Another teacher-student sex scandal...only both are legal adults

http://www.misstexas.org/images/2002/thumbs/03.jpg

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...n/3922768.html

CARROLLTON, Texas -- A 25-year-old, first-year teacher and former beauty queen faces criminal charges accusing her of having sex with an 18-year-old student.

Amy McElhenney, a Spanish teacher and cross-country coach, was charged with having an improper relationship with a student. The second-degree felony is punishable by up to 20 years in prison.

At 18, the Hebron High School student is one year past the age of consent in Texas. But McElhenney was charged under a law banning sexual relationships between educators and students even if the relationship is consensual and the student is of legal age.

Five Texas teachers have been convicted under the law since it went into effect in September 2003 and the close of 2005. Some say the law should contain provisions that distinguish for different ages and consent.

Police learned of the allegations against McElhenney when another student sent an anonymous note last month to a resource officer. The note indicated McElhenney's cell phone had personal text messages to and from the 18-year-old.

"Messages that were on there led us to believe there was a little bit more going on between the teacher and this student," said Carrollton police Sgt. David Sponhour.

McElhenney told investigators she thought their relationship was inappropriate but denied having a physical or sexual relationship with the student, police said.

However, the student told investigators in a written statement that he and McElhenney began a relationship in February and had sex several times at her apartment.

Lewisville Independent School District officials placed McElhenney on paid administrative leave May 11, and she was arrested May 25. In March, McElhenney turned in a resignation effective that day.

McElhenney represented Bexar County in the Miss Texas pageant in 2002.

In Ohio, it's part of the sexual battery (3rd degree felony) statute: http://onlinedocs.andersonpublishing...-h.htm&cp=PORC

Just had a case in Butler County that reminds me of this. She's getting off easy though:

http://www.journal-news.com/hp/conte...HERPLEA_s.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabvu2498

She's getting off easy though:

---

Compared to 20 years in prison, she's getting off easy, but losing the license she was worked so hard for would be difficult. It's the appropriate decision, though. She should not spend time in jail for this. That law needs to be changed.

Beauty queen hits the turning point of 25, life hasn't turned out to be what she thought, so she clings to the only thing she has to recapture those feelings of being the best thing since sliced bread. In the arms of a boy who represents those golden years. Pitiful somewhat. Predictable: that too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macro

Compared to 20 years in prison, she's getting off easy, but losing the license she was worked so hard for would be difficult. It's the appropriate decision, though. She should not spend time in jail for this. That law needs to be changed.

---

Under Ohio law, she was charged with Attempted Sexual Battery (because she didn't actually have contact with the student) and could have been sentenced to 18 months. If she'd had physical contact, it'd be sexual battery and that would have been up to 5 years.

That's in Ohio though. Texas still has parole.

Forgive me for being judgmental, but what is wrong with these women? Even discounting the effect that this could have on these boys -- the disregard for which could be chalked up to some kind of mental or psychological failing -- don't they want to have a relationship, sexual or otherwise, with an adult? Or do they just follow through in action with every fleeting feeling they ever have? I just don't see how something like this could be appealing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vaticanplum

Forgive me for being judgmental, but what is wrong with these women? Even discounting the effect that this could have on these boys -- the disregard for which could be chalked up to some kind of mental or psychological failing -- don't they want to have a relationship, sexual or otherwise, with an adult? Or do they just follow through in action with every fleeting feeling they ever have? I just don't see how something like this could be appealing.

---

I guess their older men couldnt please them. Besides 20 yrs is harsh especially when its an 18 and 25 yr old......

Other than them having a teacher/student relationship i dont see anything bad. She should probably be fired or resign and other than that nothing should be done. 25 yr old being intimate with an 18 yr old wont have any effect on the guy.

When you're 18 and you can die for your country, but can't drink a beer or have sex with your teacher, something is wrong. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beb30

25 yr old being intimate with an 18 yr old wont have any effect on the guy.

---

She reinforced the fact that women are nothing more than sex objects which was probably his view of them in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beb30

I guess their older men couldnt please them. Besides 20 yrs is harsh especially when its an 18 and 25 yr old......

---

Then she needs to find some different older men. I can't imagine that's really too difficult, so the fact that this was her choice says something about her motives.

Quote:

---

Other than them having a teacher/student relationship i dont see anything bad. She should probably be fired or resign and other than that nothing should be done. 25 yr old being intimate with an 18 yr old wont have any effect on the guy.

---

It's not the age thing, it's the fact that she's in a position of power over him. It's why some workplaces have similar rules, and age obviously isn't a factor there. The ramifications of having a relationship with your teacher CAN have an effect on somebody. I do agree that the sentence was harsh though. I think there might be a bit of "sending a message" involved given all of the similar high-profile cases lately, and these two just happened to be the unfortunate ones used.

Some attorney is going to make a name for him/herself defending this woman. A sexual relationship between two people of the age that a state defines as "majority" seems fairly well covered under the U.S. Constitution's right to privacy. If women can't be imprisoned for having an abortion, then they certainly shouldn't be imprisoned for %$#@ing another adult.

I can see how the state has a compelling interest in keeping professional distance between students and teachers... but... Termination -- not imprisonment -- seems like more than adequate means to deal with this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vaticanplum

It's not the age thing, it's the fact that she's in a position of power over him. It's why some workplaces have similar rules, and

---

I agree with those policies and your point. But those workplaces can terminate the culprits, not send them to prison.

Quote:

---

Ohio Revised Code § 2907.03. Sexual battery.

(A) No person shall engage in sexual conduct with another, not the spouse of the offender, when any of the following apply:

(1) The offender knowingly coerces the other person to submit by any means that would prevent resistance by a person of ordinary resolution.

(2) The offender knows that the other person's ability to appraise the nature of or control the other person's own conduct is substantially impaired.

(3) The offender knows that the other person submits because the other person is unaware that the act is being committed.

(4) The offender knows that the other person submits because the other person mistakenly identifies the offender as the other person's spouse.

(5) The offender is the other person's natural or adoptive parent, or a stepparent, or guardian, custodian, or person in loco parentis of the other person.

(6) The other person is in custody of law or a patient in a hospital or other institution, and the offender has supervisory or disciplinary authority over the other person.

(7) The offender is a teacher, administrator, coach, or other person in authority employed by or serving in a school for which the state board of education prescribes minimum standards pursuant to division (D) of section 3301.07 of the Revised Code, the other person is enrolled in or attends that school, and the offender is not enrolled in and does not attend that school.

(8) The other person is a minor, the offender is a teacher, administrator, coach, or other person in authority employed by or serving in an institution of higher education, and the other person is enrolled in or attends that institution.

(9) The other person is a minor, and the offender is the other person's athletic or other type of coach, is the other person's instructor, is the leader of a scouting troop of which the other person is a member, or is a person with temporary or occasional disciplinary control over the other person.

(10) The offender is a mental health professional, the other person is a mental health client or patient of the offender, and the offender induces the other person to submit by falsely representing to the other person that the sexual conduct is necessary for mental health treatment purposes.

(11) The other person is confined in a detention facility, and the offender is an employee of that detention facility.

(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of sexual battery, a felony of the third degree.

---

In Ohio the particular portion of the statute was added to give prosecutors another weapon to fight teachers/authority figures if some sort of sexual impropriety went on.

Cant prove rape or sexual assault??? Charge em with sexual battery...

Laws like this exist in almsot every state, and not just with sex crimes.

For inept prosecutors they're called "job security."