Professor, 30, student, 50. Is consensual sex OK?
We can appreciate the restraint of the Georgia Supreme Court in deferring to the General Assembly on the matter of a teacher-coach having sex with a 16-year-old she’d previously taught. It’s now up to the Legislature to make it perfectly clear in the law that it is sexual assault.
The case comes from Richmond County. The Supreme Court decided 5-2 that the Harlem High School teacher-coach was wrongly convicted of sexual assault because the girl, at 16, was old enough to give consent. The majority concluded that consent was a legitimate defense — and the teacher should have been able to argue it at trial.
The majority opinion, written by retiring Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears, gave real deference to the Legislature, deference that should be a bedrock for the judiciary. In this instance, the majority noted that in three instances the Legislature defines illegal sexual contact in a school, hospital or involving a person under care by a counselor.
The teacher was charged under the provision related to “a supervisor of another person” in school. It is, likewise, illegal sexual assault for a psychotherapist to have sex with a patient, a cop or jailer to have sex with anybody in their custody or an employee of a long-term care facility to have sex with any resident or patient. The court pointed out that only the section applying to law enforcement officials and psychotherapists includes the language: “Consent of the victim shall not be a defense to a prosecution.”
Since the girl was 16, old enough to give consent, and not a student of the teacher at the time of the sexual relationship, the majority overturned the conviction, saying: “We will not usurp the General Assembly’s legislative role” by extending the “consent…not a defense” language to the high school student-teacher case.
Justice George Carley, a reliable strict constructionist, and Justice Hugh Thompson disagreed that the language of “consent…not a defense” did not apply. “Although the majority accurately quotes many rules of statutory construction, it fails to apply them correctly, and the result is disturbing,” wrote Carley. “A statute enacted in pertinent part to protect students from exploitation by teachers, is now almost useless…”
This is an instance where I’d like to preserve the judicial restraint of the majority with respect to the legislative branch for all future decisions. And I’d urge the General Assembly to come back in January and make certain that its intent is clear: When a teacher-student in the same school are involved, the student should be regarded as a person in custody.
The majority says that automatically assuming that a student cannot give consent means that, as summarized by the court’s public information officer Jane Hansen, “a 30-year-old law school professor would be guilty of sexual assault for having an encounter with a 50-year-old law school student.”
He/she could. Yes. Thirty-year-old law professors should be aware of that.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
93 comments Add your comment
Dr. Siggie
June 16th, 2009
9:12 am
Obsessing over other people’s sex lives: the Republican national passtime. How gratifying!
Just Because
June 16th, 2009
9:20 am
Dr Siggie – you are a TOOL!
DX
June 16th, 2009
9:27 am
Dr., That’s all they have, poor Republicans, they are not inclined to try it for themselves.
sd
June 16th, 2009
9:28 am
There doesn’t seem to be a victim in the Richmond County case. I say let her go. Drop the charges and let the law stand where it does. 16 is old enough to give consent.
Redneck Convert
June 16th, 2009
9:28 am
Well, you might of knowed they would butt in to peoples private life. That 50 year old law student ought to be locked up for taking advantage of a 30 year old kid. I don’t care what kind of job he had. You got all kind of women out there just lusting to take advantage of younger people.
Anyhow, us rednecks take a dim view of people doing You Know What. Down here in the South, we can handle ax murders and stealing and just about everything else. But when You Know What is involved, we don’t have no patience. If you do You Know What in GA, somebody’s going to jail. It just ain’t right. I reckon we can halfway accept this Horsley guy and his mule, but if it’s between two people, that just crosses the line.
That’s my opinion and it’s very true. Have a good day everybody.
clyde
June 16th, 2009
9:37 am
I just wonder what would have happened if the shes had been changed to hes.Jail time for someone,no doubt.
One Voice
June 16th, 2009
9:41 am
I think Wooten is fantasizing about finally going to college to get an education and then encountering a young professor there who will hit on him. It’s okay to fantasize about having an education (although you should have actually done something about it many years ago), but let the sex stuff go, Wooten. Let it go. It’s much too creepy.
