known better but at least be consistent with sentencing. The media has a lot to answer for.

in the eyes of the law there's no such thing as consensual underage sex its called statutory rape

you cant give consent by law to something your not legally allowed to do"

What if both parties are underage? How does that work? X

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"i heard a woman who was married to a school teacher saying that a pupil kept sending him sexualy explicit text messages and that school girls arent always as innocent as you think they are, well i know some werent even when i was at school.

No your right there!!! But it's the adults responsibility to not persue it. "

and that's what it boils down to, I have teenage kids and couple of their mates have had a crush on me, you just laugh it off, one got a bit OTT and I had to go see his mum to ask her to have a word, never at any point did I think about jumping his bones ffs

we're the adults we're the ones who are supposed to take care of and look after kids not shag them

just my opinion

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

only reason he got 51/2 years is because he was a teacher, and yes teachers are only human, but they have to be of strong Character to fend of advances or their Pupils, I don't think he groomed her or abducted her. Simple fact is he was in a position of Trust

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"What if both parties are underage? How does that work? X"

no idea

i'm off to google lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"i heard a woman who was married to a school teacher saying that a pupil kept sending him sexualy explicit text messages and that school girls arent always as innocent as you think they are, well i know some werent even when i was at school. "

'School Girl' being the main point in this. She was a child he was an adult. He has to accept full responsibility for this

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"............I do not understand the judicial system sometimes and how the sentencing tarrif works. I'm aware it is up to the judge, but there needs to be some consistency when sentencing.

It's all but impossible to judge a sentence (and I know I've done it on here) unless you've sat through the entire proceedings and had access to the papers.

I am aware of that, but it seems like it is all down to how one person interprets something, i.e the Judge.

It was even said that the Justice Secretary was to look into the leniency Stuart Hall got when it came to sentencing. "

Given that 'somebody' has to decide on the tariff, would you prefer it to be someone who is legally qualified and who has listened to all the evidence, seen all the participants etc or a politician (Chris Grayling - a guy who wouldn't allow gay couples in a B&B) with a degree in History and who can only base decisions on the trial notes and his political masters' wishes?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

And, just to clarify, underage sex is NOT consensual in the country (or any other as far as I know - even Spain where the age of consent is 13).

ted.

Just to clarify... I wasn't talking about the legal implications, I was talking about personal consent. I was willing, he was willing... there wasn't anything untoward about it. Teenagers having sex has been going on before me and it will go on forever. I just didn't fuck a teacher and I didn't get caught. It's happening all over the world regardless of what the law says. I don't believe that he deserves to be labelled in such a way for a mistake, albeit a pretty whopping error of judgement, it was not against her will. "

I understand what you were getting at - and I wasn't getting at you either. The way the law stands in THIS country is that someone under the age of 16 CANNOT give consent to sex with someone over 16 as the law say that's the point you become an adult as far as sex is concerned. A lot of people have been saying 'she's as guilty as he is' today. No she is not. As she was of an age where should couldn't consent, she cannot be guilty of anything. It's the way the law stands. Not saying it's quite right, and it may well need looking at urgently, but it's the way it is. He knew that and yet - at the age of 29 - he went ahead and had sex with her, then abducted her!!! Either the guy has got a screw loose or he is so infatuated with her, he has become blind to reality.

The thing that REALLY annoys me about this whole 'thing' has nothing to do with this though - it's that virtually the whole teaching staff at that school KNEW what was going on, yet no one (it would seem...) dropped him in it. I am not surprised at this - I used to be a school governor for many years and this kind of 'protectionism at any cost' by the teaching profession is one of the reasons I got pissed off with it and jacked it in.

The sad part is this is going on all over the country and little is being done to expose it, so the few true paedophiles who are doing it (I don't think this guy fits the profile of a paedo btw) can carry on as it's almost condoned by the teaching profession! Almost as if, when you put hormonal teenage girls in a class with an good-looking 20-something male teacher, it's 'going to happen anyway'. That attitude isn't acceptable on any level... or at any age of consent...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Forest who had an affair with a 15 year old school girl was jailed for 5 and a half years, did he realy deserve that long a prison sentence?"

He's already admitted to other counts of sexual relationships with underage girls. 5 I think, so he will get a bigger sentence. Plus he was a teacher so should get more years in my opinion

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *els_BellsWoman
over a year ago

with the moon n stars somewhere in gtr manc


"............I do not understand the judicial system sometimes and how the sentencing tarrif works. I'm aware it is up to the judge, but there needs to be some consistency when sentencing.

It's all but impossible to judge a sentence (and I know I've done it on here) unless you've sat through the entire proceedings and had access to the papers.

I am aware of that, but it seems like it is all down to how one person interprets something, i.e the Judge.

It was even said that the Justice Secretary was to look into the leniency Stuart Hall got when it came to sentencing.

Given that 'somebody' has to decide on the tariff, would you prefer it to be someone who is legally qualified and who has listened to all the evidence, seen all the participants etc or a politician (Chris Grayling - a guy who wouldn't allow gay couples in a B&B) with a degree in History and who can only base decisions on the trial notes and his political masters' wishes?"

Obviously the person to be legally qualified, and as far as I am aware all judges have to be legally qualified. What I'm saying is there is no consistency.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"

And, just to clarify, underage sex is NOT consensual in the country (or any other as far as I know - even Spain where the age of consent is 13).

ted.

Just to clarify... I wasn't talking about the legal implications, I was talking about personal consent. I was willing, he was willing... there wasn't anything untoward about it. Teenagers having sex has been going on before me and it will go on forever. I just didn't fuck a teacher and I didn't get caught. It's happening all over the world regardless of what the law says. I don't believe that he deserves to be labelled in such a way for a mistake, albeit a pretty whopping error of judgement, it was not against her will.

I understand what you were getting at - and I wasn't getting at you either. The way the law stands in THIS country is that someone under the age of 16 CANNOT give consent to sex with someone over 16 as the law say that's the point you become an adult as far as sex is concerned. A lot of people have been saying 'she's as guilty as he is' today. No she is not. As she was of an age where should couldn't consent, she cannot be guilty of anything. It's the way the law stands. Not saying it's quite right, and it may well need looking at urgently, but it's the way it is. He knew that and yet - at the age of 29 - he went ahead and had sex with her, then abducted her!!! Either the guy has got a screw loose or he is so infatuated with her, he has become blind to reality.

The thing that REALLY annoys me about this whole 'thing' has nothing to do with this though - it's that virtually the whole teaching staff at that school KNEW what was going on, yet no one (it would seem...) dropped him in it. I am not surprised at this - I used to be a school governor for many years and this kind of 'protectionism at any cost' by the teaching profession is one of the reasons I got pissed off with it and jacked it in.

The sad part is this is going on all over the country and little is being done to expose it, so the few true paedophiles who are doing it (I don't think this guy fits the profile of a paedo btw) can carry on as it's almost condoned by the teaching profession! Almost as if, when you put hormonal teenage girls in a class with an good-looking 20-something male teacher, it's 'going to happen anyway'. That attitude isn't acceptable on any level... or at any age of consent..."

Can't argue with any of that... apart from thinking the whole legal system needs a damn good shake up. Having been in it for the last 20 years (fuck I'm old!) the stuff that's gone on beggars belief.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"..........Given that 'somebody' has to decide on the tariff, would you prefer it to be someone who is legally qualified and who has listened to all the evidence, seen all the participants etc or a politician (Chris Grayling - a guy who wouldn't allow gay couples in a B&B) with a degree in History and who can only base decisions on the trial notes and his political masters' wishes?

Obviously the person to be legally qualified, and as far as I am aware all judges have to be legally qualified. What I'm saying is there is no consistency."

That's 'cos every case is different, no matter how the versions we get via the media try to simplify matters for us.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ezebelWoman
over a year ago

North of The Wall - youll need your vest

Just a reminder that discussion about under-18 is a big no-no on the site and Ive already removed posts.

Im leaving this thread for now because its a news item BUT please keep it specific to the news item and dont go off on a tangent otherwise the whole thread will go.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"

Can't argue with any of that... apart from thinking the whole legal system needs a damn good shake up. Having been in it for the last 20 years (fuck I'm old!) the stuff that's gone on beggars belief. "

Maybe we should go back to burning at the stake or ducking stools.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"When all the kiddy fiddling celebraties are going to get away with a slapped wrist, it is a bit of a joke."

I said this earlier to a friend.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *els_BellsWoman
over a year ago

with the moon n stars somewhere in gtr manc


" I don't think he groomed her or abducted her. Simple fact is he was in a position of Trust "

This is sort of my point of view.

Nobody but the two of them knows what happened.

She was allegedly 'in tears' when he was sentenced and said she 'loved him'. The pictures are clear of them walking through the airport with her arms round him. Abduction to me means her being dragged kicking and screaming, not holding hands with their abductor?

If her parents were aware like they said they were, why were they not watching her like a hawk when she was off staying the night with him in hotels?

I'm not trying to blaming the parents, but if I had found out my teenage daughter had a crush on a teacher, and things seemed to be progressing I would be picking her up and taking her to and from school or arranging for someone to do it until things had died down.

I was 16 and was going out with a man of 28. When my Mum and Dad found out, they ended up taking me to and from work and told me in no uncertain terms I was not allowed near this man. They even got my manager to make sure I was on different shifts to him so I couldn't see him. Yes, I was over the age of consent but there was still a massive age gap and my parents did all they could to make sure I never saw him.

Think I only saw him once after then.

So parental authority can and does work.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

pretty much agree with Ted..

the issue is the law is there to protect those it deems to be in a position who can not give consent..

for every 100 'mature 15 yr olds' who are sexually active and know what they are doing there will be a smaller amount of same age who are not 'mature', not as street wise etc..

thats why the law is as it is..

he knew beyond any level of common sense that what he was doing was wrong..

bit like walking past a Bank with an open door and a pile of cash sat there..

you take it, thats theft..

end of..

yes there are failings and 'inconsistencies' within the system..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"

Can't argue with any of that... apart from thinking the whole legal system needs a damn good shake up. Having been in it for the last 20 years (fuck I'm old!) the stuff that's gone on beggars belief.

Maybe we should go back to burning at the stake or ducking stools."

Not for me thanks... I'd just like to see a fair trial with a sentence that fits the crime rather than trial by media and sentences that are ridiculous in either direction. It works both ways.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Now as I'm aware I may be wrong but he has admitted to 5 counts of under age sex with this girl and every time he did it was a crime just because it's with the same person doesn't mean it's only one crime, so that's 5 counts of under age sex and one of abducting a child and he gets 66 months, that's 11 months per crime, if I had abducted someone and only got 11 month I'd be happy with that

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The law is a lot more complicated in these situations and as a teacher he should have known better, having read up about the law regarding teacher, student relationships it's not as simple as the age of consent. Even if she was 16 he would have still been in trouble with the law!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I understand why his sentence seems OTT compared to the more lenient punishments given too other sex offenders....

But I believe those sex offenders have are the ones who’ve got off lightly and his sentence is appropriate for someone who has abused his position of trust and tarnished the innocence of a child who now risks carrying a lifelong stigma in the minds judgmental people for the willing part she played in a situation that has ended up with a man being jailed for over 5 years,,,

We often see passionate campaigning for harsher sentencing for criminals who commit violent crime against the police….

Surely the same morality should apply to a teacher who has abused his position of trust by manipulating and abusing an underage girl in his care.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I understand why his sentence seems OTT compared to the more lenient punishments given too other sex offenders....

But I believe those sex offenders have are the ones who’ve got off lightly and his sentence is appropriate for someone who has abused his position of trust and tarnished the innocence of a child who now risks carrying a lifelong stigma in the minds judgmental people for the willing part she played in a situation that has ended up with a man being jailed for over 5 years,,,

We often see passionate campaigning for harsher sentencing for criminals who commit violent crime against the police….

Surely the same morality should apply to a teacher who has abused his position of trust by manipulating and abusing an underage girl in his care.

"

You sum it up very eloquently as always

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *els_BellsWoman
over a year ago

with the moon n stars somewhere in gtr manc


"I understand why his sentence seems OTT compared to the more lenient punishments given too other sex offenders....

But I believe those sex offenders have are the ones who’ve got off lightly and his sentence is appropriate for someone who has abused his position of trust and tarnished the innocence of a child who now risks carrying a lifelong stigma in the minds judgmental people for the willing part she played in a situation that has ended up with a man being jailed for over 5 years,,,

We often see passionate campaigning for harsher sentencing for criminals who commit violent crime against the police….

Surely the same morality should apply to a teacher who has abused his position of trust by manipulating and abusing an underage girl in his care.

"

Yes, I understand and guess you are right.

I just don't think everything is as black and white as what has been made out. Guess I'm just cynical

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex


"I understand why his sentence seems OTT compared to the more lenient punishments given too other sex offenders....

But I believe those sex offenders have are the ones who’ve got off lightly and his sentence is appropriate for someone who has abused his position of trust and tarnished the innocence of a child who now risks carrying a lifelong stigma in the minds judgmental people for the willing part she played in a situation that has ended up with a man being jailed for over 5 years,,,

We often see passionate campaigning for harsher sentencing for criminals who commit violent crime against the police….

Surely the same morality should apply to a teacher who has abused his position of trust by manipulating and abusing an underage girl in his care.

"

Concise, to the point and reasonable.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Yeap, because it's still "statutory rape".

Anyone goes near my 15 year old daughter has me to deal with."

Statutory rape is an American crime not a British one.

The key elements

are

1) position of trust which is a crime not a "shouldn't have" it's a "can't have"

2) abduction of a minor ( she didn't and couldn't give consent to go with him As she's not 18)

3) the difference in age is a key point in cases of underage sex and in this case he's outside the age of 24 (I believe)

The first two items are why the sentence was as long the third element ads to the crime. If 1 & 2 hadn't existed it would be unlikely he'd have received more than a token punishment.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lentyoffun40Couple
over a year ago

Lancashire

Anyone who thinks that the sentence is too long is deluded

The man was in a position of trust ,he groomed a vulnerable 15 year old girl

, took her away to another country and had sex with an underage girl

5 1/2 years is fine

He will be out in 2 and on the sex offenders register for life and be barred from working with children and vulnerable people for ever

That's perfect !!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh

We almost made a whole thread an actual adult discussion with differing opinions and no insults.

Almost.

I'm not deluded. I have an opinion that's different to yours. Doesn't make it wrong or delusional.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *pecifically1Woman
over a year ago

Hull

There apparently is a separate law stating that as well as her being underage , him being a teacher is a separate offence. He would have been charged until she was 18 not 16 as the age of consent.

Underage is underage unfortunately, if she had meant that much to him he would have waited - he was after all the responsible adult. Regardless of what she did, he should have refused. That is nothing to do with being in love, that's about breaking the law. not to mention the code of conduct HE chose to abide by when he became a teacher.

He must have known what would happen..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I've thought long and hard about this - yes what he did was wrong, but does it count as abduction. If you follow the letter of the word, abduction means to take one from their parent(s) so yes he abducted the girl. However I can't help thinking that he's taken a big sentence for a relationship where it took two to tango, but she was a child when this occurred.

It has been said in evidence in court that he ran away with her to stop her committing suicide.

I do think that his sentence in comparison to Stuart Hall's is quite harsh, but if you think about the facts and not the romantic elements (there are reports of her saying she was sorry and him declaring love for her when the verdict was passed) then he is at fault for her being taken out of the country.

Working with teenagers I am careful to ensure that child protection is always maintained and that my pupils are not at risk. Safeguarding and child protection need to be looked at in this case I think.

Ruby

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There apparently is a separate law stating that as well as her being underage , him being a teacher is a separate offence. He would have been charged until she was 18 not 16 as the age of consent.

"

Yes there is a duty of care until 18, it is against code of practice to have contact in a social manner with children until they have left your care for 2 years. This includes on Facebook too.

It may not be nationwide but it is how it works in the academy that I do a lot of work alongside.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lentyoffun40Couple
over a year ago

Lancashire


"We almost made a whole thread an actual adult discussion with differing opinions and no insults.

Almost.

I'm not deluded. I have an opinion that's different to yours. Doesn't make it wrong or delusional. "

Until it happens to someone you are close to?

Maybe then you will understand that 5 years is probably too short !

Lets hope not

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I really struggle with some of the comments on here on this one. He was a TEACHER, she was FOURTEEN, how people can argue that he has been harshly treated is beyond me.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"We almost made a whole thread an actual adult discussion with differing opinions and no insults.

Almost.

I'm not deluded. I have an opinion that's different to yours. Doesn't make it wrong or delusional.

Until it happens to someone you are close to?

Maybe then you will understand that 5 years is probably too short !

Lets hope not "

If you read my previous comments I'm pretty sure that I haven't condoned what he's done. I'm also pretty sure that the only people who 'understand' what went on are the people involved. It's not my place to judge, I can only express my personal opinion on what we are allowed to know from the media coverage. Maybe you would like to see a harsher sentence, I would simply like to see a fair trial and a fitting punishment.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lentyoffun40Couple
over a year ago

Lancashire


"We almost made a whole thread an actual adult discussion with differing opinions and no insults.

Almost.

I'm not deluded. I have an opinion that's different to yours. Doesn't make it wrong or delusional.

Until it happens to someone you are close to?

Maybe then you will understand that 5 years is probably too short !

Lets hope not

If you read my previous comments I'm pretty sure that I haven't condoned what he's done. I'm also pretty sure that the only people who 'understand' what went on are the people involved. It's not my place to judge, I can only express my personal opinion on what we are allowed to know from the media coverage. Maybe you would like to see a harsher sentence, I would simply like to see a fair trial and a fitting punishment. "

So are you saying his trial was unfair?

And his sentence was not fitting?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"We almost made a whole thread an actual adult discussion with differing opinions and no insults.

Almost.

I'm not deluded. I have an opinion that's different to yours. Doesn't make it wrong or delusional.

Until it happens to someone you are close to?

Maybe then you will understand that 5 years is probably too short !

Lets hope not

If you read my previous comments I'm pretty sure that I haven't condoned what he's done. I'm also pretty sure that the only people who 'understand' what went on are the people involved. It's not my place to judge, I can only express my personal opinion on what we are allowed to know from the media coverage. Maybe you would like to see a harsher sentence, I would simply like to see a fair trial and a fitting punishment.

So are you saying his trial was unfair?

And his sentence was not fitting?"

fortunately he was tried by a jury with access to all the facts and who found him guilty. I don't hear his lawyer complaining of an unfair trial.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"

So are you saying his trial was unfair?

And his sentence was not fitting?"

I'm saying that we are all entitled to our opinions.

I wasn't in court so I can't say whether he had a fair trial. I don't know if the jury was made up of people sharing your opinion or whether the jury was made up of people with the ability to hear both sides of a case before making a judgement.

I don't believe he should be labelled a paedophile for the rest of his days. I think he made a mistake, he should have known better in his position but I don't think that makes him a sex offender. I remember only too well what I was like at her age. He didn't force her to have sex with him and he didn't force her to go to France. I'm not saying what they did was right, but THEY did it, together. He should have been the responsible adult but he wasn't. He made a mistake that he will spend the rest of his life suffering for.

I understand that you don't agree and that's perfectly acceptable.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If he had the same judge as Stuart Hall, who was also in a position of trust - though not quite as much as a schoolteacher - then he should have been sentenced to about two weeks in prison!!!

In the media I hear alot of ranting & raving about the British justice system, usually by politicians but time & time again, I just don't see why; it's so damn flawed!!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

So are you saying his trial was unfair?

And his sentence was not fitting?

I'm saying that we are all entitled to our opinions.

I wasn't in court so I can't say whether he had a fair trial. I don't know if the jury was made up of people sharing your opinion or whether the jury was made up of people with the ability to hear both sides of a case before making a judgement.

I don't believe he should be labelled a paedophile for the rest of his days. I think he made a mistake, he should have known better in his position but I don't think that makes him a sex offender. I remember only too well what I was like at her age. He didn't force her to have sex with him and he didn't force her to go to France. I'm not saying what they did was right, but THEY did it, together. He should have been the responsible adult but he wasn't. He made a mistake that he will spend the rest of his life suffering for.

I understand that you don't agree and that's perfectly acceptable. "

Excuse me if it seems I'm butting in, but he is a paedophile. He had sexual contact with a minor, thus making him a paedophile. Now I do agree that she is culpable in this as well as him but she didn't break the law.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lentyoffun40Couple
over a year ago

Lancashire


"

So are you saying his trial was unfair?

And his sentence was not fitting?

I'm saying that we are all entitled to our opinions.

I wasn't in court so I can't say whether he had a fair trial. I don't know if the jury was made up of people sharing your opinion or whether the jury was made up of people with the ability to hear both sides of a case before making a judgement.

I don't believe he should be labelled a paedophile for the rest of his days. I think he made a mistake, he should have known better in his position but I don't think that makes him a sex offender. I remember only too well what I was like at her age. He didn't force her to have sex with him and he didn't force her to go to France. I'm not saying what they did was right, but THEY did it, together. He should have been the responsible adult but he wasn't. He made a mistake that he will spend the rest of his life suffering for.

I understand that you don't agree and that's perfectly acceptable. "

Wow ! Lets leave it at that shall we !

I'm actually lost for words .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 21/06/13 16:39:26]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Forest who had an affair with a 15 year old school girl was jailed for 5 and a half years, did he realy deserve that long a prison sentence?"
he dose not serve the full sentence anyways he be out in 8 months

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Excuse me if it seems I'm butting in, but he is a paedophile. He had sexual contact with a minor, thus making him a paedophile. Now I do agree that she is culpable in this as well as him but she didn't break the law.

Butt in all you like like lovely... that's what forum chatter is all about.

I had sexual contact with an adult when I was a minor. There was nothing sinister about it. He was horny like I was.

I just feel that its a term that's thrown out there and I think there's a fine line. It's not as black and white in reality as it may be on paper is all I'm saying. I'm certainly not condoning what he did. As her teacher he had a responsibility for her welfare and most of us would have made that clear. I just think that he made a whopping big error in judgement and he'll be paying for it forever. It doesn't mean he's praying on kids left right and centre. Does that make any sense? "

Yes it does make sense. And its why I've really had to think about this before posting. I remember when they ran away and I remember thinking that she was culpable in it too. But he, as an adult in a position of authority, should have realised what he was doing was against the law and wrong. She was an underage child who he took to France, admittedly she chose to go with him, but I think its important to remember that she was a minor.

There are laws in this country for a reason, to protect the citizens of the country. Who knows what will happen when he comes out of prison, I wonder if they'll continue their relationship and if it'll work, 19 is a lot older than 16.

I do think, in comparison to Stuart Hall's sentence, that its heavy, but the judge in this case would have considered it carefully, of that I have no doubt. He wasn't the same judge who sentenced Stuart Hall.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ric1000000Man
over a year ago

Bolton Manchester

Mr. Forest committed one of the worst crimes anyone in a position of trust, and "in loco parentis" could possibly commit. No matter how much she may or may not have led him on, teachers have a responsibility to look after the welfare of the minors in their care. He broke this basic rule, and frankly deserves a life sentence. Teachers are not allowed to have a sexual relationship with their pupils, regardless of the age of the person. (and the age of consent is, I believe higher for members of this profession). We should stop making excuses, like he made a mistake etc.. etc... Long term, his actions may well of damaged this young girl for life... NO EXCUSE!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"Wow ! Lets leave it at that shall we !

I'm actually lost for words ."

I can't say I'm surprised but thanks for the chat.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bbandflowCouple
over a year ago

South Devon

Thank goodness a thread about a 'controversial' and socially sensitive case that has been argued coherently and persuasively by those with differing opinions, without the need for extreme reactions.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Thank goodness a thread about a 'controversial' and socially sensitive case that has been argued coherently and persuasively by those with differing opinions, without the need for extreme reactions.

"

seems we can be adult after all! I bet Jez and Ruggers are relieved!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Folks can't help who they fall in love with n young people THINK they can't LIVE without this week's current squeeze. He, however, is meant to be the 'responsible' adult n therefore take charge of the situation. If his feelings for her are as strong he must still exercise sound judgment n should have told her they could not indulge in inappropriate illegal activity n must wait till she was 16 n until then keep their hands OFF one another. Even with age gap 16/31 they would have had to ride enough of a storm. And when she was 16 n at the school he teaches it would still b inappropriate until she became an ex pupil!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

u get less for murder.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Folks can't help who they fall in love with n young people THINK they can't LIVE without this week's current squeeze. He, however, is meant to be the 'responsible' adult n therefore take charge of the situation. If his feelings for her are as strong he must still exercise sound judgment n should have told her they could not indulge in inappropriate illegal activity n must wait till she was 16 n until then keep their hands OFF one another. Even with age gap 16/31 they would have had to ride enough of a storm. And when she was 16 n at the school he teaches it would still b inappropriate until she became an ex pupil! "

From what I know its actually until 2 years after she leaves the school. So they would have had to have waited until she was 18 for him not to have been prosecuted.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"u get less for murder."

Really? I was under the impression you get life with a minimum tariff to serve.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"

Excuse me if it seems I'm butting in, but he is a paedophile. He had sexual contact with a minor, thus making him a paedophile. Now I do agree that she is culpable in this as well as him but she didn't break the law.

Butt in all you like like lovely... that's what forum chatter is all about.

I had sexual contact with an adult when I was a minor. There was nothing sinister about it. He was horny like I was.

I just feel that its a term that's thrown out there and I think there's a fine line. It's not as black and white in reality as it may be on paper is all I'm saying. I'm certainly not condoning what he did. As her teacher he had a responsibility for her welfare and most of us would have made that clear. I just think that he made a whopping big error in judgement and he'll be paying for it forever. It doesn't mean he's praying on kids left right and centre. Does that make any sense?

Yes it does make sense. And its why I've really had to think about this before posting. I remember when they ran away and I remember thinking that she was culpable in it too. But he, as an adult in a position of authority, should have realised what he was doing was against the law and wrong. She was an underage child who he took to France, admittedly she chose to go with him, but I think its important to remember that she was a minor.

There are laws in this country for a reason, to protect the citizens of the country. Who knows what will happen when he comes out of prison, I wonder if they'll continue their relationship and if it'll work, 19 is a lot older than 16.

I do think, in comparison to Stuart Hall's sentence, that its heavy, but the judge in this case would have considered it carefully, of that I have no doubt. He wasn't the same judge who sentenced Stuart Hall."

Much more eloquently put than I but yes... that's about the size of it. I get that she's a minor but in my head I think of a paedophile as someone who has inappropriate thoughts/actions towards lots of little kids with a stash of inappropriate porn on their hard drives. I get that it's not just that scenario obviously but this just seems like misplaced common sense. (And I know that sounds flippant, it's not meant to.)

At 15 I knew EVERYTHING and my parents knew nothing! Of course as an adult I know that's not the case but putting myself in her shoes, to me it's not as cut and dried.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Folks can't help who they fall in love with n young people THINK they can't LIVE without this week's current squeeze. He, however, is meant to be the 'responsible' adult n therefore take charge of the situation. If his feelings for her are as strong he must still exercise sound judgment n should have told her they could not indulge in inappropriate illegal activity n must wait till she was 16 n until then keep their hands OFF one another. Even with age gap 16/31 they would have had to ride enough of a storm. And when she was 16 n at the school he teaches it would still b inappropriate until she became an ex pupil! "

I think this is very similar to what I posted when the story first came out last yr

I would like to fast forward a yr after his release to see if they still feel the same way about each other once the dust furore and novelty has worn off

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"u get less for murder."

thats what annoys me most that people do much worse things and get a lighter sentence. also, i thought a pedophile was someone who had sex with small children, not teenagers.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"u get less for murder."

less than 5 and a half years..

dont think so somehow..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"u get less for murder.

thats what annoys me most that people do much worse things and get a lighter sentence. also, i thought a pedophile was someone who had sex with small children, not teenagers. "

The definition of a paedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children. By the law in this country she is still a child.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Folks can't help who they fall in love with n young people THINK they can't LIVE without this week's current squeeze. He, however, is meant to be the 'responsible' adult n therefore take charge of the situation. If his feelings for her are as strong he must still exercise sound judgment n should have told her they could not indulge in inappropriate illegal activity n must wait till she was 16 n until then keep their hands OFF one another. Even with age gap 16/31 they would have had to ride enough of a storm. And when she was 16 n at the school he teaches it would still b inappropriate until she became an ex pupil!

From what I know its actually until 2 years after she leaves the school. So they would have had to have waited until she was 18 for him not to have been prosecuted."

Ah right! Then I bow to your superior knowledge - not having been a parent it's an area I know nothing about!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lentyoffun40Couple
over a year ago

Lancashire


"u get less for murder.

thats what annoys me most that people do much worse things and get a lighter sentence. also, i thought a pedophile was someone who had sex with small children, not teenagers. "

Really? Tell me your joking?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Excuse me if it seems I'm butting in, but he is a paedophile. He had sexual contact with a minor, thus making him a paedophile. Now I do agree that she is culpable in this as well as him but she didn't break the law.

Butt in all you like like lovely... that's what forum chatter is all about.

I had sexual contact with an adult when I was a minor. There was nothing sinister about it. He was horny like I was.

I just feel that its a term that's thrown out there and I think there's a fine line. It's not as black and white in reality as it may be on paper is all I'm saying. I'm certainly not condoning what he did. As her teacher he had a responsibility for her welfare and most of us would have made that clear. I just think that he made a whopping big error in judgement and he'll be paying for it forever. It doesn't mean he's praying on kids left right and centre. Does that make any sense?

Yes it does make sense. And its why I've really had to think about this before posting. I remember when they ran away and I remember thinking that she was culpable in it too. But he, as an adult in a position of authority, should have realised what he was doing was against the law and wrong. She was an underage child who he took to France, admittedly she chose to go with him, but I think its important to remember that she was a minor.

There are laws in this country for a reason, to protect the citizens of the country. Who knows what will happen when he comes out of prison, I wonder if they'll continue their relationship and if it'll work, 19 is a lot older than 16.

I do think, in comparison to Stuart Hall's sentence, that its heavy, but the judge in this case would have considered it carefully, of that I have no doubt. He wasn't the same judge who sentenced Stuart Hall.

Much more eloquently put than I but yes... that's about the size of it. I get that she's a minor but in my head I think of a paedophile as someone who has inappropriate thoughts/actions towards lots of little kids with a stash of inappropriate porn on their hard drives. I get that it's not just that scenario obviously but this just seems like misplaced common sense. (And I know that sounds flippant, it's not meant to.)

At 15 I knew EVERYTHING and my parents knew nothing! Of course as an adult I know that's not the case but putting myself in her shoes, to me it's not as cut and dried. "

I think because I work with children (up to 16) I find this quite a difficult case to get my head round. I remember a few years ago being utterly appalled when a teenage boy was aroused around me (I dress very conservatively at work) it was something I had to deal with really carefully, and I actually took the child's father to one side and discussed the issue.

A paedophile is someone sexually attracted to children, she was a child when their relationship began.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Folks can't help who they fall in love with n young people THINK they can't LIVE without this week's current squeeze. He, however, is meant to be the 'responsible' adult n therefore take charge of the situation. If his feelings for her are as strong he must still exercise sound judgment n should have told her they could not indulge in inappropriate illegal activity n must wait till she was 16 n until then keep their hands OFF one another. Even with age gap 16/31 they would have had to ride enough of a storm. And when she was 16 n at the school he teaches it would still b inappropriate until she became an ex pupil!

From what I know its actually until 2 years after she leaves the school. So they would have had to have waited until she was 18 for him not to have been prosecuted.

Ah right! Then I bow to your superior knowledge - not having been a parent it's an area I know nothing about! "

I'm not a parent, I work in education.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ezebelWoman
over a year ago

North of The Wall - youll need your vest


"Thank goodness a thread about a 'controversial' and socially sensitive case that has been argued coherently and persuasively by those with differing opinions, without the need for extreme reactions.

seems we can be adult after all! I bet Jez and Ruggers are relieved!"

Yes but Im still having to remove posts from people referring to their own experiences...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I thought that under age sex was illegal - so, considering that it sounded consensual - to me at least - doesn't that mean that she also broke the law?

.....just asking, don't shoot me! Ö

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Forest who had an affair with a 15 year old school girl was jailed for 5 and a half years, did he realy deserve that long a prison sentence?"

Its the law they see sex with a minor who consented more serious than the acts Steward Hall committed with non consenting kids.I don't think 5 1/2 years too long though as he will be out in 3 if he behaves.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"u get less for murder.

thats what annoys me most that people do much worse things and get a lighter sentence. also, i thought a pedophile was someone who had sex with small children, not teenagers. "

so where as you see it would the 'line be', between what is paedophilia and however else you see having sex with a minor..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Folks can't help who they fall in love with n young people THINK they can't LIVE without this week's current squeeze. He, however, is meant to be the 'responsible' adult n therefore take charge of the situation. If his feelings for her are as strong he must still exercise sound judgment n should have told her they could not indulge in inappropriate illegal activity n must wait till she was 16 n until then keep their hands OFF one another. Even with age gap 16/31 they would have had to ride enough of a storm. And when she was 16 n at the school he teaches it would still b inappropriate until she became an ex pupil!

From what I know its actually until 2 years after she leaves the school. So they would have had to have waited until she was 18 for him not to have been prosecuted."

Correct. It was changed in the 2003 Sexual Offences Act. Anyone teaching in any capacity is not allowed to have sex with a pupil/student until they are 18. So if she left school at 16, he would still be prosecuted for having sex with her, but probably not for abduction.

I'm not sure what happens if she had stayed on until she was 18 (6th form). Not sure if the additional two years apply... ???

ted.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I thought that under age sex was illegal - so, considering that it sounded consensual - to me at least - doesn't that mean that she also broke the law?

.....just asking, don't shoot me! Ö"
Under 16 she can't consent, so therefore she cannot have committed a crime.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

See I think it's wrong that he is being branded a paedophile... Because I'm sorry but at 15 I was not a child... To be honest yes as a teacher it was wrong... But I still think he has been harshly dealt with..

as it is he hasn't really got 5 years.. he has got a lifetime of condemnation.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Folks can't help who they fall in love with n young people THINK they can't LIVE without this week's current squeeze. He, however, is meant to be the 'responsible' adult n therefore take charge of the situation. If his feelings for her are as strong he must still exercise sound judgment n should have told her they could not indulge in inappropriate illegal activity n must wait till she was 16 n until then keep their hands OFF one another. Even with age gap 16/31 they would have had to ride enough of a storm. And when she was 16 n at the school he teaches it would still b inappropriate until she became an ex pupil!

