AP: Sexual misconduct plagues US schools

Gunny

Gold Member
Dec 27, 2004
44,689
6,860
198
The Republic of Texas
By MARTHA IRVINE and ROBERT TANNER, AP National Writers
2 hours, 20 minutes ago

The young teacher hung his head, avoiding eye contact. Yes, he had touched a fifth-grader's breast during recess. "I guess it was just lust of the flesh," he told his boss.

That got Gary C. Lindsey fired from his first teaching job in Oelwein, Iowa. But it didn't end his career. He taught for decades in Illinois and Iowa, fending off at least a half-dozen more abuse accusations.

When he finally surrendered his teaching license in 2004 — 40 years after that first little girl came forward — it wasn't a principal or a state agency that ended his career. It was one persistent victim and her parents.

Lindsey's case is just a small example of a widespread problem in American schools: sexual misconduct by the very teachers who are supposed to be nurturing the nation's children.

more ... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071021/ap_on_re_us/teacher_sex_abuse

Let the witchhunting begin ...:eusa_silenced:
 
why witchhunting?

Because that is the way us society overreacts to everything. Note, I am neither condoning nor excusing improper behavior. It should be punished.

Problem is, once accused, the teacher's reputation is DONE, win, lose or draw. He/she will be persecuted by the media, but if found innocent, will NOT be cleared of wrongdoing in the media with same amount of fervor they are mudraked before the trial.
 
Because that is the way us society overreacts to everything. Note, I am neither condoning nor excusing improper behavior. It should be punished.

Problem is, once accused, the teacher's reputation is DONE, win, lose or draw. He/she will be persecuted by the media, but if found innocent, will NOT be cleared of wrongdoing in the media with same amount of fervor they are mudraked before the trial.

I don't disagree. But isn't that the case with everything? The accusations are always page one; the unfoundeds or "not guilty" verdicts are on page 13... same with erroneous accusations.

I've always thought that people accused of sexual misconduct should be treated like the victims of sexual misconduct... their identity should be kept secret. After a conviction, the identity should be fair game. Just my opinion on the subject.
 
I don't disagree. But isn't that the case with everything? The accusations are always page one; the unfoundeds or "not guilty" verdicts are on page 13... same with erroneous accusations.

I've always thought that people accused of sexual misconduct should be treated like the victims of sexual misconduct... their identity should be kept secret. After a conviction, the identity should be fair game. Just my opinion on the subject.

I agree and would add I think the MSM should be held accountable for its slanderous, pretrial convictions and/or trying cases on page one before the fact. It is completely irresponsible behavior on their part, IMO.

The two absolute worst examples I can think of are Nancy Grace and Greta Van Susteren. I watched the former calling for some guy's head from minute one when she used to do trial coverage for Court TV, and the latter will beat a dead horse into microscopic particles and then beat on it some more.
 
I agree and would add I think the MSM should be held accountable for its slanderous, pretrial convictions and/or trying cases on page one before the fact. It is completely irresponsible behavior on their part, IMO.

The two absolute worst examples I can think of are Nancy Grace and Greta Van Susteren. I watched the former calling for some guy's head from minute one when she used to do trial coverage for Court TV, and the latter will beat a dead horse into microscopic particles and then beat on it some more.

It's difficult to hold media liable for defamation, particularly in the case of a public figure. That's not to say it can't be done, though. I agree with you about Nancy Grace and Greta Van Susteren. With Nancy Grace, in particular, it appears that if the accused is male and the victim female, she automatically assumes guilt. I find it particularly offensive, to tell the truth.
 
I agree and would add I think the MSM should be held accountable for its slanderous, pretrial convictions and/or trying cases on page one before the fact. It is completely irresponsible behavior on their part, IMO.

The two absolute worst examples I can think of are Nancy Grace and Greta Van Susteren. I watched the former calling for some guy's head from minute one when she used to do trial coverage for Court TV, and the latter will beat a dead horse into microscopic particles and then beat on it some more.[/QUOTE Grace has her counterpart on the same channel. by name of Glen Beck. It is my opinion that they should both be kicked off.
 
Nancy Grace is pretty ridiculous, even when you allow for the fact that it's a cable talk show and she's performing a little.

Back around 2000, when I retired and was on terminal leave and couold afford to sit around and watch TV in the afternoon, Nancy Grace did commentary on court TV for actual court cases. She was absolutely berserk after Scott Peterson.
 
I agree and would add I think the MSM should be held accountable for its slanderous, pretrial convictions and/or trying cases on page one before the fact. It is completely irresponsible behavior on their part, IMO.

The two absolute worst examples I can think of are Nancy Grace and Greta Van Susteren. I watched the former calling for some guy's head from minute one when she used to do trial coverage for Court TV, and the latter will beat a dead horse into microscopic particles and then beat on it some more.[/QUOTE Grace has her counterpart on the same channel. by name of Glen Beck. It is my opinion that they should both be kicked off.

Glen Beck doesn't do legal commentary for Court TV.
 
Grace is an example of what is wrong with a lot of this countries Prosecutors.

She does not care about unbiased fact checking, she does not believe in the innocent until proven guilty. She does not care about the truth. She cares about winning. And she decides right from the go what is and is not going to proceed. She decides without facts what happened and then proceeds to twist and bend everything after that into fitting into what she has decided is the facts. She has no problem lying when it suits her, no problem misrepresenting what someone says, no problem squashing evidence that does not fit her theory of facts. She has no problem mudslinging and character assassination.

And unfortunately for our Justice system SHE got that job because some people believe THAT is what a prosecutor should do. The Channel hired her and keeps her because they think she is a credible commentator based on her record as a Prosecutor and her comments in the past. She is for some a shining light and worthy of emulating.
 
Young teacher, the subject
Of schoolgirl fantasy
She wants him so badly
Knows what she wants to be
Inside her there's longing
This girl's an open page
Book marking - she's so close now
This girl is half his age

Don't stand, don't stand so
Don't stand so close to me
Don't stand, don't stand so
Don't stand so close to me

Her friends are so jealous
You know how bad girls get
Sometimes it's not so easy
To be the teacher's pet
Temptation, frustration
So bad it makes him cry
Wet bus stop, she's waiting
His car is warm and dry

<chorus>

Loose talk in the classroom
To hurt they try and try
Strong words in the staffroom
The accusations fly
It's no use, he sees her
He starts to shake and cough
Just like the old man in
That book by Nabokov

<chorus>

Nothing new. It was made quite clear to me by a female PT teacher when I was nearly 15 that there was an invitation to hanky panky in the school gym. I'm just angry with myself for being so shy that I didn't take her up on the offer.

Standing by for various incoming :eusa_doh:
 

Forum List

Back
Top