Christine Scarlett

Here’s a story about Christine Scarlett, something to add to our recent list of headscratchers about the colonial cousins and the sometimes odd attitudes they have to sex and the law. Rather different from the Genarlow Wilson case though, thankfully.

In fact, the treatment of Ms. Scarlett seems entirely reasonable.

Christine Scarlett, the former substitute teacher whose affair with
a special-education student attracted national attention, has avoided a
potentially salacious trial set to begin Monday.

Scarlett, 40,
pleaded guilty Friday to five felony charges related to her seduction
of Steven Bradigan, who was the 17-year-old captain of the Strongsville
High School football team when the relationship began in 2002. She bore
him a son the next year.

Their affair was exposed last year
after Bradigan, who has a hearing problem and a learning deficiency,
sued Scarlett and the Strongsville School District, accusing her of
taking advantage of his youth and disability and district officials of
failing to report her to police. A Cuyahoga County Common Pleas judge
threw out the case, which is now on appeal.

About 6 p.m.
Friday, in a last- ditch attempt to avoid trial, Scarlett pleaded
guilty to three counts of sexual battery and two counts of dis
seminating obscene materials to juveniles. She originally faced 18
felony sexual battery charges.

Punishment was not an element of
the plea deal; that will be entirely up to the judge, said Ryan Miday,
a spokesman for County Prosecutor Bill Mason.

Judge Dick
Ambrose could send her to prison for 17 years if he chooses to give her
the maximum penalty allowable at her sentencing June 12.

17 years would seem a little extreme as a sentence for the seduction of a 17 year old. Yes, I know, she was in loco parentis, was responsible for the young man, but still, that would be an incredibly long stretch for such a transgression.

Amazingly, given Wilson’s ten years, she seems to have faced a sensible judge:

The Strongsville substitute special education teacher who admitted a
lengthy sexual relationship with a student was sentenced to 3 days in
the county jail, six months electronic home monitoring, 5 years
probation and will have the reporting requirements that go with the
designation Sexually Oriented Offender for the next ten years.

Sounds reasonable to me at least. No, we don’t want teachers (male or female) seducing their students but there’s got to be a reasonable level of punishment.

11 responses

  1. Mark Wadsworth Avatar
    Mark Wadsworth

    Fair enough. But why did the lad go along with it and then sue her, eh? I know I wouldn’t have minded much…

  2. llamas Avatar
    llamas

    Er – before you go to judging the potential sentence of 17 years too harshly – just imagine if the genders were reversed and this was a 40-year-old male teacher who had an extensive affair with a learning-disabled 17-year-old student – male OR female. I will take a small wager that most people would find a 17-year sentence less-inappropriate in such a case.
    A double standard is always present in these cases. If the offender is male, then no punishment is too severe for the filthy paedo. If the offender is female, well, nudge, nudge, wink wink, boys will be boys, it can’t have been too bad, eh, if she were my teacher I wouldn’t mind, eh . . . ? One thing is for sure – if she had been a he, no way he would have got away with 3 days in jail and 6 months home-confinement.
    So much for gender equality, then.
    llater,
    llamas

  3. Whilst we might not want teachers sleeping with their pupils, I’m not sure that we actually want any level of criminal punishment whatsoever, if there is meaningful consent between the parties. It would be sufficient to use things like references, and firing people to make teachers think twice about sleeping with their pupils.

  4. This case is hard to judge because of the alleged learning difficulties of the “victim”. Are they severe enough to prevent him consenting? Doubtful if he had mind enough to bring a civil action against the teacher. I lean more towards Marcin’s comment that those we deem old enough to make sexual decisions, e.g. post-16, can do so. The consequences should be social more than legal.

  5. “Whilst we might not want teachers sleeping with their pupils, I’m not sure that we actually want any level of criminal punishment whatsoever, if there is meaningful consent between the parties.”
    If any teacher did it to my daughter, consensual or not, I would castrate the fucker personally. He would be found dead in a moorland ditch, decapitated.
    Tim adds: And to your son?

  6. Man bites dog. hahahahahaha

  7. Peter Spence Avatar
    Peter Spence

    “If any teacher did it to my daughter, consensual or not, I would castrate the fucker personally. He would be found dead in a moorland ditch, decapitated.”
    Gobby twat with no balls.

  8. Dear Tim,
    My apologies for the absurd comment I posted above – Peter has the measure of me.
    In mitigation, as you might know I suffer from Tourette Syndrome, and was self-medicating (Gallo’s Red Zinfandel) at the time.
    It won’t happen again.
    Reagrds,
    Martin.
    Tim adds: Forgiveness quite obviously not offered. I’m partial to the red Zinfandels myself, they’re actually the closest we get to pre-phylloxera French wines. So red-wine fuelled rants are of course entirely acceptable, with or without further medical afflictions that lead you (or others) to the vocabulary of Viz.
    But the public admission that you drink “Gallo”? Shame Mr. Kelly, Shame Indeed. Russian River sort of stuff, maybe, if that’s not, as result of the wine merchant not stocking it, possible, a Douro or Dao is a perfectly acceptable substitute.
    The swearing we all do at times and the least we can do is drink decent wine while we do so.

  9. student Avatar
    student

    Steven Bradigan was captain of our football team, and hardly sexually vulnerable. I feel sorry for this teacher on more than one level: first, that she was so lonely she actually considered Steve an appealing partner of equal maturity. Also, that I was able to find her in the online public records for registered sex offenders in my area – until now I hadn’t known she lived just a few houses down from mine. Sure, there are double standards, and there shouldn’t be – what needs to be addressed in these delicate situations are the circumstances involving these key players. Steve was 17, captain of our football team, and quite possibly the loudest person I’ve ever come to know, and not just because of his hearing disability – he chose to make himself heard in school. I can remember passing him down the crowded hallways countless times; he would be leaning against what was coincidentally my sophomore year locker with his football buddies, shouting to all the girls in the hallway requests to go “make out”. It was the running joke between him and whoever else thought it was funny. I won’t lie; I laughed too. I laughed even harder when I found out he was actually prosecuting someone else for sexually abusing him. Anyone who went to school with Steve or has any memory of him whatsoever I know is in complete disbelief – not of the fact that he would prosecute (nothing is below Steve Bradigan), but that the public actually is viewing him as this learning impaired child who didn’t know any better. So next time you see anything in the news, keep in mind the stories that you don’t see; the stories that you don’t hear. There’s always more than one.

  10. Whatthehell Avatar
    Whatthehell

    Is this site a safe haven for perverts? There is an honor roll kid in Georgia in Jail for ten years for having oral sex with a girl who was a year and a half younger than him. His classmate. His Peer. They both wanted it. They were both under 18. I can’t believe that we still have people hidden in our society that think 40 vs. 17 of any gender is Okay. If this is Okay, the young man should be able to vote, drink, and run for President.

  11. student Avatar
    student

    Whether or not the relationship was “okay” by anyone’s standards is not under question here. Morally found or not, the fact is that this was an on and off TWO YEAR RELATIONSHIP. They had a CHILD. At this point, it’s difficult to establish any sort of argument suggesting that Steven was taken advantage of. This was clearly a mutual circumstance, and for Steven to be banking on his “mental handicaps” to try and take custody of their daughter is completely ridiculous in my opinion. I’m pleased to see that in the end of June the court also agreed.
    As for the counts in Georgia…the same goes. Yet another classic example of the kind of boundaries that the government far too often feels justified in crossing.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Tim Worstall

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading