Missing girl 15, runs off with Maths teacher.

If he ends up in jail it'll be a complete travesty.

I expect that he will tho, because a large section of the public will be baying for blood. The same loud, obnoxious people who would have gladly attended a public hanging in years gone by.
 
AHarvey said:
It's not rape if they shout "surprise" first :p
Click to expand...

celebritypicturestommyl.jpg
 
FoxEye said:
If he ends up in jail it'll be a complete travesty.

I expect that he will tho, because a large section of the public will be baying for blood. The same loud, obnoxious people who would have gladly attended a public hanging in years gone by.
Click to expand...

Yeah I mean it's only child abduction and sex with someone underage. Nothing wrong with that as long as she said "yes". :rolleyes: Bloody apologists.
 
FoxEye said:
If he ends up in jail it'll be a complete travesty.

I expect that he will tho, because a large section of the public will be baying for blood. The same loud, obnoxious people who would have gladly attended a public hanging in years gone by.
Click to expand...

Strangely enough the public may want people who are given positions of trust not to betray that trust.
 
Ahleckz said:
The BBC News seem to be making her sound like an innocent victim in this all, which I think is wrong atm.
Click to expand...

True. But the world chooses to see 'under age' as easily influenced, have no mind of their own, psychologically fragile. And while this may be true for a lot of <16 year olds, i think it's unrealistic to apply this every time. particularly at 16 for example. How do we know that she didn't fancy him? That she didn't lead him astray? Even if she did, she will get off scot free, his life is ruined.

e: bottom line is that he should have known better/more self control etc. Even if he really isn't some predatory monster, he's as good as one now.
 
Energize said:
Yeah I mean it's only child abduction and sex with someone underage. Nothing wrong with that as long as she said "yes". :rolleyes: Bloody apologists.
Click to expand...

To me, 'child' is some doughy eyed sprog and 'abduction' forced and hostile, neither of which are present here. The two terms are abuses of legalism. Bloody legalists.
 
BunnyKillBot said:
To me, 'child' is some doughy eyed sprog and 'abduction' forced and hostile, neither of which are present here.
Click to expand...

Then you have been misinformed. If a two year old went in a car willingly with a stranger would you not classify that as abduction because there was no force or hostility? It is hardly a legal technicality.
 
Last edited:
I don't see him as some monster, I just see him as a utter fool. Even if she is partly to blame it won't be taken that way by the law and media and tbh i'm not sure it should be taken any other way. If it was then god knows where we would be as the whole area would be greyed. They have no other option but to thow the book at him.
 
Energize said:
Then you have been misinformed.
Click to expand...

Well excuse me for not having the exact same thought processes as you. I say to you think of an elephant, you think of an elephant. You say think of a child, I think of a doughy eyed sprog, not the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child: every human being below the age of eighteen years. The scope of the term is too broad to adequately contour a pictorial reference.

I am not going to respond to your analogy because it is a farce and has no relevance here.

Edit: I am not defending him, there is clearly a position of trust and a legal case here. Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy not a romantic fire, the message of which is rash love is a sure fire way to destruction, and this is clearly an immature relationship.
 
Last edited:
what an utter moron

its just lol that he screws his whole life up over some 15 year old who was probably flirting with him and he couldnt help himself
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom