Rebecca Joynes is currently serving a six and a half year prison sentence
A teacher who was convicted for having sex with two boys, becoming pregnant by one, has been banned from the profession.
Maths teacher Rebecca Joynes, 31, was jailed for six and a half years in July last year after being found guilty of six counts of sexual activity with a child, after sleeping with one pupil before falling pregnant by a second while on police bail.
The Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) convened earlier this month via a virtual hearing, which Joynes did not attend, to consider her professional conduct. A panel recommended she be banned from teaching.
Rape. She raped those boys. Use the correct terminology.
Legally speaking women cannot be rapists in the UK at least from what I remember.
Do I look like I give a fuck what the law says? They were underage, ergo could not give consent, ergo it was rape. Also power dynamics teacher pupil makes it even more rapey
In the UK, the definition of rape requires penetration from the offending party by their genitalia. So unless the teacher has a monster clit she used to anally penetrate the boys, the definition of rape can’t apply. For that there’s the broader definition of sexual assault.
Journalists, since their purpose is to serve the public with the truth, have to really carefully choose their words as using the wrong legal term can get them in hot water - libel lawsuits and such, not to mention accusations of trying to shape the public’s opinion, and so on.
So yeah, you’ll rarely find directly said out statements in the news as most journos will try to get to as close to the definition as possible without exposing themselves to legal action. That’s why you’ll often see e.g. statements like “the purported killer” even if there’s clear evidence of the person being the murderer, simply because the case hasn’t been judged yet therefore the legal term murderer - which requires a conviction - cannot be applied, and using it before the trial even happens is a big no-no.
Don’t get me wrong, I fully agree with you that if it was a man with two young girls, the article would be going on the offensive much quicker, and even here they should’ve used the term “sexually assaulted” instead of “had sex with”, but specifically the term rape cannot apply here.
Thank you for the informative reply. As a layman in another country who isn’t worried about specific local laws, I’d like to add that she raped at least two children.
New York had (has?) a similar distinction. It came up in the E Jean Carrol saga; specifically Trump suing for defamation after her lawsuit, because it wasn’t- technically- rape.
IIRC it was dismissed with the judge saying that it fits the modern lay definition of rape and that’s not defamation.
They didn’t call it “sexual assault” either, so I’m inclined to not accept that excuse.
by their genitalia.
So, like not using an object of some sort?
Journalists, since their purpose is to serve the public with the truth, have to really carefully choose their words as using the wrong legal term
Still seems like a more generic term such as “sexual assault” would be applicable here.
It would, but that’s a very broad term. I expect they were trying to be specific, but only succeeded in being forgiving in the headline.
Til. So in the UK only men (or those with dicks) can rape?
by their genitalia
So the IDF can bring their dogs and iron bars, to the UK, and that’s not rape…
… Gets me wondering wtf law makers in the UK are up to.
The UK’s law is precedent based. The definition of rape thus goes back all the way to the 1800s (like many other restrictive laws that need to be revisited, e.g. classifying any transportation device with any kind of engine, i.e. not human or animal propelled, as a vehicle thus forcing the owners of e.g. low end e-scooters to have licences, registration, insurance etc. without providing the framework for any of these), wherein rape was almost exclusively committed by men, therefore lawmakers found it proper to define it as penetration of the victim using one’s genitalia - in a way to differentiate from “lesser” sexual assaults like flashing someone or forcing their hands on said genitalia.
Do I look like I give a fuck what the law says? They were underage, ergo could not give consent
Underage is literally a legal definition, so clearly you do care. Calm down.
I agree, but there are libel laws to consider here. It serves no one to open yourself up to a lawsuit, especially one from which the rapist can only benefit.
Thankfully I’m not a citizen of TERF Island. She raped them.
Hi! I’m not worried about being sued. She raped at least two children.
I was more referring to the news outlet. Regular folks like you and I aren’t much at risk of being sued for libel.
Regular folks like you and I aren’t much at risk of being sued for libel.
Trump: hold my 12 year old… beer
I don’t think someone would win the libel case and bad cases SLAP lawsuits aren’t really a meaningful thing here (we have protections against shit lawsuits)
I agree with you, my comment was meant to draw attention to the crappy law.
Do I look like I give a fuck what the law says? They were underage,
Blatantly, by the very next words.
Do I look like I give a fuck what the law says?
methinks yes?
if not you, then at least journalistic integrity in the UK does
deleted by creator
Then the UK is wrong.
They define rape as penetration
Good news is she did seem to actually be punished with a sizable prison sentence (by uk standards)
She got pregnant, so I’m pretty sure there was penetration
No only the person who does the penetration can rape under uk law.
The more I hear about that place the less it makes sense
The more I hear about that place the more it makes sense how America got where it is.
I dunno. I almost think there should be a different term or word for it. I’m not saying it’s OK at all, I just think bundling so many sexual crimes under one name isn’t great.
For example; I was a horny teen and probably would have been into a teacher like that. It would have been wrong and it likely would have messed up different aspects of my life. I’m not condoning it or trying to downplaying it, but I feel if I had been violently penetrated against my will by a male teacher the trauma would be a whole different kind.
So yeah, I don’t know if we should call it rape, but I recognize the boys were underage and taken advantage of, and the crime absolutely deserves to be punished. I’m also the person who get’s all worked up by modern loose usage of terms like WMD and many others, so I know I can be a handful.
Maybe that young girl wanted to have sex with an older man? Maybe there was no force involved at all?
NOOOOOO!!! RAPE IS RAPE! SIMPLE AS THAT!
I get that you want to separate sex by force from sex by free will but when it comes to kids there can never be consent and it defaults to rape. It should not be minimized just because a female teacher raped young boys.
Edit: If you want a different definition for what happens to someone being forced or not you could call it rape with assault or rape with {whatever}. I don’t think the rape part should be minimized in any way. Just extended in brutality if anything.
As per usual.
Which is fucked up frankly because that’s clearly not true.
I’m going to take a guess that, if they were over the age of consent, it would have been consensual.
That does not matter lmao
Why not? The law is made up, you know.
that would be to ‘harsh’
You need me to tiktok it to you? it is r*pe
Like I just said within my reply to the original post:
Did they give informed consent? Oh that’s right, if they’re that young, they’re denied that human right, and so we hand them over to the black market to be abused, increasing their allure to rapists and blackmailers alike. >:-| We really need to come up with better ways to protect children.
So (unless the thing the other reply to this said [“Legally speaking women cannot be rapists in the UK”] is true), then, that’s “statutory rape” [regardless of their informed consent]. Yup. Though I’m not convinced it’s necessarily “correct”.
falling pregnant by a second while on police bail.
She really can’t stop fucking kids, can she?
Maybe she has a future in US government
US Government? She’s already in the UK, why would she leave a Pro League to go an Amatuer one?
deleted by creator
You think he’s the only one? Not a chance…
You know what though? That is more than the US has ever done with high-ranking politicians.
“Y’all aint got nuthin on Savile.”
Or so we like to think, hoping the world’s not even worse than that. … But it is.
“This would be hilarious, if it wasn’t so depressing.” - M. Lermontov
She forgot to be a billionaire
She also forgot to be a man
Give some examples of male teachers having sex with students who were caught and walked free.
Bruce Siewerth. Want more? Internet searches are easy.
He got away because the statute of limitations had long run out, not because some idea you have that male pedos aren’t prosecuted.
Oh, can include priests then?
That is the church protecting their own, who are by necessity men. You are insinuating that men, specifically because they are men, are let free when they commit sexual abuse, which is simply not the case, unless they’re billionaires.
Yawn. Keep moving that bar.
I thought there were no statute of limitations on stuff like this…
… Jeez!
Whether we call it rape or not, is less relevant than the real world UK offences and sentencing guide for sex with a minor. She will serve her time, be on a sex offenders register for life, never work in teaching again and an indelible record that will show up on any safeguarding checks.
Here in the UK, our issue is that women and girls are told by the likes of Tommy (shit-for-brains) Robinson to look out for brown, black or Muslim people. Every week, women and girls have drinks spiked andraped by local white men, or are raped by people known and close to them.
This story will get some headline news because she’s an attractive white woman. If it was a brown, black, Muslim male, preferably with a beard, then we would be seeing widespread fear mongering by almost every news site.
Paedophile teacher who raped two boys is struck off
Edit: at least six rape apologists didn’t appreciate my headline correction.
Well the boys were 15 and 16, past puberty, so it’s not paedophilia. She still belongs behind bars, I’m your friendly neighbourhood language officer.
Well the boys were 15 and 16, past puberty, so it’s not paedophilia. She still belongs behind bars, I’m your friendly neighbourhood language officer.
Fine.
She raped minors.
I would like to welcome Rebecca Joyner to her future career in the Trump administration.
falling pregnant
I always find this expression incredibly strange.
Obligatory
Dammit, where were all these sexed-up teachers when I was a kid?
Fucking the hot students.
Roasted
I’d be pissed off if I wasn’t laughing so hard.
Bro… I thought we were friends now you’re telling me I’m ugly.
To be fair, I only said you were ugly as a student.
Wow, you were not who I thought you were.
You need to very seriously consider your options when it comes to designing and expressing your personality.
You seem to be under the false impression that what they said isn’t a widely held opinion among men.
Almost everyone who has been a teenage boy knows the fantasies of teenage boys. Yes, there’s good reasons this is considered criminal conduct, and teenagers at that age can’t legally consent for the same reasons, but in a consensual scenario, such an experience does not have to cause any kind of trauma or harm.
PS: The teenage boy in me thinks “nicceeeee”. Pardon.
Agreed. My issue here is the pitchfork mob mentality around it, it’s like, if you don’t scream and froth whenever this subject comes up then you become guilty by association.
From a social psychological standpoint it is functionally equivalent to people spitting and throwing eggs at condemned people at the gallows, or witch processes. It’s deeply disconcerting to me that they can’t seem to control their emotions and whip each other into a fervor not unlike religious fundamentalists. It is how groupthink happens. And genocides.
