Judith Evans: Teacher who abused pupil

[wretchedmood]

Teacher who sexually abused pupil jailed for two years

Not a trans person.
Not a drag queen.

And she only got TWO years.

My AIBU?

I WOULDN'T be unreasonable to think if this WAS a trans person or a drag queen, there would be endless screeching calling to ban ALL trans people or drag queens from schools.

But it's not.

Two years. That's all she got.

Judith Evans appeared at Belfast Crown Court on Friday

Published
14 March 2025

A teacher who sexually abused a teenage pupil has been jailed for two years and been placed on the sex offenders register for life.

Judith Evans, 33, of Elmwood Grove in Newtownabbey, County Antrim, admitted grooming and having sexual intercourse with a schoolboy.

She was a teacher at Belfast Boys' Model School when the offences occurred.

Speaking after the hearing at Belfast Crown Court on Friday, a senior police officer described Evans as a "cold, calculating child predator".

Evans, a mother of two, was sentenced to a total of four years - half of which will be served in custody and half on licence after her release.

She admitted several charges including sexual communication with a child, meeting a child following sexual grooming, sexual activity with a child involving penetration and possessing indecent images of the schoolboy.

The offences were committed between 1 March and 17 May 2024.

Evans also admitted perverting the course of justice between 13 and 27 June 2024, by making a false allegation that she was sexually assaulted by the teenager.

Evans was given a five-year Sexual Offences Prevention Order, banning her from working with children and vulnerable people.

'Explicit videos and images'

Imposing the sentence, the judge said Evans had "groomed this child, who was vulnerable by reason of age and personal circumstances, basking in his adolescent attraction towards her".

The court heard that Evans and the child exchanged thousands of text messages, the majority of which were sexually explicit, and that she sent him explicit videos and images.

They also met outside of school on three occasions and Evans drove them to locations including Black Mountain and Nutt's Corner, where they engaged in sexual activities, including intercourse.

The court heard that Evans's offending began when the child was going through a "hard time" and she began keeping him behind at school when she noticed a change in his demeanour.

The boy opened up to her and Evans gave him her personal phone number and email address, after which they began messaging each other.

The judge said that, from an early stage, the messages were sexual in nature.

'Profound effect on victim'

The boy ran away and threatened to take his own life after his family became aware of the contact from Evans and the police became involved.

Evans was arrested in May 2024 and during a police interview she replied "no comment" to all questions.

When she was interviewed again in June that year, she claimed that the teenager had threatened her and raped her in her car.

She also told police that he would show her a picture of him holding a gun and that his father was in the Ulster Defence Association (UDA), a loyalist paramilitary group.

The judge said "every aspect of that account was false".

"There is no question that the defendant's behaviour and the aftermath of the discovery of these offences has had a profound effect on this young victim and his family," added the judge.

"Teenagers need protection because their immaturity prevents them from appreciating the long-term harm caused by inappropriate sexual activity."

'Selfish desire for attention'

As Evans wept in the dock, the judge said her two children were now being cared for by their father and that she was "struggling to cope with her current circumstances".

The judge added that while Evans had reported a number of traumatic events in her life and had expressed remorse and guilt over the harm she had caused, there was a lack of explanation regarding her offending.

The judge said: "In truth, there is no explanation other than a selfish desire for attention and intimacy, which she considered was lacking in her relationship at that time."

Evans has accepted "she will never teach again", said the judge.

A spokesperson for Belfast Boys' Model School said they recognised "what a difficult and distressing time this has been for the young person".

"We fully understand the impact this has caused throughout the wider school community and would reassure all pupils and staff that the protection, safety and wellbeing of our pupils continues to be our highest priority."

The spokesperson added that the school has "robust safeguarding processes".

'Cold, calculating predator'

Det Ch Insp Jill Duffie of the Police Service of Northern Ireland described Evans as a "cold, calculating child predator who abused her position of trust by taking advantage of a young boy".

"She preyed on his vulnerabilities and built an inappropriate 'friendship' with the boy before then further grooming him and sexually exploiting him.

Det Ch Insp Jill Duffie spoke outside court following the sentencing

"The messages exchanged between her and her underage pupil were highly sexual and nothing short of sickening.

"As a result of the abuse he was subjected to, the victim has suffered greatly with mental health struggles and has shown immense bravery to bring her to justice today."

The senior officer said there was "still a societal stigma surrounding male victims of abuse" and she encouraged anyone who had been abused in a similar way to contact police.

Being successful at reoffending and continuing to seek opening to access a child with an aim of offending are imo not identical risk factors.

She will be released into the local community for the term of her supervision and can move anywhere in wider community (including out of State) once that is up.
She will need a job and could get work in a shop or petrol station both of which would give her access to children and an opportunity to "make friends" with a child.

To semiquote Abhannmor's crimes involve means , motive and opportunity

Would you not agree that

• Her *motive remains the same? Her means, and opportunity may not as advantageous to her as she will not be teaching children but she can still access and target children in her local community? Plus assuming she has not been barred from SM she could use that tool too.

She should have been highly motivated not to offend yet set about grooming a child.

I am curious as to why you think that she would not repeat the same pattern of behaviour to obtain sex even if she did not believe she have a sucessful outcome?

She'll be at a risk but that risk will be reduced a little with her job limitations. However it will still be there. She will still be able to come into contact with children in a range of capacities although not through schools. She will still be able to go to swimming pools and access changing rooms with children. She will still be able to go to shops and parks and access facilities where children are. She will still be able to access venues where children's events will take place. She will still be within the community where children live and still have opportunity to reoffend.

You are exhausting.
I don’t really think working in a shop would give her the same means and opportunity to groom a child as being a teacher. .
Nor do I think her “motive” would necessarily be the same. I think it’s highly likely that suffering the consequences of her previous actions will significantly alter her decision making matrix in the future:

Were you expecting calls for all women in their 30’s to be banned from schools?
There was a drag Queen working in a school I worked at, no one knew unless he told you as obviously he didn’t come to work in drag.
I agree that the sentence was too lenient.

How is that relevant to this post though?

A female teacher abused a child and had a disgustingly low prison sentence and only banned from working with kids for five years.
Surely that's plenty to be furious about without making assumptions about what a "certain demographic" (which one?!?) are apparently thinking.

You are exhausting.

Thank you ?

I don’t really think working in a shop would give her the same means and opportunity to groom a child as being a teacher. .
Working in a shop or petrol station gives her access to children. Some of whom hang out beside them as they are not supervised at home or are in conflict with their family etc.
The space is well lit with public activity so safer than a public park etc. and is a natural meeting point for children.

So such a location can aid in her meeting her "choosen" demographic / potential victims in an unsupervised social way.

Nor do I think her “motive” would necessarily be the same.
What do you mean by this?
What do you think her "motive" was?
And how would the "motive" change?

I think it’s highly likely that suffering the consequences of her previous actions will significantly alter her decision making matrix in the future:

How would her decisions making matrix change?

She knew she had so much to loose and still groomed a child. When she is out she "has less to loose" if she is caught again.

And the stats show that while women reoffend at a slightly lower rate than men that there is still a high number who repeat the same pattern of behaviour so in her case her decision groom a child.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/proven-reoffending-statistics-january-to-march-2022/proven-reoffending-statistics-january-to-march-2022

And that ^ is the stats for offenders who got caught again.

I am curious as to why you think that she would not repeat the same pattern of behaviour to obtain sex why do you think her motivation would not have an added factor of dont get caught the next time?

Ok .

If this woman abuses another child I will come back to this thread and acknowledge you were right.

Until then we will have to agree to disagree. I believe the response of the justice system was appropriate and do not expect that it is likely that this woman will sexually assault another child.

You came to this thread about this child sex offender and are one if the few (or prehaps the only person) who was in agreement with the sentence.

Tandora · Today 09:00
I think what that teacher did was beyond abhorrent, it undoubtedly caused serious and lasting harm to that child , and I think the courts dealt with her appropriately.

I was interested in how you concluded such a low tarrif was appropiate given that you feel the sexual assault caused serious and lasting harm.

I'll add that one of the reasons for giving an appropriate sentence is to deter other would-be offenders. Two years doesn't seem like much of a deterrent.

Technically it was 4, 2 in prison (may come with a 1 year or more reduction) and 2 supervision.
I am assuming she can move to the middle of London where nobody knows her once shes out on parole

I think they are well practiced at cognitive dissonance

Do you think that a sexually mature adult who has a sex drive will stop seeking sex?

Why did she choose a child for sex?

Perhaps you could stop using the terms sexual attraction, obtaining sex or having sex with when you're taking about an adult abusing a child. Clearly you are on some sort of gotcha trail with PP but you're being really uncareful with your language in a way that is normalising child abuse.

