Message-ID: <53195asstr$1141161002@assm.asstr.org>
From: kellis <kellis@dhp.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: {ASSM} Trying the Teacher {Varkel} (MF oral) [2/3]
Lines: 210
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:10:02 -0500
Path: assm.asstr.org!not-for-mail
Approved: <assm@asstr.org>
Newsgroups: alt.sex.stories.moderated,alt.sex.stories
Followup-To: alt.sex.stories.d

Trying the Teacher
by Varkel
February, 2006


Part 2

The sharp-nosed judge announced in his sonorous voice, "Although the 
codes of justice in many states do outlaw sex between teacher and 
students, quite explicitly in some, the code of our great state does 
not.  Public Law 17, Section 4, prohibits sexual relations between an 
institutional employee and a committed inmate, offering prisons, 
orphanages and foster homes as examples.  It says nothing about teachers
and students.  Do you have any comment, Mr. Peele?"

"Well, only that it may have been the legislature's _intent_ --"

"If the legislature had meant schools, would it not have been simple for
it to add them to its short list of institutional types?"

"Uh, yes, your honor."

"This court will uphold the defense motion.  The five counts of sex with
a dependent ward are stricken from the indictment.  Is the defense ready
to present its closing argument?"

"Yes, your honor, and thank you," said Davis.

"Then you may proceed."

The defense attorney in his still wrinkled suit got to his feet and 
faced the jury with a smile.  "Ladies and gentlemen, you will recall me
saying that the prosecution has very few footprints in this case.  In 
fact it has exactly five -- those emails -- and faint footprints they 
are, for two reasons!  First it is no longer possible, if it ever was, 
to prove that in fact they were sent by the defendant, and second ...  
You haven't yet had the chance to study them carefully, but what do they
prove anyway?  That the defendant knew something about poetry?  Perhaps
that she wanted to awaken in this callow young athlete an appreciation 
for it?  Four of these emails are Shakespearean sonnets, written in the
place and during the historical period that was a subject of her class.
I submit to you that these emails, if they originated with the defendant
at all, constituted nothing more than a conscientious teacher's effort 
to instill some appreciation for life as it existed during recent 
European history, the area of her responsibility."

For a moment Davis studied the jurors thoughtfully.  The stared back at
him with interest.

"Now then, in fact the only testimony to prohibited action is the 
statement of Jason Bartry himself.  Everything else is someone quoting 
him.  How much of it, if any, is true?  That is your responsibility to 
decide, but consider this.  Do his reasons for betraying his teacher 
ring true?  Six of you have been teenage boys and the other six I'm sure
have had to deal with them.  You all have reason to know the power of 
teenage sex drives.  Can you imagine a teenage boy who felt guilty about
disobeying his mother?  Or about having sex with any female who would 
hold still?  Or in particular about harming another male to whom the 
woman is promised?

"You must have noticed that after introducing it via the guidance 
counselor, the prosecuting attorney failed to ask Jason about his threat
to commit suicide ... and Jason's failure to recall it himself when _I_
asked him about it.  I submit that Jason couldn't remember just what he
had told the counselor ... because _none_ of it was true!

"If untrue, then what _was_ his motive to ruin his teacher?  I think we
have shown you that.  Membership in the junior varsity is supremely 
important to any young man who has a chance for it.  But towards the 
close of tenth grade, Jason's chance was hanging by a thread -- his 
failing grade in ELPS.  In fact that thread had already snapped, but 
only the ELPS teacher knew it.  If she could be removed, somehow, his 
athletic chance might be saved.  In fact she was removed and Jason's 
ELPS failure was removed along with her.

"One last thing: the prosecutor put on a final witness to rebut Mr. 
Frew's testimony about spending that fateful Saturday night with his 
wife.  But did he rebut it in fact?  Hardly!  In fact he contradicted 
nothing from Mr. Frew.  What that witness actually did, however, was 
supply a key fact that I had wondered about.  If Jason was lying about 
everything, how did he know that Ms. Frew was actually and undeniably 
present in that motel on April 9?  Now we have the answer.  I submit 
that Jason, regardless of his unlicensed state, was following Mrs. Frew
that night.  He followed --"

"Objection!" cried the prosecutor.  "Assuming a fact not in evidence."

Davis retorted, "He was in the _driver's_ seat, your honor, a pretty 
clear inference."

"Overruled," said the judge.

Davis continued, "He followed her to the motel, saw her enter the office
then go to Room 27.  With this fact in mind, he began to get a glimmer 
of the way to save his plans for the junior varsity.  The rest is the 
story of a teenager without a conscience, willing to do and say whatever
it takes to get what he wants.  He'll say anything at all, including his
ability to return home in the early hours through a backdoor that his 
father carefully locked on every other night of the year!"

Davis paused, glancing around the jury's faces.  "He'll say anything at
all, including the defendant bringing glasses in her purse instead of 
using the motel's plastic cups, and most tellingly, reporting a ho-hum 
reaction to his first experience with a female.  Wasn't that remarkable?
How does it square with your memories?

"Please note that it squares perfectly with, 'Never happened!'

"Ladies and gentlemen, I've given you more than sufficient reasonable 
doubt.  I ask you to return a verdict of 'Not Guilty.'"

