Jeremy Forrest: Schoolgirl Speaks Of 'Crush'

Oh, in the name....

http://news.sky.com/story/1105646/jeremy-forrest-feared-schoolgirl-was-suicidal

Summing up the prosecution case, Richard Barton told the jury Forrest could be considered as a "paedophile" who had "groomed" the schoolgirl.

"You do not have to decide whether he was a paedophile; you may consider, in the context of what he did, that is not an inappropriate label for him," he said.

"It is about his desires to have that young sexual flesh, to satisfy his own carnal lusts. You may feel it had nothing to do with her, it was to do with him, with his desires.

"You may feel he is a man who is flattered by the attention of very young, vulnerable girls.

"There is a word for it. It's called grooming - being caring, being kind, being close, gaining confidence, gaining the trust of that person and then you can do what you want to do with them."


I swear the wrong person's in the dock; I'd be more concerned about the prosecution for forcing teenagers to recount every detail of their sex lives.

And she ISN'T very young; she appears to be mature beyond her years, and at least seems to know where babies come from, unlike her mother.

It is pretty horrific, isn't it. He can't have seen her all that often, and he had a wife that he hadn't had sex with for several months. He doesn't sound very carnal to me.

Me neither, Sabot. Anyway, the judge is supposed to sum up tomorrow, and the jury to retire. We can be as rude as we like once their verdict is in.

http://news.sky.com/story/1106082/jeremy-forrest-trial-jury-considers-verdict

The jury's out.

bb1 wrote:http://news.sky.com/story/1106082/jeremy-forrest-trial-jury-considers-verdict

The jury's out.

Bated Breath. But not my problem if he is found guilty. There are certain Legal instances which might damn him, simply because she was underage.
But I can't see it doing any good if they do find him guilty.

From what I've seen from the judge's summing up, he seemed less than impressed with the prosecution case. Dunno, we'll just have to wait and see.

bb1 wrote:From what I've seen from the judge's summing up, he seemed less than impressed with the prosecution case. Dunno, we'll just have to wait and see.

It could be reflected in The Sentence, if indeed there is one. Or is there some sort of minimum? But apart from his job, which is probably down the pan anyway, he will not suffer too greatly in the long term. He is obviously not a paedophile. Any fool can see that.

But I have to say that I am a bit worried about The Prosecution Lawyer who seems to know a bit too much about Young Flesh. That remark was very distasteful.

Sabot, that is exactly what I thought. Usually in this sort of case, it's the defence who are castigated for putting every single detail of the 'victim's' private life into the public domain.

I've never seen a prosecutor do it before, or talk about a teenage girl in such purient terms. Rather troubling, IMO.

bb1 wrote:Sabot, that is exactly what I thought. Usually in this sort of case, it's the defence who are castigated for putting every single detail of the 'victim's' private life into the public domain.

I've never seen a prosecutor do it before, or talk about a teenage girl in such purient terms. Rather troubling, IMO.

He actually made me feel sick, Bonny. But then she wasn't playing his game. So he had to make her look like an underage tart who got sucked in. That was disgraceful.

Verdict's in:

http://news.sky.com/story/1106195/jeremy-forrest-teacher-guilty-of-abduction

Teacher Jeremy Forrest has been found guilty of abducting a 15-year-old pupil at the school where he worked.

The 30-year-old, of Petts Wood, London, was convicted by a jury following an eight-day trial at Lewes Crown Court.

Jurors took around two hours to reach their verdict.

I am going to be fascinated to find out how they reached that conclusion.

Yer, seen it. But what I expected. Just more reason to lower the age of consent. Too many busty little girls these days.

Ah yes.....at the risk of sounding like a conspiraloon, that would suit certain agendas, wouldn't it? Bring an absolutely ridiculous case, in which the young lady concerned is more than capable of making up her own mind, and use it to 'prove' the age of consent should be lowered?

Why no-one had the sense to sit the pair of them down, tell him to get a divorce and to keep it in his trousers for a bit longer, I do not know.

