Delores, Dolly, Humbert–perhaps they were characters in the Lolita story? I saw the movie so long ago that I don’t remember it well enough to discuss it any more. I think I read the book a couple decades ago too. I also had some sympathy for Ms. Letourneau after seeing the (slanted? biased?) movie, in which she had not seemed predatory. That’s all I was saying. You said it better!
Yahoo! News was reporting a judge lifted the no contact gag order. Stay tuned.
A lot of posters have used the “what if it were a 35-year old man and a 12 year old girl” retort.
What if it were a same sex couple?
Humbert was the guy. Dolores was the girl’s real name. Her mother called her Dolly, and Lolita was Humbert’s pet name for her. (IMO, Kubrick dropped the ball in the movie version in numerous ways, but not least was having the mother call her Lolita, instead of having Humbert “christen” her as his own.)
Anyway, Dangerosa has a point. Early on, it’s established that Dolores has a crush on Humbert, and their flirtation (“I have something in my eye!” “Oh, I’ll get it out!”) is mutual. And in the motel room, she’s eager to show him what she [ahem] learned at camp with a male counselor.
Likewise, Vili is said to have bragged to his friends that he could “get with the teach”. But, just as Humbert should have known better, so should MKL. And no offense, but when has a Lifetime Original Glurgefest not taken the woman’s side?
Here’s confirmation of that report.
If you think this story is getting a lot of play, imagine the level of coverage for Mary Kay had her father, John Schmitz, succeeded in his 1972 bid for the USA presidency.
I’m more astonished by the quote I heard on CNN this morning. It was something to the effect of if she’d KNOWN it was a FELONY to bang the kid she would have NEVER done it.
Drop the curtains. This society is finished.
It’s her fault they won’t have a normal childhood inthe same way that it’s the coalition country’s fault for contractor’s deaths when they won’t pay the ransom.
OTOH, if LeT really is as insane as some here think, sure, they’d have a bad childhood if nothing were done about the relationship, but sadly, nothing about it would be truly “abnormal” 
Now the story reminds me of when my nephew got married and everyone at the ceremony was making bets on how long the marriage would last before its inevitable, sad self-destruction.
Y’see, this is why I believe we should dramatically ratchet up the pay and perks of teachers… So we can be selective of who we let get an Education degree. Not only is she totally oblivious to the ethical inappropriateness of this, when she is a teacher and he is a pupil and a legal minor, but she needed it explained to her that this was a prosecutable offense? (BTW, that was the explanation she gave in the longer interview: that at the time she thought it was “illegal, but not a crime”[!!!] and she further elaborates that she did not even really understand what was the deal with felonies vs. misdemeanors) . However, it was not clear to me from the bit of interview that I heard whether she was referring to her conduct in the actual affair, or at her trial.
(OTOH I could understand a misapprehension as to what crime it was she was committing. Down here for instance she would just be guilty of lewd acts against a minor, because under the current Penal Code [we’re supposed to replace it in '05, but I’m not holding my breath], “rape” can only happen M–>F .)