Davis took his seat.  The defendant smiled at him.

The judge said, "The prosecutor will make his closing argument."

"Thank you, your honor," said Peele, getting to his feet.  He smiled at
the jury.  "Ladies and gentlemen, you have heard the testimony that 
Jason Bartry, an unsophisticated 15-year-old, came to his guidance 
counselor for help when guilt for his actions became overwhelming.  You
have heard Jason's own report of how Ms. Frew took advantage of her 
authoritative position, not to speak of her shapely good looks, to 
seduce him.  You have heard confirmation that Jason was definitely at 
the Marris Inn on the second night of her indulgence.  You will be able
to study the email this scheming woman used to fire the defenseless 
lad's prurient imagination.  You have had the chance to study his 
winsome good looks.  Compare that to the looks of her husband and you 
can understand _her_ motive perfectly.  These facts and inferences alone
are enough to convince a jury with such knowledge of human nature as I 
see before me.

"But you've also been told a different interpretation of these facts.  
Let's consider that a moment.  According to the defense attorney, Jason
advanced his claims to the guidance counselor only as a diversion to 
further his chance of acceptance in the junior varsity the following 
year.  Let's suppose for a moment that such may indeed have been his 
motive for reporting Ms. Frew's conduct.  If true, _so what_?  That 
doesn't prove the two nights of depravity never happened.  And it's the
impure events of those two nights that she is charged with.

"Charged with -- but not really answered.  I call your attention, ladies
and gentlemen, to the most telling circumstance in this whole case.  You
must have noticed that the defendant did not take the stand to deny 
these charges out of her own mouth.  The people cannot call her to the 
stand because in this country a defendant may not be forced to testify 
against herself.  But 'Why didn't she come forward at her own request?'
you must ask yourselves.  'How could she endure saying nothing?'  And 
the most likely answer, as always, is that she_ cannot_ deny the charges
-- not while she is under oath.

"Indulge me one moment longer, ladies and gentlemen, and recall the 
movie _Tea and Sympathy_, with Deborah --"

"Objection!" shouted Davis.  "Totally irrelevant, immaterial and 
incompetent!"

Peele smiled beatifically.  "I'm about to use it as an example to infer
a kinder motive for Ms. Frew's action."

"I continue to object, your honor."

"Sustained," said the judge.

Peele frowned and hesitated, as if thrown off stride.  He took a deep 
breath.  "Whatever her motives may have been, she evidently did seduce 
her 15-year-old student into sexual perversion and did supply him 
intoxicating liquor to drink.  I request that you return a verdict of 
guilty on all counts.  Thank you, ladies and gentlemen."

As the prosecutor took his seat, the judge rotated in his swivel chair 
to face the jury.  "We have a bit over three hours left to us today.  
Before this case goes to the jury, I want it to consider the following 
points carefully.

"You, the jury, are the sole judges of the facts in this case.  Your 
main responsibility is to determine if they are true.  The defendant, 
Harriet Frew, is charged with five counts of Statutory Rape of a Minor,
two counts of Supplying Alcoholic Beverages to a Minor and one count of
Moral Turpitude in a Government Employee.  If you find that the 
defendant had sex with Mr. Bartry, she is by definition guilty of one or
more counts of the first charge, whether he desired it or not, because 
at the time of the alleged incidents he was 15 years old and below the 
age of consent.  And I point out that the law does not mention the 
gender of the participants.  This act is just as illegal whether the 
male or the female is the older.

"The second set of charges also depends on his age, because the law of 
this state prescribes that alcoholic beverages may not be supplied to 
anyone under 18.  The third charge of moral turpitude may be unclear to
some of you.  Here is how the law defines it."

The judge read from an open book.  "'Moral turpitude in a government 
employee is personal misconduct by an employee of the state or a local 
government, in the duties which such an employee owes to his fellow 
employees or the citizens of the state, which characterizes the behavior
as an act of baseness, vileness or depravity.'  Ms. Frew was an employee
of a local government, to wit the public schools of Graham County.  If 
you find that she acted in a base, vile or depraved manner toward Mr. 
Barty, then you must find her guilty on this count.

"I emphasize that your duty is not to judge based on your personal 
feelings but to follow the law.  Are the claims that the defendant broke
the law true or false?  You must decide separately in each of the five 
counts, the two counts and the one, and return a verdict of guilty or 
innocent on each.

"Now, then, for reasons that I shall not disclose at this time, since 
they may affect your deliberations, I must tell you that I shall order 
the jury sequestered if it cannot reach a verdict before six p.m. on 
each day of deliberations.  The jury may now retire and deliberate its
verdicts."

-- 
Pursuant to the Berne Convention, this work is copyright with all rights
reserved by its author unless explicitly indicated.
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| alt.sex.stories.moderated ------ send stories to: <story-submit@asstr.org>|
| FAQ: <http://assm.asstr.org/faq.html> Moderators: <story-admin@asstr.org> |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|ASSM Archive at <http://assm.asstr.org>   Hosted by <http://www.asstr.org> |
|Discuss this story and others in alt.sex.stories.d; look for subject {ASSD}|
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+