From what I know its actually until 2 years after she leaves the school. So they would have had to have waited until she was 18 for him not to have been prosecuted.

Ah right! Then I bow to your superior knowledge - not having been a parent it's an area I know nothing about!

I'm not a parent, I work in education."

Fair enough

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"See I think it's wrong that he is being branded a paedophile... Because I'm sorry but at 15 I was not a child... To be honest yes as a teacher it was wrong... But I still think he has been harshly dealt with..

as it is he hasn't really got 5 years.. he has got a lifetime of condemnation. "

A paedophile specifically targets PRE-pubescent children, and NOT pubescent teenagers. He may not be a paedophile, but he has still had sex with a girl whom the law defines as a child.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"See I think it's wrong that he is being branded a paedophile... Because I'm sorry but at 15 I was not a child... To be honest yes as a teacher it was wrong... But I still think he has been harshly dealt with..

as it is he hasn't really got 5 years.. he has got a lifetime of condemnation. "

he was a TEACHER, she was FOURTEEN when they started a relationship, which part of that is remotely acceptable. Whatever you may think, someone of 15 is a child and entitled to the protection of the law. Sure there are situations where things aren't black and white but in this case I can only see the most horrendous abuse of position against a child and he deserves everything he gets.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"See I think it's wrong that he is being branded a paedophile... Because I'm sorry but at 15 I was not a child... To be honest yes as a teacher it was wrong... But I still think he has been harshly dealt with..

as it is he hasn't really got 5 years.. he has got a lifetime of condemnation.

A paedophile specifically targets PRE-pubescent children, and NOT pubescent teenagers. He may not be a paedophile, but he has still had sex with a girl whom the law defines as a child."

so if he isnt a paedophile then why are the press saying he is that cant be right.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

For a twenty eight year old man to want to have sex with a fourteen year old there must be something wrong with him.

For a teacher to want to have sex with one of his pupils there must be something very wrong with him.

At what age did her start to groom her , twelve or thirteen ?

No blame should be apportioned to this young girl. She was groomed and abused by a person of trust. She may have gone by her own free will but this does not mean he didn't abduct her. She is a child , he is an adult. He took her away from her parents.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"For a twenty eight year old man to want to have sex with a fourteen year old there must be something wrong with him.

For a teacher to want to have sex with one of his pupils there must be something very wrong with him.

At what age did her start to groom her , twelve or thirteen ?

No blame should be apportioned to this young girl. She was groomed and abused by a person of trust. She may have gone by her own free will but this does not mean he didn't abduct her. She is a child , he is an adult. He took her away from her parents. "

Very sadly true but very eloquently put

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heScotandthegirlCouple
over a year ago

London & Edinburgh

Whilst I agree it is harsh to consider a 15 year old a child in this context, the law has to draw a non-discriminatory almost arbitrary line somewhere to decide when the transition between childhood and adulthood occurs. It would be ridiculous to ask the legal system to assess every case individually.

Given this necessary definition, this man had sexual relations with a child or minor and, furthermore, one in his care as a teacher. As an adult, he should know better and (controversial perhaps) as a teacher in both a position of trust but also more likely to become the object of a 'crush' due to the nature of his work, he should know even better.

The debate over his prison sentence is interesting as I feel Stuart Hall was treated way to lightly. However, I would not have Mr Forrest teaching again in all honesty.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I thought that under age sex was illegal - so, considering that it sounded consensual - to me at least - doesn't that mean that she also broke the law?

.....just asking, don't shoot me! Ö Under 16 she can't consent, so therefore she cannot have committed a crime. "

So, under age sex is a crime so two 15 year Old's for example is illegal yet they're both too young to consent! Or does the law suddenly change? So confused, think ill crack open a Rioja!!!

"Ö"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Whilst I agree it is harsh to consider a 15 year old a child in this context, the law has to draw a non-discriminatory almost arbitrary line somewhere to decide when the transition between childhood and adulthood occurs. It would be ridiculous to ask the legal system to assess every case individually.

Given this necessary definition, this man had sexual relations with a child or minor and, furthermore, one in his care as a teacher. As an adult, he should know better and (controversial perhaps) as a teacher in both a position of trust but also more likely to become the object of a 'crush' due to the nature of his work, he should know even better.

The debate over his prison sentence is interesting as I feel Stuart Hall was treated way to lightly. However, I would not have Mr Forrest teaching again in all honesty."

There has to be a line drawn somewhere. At what point do we call a child a child and an adult an adult, well in this country the age of consent is 16, therefore he broke the law even if he wasn't her teacher.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

My thoughts are...

The guy was 30 years old, a Teacher so he had a half a brain..

..he knows the difference between right and wrong.

Let's not BS here...

15?...come on, you KNOW. You just do!

I wouldn't even entertain it.

I wouldn't even entertain 18.

Ben

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bbandflowCouple
over a year ago

South Devon


"For a twenty eight year old man to want to have sex with a fourteen year old there must be something wrong with him.

For a teacher to want to have sex with one of his pupils there must be something very wrong with him.

At what age did her start to groom her , twelve or thirteen ?

No blame should be apportioned to this young girl. She was groomed and abused by a person of trust. She may have gone by her own free will but this does not mean he didn't abduct her. She is a child , he is an adult. He took her away from her parents. "

I've ummed and ahhed for a while. Legally it's wrong. Morally it's wrong. But realistically it can and did happen. Just sad and messy and horrible. I hope that some good can come from it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"For a twenty eight year old man to want to have sex with a fourteen year old there must be something wrong with him.

For a teacher to want to have sex with one of his pupils there must be something very wrong with him.

At what age did her start to groom her , twelve or thirteen ?

No blame should be apportioned to this young girl. She was groomed and abused by a person of trust. She may have gone by her own free will but this does not mean he didn't abduct her. She is a child , he is an adult. He took her away from her parents.

