Teacher-student sex in GA: ‘It’s gross, but it ain’t illegal’
So let me get this straight. In the fine state of Georgia, a 17-year-old star athlete goes to jail for two years for having consensual oral sex with a 15-year-old, but a 36-year-old high school teacher walks free after having a torrid sexual affair with his 17-year-old student? Will someone please explain the logic in this?
Former teacher Christopher King was acquitted on sexual assault charges yesterday; both he and the student admitted having an affair, which began with kisses on a mountain and led to sex at a roadside hotel. The judge in the case rejected the charges, because of a recent Georgia Supreme Court ruling stating that student consent is an adequate defense for teachers if the student is 16 or older. So the judge, who has a flair for soundbites, was sticking by the letter of the law when he said, “It’s gross, it’s awful, but it ain’t illegal.”
It’s also immoral and unconscionable and an abuse of power.
What’s particularly galling about this ruling is that Georgia is the same state that sent Genarlow Wilson to jail for two years after he had consensual oral sex with a minor at a teenage beer bash. Wilson, unlike other young men charged with assault at the rowdy party, refused a plea bargain because he didn’t want to be put on the sex offender registry, which would bar him from living at home with his underage sister. The law was later changed, and Wilson, who endured his prison sentence stoically but fought the verdict on principle, was released after two years behind bars.
What’s up with the law in Georgia? This is tricky territory, but teachers ought to be held to stricter standards. It’s likely that the Georgia legislature will change the idiotic law that let King walk free, but how about coming up with a Teacher Sex Offender list? It’s next to impossible that this creep will ever get a job teaching again — he’s reportedly working as a salesman, lord only knows what he’s selling — but the idea of this man ever standing in a classroom again makes my toenails curl.
The most galling part of the tale? No remorse. Not a whit. No apology. No humility. No sorrowful recitation of some teacher code of ethics. “They were in love,” his lawyer told jurors. “This may be a bad idea, it may be taboo, but it’s not illegal.” It’s not love when there is a power imbalance, as the young woman involved will learn when she’s old enough to know better. As for the teacher-turned-salesman, he wants to resume the affair.
There oughta be a law. But as the judge says, in Georgia, there ain’t.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
I agree with you assessment that the jail time for the 17-year-old was unwarranted, but I’m less certain about the teacher/student example. Let’s assume the student in that case was a senior. A year later, she’d be attending college classes where student/teacher flings are as common as the A’s they generate. And those teachers/professors are likely to be 10, 15, or 20+ years older than the student.
My point is, it’s hard to regulate consensual sex once a person has reached the age of 16. Is it unethical? Probably. Is it a form of sexual harassment? Maybe, depending on the circumstances. Should the school institute a “no fraternizing” policy? Absolutely. But honestly, I’d rather the courts be focused on cases where the sex was not consensual and let the parents and schools deal with the rest.
C’mon, Patti: Me thinks thou doth protest too much. The girl is 17, not 10 or 12, or even 14. She most likely wasn’t a virgin to begin with. She knew–or should have known–at her age, what the circumstances were, and the likely consequences. At what age do you hold the putative innocents responsible? Any age seems arbitrary, once a male or female has reached puberty. You sound bitter for reasons unknown to me. This teacher-student thing happens far too often, that’s certain. But more often than not, it’s a female teacher and a male student. Do you decry the female teachers as much as you do here? Don’t get me wrong; I detest sexual predators, especially where children are the victims. But at 17 she isn’t, I wasn’t, and you weren’t, a child any longer.
You have misquoted Shakespeare, methinks. (See Hamlet Act 3, Scene 2).
Apart from that, your response totally baffles me. I said this whole age of consent thing is tricky territory. Yes, the girl is of consensual age. But we are talking about a HIGH SCHOOL teacher, not a college professor. This is a man entrusted by the public to educate young people who are not of legal drinking age and who cannot yet vote. The classroom is not a singles joint where older men are free to prey on young women (or, since you asked, where older women are free to prey on young men).
The teacher-student relationship is fraught with power, and anyone who is entrusted with the health, well-being, and education of young adults should understand that they should not abuse their powerful position to seduce a young adult. Like doctors, teachers should take an oath that says, “First, do no harm.”
