The thought police are active again ... raises dangerous consequences -

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-15719369

They were '16' and '17' ??? What offence was committed here?

Answer is below;

Drury was found guilty of two counts of causing a child to engage in sexual activity by a person in a position of trust; two counts of inciting a child to engage in sexual activity by a person in a position of trust; two counts of engaging in sexual activity with a child by a person in a position of trust; six counts of making indecent photos of a child.

'Sentencing Drury, Judge James Spencer QC told him: "You became a teacher, you showed some talent at it but, from start to finish, you used it for your own purposes so you could exploit the children in your care.

"You did not maintain the boundaries which you should have done.

"You eroded those boundaries, you took advantage of their respect for you and what you did was you assaulted the girl, you were familiar with other girls and you encouraged them to behave in a way they weren't ready for.

"It's that breach of trust that makes your case so serious." '

I believe this is where the sentence came from.I don't really know enough to comment other than he went too far,but the sentence was to excessive.

difficult to comment on unless you know the full facts but when you look at separate incidents...16/17 year olds doing what comes naturally..anyone is now in danger if their premises are used and they know about it.

Sex has become the new weapon used by authorities to beat everyone into submission.

who on earth would want to be a teacher these days ?

veritas wrote:
difficult to comment on unless you know the full facts but when you look at separate incidents...16/17 year olds doing what comes naturally..anyone is now in danger if their premises are used and they know about it.

Sex has become the new weapon used by authorities to beat everyone into submission.

who on earth would want to be a teacher these days ?

If the facts are indeed accurate he was grooming students in his care for his own voyeurism!
You take responsibility for vulnerable people in your care and you have an ethical duty to protect them,not encourage them to fornicate while you watch masturbating!

I must say whilst I am horrified by the explosion of false allegations against teachers and the hundreds of innocent victims in jail, I also feel that a law protecting students under the care of adults such as teachers is important; even if willing, teachers should avoid any inappropriate contact with pupils. It's simply unfair to the young, putting pressure on them.

Innocent Accused wrote:
veritas wrote:
difficult to comment on unless you know the full facts but when you look at separate incidents...16/17 year olds doing what comes naturally..anyone is now in danger if their premises are used and they know about it.

Sex has become the new weapon used by authorities to beat everyone into submission.

who on earth would want to be a teacher these days ?

If the facts are indeed accurate he was grooming students in his care for his own voyeurism!
You take responsibility for vulnerable people in your care and you have an ethical duty to protect them,not encourage them to fornicate while you watch masturbating!

Students above the age of consent. What he did was 'inappropriate', but three years in prison is insane. Female teachers can have sex with 14 year old kids and more often than not get a slap on the wrist.

JK2006 wrote:
I must say whilst I am horrified by the explosion of false allegations against teachers and the hundreds of innocent victims in jail, I also feel that a law protecting students under the care of adults such as teachers is important; even if willing, teachers should avoid any inappropriate contact with pupils. It's simply unfair to the young, putting pressure on them.

As you often say, there's something sick about the human race.

Blackit wrote:
Female teachers can have sex with 14 year old kids and more often than not get a slap on the wrist.

Nonesense.

What this guy did was beyond the pale. This is an unusual case of predatory and completely exploitative voyeurism, and that his tariff is exemplary is pretty apparent.

Blackit wrote:
As you often say, there's something sick about the human race.

There certainly is. Teachers getting themselves off by persuading their pupils to fuck for their own personal entertainment is a good example of exactly how sick.

the sentence seems way too excessive and yes there needs to be barriers between teachers etc and those under their authority but did he force them to do what they were going to do naturally?

(as I say..one would need to have heard the case to fully know)

and where is the line to be drawn ?..

we watch a beautiful film by Zeffereli..Romeo & Juliet with teens and their first night of sex and marvel at the beauty of it all...and award it Oscars.

Now sex has been debased as a sordid tool to be twisted and used to suit a purpose. This story could be re-written with an entirely different angle on it .

but as I say..who the f*ck would be a teacher these days ?

Blackit wrote:
Innocent Accused wrote:
veritas wrote:
difficult to comment on unless you know the full facts but when you look at separate incidents...16/17 year olds doing what comes naturally..anyone is now in danger if their premises are used and they know about it.

Sex has become the new weapon used by authorities to beat everyone into submission.

who on earth would want to be a teacher these days ?

If the facts are indeed accurate he was grooming students in his care for his own voyeurism!
You take responsibility for vulnerable people in your care and you have an ethical duty to protect them,not encourage them to fornicate while you watch masturbating!

Students above the age of consent. What he did was 'inappropriate', but three years in prison is insane. Female teachers can have sex with 14 year old kids and more often than not get a slap on the wrist.

Agreed it was too much,in fact custodial itself was unnecessary.A wrecked career,and possibly a wrecked family is punishment.But it was still a crime,an abuse of trust etc etc.