It has sadly become consensus to try and distance oneself by being part of the pitchfork mob. And I haven’t found an age mentioned in the article - e.g. the age of consent in Germany is 16 IIRC, in which case the legal problem is when the older person has a position of authority / responsibility, not the actual age. And - age of consent or not - a relationship with a big age difference among adults is also creepy.
Anyways, I remember my thoughts as a teenage boy and I would definitely - even in hindsight decades later now - have fantasized about this ^^ Even though I would have probably chickened out g
One was 15. Not sure about the other. Lots of articles on this over the years.
Age of consent in the uk is 16 too.
It’s a fucking South Park quote and you’re over analyzing this shit.
I’m gonna watch this episode when I get home. 😁
the age of consent in Germany is 16 IIRC
It’s actually 14, but only if the older one is younger than 21 or they aren’t taking advantage of the younger ones lack of ability to make informed sexual decisions. If the older person has authority over the younger one (e.g. a teacher) the age of consent is 18.
IIRC, If within 5 years difference, can be 14 in UK too.
Paying child support to your rapist doesn’t sound like a good deal to me.
Child support is for the child. The child is legally & morally entitled to full support regardless of how it was conceived.
Yes but the payments are made to the child’s guardian. Meaning that a victim of rape will be forced to make payments to their abuser directly because of the rape, which I think is morally indefensible.
Not to mention that the rape victim is, themselves, a child.
But really, my comment wasn’t meant to be a commentary on the child support system itself. Rather calling out a flippant remark that dismissed the gravity of the situation.
Not necessarily: it can be made to a trust or an agency per legal arrangement. Regardless, it’s still the child’s & not parent’s, and it’s both morally & legally necessary. Money is fungible: whatever in excess of their share a custodian pays for childcare needs to be paid back by the non-custodial parents. Charges of fraud may be pursued for misspent funds.
Why do this? There’s millions of legal age men who would love to start a family with this crazy woman. Why did she rape kids?
One kid was 15, the other 16.
She was 30 or 31.
… the answer is because she’s a groomer, a pedophile, by how those terms are generally used.
She gets off on the power imbalance, she gets off on manipulating and exploiting those who don’t and can’t reasonably be expected to know better.
She either wouldn’t prefer to be or just couldn’t be in a relationship with someone on an equal playing field.
She’s a sexual predator, the kind you’d stereotypically call Chris Hansen to investigate.
She’s a pedophile, that’s why.
.mentally ill
The TRA panel said that they found no evidence that Joynes’ qualities as a teacher outweighed the serious nature of the conviction
Wut? There was a invistgation on this? what evidence would outweigh???
“When she’s not busy raping her students, she’s actually a pretty decent teacher.”
“She tries not to rape any kids on her way to bathroom”
deleted by creator
Shed still have the criminal consequences, but maybe there is stratification for teaching bans. I.e., university level allowed and primary banned. Unlikely there’s a rape stipend extended except for tenored professors.
Based on what I see in Hollywood and politics lately im wondering if there is some fine print somewhere the public doesnt know about.
deleted by creator
I am. Phrasing!
So now the administration just needs to pardon her and make her Secretary of Education. Causes that’s fucking on brand for this shit show.
They’d struggle to pardon someone in the UK.
Ya know what…I could see it happening. It wouldn’t do anything. But it’s not the most ridiculous thing this timeline has offered.
Trump has already tried to pardon people he can’t pardon (due to the crime being state law rather than federal). He would absolutely try to pardon people in other countries.
you don’t think they’d bomb the convoy in a prisoner transfer and bring her back to the US or something?
because it’s not a non-zero chance nowadays
She is an amateur. She should just say that she didn’t know them and it’s certainly a democrats conspiracy.
Invoke the Jewish space lasers and it’s all suddenly Hilary’s fault via Hunters laptop. Blatant grift has been going on so long it should just be a class in school now
Joynes was suspended pending a police investigation. But this did not stop her from inviting a second boy to her apartment for a “date night” that involved an Ann Summers scratchcard of sexual activities.
She became pregnant with the boy and gave birth last year, but the child was taken away from her.
This is sickening! The fact that she only got six years is a severe injustice to those two boys and the unfortunate child that was conceived in such a manner. Let’s not “both sides” this: sex abuse is sex abuse. As @MrSulu@lemmy.ml pointed out, this will probably get some attention among far-right chuds for about week and get forgotten. It won’t solve any issues and one more kid will fall into that hateful ideology. I hope the two boys get the help they need and that baby gets a good family that will look after it.
(Also, I had to look up what “Ann Summers” was in the context of this story and now I feel like shooting my laptop)
Looked it up to …
A literal scratchcard in other words…
Exactly, the right wing fucks are going to derail & corrupt this issue with their brainrot & the left are already misandric enough.
Oh too, late both of those chucklefucks are already here.
Bad wording that…Struck off is also slang for “masturbation”