Could that be it? Sixty years ago I was rake thin with no sign of ever developing breasts, let alone knowing anything about sex or where babies came from. Nowadays all fifteen year olds look at least eighteen and know exactly what it is all about. Meanwhile, men remain perpetually determined to get their end away with the best they can find. And she was decidedly good looking, willing, and able.
This is only my academic opinion, of course, and I do not in general despise men. Well, not all that much. But then I never complained about being groped.

At least it is time that some mothers paid more attention to what their daughters are up to.

Education authorities should perhaps consider more school trips camping up Welsh hillsides in the pouring rain, and fewer on airliners to LA, Sabot - they weren't exactly treating the girl like a child, were they?

And her mother seems to have been more concerned with her latest pregnancy by her latest boyfriend. At least the 'child' had enough sense not to get pregnant. Why on earth her mother thought getting the police, etc., involved was going to help, I do not know. Anyone with a grain of sense would have known making her feel persecuted was going to make things ten times worse, which it did. It caused the elopement, or whatever you want to call it.

The only person in this I am 100% sorry for is his poor wife; she was made a fool of quite badly enough, without having to repeat it all in court.

And his family seem like decent sorts, too.

I am pretty sure that, age, divorces and jail permitting, those two are going to be off together as soon as they can.

My God, not only does he write songs, do it eight times a night and take her to France, he goes to jail for her! What more could a teenager want?

The Mail comments are interesting, a great many people seem to think the law has been an ass.

What did I just say?

'I love you': Married teacher Jeremy Forrest mouths message to crying schoolgirl lover, 15, as he is found GUILTY of her abduction

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2345023/Married-teacher-Jeremy-Forrest-guilty-abducting-schoolgirl-lover-15-fled-France.html#ixzz2WmKgaXix
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


I can see a smash-hit reality TV show coming out of this....

TEACHER Jeremy Forrest told a schoolgirl “I love you” in court just moments before he was convicted of abducting the teen when she was just 15 and taking her to France.
The girl - who cannot be named - put her head in her hands and started crying as the verdict was announced.
When 30-year-old Forrest was taken down to the cells the girl said to him: “I’m sorry.”


Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4977429/jeremy-forrest-guilty-abducting-15-year-old-schoolgirl.html#ixzz2WmMRc7H1

I´m not defending him or accusing him, but, in my opinion, the girl with 15 is also responsible, she, even with 15, knows what is right or wrong, but she knew what she was doing.

Agree, Pedro. She did everything possible to help him in court, the whole thing is ridiculous. While he undeniably committed a crime under UK law, how anyone can think she was 'abducted' escapes me. It makes a mockery of a heinous crime.

And frankly, the prosecutor sounded more like a pervert than he did.

yes bb1, I agree with you.

Somedebody is going to make loads a money out of this, and I hope it is them.
British Justice has gone mad, and Britain is welcome to it. This would never have happened in France.

that prosecutor, if he had any decency, should have also thought in the wife of the teacher, but, clearly, for the prosecutor it seems that he had one concern: his own reputation.

Pedro Silva wrote:I´m not defending him or accusing him, but, in my opinion, the girl with 15 is also responsible, she, even with 15, knows what is right or wrong, but she knew what she was doing.

What is the age of consent in Portugal, Pedro?

There was never any Right or Wrong in this case. Beyond an Archaic Law. These girls are all switched on at 15. Tis time that someone worked that out.

I think Pedro said earlier in the thread that it was 14, but there is a 'grey' area between 14-16, which is eminently sensible.

You do realise that if our runaway schoolgirl HAD got pregnant, she would have been entitled to council housing, state support, hot and cold running social workers, etc?

bb1 wrote:Agree, Pedro. She did everything possible to help him in court, the whole thing is ridiculous. While he undeniably committed a crime under UK law, how anyone can think she was 'abducted' escapes me. It makes a mockery of a heinous crime.

And frankly, the prosecutor sounded more like a pervert than he did.

That was the most sickening thing of all. Not sure how to say how offended I was by that, and probably not my place anyway. But when The Prosecution starts exposing the one person that by nature of The Charge they should be protecting, then the only road is down hill.

about: "What is the age of consent in Portugal", in Portugal, until reach 18, it is considered a minor.