Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is not even clear in the articles which particular constitution the defense cited, the nation's or the state's. The answer need not be the same for both and since the defendant took a plea we'll never see it appealed and decided in court. We're left with only untested opinions.
She argued under the federal Constitution (source: https://www.al.com/news/huntsville/2...ds-guilty.html), which is the only equal protection claim she could have made as the Alabama Supreme Court ruled in 1999 that the Alabama Constitution does not have an equal protection provision:
Quote:
The representatives claim that the retirement-tax structure also violates an "equal-protection provision" they say is made up of §§ 1, 6, and 22 of the Alabama Constitution of 1901. Because we hold that Alabama has no such "equal-protection provision," we conclude that the court, in entering the summary judgment, was not denying equal protection guaranteed by the Alabama Constitution.
Note, this was a departure for the Alabama Supreme Court, which has previously combined two sections of the Alabama Supreme Court to find an equal protection guarantee under the State Constitution. As an aside, for those states that do have an equal protection clause in their constitutions, I have never seen their state supreme courts fail to copy the standard of reviews that the Supreme Court has done (e.g. rational basis vs. intermediate scrutiny vs. strict scrutiny). Thus, there is nothing untested. She has no relief under the Alabama Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court precedent fails to give her relief under a 14th Amendment claim either.
She argued under the federal Constitution (source: https://www.al.com/news/huntsville/2...ds-guilty.html), which is the only equal protection claim she could have made as the Alabama Supreme Court ruled in 1999 that the Alabama Constitution does not have an equal protection provision:
Note, this was a departure for the Alabama Supreme Court, which has previously combined two sections of the Alabama Supreme Court to find an equal protection guarantee under the State Constitution. As an aside, for those states that do have an equal protection clause in their constitutions, I have never seen their state supreme courts fail to copy the standard of reviews that the Supreme Court has done (e.g. rational basis vs. intermediate scrutiny vs. strict scrutiny). Thus, there is nothing untested. She has no relief under the Alabama Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court precedent fails to give her relief under a 14th Amendment claim either.
My bad; for some reason I read it as Georgia (which does have an equal protection clause,) maybe I only saw the Decatur part and made the wrong connection with the smaller of the two.
Society needs boundaries that we don't cross...and sex between students and teachers is right up at the top. Whatever the legalities are otherwise there needs to be some sort of penalty for those who cross it.
Actually, and I know I'll get flak, but I agree with her attorney's argument.
The principle is called "institutional abuse". A prison guard cannot have consensual sex, by definition, with a prisoner because of the status of the two individuals. The same goes for teachers and students, psychiatrist and patient, etc. Even boss and employee in private industry can be a tricky situation. I hope you get the idea.
It's not like she couldn't have gone to a different school to troll for young boys at football practice or whatever she was into. Or maybe she was afraid the kids at an unfamiliar school would laugh at the "old lady" hitting on them? And that would prove the point.
Those boys must have given her a work over, she's looking a little tired and haggard.
On a serious note can't see why some 47 yr old woman would want anything to do with 17 yr old boys. Surely if it was just sex she could have someone over 18, but whatever.
She's a creep. I don't' care if the boys wanted to or not, we wouldn't put up with this garbage if the sexes were reversed.
She should not be prosecuted since the boys were above the age of consent........but there should be a zero tolerance policy for this sort of thing. You have to fire her and possibly revoke her certification.
I think her being female takes some of the edge off it for some people. Imagine a 6'4" male volleyball coach/English teacher that has a relationship with a 17-year old girl. Even if it's "legal" in terms of consent, people would have a more visceral reaction.
I know for sure that if my high school calculus teacher had shown interest in me, I would have jumped all over it. Lord knows I can remember a number of mornings where I'd stand over her shoulder as she explained a concept before class. She was probably around 25 at the time and a beautiful & voluptuous southern belle.
I'm sure she knew I had a crush on her BUT.....she was mature and never did anything unprofessional. Always friendly and respectful but never crossed any lines. That's how it should be. For that, I'll always be grateful.
i think that the people who keep bringing up this perceived double standard where it would be treated differently if it were a female student and male teacher are projecting their own faults on the rest of us. i think most people understand that it should be treated the same no matter the gender of either person in the relationship.
i think i may have been able to nail a history teacher i had in the 10th grade. i totally should have made an attempt. after class she told me how impressed she was with how clear i wrote the essay answers. nobody is that impressed by my essay answers, she wanted the D and kept giving me the A's!
My last role as active duty Air Force was as superintendent of a training unit. All the instructors on my staff were enlisted people, but their class students were often superior ranking enlisted and officers.
Yet, they were forbidden from "unprofessional relationships" with any of their students because the instructor-student relationship gave them a degree of superior organizational power even when the students were superior in rank. That's because a failing grade from the instructor in the course would be chilling to the student's career. So the instructor had power even if the student was higher rank, and could coerce sexual favors.
In this case, despite the fact that the students were legal consensual adults, the teacher still had power over their school careers and could coerce sexual favors. This is somewhat like an employer-employee relationship as well.
Is it prosecutable as a crime? That depend on the wording and intent of the law. But it's unethical as hell, and the school should certainly fire a teacher for becoming involved with students.
A smart teacher keeps the clothes on and doesn't kiss, date, or have sex with students. This is not a teacher I would want teaching my children. She does not make good decisions. I don't care what the law says. If the students were over 21, I wouldn't care. At 17 and 18, they are still high school age.
What if your daughter (or son) WAS 21, in college, in a relationship with a 45 yr. old professor, who has gives out the grades?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
