Me and her and an attic filled with frightening toys. . .
Did I not say she skeeved me? What do you propose doing, now that the law has freed her – vigilante justice, or what? You’re going to have to wait till she commits another crime before punishing her again. I make no predictions about the likelihood of her committing another crime; I merely note that she is free now. (Within the limits of sex-offender registration, etc., as Jodi pointed out.)
Undoubtedly many folks would be responding differently to an adult male and young female. Our society has fucked-up, sexist notions about sexuality–what else is new?
I have mixed feeligs about whether the goernment did the right thing in jailing her to begin with; but at this point, the government needs to butt the hell out, and let their dealings with one another resolve themselves.
Daniel
One other disturbing detail is that she apparently started her relationship with him when he was in second grade. Anyone who could be in a friendly, mentoring relationship with a child, starting when he was 7 or 8 years old, and then go on to prey on him sexually has some serious problems.
I saw the first part of an interview with Villi this morning on the Today show. The story hasn’t been posted, and I admit I was only half listening, but here’s what I thought I heard:
He wants to see her to figure out if he still wants to be with her
His daughters are being cared for by their grandmother. He wants them to see their mother, but he didn’t say he wants them to live with her.
He has tried to have relationships with other women, but the LeTorneau case is always an issue.
At the very least, we have a 21-year old man with two daughters, who doesn’t know whether he still wants to be with their mother, and who can’t build a relationship with any other woman because of his previous relationship.
So, yes, I’d say he was messed up by the experience. He’s trying to pick up the pieces, but now he has two daughters who also aren’t able to have a normal childhood.
And all this is because his teacher, who is supposed to be dedicated to helping her students get ready for adulthood and an independent life, is emotionally unstable.
At this point I’d say the burden of proof (morally if not legally) is for Ms. LeTorneau to prove she’s NOT a total loon. Otherwise, she should be kept as far away as possible from the people whose lives she’s already wrecked.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t she suffer from manic-depression? I remember hearing something about that, that she wouldn’t stay on her meds.
kunilou, if making a man unsure if he wants to be with you or not and making it difficult for him to form new relationships due to his history with you means a woman is a total loon, I know of several women who need restraining orders slapped on them, pronto.
Yes, his history is an issue. Of course it is, especially with all the media coverage. This won’t change if he gets to meet her.
No, he doesn’t know if he wants to be with her. Let him find out then.
Yes, she probably has mental problems. I believe she’s diagnosed as bi-polar. Many people are, and we don’t stop them from having relationships with other consenting adults, which is what he now is, due to that.
I think a lot of people romanticize her and her case. Hey, I was 12 myself once and had some hot-looking teachers. What could possibly be wrong about one of them fulfilling some boy’s wildest fantasy? In this case, quite a bit.
She was his teacher. A teacher’s basic mission is to teach, to impart life skills that you’ll find useful later on. Given the kid’s present situation–uneducated, unemployable, has two kids he hasn’t a clue how to raise–I’d have to conclude that she did a pretty punk job. I guess some of his problems might not be laid at her door, but if she’d exercised normal human restraint, he would at the very least have formed relationships in the past nine years with more age-appropriate partners.
I think a lot of people want to cut her slack because she represents a very specific teenage boy fantasy. Don’t. If she weren’t pretty, the inherent danger she poses to society would be obvious.
Don’t invent new laws to harrass her, just apply the ones already on the books to her in a fair and evenhanded way. And keep her the hell away from other children. This ain’t Tea and Sympathy.
I don’t disagree at all, Krok. I think what she did was absolutely wrong, abhorrant, etc. etc. I make no excuses for what she did. The question is what to do with her now.
I’d be more willing to accept that argument if she had only wreaked havoc on the lives of “consenting adults.” But she also wrecked the lives of the four children from her marriage and two children she had with Vilii.
Dangerous doesn’t just mean she’s carrying a gun.
By the way, the interview has been posted. here’s the link.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5612275/
5 and 7 according to the article I read this morning. She went to jail had the first baby (or vice versa, I don’t know) then got out, was told to stay away. The cops caught them in a car and she went back to jail and had the second girl there. At least according to the article.
