Posted on 08/07/2006 12:51:46 PM PDT by newgeezer
If "having a sexual relationship" with an 18-year-old (adult) woman is all it takes to be charged with "sexual exploitation by a school employee" and, if that's all it takes to get his name in the sex offender registry, I have to think the integrity of the registry would be damaged. Too much of that and, before long, the registry approaches worthlessness. Is so-and-so in there because he's a potential menace to society? Or, did he take a leak on some bushes after a party?
I mean, if this guy was not a school employee, would this even be a crime? If not, he doesn't belong in the sex offender registry. Revoke his teaching certificate, blacklist him around the country, do whatever it takes to keep him from teaching ever again, if that's what you want to do. But, she's 18. If she consented, if he didn't assault her, don't water down the sex offender registry with stuff like this.
He was a figure of authority, which is why he is being charged and placed on the sex offender registry.
If he happened to just be a random guy that had a sexual relationship with an 18 year old high school senior, I doubt there'd be charges filed. But he isn't a random guy.
He isn't a hot blond woman in her Mid 20's to early 30's. If he was there'd be no issue.
It's only a sexual crime when a man uses his position of influence in the school system to get laid by students. If a hot chick does this, the age of the victim is not of consequence nor is the reality of abuse.
This sounds a lot like the case down in Texas. Such behavior on the part of a teacher is universally condemned, but many people here have pointed out that 18 is above the age of consent. The article doesn't go into details, but it sounds like a consenual relationship (i.e. no rape charges). You can't make a law criminalizing actions for one group of people that is perfectly legal for everyone else. Sure, the coach should lose his job. But he should not be facing felony charges.
I agree with you on the databases. Some states seem to put anything with a sex related angle on them. Some jurisdictions put prostitutes and their johns on the list, or public nudity (i.e. flashers) on these lists. I think that's why they also have sexual predator lists as well as sex offender lists.
Sure you can. For example, you can make it illegal for convicted felons to own firearms.
So, if instead of being a teacher/coach, let's say he was a 35-year-old "assistant manager" at a convenience store and had a relationship with an 18-year-old customer. Would he belong in the registry? If she were an employee instead of a customer, would your answer change?
I mean, if this guy was not a school employee, would this even be a crime? If not, he doesn't belong in the sex offender registry. Revoke his teaching certificate, blacklist him around the country, do whatever it takes to keep him from teaching ever again, if that's what you want to do. But, she's 18. If she consented, if he didn't assault her, don't water down the sex offender registry with stuff like this.
&&&
You are correct, IMO.
"For example, you can make it illegal for convicted felons to own firearms."
I've always wondered about that.
Does the 2nd Ammendment make exceptions for convicted felons?
It seems to me that during the 'wild west' days, felons,once they did their time, had their guns returned to them.
A 35 year old man, a teacher and a coach, should be able to keep his hands off his students. If consensual, they could've waited until after her graduation to consummate their relationship. It wouldn't be the first time. There are many high school teachers married to former students. Is this relationship heading toward marriage?
If the victim had been a confused boy, and the teacher/coach were a gay man, would you feel the same?
Parents shouldn't have to worry about their daughters or sons being seduced or pressured into sexual relationships with teachers or coaches. For every consensual relationship we might hear about, there are numerous less consensual relationships involving the abuse of authority.
And your example of an assistant store manager and a customer is a bad example. You would've been better off making the 18 year old high school student an employee.
That restriction is a result of conviction and is a completely different situation. A more apt analogy would be a state law banning teachers from posessing firearms and, if found with one, would be subject to criminal prosecution and 5 years incarceration.
Too bad for him that he was not a US President and did the act in Oval Office... He would go free, and if he's married, his wife could become a senator from a state that they never lived...
Sorry. That sort of distinction used to be called "arbitrary and capricious".
I agree with Newgeezer that continued use of this yardstick will render the "sex-offender" registry worthless, to most of us. Making this guy and the violent rapist who beats his victims to within an inch of their life or worse interchangeable, is the height of stupidity. At least in my universe.
The difference between a sex offender and a sexual predator. There really should be two lists.
I agree that his placement on the list is pointless, but it isn't a surprise. It isn't as if he didn't know what he was doing was wrong. If he and the student felt strongly about one another - a simple exercise of restraint till after her graduation would've solved the problem.
I question the man's judgment, and I don't think he should be allowed to teach or coach kids anymore. Maybe the sex offender listing is overkill, but I don't think it is arbitrary. Arbitrary would imply that the rules he violated are inconsistently applied. Perhaps you mean the rules are arbitrary, and perhaps you're right. But if that's the case, change the rules. This man knew what he was doing and did it anyway. That makes him suspect of future, more questionable violations. Next time she might be 16.
With the caveat that all parties are above the age of consent, which in this case, they were.
As I said originally, if a teacher, coach, any school employee is caught so much as propositioning any student, do whatever is administratively necessary to keep him from ever being in the position to do it again, anywhere.
BUT, although it is unquestionably a deplorable thing, it is not a crime for a 35-year-old man to have a relationship with an 18-year-old woman. There is no question that, if she was a willing participant and was not coerced by his authority, he does not belong in the sex offender registry.
He may very well belong in some national school employee offender registry. But, surely you can see how putting this guy and others like him in the sex offender registry waters down the registry such that it has the effect of making it less of a stigma for everyone who's in there for actual, heinous crimes.
And your example of an assistant store manager and a customer is a bad example. You would've been better off making the 18 year old high school student an employee.
I did. But, you still didn't answer the question(s):
So, if instead of being a teacher/coach, let's say he was a 35-year-old "assistant manager" at a convenience store and had a relationship with an 18-year-old customer. Would he belong in the registry? If she were an employee instead of a customer, would your answer change?
Are you saying that guy belongs in the sex offender registry?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.