Pombearsallday · Today 17:36

AnSolas · Today 09:58
Why do you think she is at low/medium risk of offending?
Sexual reproduction is an instinct and needed to ensure humans as any animal continues to exist as a species.
She broke multiple social taboo and professional standards and the law (which she was trained to understand) to have sex with the child . So what basis are you going on that she is not a high risk offender?
Show quote history
Do you think that a sexually mature adult who has a sex drive will stop seeking sex?

Why did she choose a child for sex?

Perhaps you could stop using the terms sexual attraction, obtaining sex or having sex with when you're taking about an adult abusing a child. Clearly you are on some sort of gotcha trail with PP but you're being really uncareful with your language in a way that is normalising child abuse.

@Pombearsallday
Prehaps if you are looking for a gotcha from me you could have the courtesy to point out exactly what your problem is with a specific post?

And not cut my post in half?

You may not have noticed but @Tandora had the manners to quote my full post and also chose to extract any specific point to craft a reply?
This allowes all other readers to follow our sub-thread

But @Pombearsallday feel free to quote any post of mine and point out what you feel was me being uncareful with language or where I normalised child sex abuse or child abuse.

To help I have self-quoted the post you appeared to have clipped and added to your post.

Yes and I answered your questions

Yes I literally put the sections in my post to you? You seem very aggressive in someone remindinging you pretty politely that you are perhaps subconsciously using language that normalises this behaviour. But thanks for pasting more of your weird language highlighting the same issue. Pedophiles and their victims are not "having sex", they're abusing children. Calling it a social taboo is also weird as well.
HTH

You did answer them.
Imo you did not go into much of a detailed explanation but that is 100% your choice and right.
You did imo engage in a respectful way and were also willing to ask for clarification when you did not understand something within my posts rather than just replying based on an assumption.

Yes I literally put the sections in my post to you?

Feel free to quote any full post of mine and point out exactly where and why you feel I being uncareful with language or where I normalised child sex abuse or child abuse.

Vague "hand waving" of what you may be thinking is not useful.

You seem very aggressive in someone
I am being blunt if you find that my being blunt is agressive you can continue to feel that way.

remindinging you pretty politely that you are perhaps subconsciously using language that normalises this behaviour.

Feel free to quote where you believe me to be subconsciously using language and point out exactly where and why you think this is happening otherwise you are wasting both our time as your personal perception remains just a unspoken personal observation.

But thanks for pasting more of your weird language highlighting the same issue.

Again peehaps if you not are looking for a gotcha you could have the courtesy to point out exactly what your problem is with a specific post?

To make it easier how about you take my post and break it down and reword it using words and terms which you believe would help highlight where you are having problems?

We both may learn something from that type of exchange.

Pedophiles and their victims are not "having sex", they're abusing children.

You may have a belief on what happened during the events which led to the woman been found guilty of child sex offences. But the law is clear a jury member has to agree with the CPS that a sex offence against a child has been proven to have happened before the jury member can return a guilty verdict.

Calling it a social taboo is also weird as well.

Can you expand on what you are referring to when using the word "it" ?
what words and terms you have removed and subsituted with the word "it" and what specific relevance do these words or terms have to any of my posts?

HTH
You may feel you are being helpful but imo your posts are too vague and read as a gotcha

You've conflagulated 2 separate issues. She obviously needs more punishment but nowt to do with drag queens.

Abhorrent crime and truly sickening.
But why bring drag queens and transpeople into this? We know women can be perpetrators of sexual crimes.
Still don’t want men identifying as transwomen in my spaces (or sports)

Unfortunately. It is far too short.
Also this type of thing should mean never ever to work with children, at least with teens. Yet, only 5 years!

What a stupid whataboutery post

Women sometimes are sex offenders

All child sex offenders deserve harsh sentences and many male ones get off too lightly too.

People who perform drag should not bring their misogynistic pornified performance of themselves to work in a school.

Trans identified people should not use their unscientific beliefs about themselves to access opposite sex single sex spaces or sports and especially not in schools. And they can leave their beliefs and ideas at the door too.

All of the above can be true at once..

Trans identified people should not use their unscientific beliefs about themselves to..

The arrogance ,
presumption and judgement of some people will never cease to astonish me.

presumably in practice this will always be the case. She will never be able to get another job working with children as this offence will show up on every CRB check

I know, like people who think they can unilaterally decide to change the meaning of words, so that woman, instead of meaning 'adult human female', means, 'people of either sex who like skirts'. It really is very arrogant.

I don’t understand what being trans or a drag queen has to do with anything but obviously the overwhelming majority of sex offenders are men. Which doesn’t distract from this woman’s actions being disgusting and worthy of punishment.