Teacher, 31, claims her male student 'plainly wanted' sex
A NORTH Queensland teacher accused of procuring a student for sex has applied to have the charges dropped as the boy "plainly wanted" it.
The married woman, 31, allegedly had sex with the Year 12 student four times between March 9 and May 31 last year.
The woman, student and school cannot be named.
In Townsville Magistrates Court yesterday, defence barrister Sean Holt QC said that, as the student was 17 - past the age of consent - the woman could only be charged with procuring, which involved an element of sexual exploitation.
"There is just a complete dearth of evidence (of exploitation)," he said. "The Crown case is, at its highest, a 17-year-old describing sexual encounters which he plainly wanted and, in fact, often initiated."
Mr Holt said the woman taught at the boy's school but was not his teacher. Their contact allegedly began after a conversation in a school hall.
Mr Holt said the boy told police: "She said something along the lines of 'Would you ever sleep or have sex with a teacher?' I said 'I don't know', she said 'Ah'. I said 'Would you ever have sex with a student?' She shrugged her shoulders'," he said, reading from a transcript of the interview.
Mr Holt said the boy said his memory was unclear and he may have posed the question.
The boy said the woman then contacted him and said "'Want to chill?' or 'Want to do something fun tomorrow night?'".
She allegedly picked him up at 7pm the next day and they drove to Crystal Creek with a six-pack of beer.
Mr Holt said the boy told police they talked about the woman's husband, then he touched her leg, which led to sex.
"Far from being exploitative, or even procuring, the first move is made by (the student)," he said.
Magistrate Peter Smid noted the boy had a condom.
Mr Holt said a week later, the teacher allegedly took the boy to Lucinda Beach, where they again had sex.
On the last occasion, the boy asked the teacher to come over when his parents were out.
Mr Holt said the boy told police he ended the relationship because he was worried about being caught.
Prosecutor Len Brown said the charges should go to trial.
"The point isn't whether he consented to or engaged in sexual activities, the point is whether he was exploited," he said.
Magistrate Smid will deliver his decision on whether the charges should be dismissed on January 19.