Barbie
June 16th, 2009
9:43 am
Why would any 30 year old want to have sex with someone as ancient as 50? Wrinkles. Saggy. Ewwwwwwww!
Greg
June 16th, 2009
9:45 am
Sex between a student and teacher is always a bad idea even if it is not illegal. Its a bad idea between employer/employee, etc, etc. Yeah guy, the women these days are hot-to-trot but stay cool ’cause they don’t play fair!
A. E. Wise
June 16th, 2009
9:52 am
There is a big difference (I hop;e there still is) between “improper” and “criminal”. Sex between a 30 year old and a 50 year old might be a legitimate reason for enforcing a rule, but in no way can it be a legitimate violation of law on its own. There might be other criminal implications like where it takes place or infidelity.
Churchill's MOM
June 16th, 2009
9:56 am
All men think about is SEX but here’s our next President
Sarah Palin can be the Republican nominee in 2012. I am not saying she will be, but she can be.
Those who underestimate her do so at their own risk. She projects a tough but warm personality. Her most famous line — “You know what they say the difference is between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick!” — reflects that. She is a conservative in an increasingly conservative party.
And though the McCain-Palin ticket went down to defeat in 2008, she has not faded away. In fact, she showed last week how easy it is for her to dominate the news cycle.
She attacked David Letterman last Wednesday for making what she called a “crude, sexist, perverted” joke about her daughter, and by Friday she was being interviewed by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer and spending far more time talking about energy policy, the deficit, Israel and North Korea than about David Letterman.
True, her approval rating as governor of Alaska has dropped to 54 percent, her lowest ever, but it is not that far below Barack Obama’s national approval rating of 62 percent.
There is little doubt that Obama is the most popular politician in America (and probably the world). Yet when voters were asked last week in a Diageo/Hotline poll if they would reelect Obama today or would like to see “someone else” be elected president, Obama got 46 percent, and “someone else” got 30 percent. That’s a nice margin for Obama, but it’s not astronomical.
And someone has to run against him in 2012, if only for the sake of tradition. (We haven’t had a presidential candidate run unopposed since George Washington did it in 1789 and 1792.)
That someone could be Sarah Palin, if she does seven things right now:
1. DUMP ALASKA. She doesn’t need to run for reelection for governor in 2010 for name recognition or to get media attention. And being a governor these days is like having a target on your back. (Republican Tim Pawlenty, who has his own plans for 2012, announced earlier this month that he will not seek election to a third term as governor of Minnesota.) But there is a bigger reason for Palin to give up the governorship: Maybe you can see Russia from Alaska, but you can’t see Iowa and New Hampshire from Alaska. Alaska is too far away from where she needs to be. She can live, skimobile and hunt moose in Alaska, but she needs to spend a lot of travel time in the Lower 48 without having to run back to Juneau every week.
2. SURROUND YOURSELF WITH PEOPLE SMARTER THAN YOU ARE. That shouldn’t be hard, her opponents will say. OK, let them laugh. They laughed at George W. Bush when he ran for president in 2000 and at Arnold Schwarzenegger when he ran for governor of California in 2003. Both benefited from low expectations and smart staffs.
I am not one of those people who believe that staffs win or lose elections — candidates win or lose elections — but the Democratic presidential race in 2008 certainly demonstrated the difference that staffs can make. Hillary Clinton assembled a staff of loyal people who were largely inexperienced in presidential campaigning. Barack Obama assembled a staff of loyal people who were very experienced in presidential campaigning. It made a difference.
3. PICK A HANDFUL OF ISSUES AND STICK TO THEM. The increase in the size of government? The increase in the deficit? The increase in the role of Washington in people’s lives? All good issues for Republican primary voters. And all three are things Palin talks about already. And she shouldn’t worry if she gets attacked for being naive or simplistic. Ronald Reagan got pretty far with: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.’”
4. STUDY UP. Before CBS’s Katie Couric and ABC’s Charlie Gibson flew to Alaska to interview Palin, they studied hard, backed up by excellent research staffs that prepared a lot of material for them. Palin has to do the same before major interviews. While she is not bad at answering direct questions, she falls down on followup questions. She has to do what successful candidates do: Rehearse. The rule is that you have to study at least as hard as the people trying to trip you up.
