Jeremy Forrest on trial

[PatPig]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2339495/Jeremy-Forrest-ran-away-France-schoolgirl-secret-relationship-exposed.html

Slightly absurdly, his 15-year-old girlfriend, all over the newspapers at the time, is no longer allowed to be named.

[5madthings]

God the comments on the df link are depressing.

[Catlike]

Unless the judge is party to more bad behaviour, I am not really that convinced that he is a hard core peadophile

He may not be a hardcore paedophile as his preference is obviously for pubescent girls rather than pre-pubescent ones but his behaviour was abusive because it was damaging to the girl, regardless of her consent.

This article explains how these types of relationship are in fact very harmful to the young people involved.

[flippinada]

I think I can say this now without being deleted, as he's been found guilty.

I really hope they throw the book at him.

[PatPig]

Just looked it up and it seems he made no bail application, and has therefore been in prison for the last eight+ months, so potentially depending on the sentence could be freed relatively soon.

[flippinada]

I think you are spot on paperlantern. And he didn't take the stand and left her to defend him. He is both pathetic and despicable.

[FeegleFion]

He's a hardcore sex offender. He groomed and raped a child.

[DownstairsMixUp]

He is a hardcore pedo to me. He responded to sexual interests from a 14 year old. He still won't let it go now even though he has potentially damaged her forever. Scumbag.

[YoniRanger]

I'm not sure it matters where he falls on the paedo scale.

Surely all sexually motivated crimes against children are bad regardless?

[MooseBeTimeForSpring]

Sentencing tariff here

Maximum seven years

[PatPig]

It does look like they have discussed and planned this all out. He stays in prison on remand, she testifies in his defence hopes for a short sentence and they are potentially back together in four months time.

It could count against him if the judge decides to give a long sentence in order to curtail the relationship. But that's not necessarily a valid sentencing criterion.

[EasterHoliday]

why on earth didn't he plead guilty and take the benefit in sentencing? he didn't give evidence / put forward a defence

[flippinada]

What's far more likely is that he planned it all out (he seems to have been big on research after all) and manipulated her into going along with it.

If he was genuine, he would have pled guilty, taken the hit and saved her (and his friends, family and wife) the stressful experience of giving evidence.

[FeelingHorse]

He would be put on "List 99" as he had a relationship with someone in full time eduction. It's not actually called that anymore, it's now an education act or something.

I'm a secondary school teacher, aged 26 years old and find his behaviour outrageous. There is nothing attractive about a pupil ten years younger than me. He had let down the professional IMO.

When teachers are training, we are given a red book called the "Bristol Guide"- it clearly states that you should never overstep the professional teacher/pupil relationship. It couldn't be any clearer...

Saying that though, 3years ago in my current school it was well know that a female teacher was having a sexual relationship with a 15 year old male pupil...Nothing was done by my school.

The female teacher worked in my department and I had to face her every day. It made me sick that she carrie on this relationship and was still allowed to teach. I constantly made complaints to our Safeguarding Officer and even anonymously phones the police....

Turns out his parents didn't care about the relationship and therefore didn't want to press charges.... My school did not follow up with any kind of internal investigation. We we told never to mention it again and to carry on as normal...

She left, and now works at another local school.

It seems as though schools are more than happy to try and keep these incidents under wraps...

[FeelingHorse]

Apologies for typos...turns out that it still makes me angry!

[PatPig]

I guess his reasoning was:

• he had fucked up with his wife and therefore trying to continue a relationship with a schoolgirl was his only option
  
• if he did so while on bail, pending on trial, then that would be a very serious matter and would ensure he got a long sentence
  
• so he was better off in prison on remand, since he didn't really have a life to speak of, what with his wife and job gone, and because if he was convicted he'd get that time off his sentence
  
• he pleaded not guilty because he thought he might get away with I guess

[edam]

what a grubby, horrible little creep that man is. Sickening that he could exploit a vulnerable child in that way - not just vulnerable by virtue of her age (14 when the grooming started) but also he knew perfectly well was troubled in other ways.

I know he's been on remand for eight months, but I do hope the judge manages to find room in the sentencing guidelines to send a very serious message. Deterrence should be a big factor - making it plain that anyone else tempted to abuse a relationship of authority over vulnerable young people will face very serious consequences.

[NicholasTeakozy]

If he was genuine, he would have pled guilty, taken the hit and saved her (and his friends, family and wife) the stressful experience of giving evidence.

This. Exactly this as put by flippinada.

[PatPig]

"Deterrence should be a big factor - making it plain that anyone else tempted to abuse a relationship of authority over vulnerable young people will face very serious consequences."

Hmm, there was this case, which seems less serious, where the accused got 18 months (albeit for a different offence):

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/03/06/teacher-michael-pooley-jailed-sexual-affair-pupil_n_2817006.html

[OhDearNigel]

"Also I take it he has not been in prison on remand since his arrest, hence no time served in lieu"

Yes, he has been remanded in custody since his arrest in France

[PatPig]

Apparently, they charged him with 5 counts of sexual activity with a child today, and he pleaded guilty straight away.

Not sure if that will make any difference.

[Remotecontrolduck]

I've just heard that too, though how has this cropped up if he was on trial for abduction? Not sex with an under 16?

Obviously I think he should have been charged with it, but how has this been brought in now? I thought they weren't allowed to?

[flippinada]

Just seen that now on the news. I think that it may carry a heavier sentence than child abduction, which is max 7 years.

[scaevola]

He was probably charged some time ago (maybe with reporting restrictions). It's not uncommon to have separate trials for separate offences, and for the latter to be kept quiet to avoid prejudicing the former.

The trial for abduction was concluded yesterday. There was a fresh trial today or these 5 charges to which he has pleaded guilty.

[flippinada]

That's interesting, thanks scaveola

[flippinada]

Oops, I mean scaevola - sorry.