A TEACHER had sex with a teenage pupil in secret late night meet ups – but she has dodged jail as the judged ruled he wasn’t “harmed”.
Monique Ooms, 31, pleaded guilty to four counts of sexual penetration of a child under her supervision and care.
She will not face a day of jail time as the judge ruled the boy was not ‘harmed’[/caption]
She admitted to having sex with the boy multiple times in the backseat of car after she groomed the teen.
But despite her crimes – she will not spend a day in prison.
Judge John Smallwood ruled that boy had not been “harmed” and argued he was “very close to 17”.
He also argued that Ooms, from Maffra, Australia, was “fragile”.
Victoria’s Latrobe Valley County Court heard how the boy snuck out for illicit meet ups with his teacher as the two became close.
Ooms preyed on the boy who was in a “vulnerable” situation after a close friend of his had died in a car crash.
The two talked over social media – with Ooms sending the student pictures of her in her underwear.
She met up with the boy and they drove to a secluded spot where she had sex with him in her car.
The two would also meet at her home.
Text messages between the two reveal Ooms claimed she “fell in love” with the teen.
Two anonymous letters were later developed to the school principal – exposing their relationship.
Police were called – and she initially denied having sex with the boy, who also insisted they were “just friends”.
But she eventually confessed to cops after being duped into making admissions to a friend via text message.
“You did actually do it, didn’t ya?”, the friend asked – and she responded “Yeah”.
Oooms was scheduled to be sentenced yesterday – but it was cancelled by Judge Smallwood.
“Often in these situations the harm is what comes from other people after it becomes public,” he said.
“‘There has clearly been discussion between he and her about the wrongfulness of it. He nevertheless consents and makes that very clear.”
“He being very close to 17 … does that go to in any way, shape or form the objective seriousness of the offending?”
Judge Smallwood argued the offence ooms committed was not the act of having sex with the boy, but the fact she was his teacher.
And he questioned whether the boy should be considered a “minor”.
Crown Prosecutor Andrew Moore said: “There’s no definitive evidence of harm, but it is of course a notorious fact that in these sorts of cases – sexual offending against minors – harm doesn’t surface sometimes until a little bit later and sometimes decades later.”
He told the court the teen had refused to discuss the crime with counsellors and was determined to get on with his life.
Ooms’ barrister Katherine Rolfe argued her client should be spared jail because she’s suffered “public shame” and lost her job.
The boy declined to be involved in court proceedings – but his mum read out an impact statement, saying how she worried for her son’s future.
Ooms now works as a bricklayer having lost her job as a teacher.
Category: News, World News, Courts, Crime, Police, prison