5. DON’T BELIEVE YOU CAN’T DO IT. Palin’s critics point out that she is no Ronald Reagan, and that in tough times, voters are going to turn to potential candidates like Mitt Romney, who stress competence. But Palin has a chance because of what the Republican Party has become: a smaller, more conservative party that has already driven away many moderates and “soft” Republicans. The Republican Party today is like a star that has gone nova and collapsed to its densest core. While some potential nominees will try to sell a big-tent message, demanding that the party moderate its positions to win more voters, primaries are usually dominated by hard-core activists. This is where Palin has the potential to do well.
6. DON’T GO CHANGING. In her debate with Joe Biden, she did far better than most expected by being warm and passionate and by using everyday language like “I betcha” and “heckuva opportunity” and “darn right.” She even winked. It didn’t make her look dumb; it made her look human. She should not be afraid to stick with what has gotten her this far. She showed last week she is not afraid to be a mom standing up for her kid. But she also should not be afraid to take some risks and go back on “Saturday Night Live.” She should not be afraid to make fun of herself, even if plenty of others already are.
7. DON’T WORRY ABOUT FAILURE. Heck, there’s always 2016.
Churchill's MOM
June 16th, 2009
9:58 am
Since this happened in Augusta, let’s talk about the French Market rather than Duke’s. I never really liked their food anyway.
Big Bucks GOP doing the Lords work
June 16th, 2009
10:00 am
General Motors announced Tuesday that it had reached a tentative
agreement to sell its Swedish unit, Saab Automobile, to a consortium
led by Koenigsegg Automotive.
Koenigsegg, an unlisted company of just 45 employees based in
Angelholm, Sweden, turns out just a few “supercars” — high-performance
sports cars costing more than $1 million each — per year.
The companies said they had signed a memorandum of understanding,
contingent on $600 million of financing from the European Investment
Bank that is to be guaranteed by the Swedish government. They did not
release further financial details, but Saab has said it would need
about $1 billion to upgrade its operations.
Big Bucks GOP doing the Lords work
June 16th, 2009
10:02 am
Porsche may sell a stake for as much as 2.5 billion euros, or about
$3.45 billion, to Qatar as the German automaker seeks to cut debt and
stay independent of Volkswagen, Bloomberg News reports, citing two
unidentified people familiar with the situation.
Big Bucks GOP doing the Lords work
June 16th, 2009
10:04 am
Six Flags will not sell assets or reduce its workforce as a result of
its Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing, the theme park operator’s chief told
CNBC.
Big Bucks GOP doing the Lords work
June 16th, 2009
10:08 am
Japan’s public pension fund, the world’s largest with about $1.2
trillion in reserves, said it may sell Japanese government bonds this
year to cover payments.
Big Bucks GOP doing the Lords work
June 16th, 2009
10:09 am
A lawyer for the American International Group told jurors on Monday
that its former chief executive, Maurice R. Greenberg, plundered an
A.I.G. retirement program of billions of dollars because he was angry
at being forced out of the company.
Big Bucks GOP doing the Lords work
June 16th, 2009
10:11 am
Lincoln National, the insurance company, said it would take nearly $1
billion in federal bailout funds, issue new stock and debt, and sell
its British insurance business in an effort to shore up its
deteriorating capital base.
Big Bucks GOP doing the Lords work
June 16th, 2009
10:12 am
Lehman Brothers, the investment bank liquidating in bankruptcy, paid
its restructuring adviser, Alvarez & Marsal, $77.3 million in fees,
according a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission
U Da Moron
June 16th, 2009
10:19 am
BBGOPDTLW: Let’s get back on track here, buddy – this is about sex, not politics. ADD, buddy?
Ironman Carmichael
June 16th, 2009
10:21 am
Is Jim Wooten just writing filler for effect, pandering to the assumed prudery of his fan base, or is he really the sexually frustrated, keyhole-peeking old maid this particular column gives every impression of him being? Mind your own business! They’re both over 21. Would it make him feel better if the student and the professor were both conservative Republicans?
clyde
June 16th, 2009
10:25 am
Barbie,
I’m betting your opinion will change when you hit 50.
