Message Boards
Replies to '06/13 Teacher Sex Scandal, Part 2'
|
November 17, 2007, 1:33 pm PST
 Quote From: will6012 Red Herring: I assume that you know the meaning of the word, it has been used twice. It is a diversionary attempt. You know like throwing out words like Red Herring and inflammatory. By the way, they spell out your position.
INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty and whether you or anyone believes it in general or only when it conforms to their belief systems.
Joelle's witnesses. They contradicted her and her husband's testimony. Joelle and her husband said that they had a good relationship and the boys were always respectful. Her husband said nothing unusual about her relationship with a student she could all on a whim. Interesting. One of her witnesses said that he talked about suing her and he warned the incoming freshman to bring an attorney to deal with the teachers. He supposedly was telling rumors about her, but he is one of 5 boys she invites to her sleepover. normal dynamics in what universe.
Clear like. Matt was the only other student that testified to coming over her house. He says he was the only one there.No other student ever said that they were called. Her husband and her cousin said that they were there. Maybe, all the other students were clear about there LIKE OR DISLIKE.
Inappropriate relationship?? Last time I checked it was illegal for a 30 or 40 year old to date a minor. 17 is a minor. It is also questionable about when their relationship began. Her husband says that he MET her as a student in class, while her was a teacher. He did not say that he was is student and he became acquainted with her that summer. He implied that he MET and got to know her then.
So-called evidence: that is evidence by parties other than the parties who can actually corroborate them,which would only be the teacher and the boys. That is why, it is a he-said, she-said case. No alibis, no photos, but we have CODED NOTES and teenage games being played by a woman who prematurely left her childhood.
No matter, how anyone wants to flip it, these boys lost their innocence while in hgh school and the teacher started dating a 30 plus year old when she was a minor.
Red Herring: I assume that you know the meaning of the word, it has been used twice. It is a diversionary attempt. You know like throwing out words like Red Herring and inflammatory. By the way, they spell out your position.
I understand the meaning of the term. Every time you attempt to make a judgment about another poster based on your assumptions of their unbeknown to you opinions on OJ or Catholic priests or whatever, you are attempting to divert the real issue. I don't blame you, really. You have stated quite a bit of false information about this case (1. the case started when a female student complained - not true 2. the third boy recanted when he was pressured to do so - not true 3) the DA was sandbagged by the third boy recanting - not true, he recanted before the case started) and failed to cite your sources or give evidence of your assertions when specifically asked It seems all you have left are diversionary tactics. By the way, I didn't use the word inflammatory, and you don't know jack about my opinions on OJ.
INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty and whether you or anyone believes it in general or only when it conforms to their belief systems.
Again, there is the legal definition of innocent or guilty as determined by a trail. Then there is the reality of innocent or guilty using the general definitions that is determined by whether or not somebody actually commits the crime. You can disagree with a verdict while still understanding the legal definitions. That is not hypocrisy. Every case is different....many innocent people end up convicted and many guilty people are determined to be innocent. This is not rocket science.
He supposedly was telling rumors about her, but he is one of 5 boys she invites to her sleepover. normal dynamics in what universe.
The rumors came to light AFTER the sleep over. It is VERY normal for children to be well behaved and polite one day and disrespectful and disruptive another. Children are generally ruled by their whims, moods, and hormones rather than deeply set convictions.
It is also questionable about when their relationship began. Her husband says that he MET her as a student in class, while her was a teacher. He did not say that he was is student and he became acquainted with her that summer. He implied that he MET and got to know her then.
It is questionable only to you and people digging for a reason to condemn them. The people closest to the situation, including the school and state certification board, had NO questions or incriminating evidence about their marriage. He DID testify he was her teacher previously. If you have EVIDENCE that they have lied about their relationship, please CITE that evidence. Consult your "other source."
So-called evidence: that is evidence by parties other than the parties who can actually corroborate them,which would only be the teacher and the boys.
The boys both ADMITTED that they lied or misled people during the various depositions and formal questioning of the investigation. Do you need be to bump that post for you?
No matter, how anyone wants to flip it, these boys lost their innocence while in hgh school and the teacher started dating a 30 plus year old when she was a minor.
One more time, CITE your evidence. No matter how YOU want to flip it, you are making assertions that are either flat out false, or you are unable or unwilling to verify with any facts or evidence.
|
|
Return to the Message Board
