Ouch.

I'm not emotional regarding this issue. Rather, I'm stating that this crime be calculated the same across the board regardless of genders involved.

Existing social paradigms do hold the genders in different respect. This is often reflected in the sentencing. People find it hard to accept a woman is capable of being the aggressor and offer her built-in excuses such as "love" or "passion". If the tables were turned and a man stated that he “loved” his victim, the public would have called for a hanging. Yet, when the accused is a woman, society assumes that some altruistic reason transcended the age difference. Her gender alone will automatically and wrongfully mitigate the severity of the crime. (By the way I wonder what the child's parents think.)

The teacher involved in this crime willfully and knowingly acted against the law to satisfy her sexual desires. Period. This cannot be tolerated by the legal system and she should be measured by the same legal tools as any other individual that commits this crime.

The only boundary to explore would be the dissolution of the archaic belief that women should be coddled and protected from themselves. Maintaining the belief that women are incapable such acts is outdated to say the very least. Grown women deserve the credit of being treated like adults.

That's where sentencing comes into play. The judge takes(should?) that into consideration, but no matter what kind of soap opera comes with it, it's still the same crime. :p

In case you'd been wondering what Mary Kay LeTorneau's been up to ...

It seems as though the no contact order remains in place, and the kid is quite focused on violating it.

The kid is 21 now. How can the court forbid them to see each other?

Courts frequently forbid adults to have contact .

PFAs require no contact, as do many probation/parole orders, as is the case here.

The thing that I have to wonder is whether the court has justice in mind or simply punitive protocols? They may genuinely be for each other and I think that they should be able to find out now that both parties are, legally at least, adult.

I think that an in pertuitum decision of this nature is out of bounds.

This story is back. Do you think this chick is nuts? she is hoping a jury thinks she is.

ya gotta click here

Despite the amount of press they generate, insanity defenses are not usually successful.

Without searching, I seem to recall that they work less than 2% of the time as a criminal defense.

With or without twinkie consumption as a factor.

With searching it seems that insanity defenses are presented in only about 0.9% of criminal cases (9 out of 1000, to save you the math), and that it is successful in less than 20% of those cases (1.8/1000).

ya gotta give them props for trying though.

She's not nuts, she's a pedophile. This girl is nuts!

Prepubescent boy = pedophila

Adolescent boy = hebephilia

Or pederasty.

Why do I feel we're seeing more of these crimes?

Are the predators becoming bolder as the shame factor reduces?
Am I just paying more attention now that I'm older?
Is it now socially or financially more acceptable to report such crimes?

http://www.wtnh.com/Global/story.asp...0&nav=3YeXT0ZE
http://www.nbc5.com/education/390746...94&dppid=65172
http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/20425.htm

And here I thought hebephilia was the opposite of anti-semitism.

:) :thumbsup: