Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Teacher Fights Sex Statute Says Relationships With Students Over 16 A Privacy Right
Hartford Courant ^ | 5-27-06 | MATT BURGARD

Posted on 5/30/2006, 5:40:08 PM by Snickering Hound

A former high school teacher facing sexual assault charges says his arrest on suspicion of having sexual relations with a student violates a fundamental right guaranteed by both the state and federal constitutions.

Matthew Glasser, a former music teacher at Northwest Catholic High School, was arrested last year under a provision of the state's criminal code that makes having sex with students a crime, even if the student has reached 16 - the age of consent.

But in a motion filed in Superior Court in Hartford, Glasser claims the statute infringes on his constitutional right to privacy, which, he argues, includes engaging in a sexual relationship with another consenting adult. Glasser was 29 when the relationship is alleged to have taken place; the girl was 16.

"We believe that the statute infringes on a fundamental right to sexual privacy and therefore does not hold up under constitutional scrutiny," said Jeremy Donnelly, one of Glasser's lawyers.

Glasser is facing eight counts of second-degree sexual assault, a felony with a minimum mandatory sentence of nine months. The statute was drafted, in part, to prevent teachers and others from taking advantage of their position. Advocates for such laws argue that because teachers have so much sway, students are not truly able to consent.

But in the legal brief challenging his arrest, Glasser - while not admitting he had sex with the student - contends that the statute is inconsistent with years of legal precedent upholding the constitutional right to privacy.

The brief, which has yet to be argued before a Superior Court judge, contends that privacy rights cannot be infringed upon unless there's a "compelling state interest" in doing so; The brief goes on to say that the statute falls short of defining such an interest. A similar motion in the case of a New Haven teacher is pending before the state Supreme Court.

The legal challenge, Donnelly said, takes on only the criminalization of relationships between teachers and students, not school board policies or state licensing requirements that might prohibit such relationships. In Connecticut, public school teachers can lose their licenses over such relationships.

"There's nothing wrong with a school board saying this kind of conduct is impermissible under their policy; it's just the criminal aspect that doesn't hold up under scrutiny," he said.

Others disagree.

"I think it's appalling. It's sick," said Terri Miller, president of Sesame, a national organization that works to prevent sex abuse by educators. "To make a claim like this shows you how sick this person is, that they think they have some kind of constitutional right to take advantage of children."

Miller praised Connecticut for recognizing the difference between teachers and others who have authority over children, and other professions. Connecticut is one of more than two dozen states to criminalize sexual relations between teachers and students.

"As parents, we are mandated to place our children in the care of teachers on the faith that they will do everything they can to improve their lives and foster their development," Miller said. "To take advantage of that faith by trying to have sex with a child is disgusting, and of course it should be illegal."

One prominent constitutional expert said Glasser's challenge isn't likely to be well-received.

"I think that's an uphill battle," said Hartford lawyer Wesley Horton. "If the girl is 16 and the teacher is 29, there's a pretty strong interest in preventing that kind of conduct."

According to court records, Glasser made repeated overtures to the female student in early 2005 and, by the middle of April, she began spending the night at his apartment. The student told police she had sex with Glasser at least eight times until she decided to report their relationship to authorities on May 3, 2005, records say.

During an interview with detectives, the student provided several details of Glasser's bedroom, including a stuffed frog he kept on his bed, and police later found the frog in the bedroom during a search of the apartment, records say.

Glasser's motion closely mimics a similar legal challenge which is expected to be heard by the state Supreme Court later this year.

In that case, former New Haven high school teacher Van McKenzie-Adams is challenging his conviction on sexual assault charges after two former students complained that they had consensual sex with him on several occasions. McKenzie-Adams challenged his conviction to the state Appellate Court, which in turn transferred the case to the Supreme Court.

Richard Emanuel, McKenzie-Adams' attorney, claims that the state's sexual assault statute unfairly makes it illegal for teachers and other school officials to take part in sexual relationships that would be legal for people in other walks of life.

In particular, Emanuel notes in one legal brief, the statute prohibits teachers from having sex with students even if they are not in their class, or enrolled in the school where they teach. Emanuel notes that a teacher could be arrested under the statute even if the teacher meets the student outside of school, and is unaware that the student is a student.

On the other hand, Emanuel notes, such a relationship would be legal if the student had a sexual relationship with an older person who was not an educator.

William Gerace, one of Glasser's lawyers, said the challenge relies heavily on the McKenzie-Adams case. He and Donnelly have not enlisted the help of other constitutional experts or organizations to support their challenge.

"I'm not sure how successful the other case will be, but it will give us a good idea how successful we're going to be," Gerace said.

Sandra Tullius, the prosecutor handling the Glasser case, was not available to comment on Glasser's challenge. The case is headed to trial at Superior Court in Hartford, with no date set for the next hearing.


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; US: Connecticut
KEYWORDS: ageofconsentlaws; clintonlegacy; itsjustsex; libertarians; moralabsolutes; naughtyteacher; righttoprivacy; sex; sexualharassment; sicklibertarians; taxdollarsatwork; youpayforthis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-222 next last

1 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:40:16 PM by Snickering Hound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: VRWCmember; martin_fierro

naughty teacher ping. oops, wrong gender ; )


2 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:41:43 PM by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Snickering Hound

I've never understood the statutes that punish teachers for having sex with students . . . even if the students aren't in that teacher's class. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, but I think the person has a point. The age of consent is the age of consent. End of story.


3 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:42:13 PM by Bluegrass Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Snickering Hound

"Others disagree."




Exactly. Some think it should be 12 years old. Some say 6. And even if it were 6, some would claim that they thought the 5 year old was actually 6.


4 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:42:30 PM by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Snickering Hound
A former high school teacher facing sexual assault charges says his arrest on suspicion of having sexual relations with a student violates a fundamental right guaranteed by both the state and federal constitutions.

Can't wait to see the liberal-tarians come out and defend this guy...
5 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:42:32 PM by Antoninus (Ginty for US Senate -- NJ's primary day is June 6 -- www.gintyforsenate.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Snickering Hound

Sometimes, the snake of liberal standards starts to swallow its own tail.


6 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:44:05 PM by atomicpossum (Replies must follow approved guidelines or you will be kill-filed without appeal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bluegrass Conservative

Isn't the age of consent when people of similar age can marry?

Statutory rape laws are on top of this and is not mutually exclusive; they are meant to prevent adults taking advantage of immature people - like teenagers.


7 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:45:16 PM by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Snickering Hound
If someone like Mr. Glasser had tried this with on of my daughters...or tries it in the future with one of my granddaughters...he will find out just exactly where his "so-called" right ends, and where my right to protect my family with deadly force begins.

Sorry...but arguements like this really make my blood boil. IMHO, it's just a criminal trying to rationalize his behavior...nothing more.

8 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:45:31 PM by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bluegrass Conservative
As a teacher he is also a legal custodian of the minor child. "Inloco parentis" is the legal term I believe. As long as they have an official capacity for her welfare, such an affair would violate his legal constraints.

BUT I'm not a lawyer, so I may be partly wrong or completely wrong.

9 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:46:40 PM by theDentist (Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll. 17,400+ snide replies and counting!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel
Isn't the age of consent when people of similar age can marry?

The age of consent is the age that you can legally give consent to sexual activity. Once you hit that age, statutory rape is out the window.

10 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:46:49 PM by Bluegrass Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

I would defend him. This is no different than an employer trying to hook up with an intern. If the person is of legal age, then so be it. What good is an "age of consent" if it does not mean that.


11 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:48:02 PM by LetsRok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Snickering Hound

"...by the middle of April, she began spending the night at his apartment."

Should this teacher be in jail? Of course. What I want to know is, why isn't this child's PARENT in jail?


12 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:48:19 PM by Clioman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Snickering Hound

hmm... as much as I disapprove of teacher/student fraternizing, i've always had problems with laws that subject the rights one enjoys to their occupation.

either we're all equal or not. if sex with a 16 yo is bad, then ban it (as Rush would say).


13 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:48:26 PM by camle (Keep your mind open and somebody will fill if full of something for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bluegrass Conservative

Wrong. Its the same issue as sexual harassment. The teacher is abusing his authority.


14 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:49:43 PM by Little Ray (If you want to be a martyr, we want to martyr you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bluegrass Conservative
I've never understood the statutes that punish teachers for having sex with students . . . even if the students aren't in that teacher's class. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, but I think the person has a point.

I'm not saying it's right either, but an analogy would be that someone could be found guilty of sexual harassment if they were a work supervisor and had relations with someone who was an employee, even if the employee worked for an entirely different company.

15 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:49:56 PM by Yo-Yo (USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Snickering Hound

"... contends that the statute is inconsistent with years of legal precedent upholding the constitutional right to privacy." I see, so the right to hire the killing of an alive unborn child isn't far enough to stretch 'right to privacy', now it must be stretched to practice in conceiving the children to decide life or death over. Has this fool thought about what his plea will mean to the relationship between one in authority and one under authority? P-U what a maroon.


16 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:51:51 PM by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bluegrass Conservative
Many groups in Europe..and I'm sure here are advocating that the age of consent be lowered to as low as 8 years of age.
17 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:52:35 PM by Osage Orange (Most Congressmen are excellent Bovine Scatologist's)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bluegrass Conservative

Agree. After throwing down all restraints by lauding and encouraging homosexuality now they want to raise the flag here? Absurd.


18 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:52:53 PM by justshutupandtakeit (If you believe ANYTHING in the Treason Media you are a fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LetsRok
I would defend him. This is no different than an employer trying to hook up with an intern. If the person is of legal age, then so be it. What good is an "age of consent" if it does not mean that.

You're saying that a state or local government doesn't have the right to set laws that go beyond the "age of consent"? I have no problem with a state law that says that a teacher may not engage in intercourse with his student. You may not like the law, but to argue that it's unconstitutional is to say that we don't have the right to govern ourselves at the local level.
19 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:53:22 PM by Antoninus (Ginty for US Senate -- NJ's primary day is June 6 -- www.gintyforsenate.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Snickering Hound
Heh, I agree with the guy and hope he wins. If the age of consent in Connecticut is 16, it's perfectly legal for you, I, or five of our closest friends to have sex with a 16 year old girl. I'm not saying it's right, moral, or something that should be promoted, but it's certainly legal. If you don't want 29 year olds having sex with 16 year olds in Hartford, change the consent law.

This guy is being penalized not because of his action, but because of his job. Why is it legal for a 29 year old construction worker to sleep with a 16 year old, but not a 29 year old teacher? Privacy rights aside, it seems to utterly fail the constitutional equal protection clauses. The state cannot suspend your rights, including your right to free association, simply because of your employment status.

If you don't want 29 year old teachers to sleep with 16 year old girls, make it illegal for 29 year olds to sleep with 16 year olds. If you want to keep the age of consent at 16, you're going to have to deal with the reality that these types of situations are going to crop up, and deal with the repercussions at a school level (fire teachers who sleep with their own students, for example).
20 posted on 5/30/2006, 5:54:49 PM by Arthalion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-222 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson