Jeremy Forrest

[maggiebee]

While I don't condone for a moment the actions of Jeremy Forrest, I do think the sentence is a bit harsh. Five and a half years seems a bit excessive compared with Stuart Hall's 15 months. Maybe it was the "position of trust" which made the difference?

[baza]

S.H. should have got longer imo, the teacher betrayed his position of trust.

[Jeza]

I totally agree Maggie.

Baza, I agree he was in a position of trust.......BUT 15 year old girls can be (not all) the devil in disguise. I know I've known many.

[jno]

partly that, partly that Hall was given sentences appropriate to when his offences were committed. (Penalties were lower then.) I think Hall should have got more, not that Forrest should have got less.

Doesn't matter if the victims are all little devils, its the teacher's job to refuse them.

[craft1948]

I used to feel sorry for my daughter's extremely attractive gym teacher, all the not so little darlings literally had their tongues hanging out when he was around.
I'm sure to get rid of them he said he was gay............

[friedgreentomato]

ahhh my gym teacher was also my form tutor and shagging my sixth mate - we were sooo jealous!!

[friedgreentomato]

that should be sixth form mate!!!

[josaphine32]

Still in shock, poor sod, she was also to blame, if not more, and now he is labelled as a pedo, rapist and some murderers get less. He mouthed to her yesterday I love you, her reply was I am so sorry, they did him on position of trust, no way does he deserve that sentence, he is a scape goat, it was so much in the headlines that the man didnot stand a chance, there is another man in the headlines this week that had taken an underage girl away, I bet he will get a far less sentence, if not community service.

[jake-the-peg]

Hall got a light sentence because he had to be tried and sentenced based on the law as it was when the offence was committed and the maximum was 2 years then.

That being said you'll find many cases of stabbing where the sentence handed down was about 5 years.

I didn't hear all the evidence but on face value I can't see that this offence is on the same scale as that.

[New Judge]

“…she was also to blame, if not more”

Very true, Josephine. But many fifteen year old girls lust after their thirty year old male teachers. It is the responsibility of those teachers to make it absolutely clear that any relationship is totally out of the question, to highlight any concerns they may have to their managers and to ensure absolutely nothing inappropriate takes place. It is not their job to whisk the girl away to France, set up home and assume arrange false identities for them both. The responsibility for all this rests with the teacher, not with the pupil.

“…he is a scape goat”

I assume you mean “scapegoat” Josephine - that is one who is forced to take the blame for the wrongdoing of others. Mr Forrest is not taking the blame for the wrongdoing of others. He is taking the blame for his own wrongdoing. He broke the first rule of teaching and he broke it swiftly and with style. He broke it in a pre-planned organised way. He “groomed” the girl for his attention. He deserves his sentence and I believe he got off somewhat lightly.

[anneasquith]

he was a teacher,,,,,,,she was a pupil,,he be out in 3, not harsh in the least.,

[maggiebee]

Girl in my class at school married our geography teacher. Sure there were "goings on" before she was 16 - we were all jealous too friedgreentomato.

[sherrardk]

An inherent part of being a teacher is safeguarding your pupils (not to mention the he, as an adult, had a sexual relationship with a child).

[Svejk]

New judge says he broke the first rule of teaching.
That would be the first rule introduced in 2001 then.

[tamborine]

Did he seek her parents consent - NO. I recall how distressed the parents were at their daughter's absence from home. This couple were on the run in UK before venturing to France and taking advantage of french law of 15 for age of consent.

Not only did he abuse his professional position but he abused her parents rights.

[josaphine32]

Judge, thanks for your input, I do kind of see where you are coming from, and I do realise he was in a position of trust, but some young girls/15 year olds are more grown up than some 20 year olds I know, I don't think he groomed her but was stupid to do what he did, I was not groomed, but I was 14 and my first partner was 38, not a school teacher but high up with the celebrities, and definately not a pedo,

[cecil39]

underage sex is against the law, at 15 she was under age and not in a position to give her consent legally, so however much of a come on she gave out he should have resisted, and not allowed himself to be alone with her, he was in a posistion of trust.

[maggiebee]

My husband was 15 years older than me. We started going out when I was 15, married when I was 18 and were married for 30 years. No way would he be classed as a pedo though he certainly didn't ask my parents consent, nor did he "groom" me. Can see both sides of the argument, just think the sentence is very harsh.

[mikey4444]

Of course Forrest must be punished. He abused a position of trust, but he won't be the last Teacher to do so. Perhaps this couple really are in love...hasn't anybody read "Romeo and Juliet" ? What will we all think if they get back together again, when he gets out, which could be in 2-3 years time ? I will leave the issue of the severity of his sentence to other, wiser ABers.

Another aspect about this case is what if the roles had been reversed, and she had been the Teacher and she went to France with a 15 year old boy ?

When I was in school in the 60's, we had a French Teacher that kept our class of 14-25 year old boys in a state of almost continual priapic excitement. She was an absolute corker, as we would have said back then. We spent most of the lesson hoping and praying that she would drop the chalk onto the floor. This was back in the time that mini skirts were truly mini. As far as I know, none of us were invited onto a cross-channel ferry...I know that I certainly wasn't ! But I can assure everybody that very few of us would have needed to be asked twice.

Autre temps, as our near neighbours say ( hope that is right as my mind was on other things than French vocabulary all those years ago ! )

[New Judge]

All of what you say may well be true, Josephine. But parents send their children to school to have them educated, not to have them seduced and abducted by a teacher twice their age. This case is mainly about the abuse of trust that is associated with the abuse of the girl. The girl was vulnerable (I believe she had self-harmed) and Forrest had no concern for the obvious great distress he caused her parents.

She was groomed. This was confirmed by the trial judge (who heard all the evidence, which we have not) and he was quite clear about it. The situation you found yourself in may have been different - who knows? You may believe your first partner not to be a paedophile or that he did not groom you but any man of thirty-eight embarking on a sexual relationship with a girl a third of his age would be viewed with great suspicion. Furthermore at fourteen you may not have been in a position to judge what his motives were. However, yours is a different story and in the case of Mr Forrest I am quite convinced he acted appallingly and has been duly punished.

[FredPuli43]

Quite, NJ. It's noteworthy that Ronnie Jaffa , who was defence counsel, has said that his first impression is that the sentence is not appealable.

There may be an application to increase Hall's sentence. Hall was , as he well knew, trusted by his victims and abused his position as a celebrity.