I've ummed and ahhed for a while. Legally it's wrong. Morally it's wrong. But realistically it can and did happen. Just sad and messy and horrible. I hope that some good can come from it.

"

What good do you think could come from this?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

he will never be able to have a job working with children again, the girl isnt on speaking terms with her mother and says she wants to be with him when he comes out of prison.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 21/06/13 19:10:39]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"he will never be able to have a job working with children again, the girl isnt on speaking terms with her mother and says she wants to be with him when he comes out of prison."

she's 15, lets be realistic by the time he gets out she'll be with someone else and forgot about him

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"he will never be able to have a job working with children again, the girl isnt on speaking terms with her mother and says she wants to be with him when he comes out of prison."

Sadly, I imagine her name is all over google from when this took place and I imagine she will find it difficult to find a job as employers do look at the internet when employing people.

The whole thing is a bloody mess and I would imagine that child protection officers at schools and in local authorities are already looking at retraining staff.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"u get less for murder.

thats what annoys me most that people do much worse things and get a lighter sentence. also, i thought a pedophile was someone who had sex with small children, not teenagers.

so where as you see it would the 'line be', between what is paedophilia and however else you see having sex with a minor..

"

I think the main thing is that you cant have people in the position of looking after children having sex with them

People who work job such as teachers, care home workers etc simply must act in a manor responsible to fit their job, no if's no but but people in a position of looking after kids can not be having sex with them it goes against all the trust put in them, be the child 10 or 15 its not not acceptable

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Is it worse then stuart hall no and he only got 18 months fucked up or what

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lentyoffun40Couple
over a year ago

Lancashire


"Is it worse then stuart hall no and he only got 18 months fucked up or what"

You can't compare different cases

Each case should be treated individually and prosecution for the offences committed vary

Simple as

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"he will never be able to have a job working with children again, the girl isnt on speaking terms with her mother and says she wants to be with him when he comes out of prison.

she's 15, lets be realistic by the time he gets out she'll be with someone else and forgot about him "

Actually I would dispute what u say. An incident quite similar to this case happened to me when I was a minor involving the police the court etc etc n in time the person n I resumed our relationship for a number of years! Looking back I believe the degree of 'authority' involvement in my scenario probably drove us closer together rather than apart. Justice took its due course as indeed it should n as it has done with Forrest. To this day I consider the person I was involved with to still have been the one great love of my life n altho we didn't succeed with our relationship we stayed staunch close friends until 2007 n cancer took 'my dear friend' !

What Forrest has done is undoubtedly wrong but it seems the girl's family has disintegrated as indeed did mine - n mine never repaired or was the same again. Just my opinions that's all

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Is it worse then stuart hall no and he only got 18 months fucked up or what

You can't compare different cases

Each case should be treated individually and prosecution for the offences committed vary

Simple as"
totally disagree - why not? Can you please explain why tht is?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lentyoffun40Couple
over a year ago

Lancashire


"Is it worse then stuart hall no and he only got 18 months fucked up or what

You can't compare different cases

Each case should be treated individually and prosecution for the offences committed vary

Simple as totally disagree - why not? Can you please explain why tht is?"

Yes

But before I do I'm not condoning Stuart hall or in anyway minimising what he did

If you look at my post on him you will see my views

1) Stuart hall didnt abduct anyone

Forrest did

2) Stuart hall didn't have full sex with a girl he was supposed to be in a position of trust over , Forrest did

What hall an Forrest have done is disgusting and horrendous and although they both sex cases

Their crimes had different tariffs for prosecution

Is that fair ? Not my decision but each case is unique and have different mitigating circumstances .

Some get harsher sentences than others

Some get away with stuff they shouldn't

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Is it worse then stuart hall no and he only got 18 months fucked up or what

You can't compare different cases

Each case should be treated individually and prosecution for the offences committed vary

Simple as totally disagree - why not? Can you please explain why tht is?

Yes

But before I do I'm not condoning Stuart hall or in anyway minimising what he did

If you look at my post on him you will see my views

1) Stuart hall didnt abduct anyone

Forrest did

2) Stuart hall didn't have full sex with a girl he was supposed to be in a position of trust over , Forrest did

What hall an Forrest have done is disgusting and horrendous and although they both sex cases

Their crimes had different tariffs for prosecution

Is that fair ? Not my decision but each case is unique and have different mitigating circumstances .

Some get harsher sentences than others

Some get away with stuff they shouldn't "

I have to disagree with you on this one. I think Stuart Hall should have been sentenced to a longer sentence. I actually don't think the two crimes can be compared - what Hall did was a wide range of abuse on different victims, what Jeremy Forest has done is with one child (who was also culpable to some extent)

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *lentyoffun40Couple
over a year ago

Lancashire


"Is it worse then stuart hall no and he only got 18 months fucked up or what

You can't compare different cases

Each case should be treated individually and prosecution for the offences committed vary

Simple as totally disagree - why not? Can you please explain why tht is?

Yes

But before I do I'm not condoning Stuart hall or in anyway minimising what he did

If you look at my post on him you will see my views

1) Stuart hall didnt abduct anyone

Forrest did

2) Stuart hall didn't have full sex with a girl he was supposed to be in a position of trust over , Forrest did

What hall an Forrest have done is disgusting and horrendous and although they both sex cases

Their crimes had different tariffs for prosecution

Is that fair ? Not my decision but each case is unique and have different mitigating circumstances .

Some get harsher sentences than others

Some get away with stuff they shouldn't

I have to disagree with you on this one. I think Stuart Hall should have been sentenced to a longer sentence. I actually don't think the two crimes can be compared - what Hall did was a wide range of abuse on different victims, what Jeremy Forest has done is with one child (who was also culpable to some extent)

"

Your missing my point

I'm not saying that halls crimes weren't as bad as forrests

Not at all

I'm merely pointing out that the prosecution can only deal with the crime infront Of them

Each of the crimes carries its own sentence

Just merely pointing out that no 2 crimes are the same

So it's hard to say one should get longer than the other

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top