NEW YORK
Albany Times Union
By MATT PACENZA, Staff writer
First published: Sunday, August 7, 2005
In Vermont, Sandra Beth Geisel would not be a rape suspect. Sex there between an adult and a 16-year-old is not considered a crime.
Advertisement
But in New York, the former teacher faces up to four years in a state prison if convicted of third-degree rape for having sex with a Christian Brothers Academy student.
The explosive revelation that Geisel, the estranged wife of a prominent local banker, allegedly had sex with at least four teenage students shines a light on a controversial area of law and social norms.
Rape laws presume teens under a certain age which varies from state to state can't offer informed consent. In New York, teens younger than 17 are victims of rape if they have sex with someone older than 21, regardless of whether it is forced, coerced or desired.
Such laws are necessary, prosecutors assert, because such encounters are inherently traumatic and are likely to cause long-term harm to the underage victims.
But interviews with experts, research on adult-teen sex and the facts of the Geisel case itself complicate that analysis, raising questions about the appropriateness of the very words at the heart of the case: rape, abuse, trauma, victim.
The case comes at a time when the issue of priest sex abuse has focused attention on pedophilia, even as criminologists report that the frequency of child sex abuse is decreasing.