Comments for the above article, "
Bromley Brook teacher charged with sex crimes" (by Patrick McArdle;
Rutland Herald; Dec. 28, 2009):
____________________________________________________________________
In Vermont it is ok to do this in fact these teachers come from out of State to pray on our children, he is facing the same time as a murder but yet he will be released without having to post bail and out of facing 20 years in jail he will NOT DO A DAY!!! You watch!You know why it is because these guys do the same thing themselves and if they get caught they do not want jail.
None None on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 5:32 am EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
None None, don't you have anything to do?
Terry Ward on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 5:49 am EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
One important point has been left out: the age of consent in Vermont is 16. Peters hasn't committed a crime here unless the relationship started before the girl turned 16. His alleged behavior is slimy, obviously, and if he's made sexual advances against a 12-year-old he should be prosecuted, but you'd think the authorities would be aware of the age of consent.
Red Wood on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 7:25 am EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
Red Wood,
Actually the law has provisions for a person in a position of authority over a person, ie student, developmenttally, challenged, etc. The 16 year old age of consent would not apply here.
Joel Davidson on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 8:00 am EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
the problem with prosecuting this scum is that children that have issues are considered not reliable so given the nature of where he was working he probably counted on that fact. I know this because someone very close to me was sexually abused and by someone in authority and because of the nature of this mans work with the family it never went to court. He is on probation but he never went to jail because of the reliability of the witness. Other kids came forward but because the other children had mental health issues this scum was never prosecuted for them.
city observant on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 9:05 am EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
to pray on our children? Right none none...i can totally take you seriously now that I had to sift through your word jumble.
Red Wood the age of consent with a Parent's Permission is 16, get your facts straight.
And here in the Great United States of America, We are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, Maybe you jackals should go look for blood elsewhere until this guy gets his right to a fair and speedy trial. If he is guilty, Then you can tear into him. But I am willing to bet everything I own none of you are perfect saints. Go back to communist china if you want to destroy people's lives on an accusation.
bob vila on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 9:34 am EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
yeah! if I have a 16 yr old. I would so want them to date a 40 yr old. We can all only imagine-bob vila- what kind of pervert you are to even think that is an appropriate relationship. Kids dont make those accusation to destroy peoples lives. People that do that to children destroy their lives. Get your facts right.
city observant on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 9:41 am EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
One more thing. Perverts that pray on children rarely see trial because the trial itself is yet another traumatic experience the child must endure to see justice is served. Unfortunately most of the kids that have been victimized are so traumatized already that making them sit and court and face the person that hurt them is more trauma than they can endure so the perverts get off with only probation. Until you see how this sick act affects a child who has been victimized you should keep your mouth shut
city observant on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 9:43 am EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
city observant, Thank you...I was grabbed on the street in Hydeville, on a Sunday morning, when I was 15 years old. This was back in 1977. I gave a statement to the Vermont State Police. Even though this person grabbed me in a private area they told me they could not consider it sexual assault. I did not know this man. I have had to live with this and will have to live with this for the rest of my life. It has definitely caused me to have a myriad of problems, especially trust issues. That was 1977. This guy is now on the Vermont Sex Offender Registry for several convictions but, didn't get the first conviction until 1990. If the State Police had done something when I first made the complaint it could have saved others. Now I also have to live with the fact that people don't understand why I don't trust law enforcement to help. Go Figure.
White Witch on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 10:21 am EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
To "bob vila": read the law. There is nothing in it requiring a 16-year-old to get a parent's permission to engage in sexual activity. Such a concept flies in the face of human nature. Get your facts straight.
Though there is nothing in Vermont's sexual assault statute specifically stating that a person in authority misusing that authority to garner sexual favors is a crime, it can be a form of coercion and therefore sexual assault under some circumstances. The water here is a little murkier.
Red Wood on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 11:12 am EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
Also, the word is "prey," not "pray." Learn to spell before writing a comment.
Red Wood on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 11:14 am EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
Red Wood,
Here's the relevant T.13 V.S.A. § 3252. Sexual assault
(a) No person shall engage in a sexual act with another person and compel the other person to participate in a sexual act:
(1) without the consent of the other person; or
(2) by threatening or coercing the other person; or
(3) by placing the other person in fear that any person will suffer imminent bodily injury.
(b) No person shall engage in a sexual act with another person and impair substantially the ability of the other person to appraise or control conduct by administering or employing drugs or intoxicants without the knowledge or against the will of the other person.
(c) No person shall engage in a sexual act with a child who is under the age of 16, except:
(1) where the persons are married to each other and the sexual act is consensual; or
(2) where the person is less than 19 years old, the child is at least 15 years old, and the sexual act is consensual.
(d) No person shall engage in a sexual act with a child who is under the age of 18 and is entrusted to the actor's care by authority of law or is the actor's child, grandchild, foster child, adopted child, or stepchild.
(e) No person shall engage in a sexual act with a child under the age of 16 if:
(1) the victim is entrusted to the actor's care by authority of law or is the actor's child, grandchild, foster child, adopted child, or stepchild; or
(2) the actor is at least 18 years of age, resides in the victim's household, and serves in a parental role with respect to the victim.
(f)(1) A person who violates subsection (a), (b), (d), or (e) of this section shall be imprisoned not less than three years and for a maximum term of life, and, in addition, may be fined not more than $25,000.00.
(2) A person who violates subsection (c) of this section shall be imprisoned for not more than 20 years, and, in addition, may be fined not more than $10,000.00.
(g) A person convicted of violating subsection (a), (b), (d), or (e) of this section shall be sentenced under section 3271 of this title. (Added 1977, No. 51, § 1; amended 1985, No. 83, § 2; 1989, No. 293 (Adj. Sess.), § 5; 2005, No. 192 (Adj. Sess.), § 10, eff. May 26, 2006.)
Look at section (c)(2)(d) of the law. The authority of law applies to teachers, coaches etc.
Hope this helps.
Joel Davidson on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 11:50 am EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
Manchester-based attorney Stephen Saltonstall, who represents Peters, said on Wednesday that his client was not guilty.
How could he possibly know that? Since no one ever believes anything that any lawyer ever says, why do they even bother to talk?
Michael in Vermont on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 12:59 pm EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
Thanks, Joel, although I did have that page up when I wrote my comment.
Michael, you have to stop getting your ideas of justice off TV. That's not how our system works. An accusation is not evidence. It is up to the prosecution to gather together enough evidence to prove guilt. Until guilt is proven, the accused is considered to be innocent. The criminal standard of proof is quite high in order to prevent innocent people from going to jail. Peters' lawyer is being correct; his client has not been proven guilty.
Red Wood on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 1:19 pm EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
Everyone here assumes the guy is guilty.
What if the 16 year old is teed off about something, her grades, her parents making her go to this school, her not being allowed to see her old friends at home, the list could be endless.
What if the 16 year old and the 12 year old are friends and the 16 year old is trying to get back at this guy for something, and has coerced the 12 year old into a story of her own?
I would be the first one in line to convict if I was absolutely sure without any doubt...probably even vote for castration in these kinds of cases...or locking them up and throwing away the key.
Is it possible that there could be some people that make up this kind of story for whatever reason???
Citizen With a View on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 1:51 pm EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
I did a story when I was in college about sexual predators and people that are abused. I did alot of research on the law and statistics. The statistics prove that children dont make up accusations like this one as often as children are actually victimized. The posts on here that question the perpetrators guilt or innocence have a right to do so, the only thing I wonder is if the question would still be there if the children were in a different setting, such as a private school. Maybe these children have problems far beyond the scope of what we are told. All I know is that accusations like this should be taken seriously and no matter what to believe the child and get the facts. Although it does happen that occasionally a child will make up a story it is very rare according to what I have read in the psychology journals. I applaud the school for taking these accusations seriously and the parents for acting on it. That in itself will make the difference in the emotional damage of the children. We will just have to see how this plays out to see if he is guilty or innocent. Also, predators tend to work in professions where they have access to children that are easy targets. Such as teachers, coaches AND THERAPISTS. Its sad but true.
city observant on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 2:27 pm EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
bob vila wrote:
"Go back to communist china if you want to destroy people's lives on an accusation."
In the context of his post, and with free speech in mind, I guess he can make this statement. But why, "Go back?" Go back in time? Or, why refer to China?
I do wish that we were all innocent until proven guilty in this country, although the TSA actions/regs state otherwise!
I tend to bristle when folks throw out "China/communist" comments as we have family living there and have visited this country - a country that faces humongous issues and is trying to address them.
Also, am so tired of the Native issue tossed out - some of us are of the real natives, which can be from all points USA...and even our ancestors emigrated here - from China!
chere tournet on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 4:57 pm EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
this stuff happens all the time troubled teens in a place where they dont want to be with people who they dont like so they make things up to get that person in trouble or to get get out of doing something them selfs. the fact that this kids room mate is for now the only one backing any of this up makes me think that its not reel, but lets see where it ends up befor we go hanging anyone ok none none and all you other linch types. God just think about it for a while
Wayne Davis on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 5:11 pm EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
Red Wood scolds me that: Peters' lawyer is being correct; his client has not been proven guilty.
I didn't say he had been proven guilty. His lawyer didn't say that he was not guilty until he is proven guilty. He didn't even say that his client claims that he is not guilty. His lawyer stated flatly that his client is not guilty.
Once again, he could not possibly know that. So why bother say it?
Michael in Vermont on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 6:03 pm EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
Just because the 16 year old might not dig school is no reason to assume she is lying as he also stands accused of kissing a 12 year old girl too and even though that is not considered a sex act in the eyes of the law, if when I was 12 and got kissed on the lips by a teacher my foster parents would have gone ballistic as that is crossing the line too. And several of you are exactly right about predators, they know where the children are and teachers, counselors and I speak from experience there, I was raped at age 14 at Weeks School, anyone remember that hell hole? I was sent there by my parents because they no longer wanted me and the first night I am there, I am raped and nothing was ever done to the bastard that did it and he had done it to other residents and not one person believed us because he was such a fine upstanding citizen for "counseling" troubled teens and we were all "bad kids" lying through through our teeth. It took me many years to overcome what that bastard did to me and he got away it and I am willing to bet he continued to do it after I left there, I had a social worker who knew I did not belong there, I had done nothing wrong except run away from people who did not love or want me because I was not a "perfect child" and Bless her, she was able to get me into a great foster home where I excelled as I felt love for the first time without conditions and I truly bless those folks to this day. SO I am going to assume this man did these crimes of which he is charged, he is 40 years old, about the same age as my rapist and this was not consensual, no girl at 16 is going to welcome advances from someone that age. And kissing a 12 year old, my god-daughter is 12 and if she were to tell me that her 40 year old teacher kissed her, I would be on the horn to the sheriff's dept in seconds and he would be in custody in minutes!!! But this is VT, where babyrapers get 30 day sentences and the dude who sells a joint to a consenting adult gets 3 yrs so it will be interesting to see if this creep actually does any prison time.
Linda Brown on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 7:18 pm EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
How's this, IF he is found guilty I hope that he rots in jail or worse. Plain, simple and to the point. IF he is guilty he is one sick person and I commend the kid's that come forward when things like this happen.
Rebecca Brown on Mon, Dec 28, 2009, 9:53 pm EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
you can tell some of these people here have a fine vermont education.Pray and prey are two differant words for your info. I love it when people try to look so smart and can't even spell.
md on Tue, Dec 29, 2009, 8:52 am EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
md... "differant"?
concerned citizen on Tue, Dec 29, 2009, 12:49 pm EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
If this teacher actually did this, he deserves all that is coming his way. However, in seems that nobody in this discussion so far has mentioned, or even knows, what kind of school the Bromley Brook schools is.
It is a boarding school for girls with very significant emotional and self esteem issues. As a result, there may be significant credibility questions in these accusations.
http://www.bromleybrook.com/profile.htmlRay Makul on Tue, Dec 29, 2009, 1:09 pm EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
as I said earlier, the man accused probably counted on the fact that there would be credibility issues. Thats why abusers pick those kind of professions.
city observant on Tue, Dec 29, 2009, 1:39 pm EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
Hey Concerned Citizen......LOL LOL LOL.
_
None None on Tue, Dec 29, 2009, 3:21 pm EST[/list]
____________________________________________________________________
michael in VT.... do you even know how the judicial system works? When first brought into court, you and your lawyer (if you have one) are asked to plea. Either guilty or not guilty. Guilty immedietly admits wrongdoing, the case can now go to punishment. However, in order to GET a FULL trial, you have to plea not guilty. So, in order to prove your innocence, or to give the prosecution a chance to prove your guilt, you MUST plea not guilty. so yeah, that would by the reason to say it. for some reason, the simple things seem to escape some people.
Rebecca. I agree. If found guilty, let him go away for a VERY long time. If found not guilty however, just the accusation has removed this mans ability to work in his profession. its sad that in this great nation, a simple accusation, no matter how unfounded, can and does destroy a life. I wonder, what ever happened to "Innocent until proven guilty"? oh wait, thats a leeding heart liberal thing isnt it? you know, the same bleeding heart liberals who wrote the constitution?
firedog on Wed, Dec 30, 2009, 8:14 pm EST[/list]
© 2008 Rutland Herald