• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Arkansas teachers/student sex, FTW

highland145

highland145

Lifer
Arkansas high court overturns teacher-sex law


The Arkansas Supreme Court on Thursday struck down the state's law banning sexual contact between teachers and students, finding that people 18 or older have a constitutional right to engage in a consensual sexual relationship. The court sided with 38-year-old David Paschal, an Elkins High School history and psychology teacher who admitted having a five-month consensual sexual relationship with an 18-year-old student.

"Regardless of how we feel about Paschal's conduct, which could correctly referred to as reprehensible, we cannot abandon our duty to uphold the rule of law when a case presents distasteful facts," wrote Chief Justice Jim Hannah.
Attorneys for the state argued the law protects high school students from sexual advances of teachers who are in positions of authority. But the high court found the law was unconstitutional because it criminalized sexual conduct between consenting adults.
In a dissent, Justice Robert Brown said that the majority's opinion will cause disruption in high schools because there will be nothing to prevent teachers from having sex with students who are 18 or older.
"This will cause significant disruption in our high schools and have a deleterious impact on education in general and the teacher-student dynamic in particular," wrote Brown.
Click to expand...
 
In a dissent, Justice Robert Brown said that the majority's opinion will cause disruption in high schools because there will be nothing to prevent teachers from having sex with students who are 18 or older.
Click to expand...

I think there will still be that little thing called being fired and the reason why going on your 'service record' as a teacher to act as a major deterrent.
 
holy shit that teacher got 30 fucking years in prison for screwing his OF AGE student??? thats a load of bullshit right there.
 
But the high court found the law was unconstitutional because it criminalized sexual conduct between consenting adults.
Click to expand...

I think this is great. :thumbsup:

But it doesn't mean we can't discourage teachers and students from getting it on. Just like with any place of employment, the school can have an anti-fraternization policy. Just because it isn't against the law to have sex with a "coworker", doesn't mean that the "employer" can't fire you for breaking the policy. It also doesn't mean that the "subordinate" can't sue for sexual harassment.

I think this is how we should approach this.
 
Paschal_David_t598.jpg


The girl, NSWF.
 
:thumbsup:

teacher should still be fired, though. Ethics and such.


....and in before FDK laments the moral decrepitude of modern society and enabling pedophiles., blah blah blah.
 
SithSolo1 said:
I dunno about most people but I was out of high school before I turned 18.
Click to expand...

It seems to be split about 50/50 from what I can tell (my high school class, my wife's high school class, looking ahead for my kids' classes).

BTW, I turned 18 in the middle of my senior year of high school; My wife turned 18 in the middle of her freshman year of college.

With all the redshirted kids nowadays, this will come up more often in the future.

MotionMan
 
legally, I see nothing wrong with an adult teacher having a relationship with an adult student.

but if the teacher is their teacher, that should be considered grossly unprofessional and grounds for termination.
 
Paschal, who is serving a 30-year sentence, will have his convictions reversed and dismissed. His attorney, Casey Copeland, said his client was "vindicated by the Supreme Court."
Click to expand...
Damn.

I wonder if someone's going to end up cutting him a check for that.
 
jlee said:
Damn.

I wonder if someone's going to end up cutting him a check for that.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. I don't think overturned convictions based on supreme court rulings (state or federal) generally open up everyone to civil liability.

Good for him though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top