Ray Pugh
June 16th, 2009
10:32 am
The more I realize it, most of the unsavory traits social conservatives exhibit stems from the fact that they didn’t get any in high school…
David
June 16th, 2009
10:37 am
If yo uare old enough to have sex, you are old enough to have sex – when, where, how, and how much. The fact that you met them in a particular place is of no ones concern. If you are old enough to have sex, then you are old enough to say “no” when, where, how and how often you want. Old enough to have sex means you are old enough to make decisions for yourself. The courts and the legislature need to butt out of private lives and stop trying to back door revenge against former lovers if things don’t work out.
J.D.
June 16th, 2009
10:42 am
Amen, Clyde.
gayblackcripple
June 16th, 2009
10:48 am
I just hope Churchill’s MOM is psychic.
Huckabee/Palin in 2012, 2016!!!
Palin/Anyone in 2020, 2024, 2028, 2032, 2036!!!!
GOOOOOOOOOOOOOO rightwing zealots!!!!!!!
sd
June 16th, 2009
10:50 am
Right on David.
Ramblin Wrecker
June 16th, 2009
10:54 am
It’s real simple. Once a person has reached the age of consent, it isn’t a crime to have sex. It’s still morally questionable, but not illegal. Even though people like Jim Wooten wished everything immoral was also illegal. (Even though he wants judges to read the constitution as it is written, but feels rights are unnecessary). Go figure.
The way to prevent teachers from having sex with students who are of consenting age is to make a law that says you lose your job for such an act. You don’t go to jail and become labeled as a sex offender, but you lose your priviledge to be a teacher of non-adults.
Let’s be realistic, none of these sex laws should apply to any school where the teacher and student are both adults. So Wooten’s smug assessment that a college professor could be prosecuted for having sex with a consenting adult student, is stupid.
Mutts-R-Stupid-especially-journalism-majors
June 16th, 2009
11:06 am
Is this fiasco what Judge Slutomeyer implied when she said a woman of color could reach a better legal decision than a white male? It seems that Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears’ court has clearly demonstrated that women of color do not make better, and certainly not right decisions. The problem of female teachers having sex with their female students is far more widespread than is generally known, and may exceed that of male teachers hitting on female students. There was the State Championship Walton High School girls volleyball coach who began having sex with a 13 year old girl in middle school, and continued while the girl was a student at Walton. The teacher is currently serving a prison sentence for this crime. FYI: The teacher was a graduate of the private Berry college, a religion affiliated school in Rome (methodist, presby, one of those off shots of catholicism). Yes, these molesters like to hide behind authority, both civil as teachers, and religious as church members and officers, making it very difficult for anyone to accuse or investigate them for their perversions and child molestations. Do you recall the 16 year old private school girl who did a count down to a head on collision with another car in an attempt to extort sex from another girl? She killed the mother of several children and her only penalty was court ordered psyic counseling, since mommy and daddy were rich and well connected. The story was not only dropped by the AJC, but the archives cleaned of the original story, as near as I can tell in doing research for this rant. My point is this: Was this girl a victim of a female teacher molesting her, and convincing her that the lesbo nature was her’s?
Reggie
June 16th, 2009
11:08 am
A trucker walks into a bar and orders a drink.
He sees a small man in a suit sitting next to him so he decides to mess with him while he waits, he grabs the small mans shot glass and downs the drink.
The man looks up at him and says.
“Come on man! Why did you have to do that!?”
The trucker laughs and says.
“Don’t worry little buddy, I’ll get you new drink.”
“Its not that.” Pined the little man.
“I was late for work, and when I get there they fire me.
When I get to the parking lot I find my car has been stolen, so I walk home.
When I get there I find my wife in bed with 2 other men!
And then when I’m sitting here deciding if I should end it all, you walk up and drink my poison!”
retiredds
June 16th, 2009
11:14 am
No surprises here. The Republican platform at its best: Sex, guns, religion (ours not yours), war (whether justified or not), supply-side economics, rule of law (when you agree with my interpretation), activist judges (when the judge rules differently than me), secession from the USA, etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum.
Rod
June 16th, 2009
11:14 am
Have you seen “today’s” 16 year olds? They’re far more sexually aware and educated than even 20 years ago. A 16 year old knows EXACTLY what he/she is doing.
Peadawg
June 16th, 2009
11:14 am
Ha Ha, nice one Reggie!!
retiredds
June 16th, 2009
11:17 am
Reggie, like your joke at 11:08. Humor is what we need more of. Too many taking (almost) everything too seriously these days.
Speaking of humor: Do you know the difference between humor and odor? Humor is a shift of wit.
deegee
June 16th, 2009
11:23 am
I think that a 16 year-old knows exactly what he/she is doing but doesn’t completely understand the consequences. An adult teacher knows the consequences. The teacher should behave like the adult and show some self control. Sex between teenagers, ala Gennarlo Wilson shouldn’t have criminal consequences. Sex between adults shouldn’t have criminal consequences. Sex between adults, over the age of 21, and teenagers should have criminal consequences for the adult if the teenager is in the custody of the adult.
Dave
June 16th, 2009
11:24 am
Didn’t the AJC have some big deal about a year ago for Wooten leaving? They were having some sort of a “try-out”, to see if they could find anyone else so out of touch with reality to take over this column. Guess they couldn’t find anyone else.
Doug
June 16th, 2009
11:25 am
So deegee – sex between a 25 yo teacher and a 19 yo student is illegal to you, but sex between two 13 yo students is alright?
That’s sick.
Mike Vick
June 16th, 2009
11:32 am
Is it okay?
I didn’t hear any of my dogz… uh, you know…. complain about it.
OhPishPosh
June 16th, 2009
11:32 am
We need to call it what it is. Any adult who engages in sex with a 16 year old is hard-up.
On the other hand, any 16 year old who looks for sex with an authoritative figure is missing something at home. That something is probably a father figure.
deegee
June 16th, 2009
11:33 am
Doug, you are taking this point to the logical extreme and making this a moral rather than a legal issue. If charges are brought against a 25 year old teacher by a 19 year old student then the 25 year old teacher may be found guilty after the case is argued in court. If two 13 year old children engage in sex, who is criminally liable?
Chris Broe
June 16th, 2009
11:47 am
Wooten is RIGHT! Nothing makes me angrier than reading about teacher/student sex. When I was in high school, I couldn’t get a teacher to sign a hall pass.
And now, it’s time for: “If Lincoln were a Schnauzer”……. “Four score and 49 years ago, our furbearers brought forth a new dalmation, conceived in littery and….”
I don’t know what has happened to Wooten. I guess he wants us all to realize that he doesn’t really harbor lunatic fringe fascist/rascist ideas, (it was just business all along). After all, we are what we sell out 2B. Mostly, Wooten doesn’t think it’s nice: us laughing at his 40-acres-and-a-mule mindset. Wooten don’t like hearin’ democrats laughing. He gets the crazy notion that they’re laughing at him, but, if we all apologize, (like he know’s we’re going to), maybe he can convince himself that we really didn’t mean it…..
2Bcontinued
itamazesme
June 16th, 2009
12:07 pm
Doug – it may sound sick to you BUT it happens. I get what deegee is saying. Two teens are totally different. Just this past weekend i witnessed to kids NO MORE than 14 yrs old, passionately kissing and grinding each other. As adults/parents we need to take the blinders off and realize that teens are exploring their sexuality these days. So although it sounds sick – it is more common than you will ever imagine.
