All EOS blogs All Spain blogs  Start your own blog Start your own blog 

Donna Gee - Spain's Grumpy Old Gran

SHARE THE MOANS AND GROANS OF AN IRRITABLE EXPAT BRITISH JOURNALIST

The legal joke that put Jeremy Forrest behind bars
01 July 2013 @ 00:22

SIR A CHILD ABDUCTOR?

DON'T BE SUCH AN ASS!

 
WHEN schoolteacher Jeremy Forrest and his 15-year-old girlfriend were on the run in France, I questioned why Sir’s romantic jaunt across the channel was being projected in the UK as a heinous crime.
Now I know the answer. Basically the poor guy is beginning a five-and-a-half jail sentence for having a relationship with a young lady who happened to be a few months below the legal age of consent.
That, for a schoolteacher like Forrest (pictured) is far more disgusting than abusing little girls - assuming you side with the barmy-brained bunglers whose job is to make the punishment fit the crime in Britain.
I’ve taken a straw poll among my friends…and have yet to find one who agrees with the Judge and jury over Forrest.
UK law is such an ass that there’s now a gag on publishing the name of the girl, even though it was blasted all over Europe during the frenzy to return her to the mother she now despises.
The  prejudiced guardians of 'justice' got their way as Forrest, 30, was branded a paedophile and sentenced to more than four times the jail term given to ex-BBC broadcaster Stuart Hall for offences against REAL children aged as young as nine.
This, despite the fact that Forrest’s ‘victim’ mouthed sweet nothings across the court and vowed tearfully to wait for him rather than end the bitter impasse with her mother.
Mum talks of an unbridgeable rift with the girl - but that will only get worse now she’s has had the man her daughter loves locked away for what must seem a lifetime.
I do not believe Jeremy Forrest is a bad person, though he clearly has relationship problems. But I am less than convinced when ex-pupils suddenly come out of the woodwork with allegations of impropriety. ‘Publicity stunt’ is the expression that comes to mind – particularly when the headlines are accompanied by a photo of the ‘victim’ which might just attract a call from a modelling agency.
As for the unfortunate mother, she should know that teenage girls can be a nightmare. My two daughters were impossible at one point – but take away their hopes and their dreams and they will never forgive you. Well, not for several years, anyway.
This vindictive Mum seemed obsessed with putting Forrest behind bars. She told the media he had “robbed my daughter of her childhood’’. In that case, what was the girl doing during the 15 years before she met Jeremy – putting out Forrest  fires?
I suspect the school and the girl’s mum teamed up with the UK police in that ‘Find, Flog and Finish-off Forrest’ campaign last autumn. The French cops weren’t interested because Forrest had committed no crime under their laws. And indeed would be committing no offence in Britain now if he was not in jail. The problem is the archaic British law which deems that a young woman  approaching her 16th birthday is as much a child as a three-year-old toddler. It matters not that a teenager  looks 18, 19 or 20 - any young man who has sexual relations with her is by implication a paedophile.
Forrest was ridiculously convicted of abducting a ‘child’ – even though that ‘child’ went with him willingly and may even have instigated the ‘escape to France’ plan.
Arguably the most ridiculous edict handed down by Judge Michael Lawson QC was to bar Forrest from working with children for life and order him to sign the sex offenders’ register. Alongside real perverts, for heaven’s sake.
The whole circus aime to make an example of someone who broke the rule that teachers mustn’t have relationships with pupils. Even if the teacher has the enthusiastic support and loyalty of the ‘victim’.
In the misleading parlance reserved for perceived paedophiles, the court was told that Forrest ‘’groomed’’ the girl for his evil ends. But in a school environment where  it’s fashionable to have a crush on a teacher, who’s to say it wasn’t the girl who did the grooming? The Forrest affair is not about child abduction. It is about two young people who find romance in impossible circumstances – and run away together to escape the ever-growing mayhem orchestrated by the girl’s mother and a police force determined not to be seen as plonker plods.
The only people who come out of the affair with honour are Forrest’s family. Respectable and well-spoken, they repeatedly insist Jeremy’s behaviour has been misunderstood – which is obvious from the way he’s been demonised by judge, jury and most of the media as if he were a reincarnated Jimmy Savile.
So there’s 14 years age difference between Jeremy and the girl who cost him his freedom and his livelihood. What’s the big deal? My son-in-law is 16 years older than my daughter – but no one objected to them marrying and bringing up three gorgeous kids.
In five years time, Forrest will be 35 and the girl 21 – and there will be nothing to stop them  marrying.
I hope it happens because the guy deserves a break. He’s not a killer, a bank robber or a drug dealer. He’s a schoolteacher who made a mistake and can never teach youngsters again.
His consolation is that he won’t have to look far for money when he eventually gets his freedom. The two-faced tabloids will be falling over each other to hear the other side of the story…and the spirit of Romeo and Juliet will live again.
Published in The Courier (www.thecourier.es) - June 28, 2013



Like 0




4 Comments


Sandra Piddock said:
01 July 2013 @ 09:29

Couldn't agree more, Donna. I remember my own school days, when an entire class of girls was in love with a student teacher. He taught art, and all of a sudden, we were all budding Picassos. We even pinned him down on the last day of term and took his trousers off - the poor guy is probably still traumatised.

Nobody could have blamed him if he'd taken up one of our blatant offers of eternal love and affection. However, if it had come to light, he'd have been the demon, even though we'd flaunted ourselves shamelessly. The law is indeed an ass.


Allan Francis said:
01 July 2013 @ 17:12

The man is a convicted paedophile. simple. Laws are to be obeyed. If you drive too fast in your car then you are a speeder - once again - simple. If the law was 15, then why not make it 14? ~then 13? Then 12? What the hell, lets make it 2!
Paedophile he is and will always be.


Mac said:
04 July 2013 @ 19:55

That's all very romantic but sorry but what is a 30 year old doing with a 15 year old full stop. Donna was your daughter 15 when she brought her future husband home? If my daughter at the age of 15 was going out with a 30 year old and on top of that her teacher I would deal with it personally. There is no excuse, there are limits and he crossed them. Age difference is not a problem when both parties are mature enough. I know some 15 year olds appear 18 or more but he knew she was 15 from the start and knew he was breaking the law which shows disrespect for her and the law. If it had happened in Spain he wouldn't have been labeled a Paedophile as the age of consent is 13 and nowadays I think we would all be surprised at the large number of 15 year olds who have already had relationships. So I can see that labeling him a paedophile may be a bit much from a Spanish perspective, but I certainly wouldn't stand for it. And that he should not be allowed to teach again? Definitely.
Going to prison for 5 years is way over the top though if there was consent by the girl. However if he actually does his 5 years, I very much doubt that Juliette will be waiting for him..she may hate her Mum, but by the time she is 20 she would have lived a bit and discovered new frontiers. The guy was stupid to even think that a 15 year could even control her emotions and should have known better. That said the courts have gone way over the top with his punishments and they have literally destroyed his life when dangerous criminals are walking free.



derekhek said:
19 July 2013 @ 16:15

I feel very sorry for Miss S. She went on a quiet break in France with her boyfriend and then finds all hell has been let loose. She is having a walk on the streets of Bordeaux when she is seized and restrained by a group of plain clothed officers whom she initially thought to be muggers. The problem could have been solved in a couple of minutes at that stage. The officers only had to ask Miss S if she was in Bordeaux of her own freewill and when she said yes the pair could have been released without further problems. The French could have gone back to the UK for further instructions as the girl is not a kidnap victim and Mr Forrest has not abducted her.

Instead the girl is arrested and if the media is correct was made to submit to a Medical examination even if she objected. That in itself seems to contravene the United Nations convention on the rights of the child to which both the UK and France are signatories. To that extent it appears Miss S was abused and assaulted by the authorities.

As a UK and EU citizen Miss S had a right to be in France. What were the reasons for her arrest? What had she done that called for her to be subjected to a medical examination? Has the Foreign Office protested to the French about the unlawful detention of a British citizen?

There are many things about this case that call for an answers by our legal authorities



Leave a comment

You don't have to be registered to leave a comment but it's quicker and easier if you are (and you also can get notified by email when others comment on the post). Please Sign In or Register now.

Name *
   
Spam protection: 
 
Your comment * (HTML not allowed)
 
 
(Items marked * are required)



 

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More information here. x