I’d certainly think it would be strange. I wonder what they’ll think of this when they’re old enough to fully understand it.
BINGO! You nailed it. People think “Oh, she’s not that bad!” because she happens to fit some popular image of “beauty”. If she looked like my 5th grade teacher, she would still be locked up.
The Lifetime movie the other night told the story from her point of view. Things I perceived: He pursued her, after bragging to his friends that he was “going to get her,” like a love-struck boy. He offered her a shoulder to cry on when her father was dying and her husband didn’t offer anything other than, “What do you want me to do about it?” or words to that effect. At the first ‘big moment’ he begged her, saying “I need you” and “I can’t stand it anymore” (or wtte). He seemed like a very mature 12-year-old, as some 12-year-olds can. Considering how strong a sex drive can be, well, somehow, after seeing the movie, I was a bit perturbed by her having to register as a sex offender.
MizQuark - You’re ]perturbed that an adult that had sex with a 12 year old over whom she was in a position of power has to register as a sex offender? First of all, as you say, the movie seemed (to you) biased in her favour. You can’t say based on a TV movie what the real circumstances were. But even if the boy had “come on to her”, it was her responsibility, because of her age and her position as a teacher, to handle things correctly and legally. There is no excuse for what she did. Not that her husband was distant. Not that* he *come on to her. She knew what she was doing was wrong yet she did it anyway. Why shouldn’t she be a registered sex offender?
StG
StGermaine, yes I felt a little perturbed but not bent out of shape, because I didn’t know how much of the movie was slant or bias. But it certainly seemed no one had been raped–especially not him, by her. Of course she should have known better, but isn’t that quite often the case in sexual encounters–at least one of the participants should have known better, considering all the unwanted pregnancies, STDs, etc? I suspect they were both consenting, even if not both adults legally.
No twelve year old is capable of giving informed consent to a sex act with any adult. I don’t care what an “old soul” he seemed like to her, how vulnerable she was in her unhappy marriage, etc. If this is unclear, think of Kary Kay as a man and Vili as your 12-year-old daughter.
I distinctly remember attractive 21-year old student teachers effectively dispatching love-struck (or horny) 18-year old high school students.
Being “pursued” is not even a factor in what LeT chose (or may have thought she was driven by fate) to do.
So, Miz, you think she’s kind of like Humbert Humbert? Huh?
See, I’ve always had this thing with Lolita. Delores isn’t innocent. She is young. She is a child. She can not legally consent to sex. But she isn’t innocent. She seems to me to be fully aware of what she is doing - even as society absolves her of responsibility.
Humbert is wrong. But he happens to be the wrong guy in the wrong place with the wrong girl. He is also not innocent. And as an adult responsible. However, I doubt he would have seduced Lolita if she wasn’t busy seducing him. He doesn’t seem preditory to me. (That ass Dolly winds up with near the end of the book - he’s a preditory child molestor). But much more sympathetic than the “Humbert the child molester” theory.
I have some sympathy for Ms. Letourneau - perhaps she isn’t preditory. But she should have known better. And she should have kept herself under control. That was her responsibility. And that is the law.
There is some discussion over at The Volokh Conspiracy about the no-contact order. The legal minds over there think it may not be legally valid. Apparently the purpose of a non-contact order is to prevent the parollee from re-offending, and, because he is now of age, it is impossible to for her to commit the same offense again – at least with him.
I have no idea if this is correct or not. It may be relevant that she is on parole and not fully discharged, it may not.
In any case, it sure does look like the kid is now carrying some heavy baggage on account of her. Plus two more innocents who won’t have anything remotely resembling a normal childhood.
I agree with you that things would be very different if the genders were reversed. However, I would like to point out that in addition to the “protect innocent girls from sex” reaction we’d have there’s also the fact that it’s freaking dangerous for your average 12 year old to endure pregnancy and delivery. And again when she was 14? :eek:
Young men/boys don’t die in childbirth.
But that does not mean they should be having sex.