Before the alleged intercourse, Andrew Riley, 36, had pleaded with the teenager, who was 17 at the time, not to scream, "yes Sir, yes!" in the throes of passion.

move 2 ile

It's his name: it's cursed.

http://www.dispatch.com/live/contentbe/dispatch/2007/03/14/20070314-B4-02.html

Not as bad as this fine citizen, though: (FIVE years old)

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/14132485/detail.html

When the affair ended the girl made a CD of the messages that allegedly passed between her and Riley and handed them to senior staff at Baines High School in Poulton-le-Fylde, Lancs.

YSI?

The post that didn't have to be made

Their relationship carried on until after her 18th birthday but fizzled out when she went to university.

it's an age-old story.

the advent of freshers draws ever nearer

maybe you could pick some of them up by making jokes about battered women

HUHT

who was 17 at the time
denies two charges of sexual activity with a child

?

17 = grey area

to be fair, i can just about imagine the horsier cambridge undergraduettes going for that.

xpost

it's not a grey area. he was in loco parentis as a teacher.

dang, hadn't thought of that. irresponsible me.

'betrayal of trust' and all that. whatever happened to the platonic ideal?

buttsex?

PEDERASTY, geddit right

how is this not a pic thread yet?

http://www.english.uga.edu/wblake/EverlastingGospel/plato4.bmp

unsurprise buttsechs

cocaine + sex = classic
-- kenan, Monday, 7 May 2007 20:18 (4 months ago) Bookmark Link

how did you find that?

like finding seashells on the beach

i imagine it's a popular opinion shared by many

cocaine + sex = classic
-- kenan, Monday, 7 May 2007 20:18 (4 months ago) Bookmark Link

I missed the "cocaine plus sex, classic or dud" thread.

how did you find that?

I remembered it being expressed on one of the coke threads, fuck knows why tho

because it will put me right off what I am doing

God I love the British

he was fine with "Daddy"

There's the teacher/student in loco parentis thing, which obviously makes it very wrong (but was probably a big turn on for the pair of them), but I can't see why he's being charged with the child sex offences (although the coke probably doesn't help) as she was above the age of consent at the time.

I'm not sure that it is a legally grey area (it's pretty obviously a moral one), as the law is fairly specific on the point.

I think it's illegal for teachers to have it off with pupils even if they're over 18 (as lots of upper 6th formers are) nowadays. But yeah making it a child sex offence seems a bit weird.

i don't think it's really a moral grey area at all!

if you sign up to be a teacher you are making a covenant not to fuck your pupils. it's completely irrelevant that she was 17 or 15 -- plenty of 15-year-olds are just as capable of making their own decisions and fucking their teachers. it's on the teacher not to.

Jeez. I've known teachers who have married ex-pupils.

in loco clitoris

have dawnson's creek and skins taught us nothing?

xxpost: I've been taught by one!

Jeez. I've known teachers who have married ex-pupils.

-- Stone Monkey, Tuesday, September 18, 2007 3:33 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

yeah me too and it remains creepy as fuck. though none as old as 36.

I think the point isn't whether he did something against the law or now, that seems to be pretty clear. I think the question is why he's charged with child sex offenses instead of something more relatable to the teacher/student relationship thing.

he shouldn't be charged with any criminal offence, but he should be banned from teaching.

Jeez. I've known teachers who have married ex-pupils.

Happens all the time in grad school, if a slightly different dynamic. Slightly.

the article is very (deliberately?) murky and doesn't mention who brought him to trial or exactly what for (supplying drugs??). why did the girl give the messages to the other staff? revenge for being dumped presumably?

yeah me too and it remains creepy as fuck. though none as old as 36.

how is it particularly 'creepy' if not just for the age gap?

I think the point isn't whether he did something against the law or now, that seems to be pretty clear. I think the question is why he's charged with *child* sex offenses instead of something more relatable to the teacher/student relationship thing.

-- jon /via/ chi 2.0, Tuesday, September 18, 2007 3:37 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

it's because 'in loco parentis' means 'in place of the parent'. i don't know, it seems pretty obvious to me.

it could be that the girl is, say, looked after or otherwise vulnerable, i dunno.

how is it particularly 'creepy' if not just for the age gap?

-- blueski, Tuesday, September 18, 2007 3:43 PM (37 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

seriously? teachers scheming on their pupils?

Is it actually illegal for a teacher to have consensual sex with a pupil over the age of consent? Yes the teacher should get sacked for it. But a criminal prosecution, when it's two people over the age of consent having consensual sex?

I dated one of my T.A.'s right after the semester during which she taught me was through, she was eight months older than me.

Zelda OTM

so you think it would just as 'creepy' if he was only a few years older? (xpx3)

Obviously what he did is all kinds of sleazy and wrong and he should lose his opportunity to teach ever again, but I don't think its the same thing as someone having sex with an underage child.

Is it actually illegal for a teacher to have consensual sex with a pupil over the age of consent? Yes the teacher should get sacked for it. But a criminal prosecution, when it's two people over the age of consent having consensual sex?

-- Zelda Zonk, Tuesday, September 18, 2007 3:45 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

he was in loco parentis as a teacher.

-- That one guy that hit it and quit it, Tuesday, September 18, 2007 1:05 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Link

Yes the teacher should get sacked for it.

should they even? in all/under any circumstances?

o you think it would just as 'creepy' if he was only a few years older? (xpx3)

-- blueski, Tuesday, September 18, 2007 3:47 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

in a way *even weirder* because a teacher in his/her twenties isn't having the mid-life crisis that this stuff usually comes out of.

xpost

yes

Or buy cigarrettes tooo.

xxp but... doesn't that mean the law is equating 17 year olds with 11 year olds?

to be chapter-and-verse about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#England

or even better

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts2000/20000044.htm

So it's a specific offence, then. If you'd just said that...

i kind of covered it with the shorthand comment:

he was in loco parentis as a teacher.

-- That one guy that hit it and quit it, Tuesday, September 18, 2007 1:05 PM (4 hours ago) Bookmark Link

u should've linked it earlier. i disagreed with that law anyway tho. put AOC back to 18 for all until we can alter the socio-cultural stigmatisation of teenage sex and reduce STDs and unwanted pregnancies among them. it's all in my latest newsletter.

i didn't link coz i hadn't looked till then. it's my years at the bar, it's instinct.

while searching i saw that some wiseacres had suggested lowering age of consent to 14 *provided the fuckers [sexees?] are only two years apart in age difference*.

put AOC back to 18

You mean forward to?

So that law would still apply is he was a 36 year-old professor teaching a 38 year-old continuing education student?

"if"

no no, sorry, the thing i saw (some policy document) was proposing that 14-year-olds should be allowed to have sex with other 14-year-olds, 15-year-olds, and 16-year-olds, but no-one older.

I think jvc's question is still, good, though, w/r/t the whole "in loco parentis" thing (which I'd never heard of before this thread): Does it still apply when the student is older than the teacher?

well, it ends at the age of 18, so no.

university is a whole different kettle of fish

well yes. tutors often are in a comparable "position of trust" to students and it would be interesting to see if breach of same had ever come to the courts. i'm sure it's been an administrative issue at universities.

I'm surprised no one has linked to, ahem, this yet:

Teacher 'had sex with pupil while driving bus'

OK, Henry, I was confused b/c you said:

it overrides the age of consent.

-- That one guy that hit it and quit it, Tuesday, September 18, 2007 10:50 AM (40 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

up to what point?

-- Jarlrmai, Tuesday, September 18, 2007 10:55 AM (35 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

point she leaves school, i guess.

-- That one guy that hit it and quit it, Tuesday, September 18, 2007 10:57 AM (34 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

ie 'in loco parentis' lasts until it stops.

-- That one guy that hit it and quit it, Tuesday, September 18, 2007 10:57 AM (33 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

school meaning pre-university there. teacher meaning schoolteacher too.

OK, got it.

So the law would be okay with this if she'd have been 18? Thats what I'm taking from this "in loco parentis" thing.

yes. if, on the day after she left school, this teacher who had spent many a chaste year admiring her bloom, gave her one, the law would be okay with that.

some pupils reach 18 before they leave school -- i think he'd still be in a position of trust and thus liable. but after that, bang away, not at all creepy.

Is no one excited about the bus?

Thats my confusion though.. so if she was 22 and still in school then the "in loco parentis" would apply and, thus, the sex would be illegal. What if she was two years older than him and still in school? Thats what I'm confused about.

Not as much as the teacher was (xp)

plenty of room up top

Move down the back please

something about oysters

The head of a school sixth form engaged in a sex act with one of his pupils while driving a school minibus, a court heard today.

Andrew Riley, a married father-of-two, spoke to a colleague on a mobile phone as the 17-year-old girl performed a further sex act upon him, Preston Crown Court was told.

Now that is truly disgraceful. This man should be ashamed of himself, lock him up and throw away the key - talking to someone on a mobile phone while driving.

Thats my confusion though.. so if she was 22 and still in school then the "in loco parentis" would apply and, thus, the sex would be illegal. What if she was two years older than him and still in school? Thats what I'm confused about.

-- jon /via/ chi 2.0, Tuesday, September 18, 2007 5:44 PM (52 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

if you're 22 and still in school um... you too thick to have sex.

school means: place where you go from age 4 (or whatever) to age 18. after that it's not school. you don't get schoolteachers younger than their pupils.

Eyes a-boggle @ mouth-to-mouth sambuca game.

lot of 22 y/o's in high school round your way?

xp

How these things happen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTDz5hvNqTQ

as usual Hollywood shows us the way

http://www.movieprop.com/tvandmovie/reviews/neverbeenkissed.jpg

heh heh heh

hey wtf is up with that link? it was supposed to be the bangbus thread :(

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e9/Onthebuses.jpg/250px-Onthebuses.jpg

in a way it kinda is (xp)

whoa wtf haha

i remember there being a mythical thread that did that, nice find.

lolz

Hold on are you the Real Actual Geir Hongro???????????!!!!!!!!!!!

So we are making the distinction between (in the US) high school and college students then?

I'm really not trying to be difficult here, just trying to understand. When I was in college it was not at all strange to find teachers very close in age to students.

when i did my stint in grad school they spent A LOT of time in TA orientation was 1 day, 1/2 of which was a workshop saying "PLZ PLZ DO NOT FUCK ANYONE WHILE HERE ok well we can't stop u but plz don't."

er bad edit there: orientation was one day, half was spent on this point!

I think there may be some confusion over the fact that Americans use the word "school" to refer to higher education as well. If someone tells me, for instance, that she was an English major, I might say, "Oh, where'd you go to school?" and expect an answer like "University of Michigan."

Thanks jaymc, thats what I was getting at. So when you say in loco parentis stops when s/he leaves "school", I was picturing university being included in that. Hence my confusion.

i think universities have taken pains in recent years to squash the culture of profs, grad students, and undergrads having relationships. even just beginning to frown on it publicly is a big change from the days of yore.

age of consent issues are moot at that point but the status and dependency issues definitely aren't.

I also think university culture has changed from the inside. I'm not saying professors + students never get involved, but I get the impression that in the 70s relationships between older male professors and young female grad students/undergrads were everywhere. that is just not how it is now, at least in my program; partially because of changes in demographics.