To think that a 6 year sentence is excessive

[Frenchfancy]

And that à man in the same circumstances would never have been given such a sentence.

Obviously she should be punished and never teach again, but 6 years!
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breaking-married-teacher-35-who-23612495

She was obsessed with sex too - ex boyfriend broke up with her as she was demanding it up to 6 times day. Seem a tad excessive

The problem isn’t this sentence. The problem is men are often given a shorter sentence eg this teaching assistant:

www.ledburyreporter.co.uk/news/18796958.teacher-assistant-jailed-sex-underage-girl/

Still a far longer sentence than either of the women in the two cases I linked to previously.

Again, apples and oranges. You can't compare 1v1 and conclude that a difference in sentence is down to the sex of the perpetrator.

@SchrodingersImmigrant

You're seeking to minimise her actions. You're defending a paedophile.

That's very unfair towards that poster and others. Using correct term isn't minimising it. It's still a child being sexually abused. It doesn't make it any lesser.

Fucking bullshit. Why are these posters so exercised about the 'correct' classification of child abusers?

You know full well why.

[quote XDownwiththissortofthingX]@NeverDropYourMoonCup

Oh, right, that makes it all OK, then

Yes, because that's exactly what I said.

Totally bizarre assertion to make, that correcting someone about a completely contextually improper use of a term results in it somehow becoming harder to remove inappropriate people from positions of trust.

This website is full of ridiculous takes and overreactions, but you're really pushing the envelope here.[/quote]
Yes. See also people referring to offenders not serving their full time. Offenders always serve their full sentence. It's just that a custodial sentence consists of time spent in custody and in the community.

There's a discussion to be had about the differences in sentences for males and females committing the same crimes. The theory of Double Deviance suggests that women are treated more harshly by the criminal justice system because not only have they deviated from accepted social norms by breaking the law, they've also deviated from gender norms which state how women should behave, which can result in them being punished more harshly. It's interesting.

@thedancingbear because it's also an interesting point for some. That there is more than one term and that there are actually classifications like that.

Doesn't mean people sympathise with a child abuser🤨

Fucking bullshit. Why are these posters so exercised about the 'correct' classification of child abusers?

You know full well why

Well I can only speak for myself, but it's because I'm autistic and I have a huge pedantry problem, to the point whereby seeing the term repeatedly and frequently used incorrectly on Mumsnet annoys me. I'm not beyond admitting that it's childish and banal to point it out, but meh, I'm also guilty of indulging in grammar-naziism when the mood takes, and nobody suggests that's down to being some sort of pedo-apologist, for some strange reason.

This is not excessive at all! In fact, it’s not long enough. She sexually assaulted a child, it doesn’t matter if he was 15 or 5. He was a child.

@SchrodingersImmigrant

You're seeking to minimise her actions. You're defending a paedophile.

That's very unfair towards that poster and others. Using correct term isn't minimising it. It's still a child being sexually abused. It doesn't make it any lesser.

I'm not sure why people think using accurate language is minimising. Unless they have an underlying assumption that if they acknowledge that there is an age difference implied that makes it less serious.

But that is their own baggage.

I actually think it's really important to acknowledge these differences because it impacts prevention and the general public should have some awareness of that. Attraction to teenagers is not in itself a paraphilia unless it is obsessive or exclusive, and that can make it more difficult to deal with in terms of social norms - it has to be treated very consciously to have a society wide taboo around it - and we aren't actually all that good at doing that, there is a lot of sexualisation of teens in our culture.

@Nightbear

I think that the true problem is that many men don’t get long enough sentences rather than this sentence being too long.

Precisely.

I'm not convinced that woman do get harsher sentences in these cases, does anyone have any stats to show that is the case?

In general I would have said that women having these kinds of sexual encounters with teen boys has tended to be minimised or seen as nice for the boy. Probably in part because boys don't get pregnant but also for other reasons.

But you can't look just at individual cases, there are all kinds of reason specific cases are sentenced differently. Given this woman's behaviour I would not be surprised she received a longer sentence.

Yabu OP. She should have got longer.
I have a 15 year old DS. He is a child in a young man’s body.
She is a child abuser. If someone did this to my child I’d want them to serve a lengthy sentence.

There's a discussion to be had about the differences in sentences for males and females committing the same crimes. The theory of Double Deviance suggests that women are treated more harshly by the criminal justice system because not only have they deviated from accepted social norms by breaking the law, they've also deviated from gender norms which state how women should behave, which can result in them being punished more harshly. It's interesting.

It is interesting.

However male offenders are still significantly more likely than female offenders to be imprisoned in the first place (eg 267% more likely to be imprisoned for violent offences according to the report below). So it seems women are more likely than men to receive a different CJS disposal other than prison, relative to men... But when they do receive a custodial sentence, the sentences may be harsher?

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/571737/associations-between-sex-and-sentencing-to-prison.pdf

My teacher when I was 15 was arrested and charged for abusing 8 year old boys he was looking after at a club. He got 6 years. All I think is that 6 years is not enough for that as opposed to 6 years being too many for her.

I think the number of different charges is why she got a longer sentence, the article states how her sentence is made up.

Sentencing doesn't seem to make any sense to me, I will never understand how sexual abuse of under 13s doesn't carry huge sentences. Cases like this should be at least 6 years, it doesn't matter in any way whether the participant was willing or not, or if they are 16 not 15, as if they are a teacher and pupil it is disgusting and should be given an appropriate prison sentence.

I do think it appears that sentences for men are lower though but I suspect it is because we hear about more of them.

@HollowTalk

She wasn't charged with rape, though.

As she's a woman that doesn't really prove much does it.

I thought it was to long ,but only because I don’t for one minute think if it had been a male teacher and female student ,he would of got the same 6 years

It's because she's a teacher and in a position of power.

[quote Frenchfancy]And that à man in the same circumstances would never have been given such a sentence.

Obviously she should be punished and never teach again, but 6 years!
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breaking-married-teacher-35-who-23612495[/quote]
If the sexes were reversed in this you would be organising a Lynch Mob.

She deliberately targeted a child. Groomed him. Abused him. Then threatened and manipulated him (including the pregnancy stuff) to make him scared to speak out.

She’s lucky she only got 6 years. She’ll be out in three and home with her husband and kids,

Meanwhile he’ll be dealing with the consequences of her abuse (and the impact it had on his GCSE’s) forever.

@XDownwiththissortofthingX

Part of the reason the sentence is 6 years is that she took it to a full jury trial. If she had pleaded at an earlier stage she would have been looking at 4 years and be out in 2

Indeed.

The examples I linked to earlier were of women who admitted to their offences at the earliest opportunity and did not contest the charges.

Again, you can not juxtapose one outcome with another and draw any reasonable conclusion, when the circumstances and considerations are completely different.

I do agree though that on the whole, sentences for criminal acts of a sexual nature definitely seem overly lenient on a purely 'eyeball' basis.

Is that because if you plead early you avoid more distress for the victim? I can imagine if the boy was forced to give evidence in court that is just abuse on top of abuse.

In my view, six years should be the starting point, a minimum. Not three years, plus time on licence. But then I'm of the "hang 'em and flog 'em" brigade so I reckon that sentences are too short all round.

Jeremy Forrest got five and a half years for a similar case. Arguably this case is more serious because of the greater manipulation going on.

@ancientgran partly that and partly the cost of a full Jury trial.

Totally appropriate

She’ll be out in half of that.