Mutts-R-Stupid-especially-journalism-majors
June 16th, 2009
12:08 pm
Did ya catch the lawyer-in-chief telling the docs how to practice medicine yesterday on the boon tube? What the lying thieving lawyer did not say was that the reason health care costs are so high is because the lying thieving lawyers force all doc’s to practice defensive medicine. The doc’s have been doing this now for so long that it is automatic. Try this next time you visit the doc: on the family history form, just put down a couple of obscure disease as running in your family. By running, ah mean one member of the family has the disease, and rumor in the family is that great aunt Gertha also died from the disease, based solely on speculation by uneducated family members. The next thing you know, old defensive specialist doc quack will be ordering cat scans, mri scans, stress tests, you name it. Why? Well not because you family history showed any higher probability that YOU have the disease in question, and you certainly do not have any symptoms, but because of the low chance that you may one day have this disease, and some lying thieving lawyer scum bag can come back to the family history and say the doc is liable for not following up on your flimsy excuse for a hundred thousand dollars worth of tests for a disease for which you have no symptoms. Do ya want proof? Ok, here it is: General Electric makes these fancy CAT and MRI machine, and they want to sell more. The hospitals know that they do not need more, but hey if we have National Health Insurance covering EVERYONE there will be a lot more demand for tests for which people have no symtoms. SO our little pals at GE are now offering hospitals 100 million dollars worth of these machines on spec, at zero interest. The hospital only pays if they git reimbursement in excess of a certain amount. Hold on to your wallet, the clowns at Medicare who sponsor the “Scooter Store” ads on the boob tube are about to sponsor MRI and CAT scans for all, never mind that Medicare is bankrupt, and has been for several years now. Those clowns let fraud continue for decades as long as it does not exceed a certain dollar volume or the news media make the fraud an issue. Take these Community Mental Health Centers: 20 odd years ago, a wide spread fraud involving these centers occurred in Alabama, where people would fill out the application for a provider id number, and send it in to the State and the Feds in order to open a Community Mental Health Center. Since there was no initial survey of the physical site, and no review of patient records, these “providers” did not even have to open a physical site, like an office. They just had a mailing address. So once the provider had the valid id, they could just purchase a list of Medicare and Medicaid people, and submit electronic claims for them. The people were never seen, and certainly not treated. So after losing tens of millions of dollars to this fraud, Medicare finally required an initial survey of new community mental health providers, prior to issuing a provider id. This stopped the fraud in Alabama. But not in the other 49 states, where the fraud continued until a few years ago when this became public knowledge via the newspapers. Now initial surveys are required, but only after the idiots at Medicare had paid out tens of billions of our tax dollars to these thieves. As long as the scooter store is advertising on the boob tube to give their fancy electric scooters to FAT people at the expense of medicare, I will not support universal health care.
itamazesme
June 16th, 2009
12:09 pm
oops that sould be two kids.
Gator Nation
June 16th, 2009
12:13 pm
I thought conservatives were in favor of personal responsibility. The teacher should have known better, that’s for sure. But to relieve a 16 year old of their responsibility to govern their own thoughts and actions is also a mistake. We can’t expect adults to behave properly if we allow them to be irresponsible children and teens to begin with.
Redneck Convert
June 16th, 2009
12:21 pm
Well, I’m with Gator Nation. Throw the teacher and the 16 year old both in jail for fixing to sock us taxpayers with welfare and Peachcare and about every other kind of care to spend our taxes on. And make them get married to boot. Just do a strip search to make sure we ain’t carrying out a Gay Marriage.
williebkind
June 16th, 2009
12:32 pm
This is a loser question! Some form of SEX is what the liberals are about mostly–everything else comes afterwards.
The conservatives believe in sex too! You can not disregard a law stating consenting ages is that is the law. I think you should change the law which may or may not be good to raise the consenting age.
The teacher should be fired and the student kicked out of the school. Otherwise leave things alone.
Normal
June 16th, 2009
12:33 pm
If it’s not consentual, isn’t that rape?
Hmm
June 16th, 2009
12:44 pm
This makes no sense. If a person is old enough to consent then they are old enough to consent period. What difference does it make if a 16 year old sleeps with a 28 year old wal-mart employee or a 28 year old teacher, especially if the 16 year old was no longer a student of the 28 year old. At the most this teacher was guilty of making a bad judgement call.
PokeUINURI
June 16th, 2009
12:45 pm
It just goes to show you just how many of our laws are totally stupid and are oftentimes only a kneejerk reaction by self righteous zealots who feel the need to legislate others’ morality because it is not in line with theirs.