02-04-2007, 10:14 PM #1
Teacher Sentenced For Having 3rd Grade Girls Take Nude Pictures
What a load of crap this guy's exscuse was, blaming it on the girls themselves and laughing it off "as kids being kids." Sickening!
OLATHE, Kan. -- A former teacher will spend two months in jail for having three third-grade girls take nude photos of each other in the school bathroom.
Neal Byron Lenarcic, now a stay-at-home father, pleaded no contest last year in Johnson County District Court to two counts of attempted sexual exploitation of a child.
Under a plea deal, defense and prosecuting attorneys had recommended that Lenarcic serve 45 days of "shock time" in jail. Instead, Johnson County District Judge James Franklin Davis sentenced Lenarcic on Friday to 60 days of "shock time" in the county jail.
Davis veered from the plea deal after Lenarcic reasserted earlier claims that it was the girls' idea, not his, to take the pictures. He apologized for not stopping it and reporting them.
"I shouldn't have laughed it off as kids being kids," Lenarcic said. (more at link)
02-04-2007, 10:18 PM #2Former Member
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- New England
Wow. TWO MONTHS in jail for producing child pornography??? TWO MEASLEY MONTHS???? Sorry, the judge is a complete loser. This man should be in jail for YEARS. Pervert!!
02-04-2007, 10:26 PM #3Former Member
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
Anyone who believes this lying piece of C..p is totally delusional. He knew and more than likely instigated. They are in the third grade not likely to be into nude pics but Barbie Dolls and such. Wanna bet he sold them a song and dance in the pervert world?
The sentence is what is appalling. So, appalling I cannot believe more wasn't done. Do we just wait until he rapes and murders and then say I knew it and the system failed? Where is the system when there is obvious need for protection?OK, I need to step away for a sec as I need all my arteries.
02-04-2007, 10:37 PM #4
What is this 60 days of "shock time" crap? It's "shocking" to me that he didn't get more time!
02-04-2007, 10:38 PM #5
Hmmmm....he's not allowed to be around children under 18 EXCEPT his 7 month old son. Why do they think the son is safe with him unsupervised?
02-04-2007, 10:39 PM #6
Oh, and now he's a "stay-at-home" dad. I sure wouldn't want him staying at home with my kids! Now he's got all day to sit around distributing or making child porn.
I guess his wife bought his exscuse.
02-04-2007, 10:51 PM #7
She must have. I wouldn't trust him at home with my dog.
02-04-2007, 10:59 PM #8
Sounds like they all bought his excuse. I wish they had told whether or not the girls were to bring the pics back to the freak and set up a real bust. This is sickening and I'd like to know why there is such a protection and hand slapping for so many who are child pornographers. It's almost like it's not really a big deal to so many judges and prosecutors. The girls would have received much worse punishment had they been turned in since they would have been sent to alternatives schools, been reported to CPS, and labeled as sexual harassers and sexual misconductors by the legal and school system. They could possibly have even been sent to Juvie as sexual offenders for up to a year and forced to go through some offender program and put on a list.
02-04-2007, 11:17 PM #9Originally Posted by txsvicki
The teacher should have, of course, put a stop to it and had talks with their parents.....if, as he says, he was not involved.I do not intend to tiptoe through life only to arrive safely at death!
02-04-2007, 11:28 PM #10
I think if he wasn't involved he would have let someone else (like maybe the principal) in on it right away, to cover his A**, especially in this day and age where so much of this kind of thing is in the news.
He had to know that this would be found out some way or another. Maybe he thought others would buy his piss poor exscuse, or maybe he knew he'd just get a slap on the wrist and figured it was worth chancing it.
02-05-2007, 12:14 AM #11Former Member
Originally Posted by southcitymom
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- New England
As far as the girls being labeled "sex offenders"---that may be a little extreme, but shoot--it's certainly possible when I read stories about about 4 year old boys being charged with sexual harassment because a loony teachers aide felt like his hug was actually his attempt to cop a feel of her breasts! There's a thread here on WS about it.
ETA: I just re-read the linked article, and he is just saying that it wasn't his idea. One of the girls said he specifically asked them to take photos of their private parts.
02-05-2007, 12:39 AM #12Originally Posted by southcitymom
I'm not kidding. I meant that if it were the girls doing this, especially if one got others to do it, she would be in big big trouble. These things could be done with them for sexually acting out with other kids. The teacher did try to blame the whole thing on the girls and said that they were talking about it and he didn't think they would really do this. What a jerk.