Teacher claims it's her constitutional right to have sex with her students

[DGUtley]

A high school teacher claims it's her constitutional right to have sex with her students...

Alabama high school teacher, 47, who claimed it was her constitutional right to have sex with her students is jailed for just 18 months and ordered to register as a sex offender

• Former teacher and cheer coach Carrie Witt was sentenced to 10 years for sex with a student, but much of her sentence will be served on probation
• Witt pleaded guilty in March to one count of a school employee engaging in a sex act with a student
• Judge earlier dismissed charges against Witt after she argued law barring school staff from having sex with a student under 19 years old was unconstitutional
• Witt claimed her relationships with two students, ages 17 and 18, were consensual, and the 2010 law violated her right to privacy
• Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals later reversed ruling and reinstated charges against Witt
• In court on Thursday, Witt apologized and said she felt ashamed; she will spend just 18 months in state prison

45103167-9761135-image-a-23_1625582824486.jpg


Witt claimed that she was in a consensual relationship with the students, and that she was only prosecuted for being a school employee, which violated her 14th Amendment right to privacy and equal protection.


45102951-9761135-image-a-25_1625582856630.jpg


45102953-9761135-image-a-26_1625582866108.jpg


45102947-9761135-image-a-27_1625582869072.jpg


1f197f9de01bf5ebd656ababff944fa3.jpg


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...18-months.html

[FindersKeepers]

I always wondered why it was illegal for one adult, say a 30-year-old man (a teacher), to have sex with a student who is of legal age (18) while it's legal for his twin brother (a janitor) to have sex with the same student.

Personally, I think any teacher who feels that way about a student, ought not to be teaching, but it is arbitrary.

I guess it's because being a teacher is a "position of authority," but does that legal rule also hold true for personal trainers, pastors, softball coaches, employers, etc.?

I mean, if an 18-year old can legally consent to having sex, why does his/her choice of partner matter?

[carolina73]

I always wondered why it was illegal for one adult, say a 30-year-old man (a teacher), to have sex with a student who is of legal age (18) while it's legal for his twin brother (a janitor) to have sex with the same student.

Personally, I think any teacher who feels that way about a student, ought not to be teaching, but it is arbitrary.

I guess it's because being a teacher is a "position of authority," but does that legal rule also hold true for personal trainers, pastors, softball coaches, employers, etc.?

I mean, if an 18-year old can legally consent to having sex, why does his/her choice of partner matter?

Good question. I get the position of power argument but an employer would face social and job consequences but not legal consequences. Rape still requires lack of consent.
I actually thought it was ridiculous for these actresses who admitted they were prostitutes and slept with Weinstein for a acting gig. Then they complained about what they did 20 years later.

[DGUtley]

I always wondered why it was illegal for one adult, say a 30-year-old man (a teacher), to have sex with a student who is of legal age (18) while it's legal for his twin brother (a janitor) to have sex with the same student. Personally, I think any teacher who feels that way about a student, ought not to be teaching, but it is arbitrary. I guess it's because being a teacher is a "position of authority," but does that legal rule also hold true for personal trainers, pastors, softball coaches, employers, etc.? I mean, if an 18-year old can legally consent to having sex, why does his/her choice of partner matter?

It is not arbitrary - is based on the fact that those positions are positions of trust / power / authority - and the coercive influence or potential thereof. Coaches, pastors, trainers etc. - in Ohio, yes - illegal.

[FindersKeepers]

It is not arbitrary - is based on the fact that those positions are positions of trust / power / authority - and the coercive influence or potential thereof. Coaches, pastors, trainers etc. - in Ohio, yes - illegal.

Okay, I get that, and I can see where some may abuse positions of trust or authority in those situations. But, that makes it "non-consensual," or "coerced," no matter the age, and that's already illegal. Right?

The arbitrary part is in how it affects the 18 year old. He/she can be in a sexual relationship with anyone they so choose -- except certain individuals.

I find that odd. Why not just make all sex illegal for 18 year olds?

[FindersKeepers]

I actually thought it was ridiculous for these actresses who admitted they were prostitutes and slept with Weinstein for a acting gig. Then they complained about what they did 20 years later.

Yeah, that was odd. It's like it was Weinstein's fault for them choosing careers as hookers.

A prostitute that blames another for her choice of career. I can't figure that one out. But, they do.

I think they're probably ashamed of what they did so they're trying to revise the narrative to make themselves look like victims. It might be mainly a liberal thing.

[carolina73]

Not that it matters a great deal, but were these gay relationships or are they talking about male cheerleaders on her cheer squad? The sex of the victim often seems to be more of a factor when looking at consequences.

[Adelaide]

I always wondered why it was illegal for one adult, say a 30-year-old man (a teacher), to have sex with a student who is of legal age (18) while it's legal for his twin brother (a janitor) to have sex with the same student.

Personally, I think any teacher who feels that way about a student, ought not to be teaching, but it is arbitrary.

I guess it's because being a teacher is a "position of authority," but does that legal rule also hold true for personal trainers, pastors, softball coaches, employers, etc.?

I mean, if an 18-year old can legally consent to having sex, why does his/her choice of partner matter?

That would result in termination of employment and open up the individual to civil lawsuits, if not criminal prosecution, depending on the type of position of authority - any supervisor or employer would be in deep, deep $#@!, regardless of something being consensual. It is still considered to be a violation of workplace harassment and sexual harassment rules.

Also, professional organizations can impose major sanctions. If I were to have a relationship with one of my professors, they'd lose their job and likely be subject to having their psychological license suspended pending an investigation. I am unsure about other organizations (lawyers, physicians, etc.), but a core responsibility of psychologists is mentorship and training new psychologists so to violate that and engage unethically in an abuse of their power are two massive issues. The idea of a relationship with a patient is absolutely bonkers to me because I know the rules for in between professionals where there are already almost always hierarchies that would make it unethical and legally liable.

[The Xl]

If they were the age of consent, I agree with her. The whole power dynamic laws are probably unconstitutional.

[FindersKeepers]

That would result in termination of employment and open up the individual to civil lawsuits, if not criminal prosecution, depending on the type of position of authority - any supervisor or employer would be in deep, deep $#@!, regardless of something being consensual. It is still considered to be a violation of workplace harassment and sexual harassment rules.

Also, professional organizations can impose major sanctions. If I were to have a relationship with one of my professors, they'd lose their job and likely be subject to having their psychological license suspended pending an investigation. I am unsure about other organizations (lawyers, physicians, etc.), but a core responsibility of psychologists is mentorship and training new psychologists so to violate that and engage unethically in an abuse of their power are two massive issues. The idea of a relationship with a patient is absolutely bonkers to me because I know the rules for in between professionals where there are already almost always hierarchies that would make it unethical and legally liable.

Okay, so let's say you fall in love with a professor--not one that teaches you, but one you met at the library or something. Would that also get the professor fired?

Or, what if he transferred to another university--could you then see him?

For doctors, I would ask whether they could date any patient of the clinic where they work, not just their patients?

Office affairs are always frowned upon, but I'm not sure there are a lot of legal consequences if both parties consent.

It's an interesting subject because I find it antiquated in a way that's similar to not letting young people date outside their race or religion. I do get it where someone can have undue influence over a gullible person, but I'm not sure that's usually the case.