The first commenter here said that this kind of affair might be a form of sexual harassment, and perhaps that’s the only way to categorize it legally. But morally and ethically? It’s wrong. Apparently you were seventeen once, so you know how impressionable young adults are. You know how much power a teacher wields. The fact that this guy is so delusional he doesn’t realize he abused his power is sick. The law’s the law, and the judge made the only call he could. But I agree with him: It’s gross, it’s awful, and the guy is a creep who should never, ever set foot in a classroom again.
As for your question about reversing the genders, of course I would decry it if a female teacher seduced a young man (or a young woman, for that matter). Can you spell Debra LaFave?
In response to another comment. See in context »It seems that I have incurred your wrath. But let me suffer your sarcasm and ask what leads you to believe that this teacher seduced the female student. Is it not possible that the student’s hormones were in need of attention, and that it was she who did the seducing?
I know that it’s infinitely arbitrary to pick a specific age when children become responsible for their actions–and that some children mature more quickly than others–but 17 seems to me to be an acceptable age.
In response to another comment. See in context »I see no difference between the sexual activity that might occur between a university professor and an 18 year-old, and the circumstances that you have addressed. The difference of one year does not a mature person make. I speculate that there are 21 year-old women and men–and far older–who fail to use good judgment when encountering a sexual proposal. The sexual coupling of man-woman is fraught with danger. Unless you have far more details than what you present here, how can you castrate the teacher so dismissively?
Debra LaFave–there I spelled it.
At the trial, the young student talked about receiving a come-on text from the teacher. She said, “Initially, I kind of remember reading it, and I was, like, it was inappropriate.” King’s lawyer paraphrased the text as saying something to the effect of “If I were your age, you would be someone I would be interested in.” So the teacher sought her out, and even she knew how inappropriate that was. (And for a teenager, that makes it all the more titillating.)Is that preying on a student? I say yes.
Sorry if this was unclear, but I have said several times that the judge made the right call. The law’s the law. I never said he should be guilty of sexual assault. But I categorically think that what the teacher did was morally and ethically wrong. He preyed on a high school student, and that’s indefensible.
It’s sort of funny that folks have spent the last few weeks counting Tiger Woods’ mistresses and tsk-tsking the affairs of a celebrity sports star, but the story of a high school teacher seducing a student is no big deal here. I haven’t followed l’affaire Tigre, and honestly, it’s none of my business. The difference here is the power balance between a teacher and a student and the fact that King was a public employee paid to educate children, not to seduce them.
Honestly, I find the responses here really interesting. I wonder why this touches a nerve for the folks who have commented. It seems so obvious to me to decry a smarmy teacher who hits on his 17-year-old student. Why the outrage over Tiger and not so much for this guy?
In response to another comment. See in context »I can’t speak for others, Patti, but at 70 years of age I know how anyone’s morality can be tested, and how easily anyone can make a mistake. So, while I condemn this teacher’s behavior, I’m pleased that I was never presented with such a situation. I can’t truly say what I would have done. It is my hope that I would have done the right thing, but I also know that I am a flawed person.
In response to another comment. See in context »Stupidity is not a crime, Ms. Hartigan, nor is it a reason for the rest of us to get our undies in a bundle. The teacher was stupid for being inappropriate towards a student, and the student was stupid for taking him up on it (and by her own admission she knew it was an out-of-bounds relationship, so let’s not feign her innocence. Again, she was 17, old enough to know better). But in both cases, it was mutual stupidity which was dealt with by the school. Case closed.
I’m not sure what the Woods case has to do with this, but I for one am more amused by the golden child’s fall from grace than I am horrified by his behavior. I do feel for his wife, however, who must be making a beeline to her nearest HIV clinic for screening. I guess stupidity is pretty rampant these days.
In response to another comment. See in context »Seriously, I’m a mother of a teenage girl, too, but I think you’re going way overboard here. The charge was sexual ASSAULT (emphasis mine). There was no assault here, and it’s questionable there was even statutory rape. The judgement was the correct one and probably shouldn’t have been brought to court in the first place. He was fired from his job, which was the right thing to do.
We seem to forget that only 50 years ago, girls were getting MARRIED at 17 and 18, right when they graduated high school. And sometimes they married men as old as this teacher. Obviously, I’m not suggesting we go back to this model, but let’s put this in context.
In response to another comment. See in context »I don’t want to gang up on Pattie, but I’m onboard with you.
In response to another comment. See in context »